NYTimes asks: why aren't -these- on DVD? (1 Viewer)

[Damin J Toell]

I'm sure MGM has many of UA's elements but most of the UA elements have been stored in various warehouses and much of it is hard to find.

I can't figure out if you think you're disagreeing with me about this. If anything, if you're disagreeing with Mr. Heuck.

DJ

 

[Mark Zimmer]

If anything, I should think that having multiple owners and distributors would increase the chances of a good print surviving; one of the reasons so few MGM silents exist is that MGM was very anal about making sure all prints came back to them. As a result, when MGM's nitrates burned, no private collectors or distribution houses had additional copies--see, e.g., London After Midnight.

 

[David_Caldwell]

I am also surprized that there hasn't been more reaction to the news of the Blade Runner SE cancellation: was this already common knowledge?

Ted, and everyone, it is not exactly common knowledge, but it is perhaps what many have already assumed. But then, this project is not exactly cancelled either. Keep a candle alight - believe it will happen and eventually it will. Perhaps even in your lifetime...

 

[Conrad_SSS]

If anything, I should think that having multiple owners and distributors would increase the chances of a good print surviving; one of the reasons so few MGM silents exist is that MGM was very anal about making sure all prints came back to them. As a result, when MGM's nitrates burned, no private collectors or distribution houses had additional copies--see, e.g., London After Midnight.

You've got the facts wrong here. MGM and DISNEY started preserving their nitrate in the '60s, way before other studios. Over 200 MGM silent features exist in complete form, and another 100 partially. More MGM silents exist than those of any other major studio. While it is true that several key MGM silent films are gone like LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT, more of their silent legacy survives than that of any other studio from that era.

While it's true that many original MGM nitrate negatives burned in the tragic Eastman House fire of 1978, safety dupe negatives and finegrains made in the '60s and early '70s made as protections kept those films from ultimate demise.

 

[Greg_M]

Damin J Toell
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just informing you of the situation with United Artists films.

 

[Jason_Els]

The New York Times isn't what it used to be. Their vaunted fact checking seems to be lacking of late. I don't read it any longer.

 

[Damin J Toell]

I'm not disagreeing with you.

Sorry for misreading you, but posts that begin with "That may be true, but..." usually sound like disagreements.

DJ

 

[Patrick McCart]

One reason why "Mad World" "Around the World in 80 Days" & "West Side Story" 70mm elements are almost gone or beyond repair.

I don't think UA ever handled elements for 80 Days outside of distribution. It looks like Michael Todd's estate personally housed the materials for years until Liz Taylor handed them over to Warner Bros. in the early 1980's.

Plus, tons of 16mm, 35mm, 65mm, and 70mm materials were handed over to the Library of Congress. (including some elusive separation masters)

 

[David Lambert]

Well, I was right about his status as a regular of the NYT! The article concludes thus:

Fred Kaplan is a columnist for Slate.com and a film critic for The Perfect Vision.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

The Jerry Perenchio news regarding the Blade Runner SE DVD has been around for awhile; I heard about it earlier in the year from a friend. It sounds suspiciously like the Allen Klein feud with Alejandro Jorodowsky over "El Topo" and "The Holy Mountain." News like this baffles me.

Also, Excalibur came out in late 1999, well after DVD was introduced. I remember the furor over the ugly cover on this very board!

 

[David Lambert]

Mark, Greg_M's post to the contrary in #34 of this thread slipped right past me! You're right, it was NOT an early DVD release like he claims:



Excalibur and The Matrix streeted on DVD the same day: 9/21/99. I bought both, along with the already-released Wargames, at Best Buy that day for $50.97 plus tax ($15.99, $14.99, $19.99 respetively). They were my 6th, 7th, and 8th DVDs in my collection,having finally bought my first player 10 days earlier!

 

[oscar_merkx]

great read indeed and good to hear about more Marx Bros
and let's hope that B R will be out later

 

[Brandon Conway]

They were my 6th, 7th, and 8th DVDs in my collection,having finally bought my first player 10 days earlier!

And DVD sales have skyrocketed ever since. Coincidence?! I think not.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

If WB had no hope of releasing the BR set, they'd probably release a pared-down version of it with a freshly restored transfer (which fans would love to have) and all the extras they can legally include. Not releasing the set indicates that they have some amount of hope of being able to release the whole thing.

My opinion, of course. I'm the first to admit this could just be wishful thinking.

 

[David Lambert]

Thanks, Brandon!






:b (it's true)

 

[AndrewWickliffe]

In regards to Warner Bros. early P&S jobs . . .

If you've got a regionless player, Australia has a number of them widescreen.

I just picked up: Clean and Sober, Star 80, and Innocent Blood

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Eh? Every version of the Fugitive that Warner has released was anamorphic. As for the transfer, it wasn't too hot

But it's not "sub-VHS quality" - that's a ludicrous claim...