Paramount is THE WORST for releasing catalog titles. (1 Viewer)

[Thomas T]

Love Gene Hackman in "The Conversation". Such a great movie
As far as Paul Newman is concerned I think he is great in so many of his roles.
I think his performance in "The Verdict " is perfect.

See, even in disagreement, we can find a common ground. I'm sure if dug a little further, we'd find other performances we equally admire. Now, back to that naughty Paramount for not releasing (write title of choice in this space)!

 

[JoHud]

See, even in disagreement, we can find a common ground. I'm sure if dug a little further, we'd find other performances we equally admire. Now, back to that naughty Paramount for not releasing (write title of choice in this space)!

Nah, I prefer the discussion you guys had going.


I initially though of posting a counter to the click-bait title of this thread, but really, why bother? Though it did get me thinking about how fast the WHV deal on Paramount titles has dried up lately so I guess that's something.

 

[ahollis]

The Paramount/Warmer deal ends December 31, 2015.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/warner-bros-paramount-announce-home-media-distribution-deal-348266

I'm sure if both companies agree, it can be renewed. But if anyone is on the fence in purchasing some of the titles in the WAC division, you might want to think about getting them.

 

[trajan]

The Paramount/Warmer deal ends December 31, 2015.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/warner-bros-paramount-announce-home-media-distribution-deal-348266

I'm sure if both companies agree, it can be renewed. But if anyone is on the fence in purchasing some of the titles in the WAC division, you might want to think about getting them.

Did it ever start?

 

[JoHud]

The Paramount/Warmer deal ends December 31, 2015.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/warner-bros-paramount-announce-home-media-distribution-deal-348266

I'm sure if both companies agree, it can be renewed. But if anyone is on the fence in purchasing some of the titles in the WAC division, you might want to think about getting them.

Oh, yeah....the WAC rereleases. That arm is still adding some occasional new Paramount titles, rereleases they may be. I bought a few that would have been cost-prohibitive at OOP pricing. Curious if those are truly a limited time deal though given how MOD operates it should not be hard to pull the plug at any given moment since there aren't any notable stock issues to worry about.

 

[Alan Tully]

The Paramount/Warmer deal ends December 31, 2015.

http://deadline.com/2012/10/warner-bros-paramount-announce-home-media-distribution-deal-348266

I'm sure if both companies agree, it can be renewed.

You never know, but I can't see Warner wanting to renew it, as they've hardly used it (& they have enough of their own titles to release). That could be a good thing if Paramount start to license out titles to some of these smaller companies.

 

[Mike Boone]

While having joined in this criticism of Paramount's treatment of its catalog titles, I would like to point out that in the early days of home video the studio was a hero to those who wanted to own and collect movies on videocassette, rather than merely rent them. At a time when virtually all major Hollywood releases were priced at $79.95-89.95, Paramount pioneered the concept of "sell through" with its radical move of lowering the price on releases such as Raiders of the Lost Ark and An Officer And A Gentleman to $39.95. Then, somewhat later, the studio cut the prices of many of its movies on cassette to $29.95. And if this old guy's memory is still serving him well, I believe it was Paramount that was the first studio to even run special offers where some hit movies, including Trading Places, had promotional prices of $19.95.


I certainly recall being quite grateful, back in the 1980s, that Paramount seemed to be interested in championing the cause of film collectors, such as yours truly. Thanks, in part, to Paramount, there are cherished memories for me of when my school age daughter stayed at my small apartment on weekends, and we enjoyed movies together, being able to watch one, just by pulling its videocassette out of the little bookcase in my living room. Certainly, our experience was not unique, but must have been just the sort of way that countless people were enjoying movie experiences in those times.

 

[Matt Hough]

I remember paying $24.95 for the laserdisc of Raiders of the Lost Ark thinking there must have been a mistake somewhere along the line that would allow that kind of price for such a cherished title. Nope, that's what they charged.


That was a STEAL for a premiere title.

 

[MatthewA]

Laserdiscs were sometimes cheaper than their video counterparts. I remember it being odd that Gone with the Wind cost less as a laserdisc than it did as a VHS tape back in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

[Persianimmortal]

I think it's far too late at this juncture - what with the decline of physical media and Blu-ray specifically - to be berating any studio for not releasing less popular movies on Blu. A few years ago, when there were major and extremely popular movies missing on Blu, yes there was cause for outcry.

Now we need to be grateful for what we can get. The studios can pretty much do without the meager catalog sales on Blu. Certainly threads like this one are bound to be ignored by the studios, so I'm afraid I don't see the point anymore in the wish-list threads, especially the more aggressive ones. The more sensible approach is to pick titles you believe have some commercial value, then politely approach one of the boutique providers like TT, Kino, Arrow or Criterion with the suggestion.

 

[jcroy]

Laserdiscs were sometimes cheaper than their video counterparts. I remember it being odd that Gone with the Wind cost less as a laserdisc than it did as a VHS tape back in the 1980s and 1990s.

During the very brief short time period I was into Laserdiscs, I picked up the widescreen Terminator 2 laserdisc for a lot less than the price of the VHS version. (T2 was just then-recently released on home video).


I asked the guy running the video store about this, where they mentioned that some then-current movie laserdiscs were not subjected to the same sky high initial release prices that the VHS versions were. (At the time, I don't think I actually believed him).

 

[Keith Cobby]

Perhaps the future for catalogue titles is the limited edition model. The collector/enthusiast can buy the disc and everybody else can stream.

 

[Mike Boone]

I think it's far too late at this juncture - what with the decline of physical media and Blu-ray specifically - to be berating any studio for not releasing less popular movies on Blu. A few years ago, when there were major and extremely popular movies missing on Blu, yes there was cause for outcry.

Now we need to be grateful for what we can get. The studios can pretty much do without the meager catalog sales on Blu. Certainly threads like this one are bound to be ignored by the studios, so I'm afraid I don't see the point anymore in the wish-list threads, especially the more aggressive ones. The more sensible approach is to pick titles you believe have some commercial value, then politely approach one of the boutique providers like TT, Kino, Arrow or Criterion with the suggestion.

What you have said really leads to the question of whether film collectors can expect the studios to give any significant attention, at all, to transferring their catalog titles to UHD Blu-ray, since, compared to 1080p Blu-ray, there is bound to be an even smaller number of customers interested in buying those kinds of releases on the new format.

 

[Brandon Conway]

My understanding of the Paramount/Warner relationship is that Paramount still decides what to prepare for release, while Warner authors the discs and handles distribution. Warner can't author/release something that hasn't been prepared by Paramount. Think of it like Twilight Time and the titles they get from Sony - Twilight Time may create the disc and handle the release, but Sony has to have the master/transfer ready first. This is where the volume of output from Paramount suffers by comparison to other studios. But it's all cyclical - Fox has screeched to a halt over the last year after releasing many titles on their own or through other labels, for example.

 

[JoHud]

Paramount also has a lot of tie-ups with CBS and Viacom. The red tape involved with some of the properties is generally enough that they just don't get the momentum they should unless routinely pokes them with a stick.

Now we need to be grateful for what we can get. The studios can pretty much do without the meager catalog sales on Blu. Certainly threads like this one are bound to be ignored by the studios, so I'm afraid I don't see the point anymore in the wish-list threads, especially the more aggressive ones. The more sensible approach is to pick titles you believe have some commercial value, then politely approach one of the boutique providers like TT, Kino, Arrow or Criterion with the suggestion.

Agreed.