Warner Bros. from Savior to Failure! (1 Viewer)

[Ed St. Clair]

Replacing a snapper jacket was a joy! Snap, snap open. Put cardboard in other jacket, snap, snap closed.

Why are you "replacing" jackets "in excellent condition"?

Or are you talking about shipping damaged jackets only?

If you take into account how many keepsake cases are shipped too you and how many are snappers, is the ratio for damage still higher in the keepsake?

 

[Trace Downing]

Glad to see you have such a high tolerance!

I was trying to make a pointed joke. ALL carnies are creepy ( just like Austin Powers says).

I was trying to point out the importance of the issue. Pan&scan, old non-anamorphic transfers, Themed TV show sets, and flippers are something to really be egging Warner about.

I'm just saying that in the grand scheme of things, Warner switching from Snappers isn't going to end this war against terrorism any sooner. So why is it such a big deal?

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

As a whole, I have no problem with WB, it's their Family department I have a problem with. They were fully willing to release 'The Goonies' in p&s only until Richard Donner stepped in, and that is an anamorphic 2.35:1 film! So if they were willing to do that, they are capable of much harm. Has anyone heard anything on 'The Iron Giant' SE? I for one am very worried about this title in the hands of WB's family department.
But, if they try to pull the same shit they tried to pull with 'Cats & Dogs', and 'Willy Wonka', i'll be ready to make my voice heard!
NO OAR= NO SALE WARNER BROS!

 

[cafink]

Okay, The Goonies, Cats & Dogs, and Willy Wonka were all very close calls, but we ultimately got what we wanted in the end. After all the noise we made about them (Wonka in particular), do you think there's any danger of Warner releasing a p&s-only disc in the future?

 

[Doug Pyle]

ehem ... Eyes Wide Shut is still censored by the studio in R1. Not a trifle. We're talking Kubrick -- of all filmmakers to censor! I'll relax and enjoy and respect WB when I can enjoy the uncensored film art of Kubrick on DVD.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Carl, that's the million dollar question isn't it? Did Warner learn their lesson?
We'll see.

 

[Cees Alons]

If you take into account how many keepsake cases are shipped too you and how many are snappers, is the ratio for damage still higher in the keepsake?

Yep! I'm not sure whether or not central hubs really break during the shipment period or at the factory (actually, I think: the latter). But it's a sure fact that Amarays arrived more often with broken hubs than snappers. The two snappers I was referring to, came from a severely damaged box. This damage in this case was the obvious result from mistreatment during shipping.

Cees

 

[Jesse Skeen]

Lemme say this just one more time: One thing that got me into laserdisc a while ago was that Warner was putting out EVERYTHING in widescreen- no dual-inventories or anything like that- if it was from Warner and a recently-made disc, it was gonna be in widescreen, period. The back cover would even tell you if the movie was flat or scope (they got it wrong a couple times, but it was still the thought that counts.)

When DVD came along, they did NOT follow this same policy! With movies they thought "unworthy" of widescreen, they still put the laserdiscs out in widescreen but the DVD only in pan and scan, even on titles short enough to fit BOTH versions on (Space Jam, My Fellow Americans, Vegas Vacation). While they've improved on those shortcomings since, they have still put out WAY too many discs in pan and scan only when widescreen laserdisc editions were already out. The "Pokemon" movies are only in pan and scan and there are NO laserdiscs of these at all, and the "Willy Wonka" thing was the ultimate blunder- the LD was widescreen, the first DVD had both, then they wanted to do the "special edition" with pan and scan!!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

I was trying to make a pointed joke.

I laughed!

 

[Larry Gardner]

Just to add my two cents to this snapper issue. I to am not that happy with them.

Perfect example ... just recently I add water damage in my house due to a collapsed sewer line. The DVDs I have on my lower shelf were all exposed to water.

Fox was great by allowing me to replace my Planet of the Apes box and X-Files box, which the boxes at the same time

protected the discs within.

Amaray cases that were damaged, I was able to download covers for all and print them at Kinko's and replace the keepcases.

All of the snapper cases were damaged, warped and waterlogged. Contacted WB and was told that I had to go back to the retailer. After three weeks of e-mails back and forth, and notifying customer support that I was going to forward all the e-mail replies to Warner Bros. corporate on the type of customer support we are accustomed to by Warner Bros customer support (I have had MAJOR run-ins with them before on other issues), I finally was told that WB does not supply their DVD artwork to anyone and that I would have to repurchase the DVD - even though the DVD was unscathed.

So now I have these damaged snapper cases (which I will eventually replace with scanned in images from other places) that basically have watchable DVDs but no cases.

Other than that, I also find that snapper cardboard is very easily scratch prone, spine weak (the more I open the case the more wear and tear I cause on the snapper spine).

I have over 1000 DVDs (mostly keepcases) and nearly all the snapper cases look like they are 20 years old. The keepcase however look like the day I bought them.

Maybe I'm just watching my DVDs too much that prevents me from keeping my to snappers in pristine condition.

Never had this problem with any of the 6000 LDs in my collection.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

direct from the digital files transfers

But that is what the forum is for. You are 100% correct, if a film is not created in the digital form, that I or anyone else, could call it a digital film.

The transfer of Snow White & Oh Brother did start out as film. And they will never be digital movies.

However, I know that these films were transfered to DVD direct from digital files. And I am sticking to my definition that these films are "direct from the digital file" TRANSFERS. And only that.

The reason I love these transfers [and now have a hard time watching anything else] is the lack of film artifacts that can be achieved though this process. Hence [one of the reasons] the fave reviews of SW, saying the movie looks better than it ever has.

First was a Bug's Life [a true digital creation], and I can't stop!

If you'd like to try or can, please give a proper/better definition of this transfer process direct from the digital files.

 

[Nigel McN]

I got to admit the NTSC region 4 thing is very confusing

 

[Trace Downing]

Okay;
I've brought this up before in the Friday the 13th Uncut threads, and had my suspicions confirmed by Martin Blythe. So I will try again to explain a possible reason for Eyes Wide Shut being censored...I doubt it will sink in this time, but here goes anyway.
Politics!!! Who used Hollywood's decadence/immorality as a national rallying cry during the 2000 presidential elections? Al Gore, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Joe Liberman, The Christian Coalition, Family Research Council, & The AFA, not to mention Pat Buchanan. Doesn't anybody remember Al Gore saying "Hollywood! Clean up your act or else!"
Should Warner stand up to this? Sure they can. Would they be held in contempt by these political lobbying groups? Possibly. Is it wise to upset what might be a major portion of the population just for artistic integrity? Well, you decide that for yourselves. When your group is the target of political rallying crys, along with being blamed as a scapegoat for school shootings, your group tends to get skittish. Look at how many people out there who are burning Harry Potter books as witchcraft.
You have a problem with EWS being censored? Get involved, stand up against the pressure groups. Don't sit back and complain about Warner, because they just don't listen to you. Someone else is screaming louder...Warner can't hear you through that.

 

[Neil Joseph]

I agree with about 99% of the original post. It is very strange that Warner was such a strong DVD format supporter back in those days and a major force against DIVX. Why then has their studio backed down so much when it comes to supporting OAR among other things.

 

[Tom Brennan]

It's hard to disagree with the majority of what you said. I find many of their moves puzzling, mainly their refusal to properly handle their TV products.