Warner Chat Thoughts (1 Viewer)

[Jay E]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was in reply to a reference to the censored version of Eyes Wide Shut.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------:end quote
This also upset me when I read the transcript, however, I knew that this was their stance beforehand so it didn't shock me as much as their answer to the OAR questions. This is one of the reasons why Warner is & will remain on the bottom of my "favorite studios" list, even though they have made a more favorable impression on me due to their new approach to catalog titles.
We at the forum are supposed to be the champions of OAR, yet it astounds me that there is not more of a backlash against Warner regarding their views on OAR. All because Willie Wonka & Cats & Dogs are being released widescreen, doesn't mean we have won the war. It's the smaller films that won't get thousands of signatures on a petition which will suffer in the future. How anyone here at the forum can call Warner one of their favorite studios after hearing their views on OAR & NC-17 is beyond me.

 

[george kaplan]

I have a suggestion, not for modifying the chat format, but for appending to it.
The chat is a good format that serves a good purpose, BUT, there are still lots of us for one reason or another who are unable to participate. And that means that while a lot of good info gets transmitted back and forth, the studios may have a skewed impression of the overall HTF demand for certain titles.
I'd suggest instead of having prepared questions before the chat, or modifying the chat itself, having a post-chat scenario.
Basically, set up a poll of ALL HTF members asking which unreleased titles they want most, compile the results, and provide a more accurate marketing-friendly list to the studio sometime after the chat as a service from HTF. I couldn't get on, so I couldn't ask about the Thin Man or To Have & Have Not, etc., etc., and while South Park and Twin Peaks are fine, I hate that Warner didn't hear about a lot of other titles.
I also think that the moderators could use their own judgment to include in the post-chat materials provided to the studio, a sense of the biggest HTF concerns. In this case probably the OAR issue, especially as it relates to current comedies that need to be rereleased (like Vacation, Grumpy Old Men) that would most certainly then be big sellers.
Anyway, that's my two cents about improving the whole studio communication process, of which the live chats are one important part.
------------------
13-time NBA world champion Lakers: 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001

 

[todd s]

Well everyone else is giving their 2 cents. So I might as well throw in mine. But, let me start by thank Ron, Parker and Warner for doing the chat.
PLUS:
-All the Batman:Animated movies and shows are coming
-Reissue of Robin HoodOT
-Strange Brew
-Clash of the Titans
-Sounded like they got the hint about doing season box sets instead of best of's for tv shows.
ON THE FENCE:
-Babylon 5. While I am psyched that the 2 movies are coming out. I am concerned that they will judge the sales of them as to whether more will come out. I am not upset because of this business practice. I just wonder how many have to sell to be considered a success. So everyone go out and buy it.

-No difinitive answer on a Batman:SE (1989)
MINUS:
-Still no commitment on widescreen releases for all titles.
-Lack of tv releases
-The Flash tv show is not coming out.(Hey, I can dream can't I?)
Was I happy with everything said? No. But, I didn't expect them to release all that I want. But, as long as they come out with some of things I want and don't forget us Widescreen fans. I will be happy and continue to buy their products.
By the way did I mention that I want more Babylon 5?

 

[Gavin K]

I don't necessarily mind the redundancy of some of the questions. Warner's first reply about Southpark sounded like a typically vague response. By the third time they sounded a little annoyed and emphasized that they would pass on their concerns to Comedy Central. Wether this was a dodge or an honest reply, I don't know, but I am confident that they now know how serious this issue is to some of us.
I don't expect hard-hitting answers from these chats, they mostly seem to be PR, a way for Warner Bros. to generate excitement for upcoming releases and get an idea for what the titles we want.
I am thankful that Warner came here to chat, and am very happy with some of the announcements, such as Strange Brew and Clash of the Titans. But it is the responses by Warner's concerning OAR that have me feeling negative. And I don't mind letting Warners know.
One of the mission statements of the HTF is to advocate OAR. And WB actually has to ask wether or not there is a demand for flat comedies in OAR? This statement alone speaks volumes about how those representing WB in the chat feel about their product, and how seriously they take us forum members.
You would think that after the response by us and other forums to WW and Cats & Dogs that they would have at least been prepared, or had some kind of generic answer ready when this issue came up. Their response was ignorant and it does not bother my conscience any to point this out.
I hope the complaints don't scare Warners away from chatting in the future. In the grand scheme of business, when a comapny is doing well, few people take the time to write in and praise them. They speak with their wallets. But when a business screws up, consumers are very quick to respond. I would hope Warner's is thick-skinned enough to understand this and take our complaints with a grain of salt.
Instead of being offended, they need to try and understand the nature of the comlaint and decide wether or not the central issue is worth doing something about.
As you mentioned Ron, not everyone has the same taste in obscure films. Well, not everyone has the same taste in snappers, or unrated films, or any other issues raised. People are passionate about different things. And that passion sometimes leads to frustration, anger, or who knows what. So every complaint is valid, because the complainer may have a different view than the majority and is frustrated that his view is not being heard.
Again, this falls back on Warner's being able to understand the nature of consumers and being able to differentiate the complaint from the rhetoric.
I don't think we have ripped WB to shreds. Compare the WB complaints to those of the Van Ling EE thread and I think there is a clear difference. And Van Ling is still going to chat with us.

 

[Brett_B]

I read the transcript for the chat and I feel that it went very well, and Warner gave honest answers.
Reading this thread, I see many complaints about using VHS as a measuring tool. I went through the transcript again, and with the exception of ER, all titles that were asked about were titles released to video prior to the invention of DVD.
So, can you honestly blame them for using the VHS numbers to determine what to release from the catalog titles (before DVD)? I think not.
Brett B.

 

[Wes Ray]

I agree that a lot of time is wasted on repeated requests for mainly mainstream titles. Do you guys really think Paramount will NEVER release the Indiana Jones trilogy? Or that Fox will NEVER release the Star Wars trilogy? Or that Universal will NEVER release the Back to the Future trilogy? Mainstream titles will always get released eventually. You may not be able to pre-order them for another three years, but they'll be coming sooner or later.
I feel a more important issue is the titles that actually may never see the light of day on DVD. Obscure (mainly horror and sci-fi) titles that aren't as popular as the mainstream movies, but just as important to certain sections of fans. Movies like Return of the Living Dead Part 2, Happy Birthday to Me, Monster Squad, Fearless Vampire Killers, The Hills Have Eyes, Student Bodies, Deadly Friend, etc. may never get released unless the studios see that there is a need for these films from DVD buyers. Anchor Bay releases quite a bit of rare titles, but they can't release them all. That's why I push so hard for people to give the mainstream movies a break during these chats and to ask more about rare titles. Even if they aren't horror-related. Every movie of every genre deserves it's moment in the digital spotlight.
How die-hard DVD addicts can criticize people who want to try to get studios to release films that may not otherwise have been released, is complete hypocrisy.
Ron,
I'm glad we got things cleared up. I still say a sort of "live update" type thread in one of the forums may be the answer to our chat squabbles. You wouldn't have to put every bit of news info to come out of the chat if you didn't want to. Just keep updating a list of titles that have already been brought up or topics that have been mentioned in the chat. For instance...
1. "South Park"
2. Snapper Cases
3. "Babylon 5"
4. "Dial M For Murder"
5. "Batman" SE
Etc. Have someone keep updating a list during the chat for people who arrive late. They can open a seperate window in whatever forum has the thread containing the list. That way, whoever arrives late can have somewhere to go to sort of "catch up". After the chat's over, the thread can be immediately closed. Then the next day, those who didn't get to be at the chat can check the transcript as usual.
[Edited last by Wes Ray on October 18, 2001 at 10:20 AM]

 

[Wes Ray]

Will and Doug,
I too was disturbed by Warner Bros. policy about Unrated/NC-17 films. It is a topic which more HTF members should care about, but where it mainly involves films of the horror genre, most here probably think it's not worth fighting for because horror isn't "respectable". But even more respectable, dramatic films like Eyes Wide Shut fall under this category. DVD fans everywhere should be more concerned about this. I'd gladly take a pan and scan Uncut version of Eyes Wide Shut or Valentine over an anamorphic widescreen edited version any day. At least the OAR issue doesn't affect the actual content of the film being presented.
What's funny is that Warner Bros. wouldn't even restore the true R-Rated version of Valentine for DVD. It was R-Rated, completely approved by the MPAA and then before it's release, Warner Bros. cuts out all the gore while still saying it's R-Rated. On the DVD's commentary track, the director comments on all sorts of things that were trimmed AFTER the film got an R-Rating. Why couldn't Warner Bros. release a Director's Cut on DVD? You'd think after the terrible box-office showing of Valentine (a film that, while not great, could've been much worse) that Warner would've tried to pull out all the stops to get people interested in the DVD release.
I hope to see more people become interested in Director's Cuts of various movies, even if they are not horror fans. Everything deserves to be seen as it was intended on DVD, horror or not. What Warner Bros. did with Valentine was completely shameless and un-precedented.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

I have yet to participate in a chat but do read the transcripts.
I found Warner reps replies too short, vague, and somewhat rude. They were warned ahead of time what to expect!
I too was disappointed that the session centered on South Park and not more classics from their library. I was a bit peeved that too many "obscure" titles were brought up. Many I have never heard of and sure many thought the same.
Just my .02¢ worth.

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Ron,
I too believe that moderating the questions to say "Already Has Been Asked" would help provided that you can also help the question along if it could benefit from an "addition" or expanded form to cover other people's redundant questioning.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I read many of your responses since my last.
I am all for making these chats better for
everyone if it can be done.
Right now, the software we are using does
not allow us to do some of the things you
guys have suggested.
Furthermore, Parker and I are extremely
busy during these chats. It takes an immense
amount of work on both our sides to keep
things flowing. For that reason we cannot keep
track who comes in late or even post what
questions have been asked.
I can begin to ammend the problems you guys
bring up by immediately cutting off anyone that
has asked a question previously asked. That
person will lose their tun and we will move on to
the next question.
Although...
Someone stated that redundancy works
very well because the question may not be answered
well the first time. Repeated questions also
send a message of urgency to the studios about
what DVD enthusiasts most want.
As for a GOOD question vs. BAD question....
Yes, we all know that one day INDIANA JONES
and STAR WARS will come out. But will it be
next month? next year? Is it in the works?
These are legitimate questions you don't get
answers to every day. Thus, they are still
good questions.
Nobody has a bad question as far as I am
concerned. There are those of us that enjoy
mainstream titles and those that want more
obscure. It's a roll of the dice to see who
gets to ask what. That's what makes these
live chats so exciting. Anything preprepared
I can do over the phone, and that's not what I
wish to do.
Keep the suggestions coming.
------------------

Ronald Epstein (pronounced like the English "Ronald Epstein")
Circa 2000
Home Theater Forum Administrator
All forum questions & to get on our private forum mailing list (new members)... Email: [email protected]
Problems with the webpage or site? Contact WEBMASTER
Email Packy [email protected]

 

[LarryH]

I want to add my thanks to Warners for coming. I think it was a very productive event.
Just a minor observation on the issue of using VHS sale to predict DVD sales, especially for B5: I don't think B5 VHS was ever sold in complete seasons. If DVD sets of complete seasons are published I think the appeal to collectors would obviously be far greater and I don't think there is a TV show with more potential collectors (I may be biased).
Personally I have VHS copies of all the shows from broadcast but would instantly sign up for the much higher quality presentation of DVD (especially if anamorphically enhanced). I would also hope it would be less costly to buy a DVD season than individual VHS tapes (especially from Columbia House) not to mention the smaller storage space required.
I just think the DVD market is a whole new ball game.
[Edited last by LarryH on October 18, 2001 at 10:55 AM]

 

[Brian Kidd]

I also think the WB showed big cajones by entering into a chat with an obviously hostile constituency. I'm glad they did it. Kudos. However, I do wish that they would be more straightforward with us about the whole OAR issue. Their answers were quite vague and, at times, rude. It was obvious that there were several people sitting around on the WB end, deciding what kind of answers to give. Chat by committee is not a chat, it's a press release. I, for one, found the WB chat to be the worst example of a chat I've been privvy to on this site. Thank goodness the other studios know how to treat us.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I would say that repetition during chats is a good thing, after all, it was the repetitive requests for a certain film I wanted on DVD that encouraged the studio to pursue it. It also allows for more elaboration in the answer, or a return question from the studio.
Banning those who come late from asking questions isn't an option either, as there are any number of reasons someone may be late.
I don't think there is much I would change with the current chat format. A second channel for already asked questions would be okay, but that would need updating every few seconds as IRC won't show anything that wasn't posted since a user logged on, and I'm sure that the transcript wouldn't be a good thing to post raw into a thread on an ongoing basis.
If being an HTF puppet means I can come to a chat, ask my question, and have my requests granted by the studios, then I'm all for that.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Jay W]

I finally read through this as well. I wasn't all that dissapointed. The old addage 'beggers can't be choosers' goes along here pretty well I think. They did give us some encouraging news and the fact they are willing to participate to this degree is a reflection on the members and administration over here. It's nice to see even a big studio like Warner listening (to some extent). Thanks for having them over.
------------------
Home Theater
DVD Collection

 

[Michael*K]

I thought someone might have asked about the possibility of an Unforgiven SE.

Alas, guess I'll have to clear my schedule the next time WB comes to chat.
------------------
--Mike
Amazon Hot 100 DVD's

 

[Peter Rohlfs]

Though I miised the chat, I read the transcipt. I think it's great that warners showed up. They also addressed some issues I asked about in previous chats with them.
Robin Hood is getting a restoration and is set for 2003.
Prince and the Showgirl is now going to be released. When I first asked, they didn't know they had it

No if only Fox would do a second Marilyn box set.
Peter

 

[Steve Kramzer]

Ron, you state that you are rather busy during the session and don't have time to keep track of when people come in and out. Well, it would probably be relatively easy to have an irc bot scripted that would keep track of this. You could have it ignore people who come in late when you unmod the chan and it could keep track of people waiting in line to ask questions next. It would probably be a little more difficult, but you could also script it to automatically devoice and voice people when they are done wiht their question by having a key word at the end of their question like !Done . Also, instead of having to have a constantly updating thread on teh topics covered already, you could set a file on teh bot of what was already said during hte chat and for people to retrieve this they would just have to do something such as /notice Botname !progress or something similiar. This way everyone would be able to be updated through the entire chat.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Steve,
If you want to astermind this operation
I'll put you in touch with Parker.
I don't feel, however, we should restrict
latecomers.
------------------

Ronald Epstein (pronounced like the English "Ronald Epstein")
Circa 2000
Home Theater Forum Administrator
All forum questions & to get on our private forum mailing list (new members)... Email: [email protected]
Problems with the webpage or site? Contact WEBMASTER
Email Packy [email protected]

 

[RayG]

Warner would have to abandon their NC-17/unrated policy to release director cuts of Nightbreed, Once Upon a Time in America, and maybe Blade Runner. I think the "...just now." means they will abandon this policy in the near future.

 

[Nigel McN]

as I said before one of the main points of running another chat room would be to dish out the info to latecomers.