Warner to Buy MGM film library?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Greg_M, Mar 4, 2002.

  1. Greg_M

    Greg_M Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,189
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nightly business report annoucned tonight that Warner Bros. is very interested in buying the MGM/UA library. That would most likely make them the largest Home Video library if they aren't already.

    more snappers anyone...
     
  2. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,596
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    Why is WB even interested? Don't they have enough films from the Turner library...come on...they still haven't released most of their films due to the sheer size of it.
    WB would do a good job (None of this re-using laserdisc transfers like MGM did with The Apartment and Westworld.)
    I hope if WB does buy MGM, they put more money and effort into restoring the old UA library and releasing it to DVD.
    I think the James Bond DVD's would look great in snappers. [​IMG]
     
  3. Marc Colella

    Marc Colella Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 1999
    Messages:
    2,601
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Although MGM has really made a major improvement lately, I would still love to see Warner buy them out.

    Warner puts out some fantastic transfers.
     
  4. Jon_W

    Jon_W Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  5. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,585
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With the 2 $60m US flops (Hart's War, Rollerball) MGM has to be a bit more vulnerable at this point. Selling off catalog stuff would be one method to raise capital.

    Seems possible. Not sure what that would mean to the DVDs at this point (except more snappers).
     
  6. Rob T

    Rob T Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2001
    Messages:
    1,987
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  7. Martin Fontaine

    Martin Fontaine Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2001
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lets not forget that MGM has put a few DTS titles so far, and Warner are Anti-DTS...

    But for me, 384kbps Audio bothers me more than Snappers...
     
  8. Robert George

    Robert George Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    1,105
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
     
  9. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,596
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
     
  10. Joseph J.D

    Joseph J.D Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    2,695
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Oh goody....more movies for Warner to horde and not release to the public in a timely fashion.[​IMG]
     
  11. Mark_TS

    Mark_TS Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,704
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    *IF it happens...not good news....WARNER may release great transfers-a half dozen or so per year of SELECT catalog films. The rest is mostly NEW STUFF. MGM releases loads of product, most of it quite adequate, even excellent, and definitely stuff that will never see the light of day at WB.
    Since WB can barely release any catalog beyond 1 per month, at best, and ONE GREAT 'restoration' every few months, I fail to see how their owning an even larger library (which will set them back big dough-and likely slow down further their release schedule-Huge Capital outlays=Departmental budget cuts) will help get more catalog on the street.
    Say good bye to the AVANTE GARDE/MIDNITE MOVIE/FOREIGN FILM release schedule that is so free flowing at MGM.
    WB cant seem to even put out THEM! SIERRA MADRE, or SHELTERING SKY etc -how could one expect them to put out such titles as say, ANGELS AND INSECTS, BLACK ROBE, FELLINI SATYRICON, etc...
    ...and no need to worry about their crappy cases- if nothing from MGM ever gets released in them [​IMG]
     
  12. Mark Bendiksen

    Mark Bendiksen Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 1999
    Messages:
    1,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  13. Mitchell Kaufman

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2001
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree. All that aliasing has me wondering about something.

    Is it possible that MGM used the film-to-tape transfer that was made for the old LD and used *it* as the basis for the anamorphic DVD (rather than going back to film)?

    It would seem that the mere fact that it's anamorphic doesn't rule out the possibility that an old transfer was used.

    Or am I nuts?

    MK
     
  14. Sanjay Gupta

    Sanjay Gupta Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Sanjay Gupta
    Warner has put out more than their share of crappy 'catalog' DVDs, where they have used old transfers made for Laser Discs or VHS. In fact they were the first to come out with their Pan & SCam low priced DVDs. Also Warner are most certainly anti DTS. They have released a few catalog titles with DTS and that was it, even a major release such as Matrix did not get a DTS track. Also as far as them releasing DTS prints for the theaters is concerned, all movies from all studios are released with all the theree major sound formats, 'DTS, DD & SDDS'. This is a must since all theaters are not equiped to handle the various sound formats, thus Warner has pretty much no choice but to release DTS prints also.

    All in all, clubbed with the argument that with a huge catalog of movies already Warner is way behind in releasing them to DVD and they also do not give importance to all of their catalog releases, I would say Warner buying out MGM may not be such a good idea after all.

    Other than the strong resistance shown by Warner (albeit in it's own interests, since it owns patents on DVD) to DIVX and their support for low priced sell thru titles, Warner has done little to advance the cause of good quality DVDs.

    Sanjay

    Member since 1997
     
  15. Jay E

    Jay E Cinematographer

    Joined:
    May 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And you can kiss goodbye any chances of seeing any unrated or NC-17 DVDs released (ie:Last House on the Left).

    I hope this doesn't happen. I love the way MGM has turned it around as they are starting to release some great DVDs. And I'm sure that the 10 to 15 catalog titles MGM puts out a month will slow to 1 or 2 when Warner gets their hording little hands on them. Sorry, but I don't want to wait 30 or 40 years to see some of my favorite films released on DVD or HD-DVD.
     
  16. Larry Bevil

    Larry Bevil Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 1999
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Shucks, I was hoping it would be the other way around - with MGM buying Warners. Maybe we could get some long overdue catalog titles on the release list if MGM were managing the catalog titles. [​IMG]
     
  17. Mark Zimmer

    Mark Zimmer Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    4,301
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Warner buying the MGM library as it remains would be a tragedy of immense proportions for the home theater fan. MGM has been doing an excellent job of releasing minor titles that would never, EVER see the light of day in the Warner regime. I don't expect to live long enough for Warner to finally get around to releasing titles like Freaks.
    I agree, it would be MUCH better if MGM would buy out Warner's library. [​IMG]
     
  18. Peter Kline

    Peter Kline Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 1999
    Messages:
    2,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Unfortunately, releasing minor titles means minimal sales. It generally costs the same whether its a hit or older title to master. MGM/UA has undergone tremendous changes in the past 30 years. Ownership has been mostly by people only interested in leveraging films so that at some point they can sell and turn a profit. These money men have no real interest in film per se. It's just a commodity to them.
     
  19. Greg_M

    Greg_M Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,189
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If Warner's owns the majority of films (Warner, New Line, MGM, United Artists) they'll have better control when it comes to only releasing films for "Video On Demand" - especially if you can't see them any other way. Warner wants to eliminate video "Blockbuster" rental and have the profits come directly to them. The only way to do this is to control all the films. (

    Of course Disney, Columbia, Universal, Fox and Paramount will still be around)
     
  20. Larry P

    Larry P Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MGM is one of my favorite studios for DVDs. They put out so many smaller films and older films.

    And IMO, they create the best covers. I love the way the way they color the images on their covers; it reminds me of the way the old black and white films look afeter they've been artificially colored. I think they are just really creative when it comes to the cover and jacket design for their films, especially the older and independent/foreign films. Most studios don't give that much attention to these films, and its nice that MGM not only releases them but also gives us the nice cover art to look at.
     

Share This Page