Which company do you think MGM should move to if Disney absorbs Fox's home entertainment division?

Which company do you think MGM should move to if Disney absorbs Fox's home entertainment division?

  • Warner Bros.

    Votes: 20 43.5%
  • Sony

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • Universal

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • None; they need to stay at Fox.

    Votes: 4 8.7%
  • None; they need to stay at Fox/Disney.

    Votes: 6 13.0%
  • Fox/Disney (for some titles)

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Shout/Criterion/Kino/etc.

    Votes: 17 37.0%

  • Total voters
    46
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
11
Points
11
Real Name
F
I bet it would likely be Warner Bros., I think they should hire some Fox executives to take much better care of their library and distribution deals, and forge more licensing deals with smaller HE distributors/boutique labels, along with a new HE distribution deal with MGM (whose logo would be on the spine and next to the Turner Entertainment logo on the back cover for future WB releases of pre-1986 MGM titles, just like how the Warner Bros. Pictures logo is next to the Turner Entertainment logo on covers of pre-1950 WB titles). I think both MGM's post-1986 library and WB's pre-1986 MGM library should be full circle, along with the other libraries that MGM owns.

(P.S. I know you might disagree with me, but I think WB should renew Paramount's library deal as well, but take much better care of Paramount's library than before as long as they make hires from Fox to work at their HE group.)

You can also vote multiple choices if you think all four companies should each handle a specific portion of MGM's library.
 
Last edited:

Josh Steinberg

Executive Producer
Reviewer
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
18,443
Reaction score
22,870
Points
9,110
Age
37
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
I’m skeptical that any major studio would be interested in making a new deal to distribute another studio’s physical media in 2019 and beyond. The market is drying up and the major studios are all winding down their output.

I think Todd’s idea that they’ll continue to be distributed by smaller labels is the best possible guess.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
11
Points
11
Real Name
F
I’m skeptical that any major studio would be interested in making a new deal to distribute another studio’s physical media in 2019 and beyond. The market is drying up and the major studios are all winding down their output.

I think Todd’s idea that they’ll continue to be distributed by smaller labels is the best possible guess.
Probably, but they're only licensing deals. Maybe the major studios need to ramp up their deals with those labels and continue licensing their titles to them, especially WB since they've got deals with Criterion, Mill Creek and Shout! Factory now.
 
Last edited:

darkrock17

Screenwriter
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,581
Reaction score
697
Points
1,610
Location
Alexandria, VA
Real Name
Andrew McClure
DON"T let WB anywhere near MGM, as they already own the pre 1981 library, they don't need to have the entire lock stock and barrel
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
33
Reaction score
11
Points
11
Real Name
F
DON"T let WB anywhere near MGM, as they already own the pre 1981 library, they don't need to have the entire lock stock and barrel
I know they own the pre-1986 library, that's one of the reasons I picked them.

Edit: If you don't think they should handle distribution of MGM's entire library, TV content and select new movies, then you need to choose multiple companies, with one that will handle main distribution, which covers a portion of their library and select TV and new film content, and the other companies handling distribution of other specific portions of the library. (I know this is already done by the boutique labels that license the library titles from MGM.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bill McCamy

darkrock17

Screenwriter
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,581
Reaction score
697
Points
1,610
Location
Alexandria, VA
Real Name
Andrew McClure
I know they own the pre-1986 library, that's one of the reasons I picked them.

Edit: If you don't think they should handle distribution of MGM's entire library, TV content and select new movies, then you need to choose multiple companies, with one that will handle main distribution, which covers a portion of their library and select TV and new film content, and the other companies handling distribution of other specific portions of the library. (I know this is already done by the boutique labels that license the library titles from MGM.)
Shout Factory is best to make a permanent deal with MGM so that they can forever have the titles that they've been releasing so far.
 

BRAD1963

Supporting Actor
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
546
Reaction score
493
Points
610
Real Name
BRAD
I may already be Universal. They distributed MGM's Operation Finale on Blu-ray last month.
 

ahollis

Lead Actor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
7,780
Reaction score
3,407
Points
9,110
Location
New Orleans
Real Name
Allen
I think they will just license their cataloge titles out to independent companies, but will work with Sony or Warner’s on the Bond Films.
 

Ronald Epstein

Founder
Owner
Joined
Jul 3, 1997
Messages
55,581
Reaction score
11,301
Points
9,110
Real Name
Ronald Epstein
DON"T let WB anywhere near MGM, as they already own the pre 1981 library, they don't need to have the entire lock stock and barrel
Actually, my vote would be that Warner does acquire it all -- though that attempt was made and failed years back.

Nobody does a better job with classic output than Warner Bros.
 

Robert Crawford

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
47,678
Reaction score
23,817
Points
9,110
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Actually, my vote would be that Warner does acquire it all -- though that attempt was made and failed years back.

Nobody does a better job with classic output than Warner Bros.
I think some people don't want Warner because of the number of releases is lower than they want from Warner and that they release too many "B" movies while not releasing enough "A" movies from their film library.
 
Last edited:

Brian Husar

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
405
Reaction score
232
Points
110
I say let the smaller boutique companies handle them, because they are doing good work, especially with the UA titles. Kino even restored the original United Artists logo for A Fistfull Of Dollars and The Good The Bad and The Ugly, and I hope that happens more often. Would love to see the a new 4k reissue of Raging Bull done by Arrow or Criterion with the UA Transamerca logo restored.
 

Billy Batson

Producer
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
3,496
Reaction score
2,287
Points
4,110
Age
69
Location
London
Real Name
Alan
Well I just don't know,. It looks like most of the major studios have given up on catalogue releases, but happily they do license out titles to boutique labels (not Paramount of course). Warner is the best label right now, but they have such a backlog of titles & it would be crazy to add to them. It would be great if Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation could take control of all those UA movies, but that's wild wishful thinking.
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
343,768
Messages
4,689,416
Members
141,039
Latest member
topreplay