WHV Announcement: Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume Two (Blu-ray) (DVD) (1 Viewer)

[cgm1013]

I was on Amazon looking at the two photos of the set. On the top of the back cover there is a scene from "Casanova Cat" where Toodles accidentally paints Tom's teeth instead of her fingernails. Tom then smiles and it looks like he has missing teeth. A very funny gag which shows how great this cartoon is.Why in the world would that image be on the back cover if WB intended not to include it in the set?

Also, the back cover has the disclaimer!"Tom and Jerry: Golden Collection Volume 2 is intended for the Adult Collector and May Not Be Suitable for Children."

 

[dana martin]

UPDATE

The poster above has managed to post the latest news I received from Warner Bros. moments ago.

Here is the situation...

Your questions are not going to be answered as promised.

A Warner Bros. spokesman instead reached out to let me know that the studio has decided to postpone the release. Word for word, what was posted above was the official response I received from a studio representative.

What does this mean? I have no idea. However, if I were to take a guess --- and this merely an assumption --- your concerns were heard loudly and clearly.

I would keep my fingers crossed as well.

and along with crossed fingers , i thought it might be time to switch up the profile pic

 

[JJHLH]

That sounds like a pretty good reason to postpone the release: Change the cover art to reflect the content included.

But the back cover art just now appeared on Amazon, two months after WB had already announced they were omitting 2 cartoons from the set.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

That sounds like a pretty good reason to postpone the release: Change the cover art to reflect the content included.

The fact they did not answer the questions as promised combined with the postponement
of the release -- for me -- is quite telling .

If this were just an opportunity for them to change the cover art I think they would have
defended their original decision and answered your inquiries.

In other words, my guess (and without knowing a thing) is that you guys are going to
get what you want.

 

[JoHud]

Also the set doesn't appear to have gone in production yet so fixing the box art wouldn't have postponed the set indefinitely, more like push it back a month, if at all.

 

[David_AG]

In other words, my guess (and without knowing a thing) is that you guys are going to
get what you want.

Ron, Warner has a very bad track record when it comes to box art on animation releases. The case for the recent "Looney Tunes Super Stars: Porky and Friends" featured stills from no less than three cartoons that weren't on the set: Daffy Doodles, Nothing But the Tooth, and Tick Tock Tuckered. It could simply be bitter irony that the Tom and Jerry case pictured one of the disputed cartoons, while still not including it on the disc itself. It might have been part of the package design months ago.

 

[Ruz-El]

Ron, Warner has a very bad track record when it comes to box art on animation releases. The case for the recent "Looney Tunes Super Stars: Porky and Friends" featured stills from no less than three cartoons that weren't on the set: Daffy Doodles, Nothing But the Tooth, and Tick Tock Tuckered. It could simply be bitter irony that the Tom and Jerry case pictured one of the disputed cartoons, while still not including it on the disc itself. It might have been part of the package design months ago.

That was my thinking when I said "That sounds like a pretty good reason to postpone the release: Change the cover art to reflect the content included." Seeing as a fuss was kicked up about the exclusion of cartoons, maybe a closer look at the release showed stills from them on the cover art, so they pulled it to correct the cover art as opposed to reprinting the discs with the missing cartoons.

My concern is: Everything I have heard about Warner Brothers for the past 6 or so years was that their was no money in traditional releases. So what's more cost effective to the suits in charge; changing the cover art so as not to give the people upset with this release more ammunition to complain/scrap the set completely, or re-press the set to include the cartoons that were specifically and purposely pulled from the release?

My heart hopes for the latter since I grew up with and love these cartoons, my brain suspects the former sadly. I see this set either compromised or scrapped. And I really do hope to be proved wrong for once. I don't plan on buying another Warner Brothers classic animation release until they commit to doing right by these Tom & Jerry sets and that means releasing them complete and uncensored for the adult collector as was their original stated intent.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I would just personally find it heartless if the studio promised to answer
your questions (which they have), then refused to do it under any
circumstances other than that they were going to cave in and release
the set uncensored, as the fans demanded.

I am certain all of you would look at it the same way as well.

 

[Ruz-El]

I would just personally find it heartless if the studio promised to answer
your questions (which they have), then refused to do it under any
circumstances other than that they were going to cave in and release
the set uncensored, as the fans demanded.

I am certain all of you would look at it the same way as well.

But that's not quite what happened though right? A person from the publicity department very graciously agreed to take our questions and concerns to the powers that be and did so. The "response" was that none of those questions or concerns would be addressed, instead the title was being postponed. That can, as is apparent by many of our posts and probably mostly my concerns (I'm largely a glass half empty guy when it comes to corporate stuff with Warner Bros) since yesterday, mean anything.

I'm not blaming the person who took our questions to the powers that be of course, they did what they said they would. It was fantastic of them to do so. I just don;t see anything coming from Warner's about the issue other then the initial press release and the updated post from yesterday that it was postponed.

I'll be happy to be wrong of course, or miss-remembering. I don;t recall any type of promise.

And it would be heartless of them to not release the cartoons now, but I suspect they're more gutless and will continue to withhold them.

 

[Traveling Matt]

I wouldn't look too much into a lack of answers and what it could mean. There are different people making decisions now, and that cleans the slate.

 

[David_AG]

I would just personally find it heartless if the studio promised to answer
your questions (which they have), then refused to do it under any
circumstances other than that they were going to cave in and release
the set uncensored, as the fans demanded.

I am certain all of you would look at it the same way as well.

I would, of course; but that's why we at HTF would like you to talk with Warner and investigate further, rather than presume that the case is sure to be settled in our favor.

 

[Robert Crawford]

But that's not quite what happened though right? A person from the publicity department very graciously agreed to take our questions and concerns to the powers that be and did so. The "response" was that none of those questions or concerns would be addressed, instead the title was being postponed. That can, as is apparent by many of our posts and probably mostly my concerns (I'm largely a glass half empty guy when it comes to corporate stuff with Warner Bros) since yesterday, mean anything.

I'm not blaming the person who took our questions to the powers that be of course, they did what they said they would. It was fantastic of them to do so. I just don;t see anything coming from Warner's about the issue other then the initial press release and the updated post from yesterday that it was postponed.

I'll be happy to be wrong of course, or miss-remembering. I don;t recall any type of promise.

And it would be heartless of them to not release the cartoons now, but I suspect they're more gutless and will continue to withhold them.

I suppose calling them gutless and such will get them to do what you want them to.

 

[JJHLH]

My concern is: Everything I have heard about Warner Brothers for the past 6 or so years was that their was no money in traditional releases. So what's more cost effective to the suits in charge; changing the cover art so as not to give the people upset with this release more ammunition to complain/scrap the set completely, or re-press the set to include the cartoons that were specifically and purposely pulled from the release? My heart hopes for the latter since I grew up with and love these cartoons, my brain suspects the former sadly. I see this set either compromised or scrapped. And I really do hope to be proved wrong for once. I don't plan on buying another Warner Brothers classic animation release until they commit to doing right by these Tom & Jerry sets and that means releasing them complete and uncensored for the adult collector as was their original stated intent.

I'm not convinced these sets don't sell well. WB has already said that they have sold over 17 million Tom and Jerry units (probably all iterations - VHS, laserdisc, DVD, bluray, iTunes), but that is a lot of units!! And remember, these are sold worldwide. That is especially true for Tom and Jerry where there isn't much talking. Most of the jokes involve visual gags and music, so people who don't understand english can still fully enjoy the shorts. The animation work was done decades ago. Their main expense is probably marketing and restoration. And don't forget the franchise value. It's not just profits from the sets themselves but the royalties from Tom and Jerry merchandise - cups, gifts, new TV series and movies, stuffed animals, video games, ect. I'll bet they make money hand over fist. And they are only scratching the surface of what is possible. But they need to expose a new generation to these treasures, and that is one of the reasons for the release. Profits on the release itself may even be a secondary consideration. The franchise value itself being of primary importance. Heck, Walt Disney started an empire from a cartoon mouse.

 

[Greg Chenoweth]

I would, of course; but that's why we at HTF would like you to talk with Warner and investigate further, rather than presume that the case is sure to be settled in our favor.

We need to be patient and wait for WHV to announce what is going to happen. If there had been an instantaneous answer, then we would have received it. It might take a couple of weeks to sort it out, maybe longer. We need to wait for their response at this point.

 

[kitt1987]

I wouldn't worry too much about the box art being displayed on Amazon. I'm sure that the art was prepared months ago and remember Mr. Harris was under the belief that the omitted toons were going to be included in the set as late as a week or two before the Blu announcement. Also Amazon will eventually change the release date, just give them time. More than likely they're simply waiting on further word from WB (as we all are) as to what the potential release date will be.
I look at this postponement as positive thing at the very least. I agree and will reiterate that name calling and acting disrespectful towards the WB will get you nothing with the exception that you end up sound like a self-entitled brat with the rest of us. We rallied and our voices were heard so let's patiently wait and see what happens.

 

[dana martin]

New "original" movie based on Jack and the Beanstalk coming, but as for the answer we are all waiting on, its straight out of a Looney Tunes cartoon, or is it only me that is hearing crickets?

 

[David_AG]

"Changing the cover art" is a rationale that was invented here at HTF. I have seen no indication anywhere else that Warner even realizes the cover art depicted one of the banned cartoons.

The radio silence from Warner seems to suggest they're more likely to have simply shelved the set completely. Someone ought to tell them that this would be just as offensive to us as releasing it censored; if not more so.

 

[Dan_Shane]

The radio silence from Warner seems to suggest they're more likely to have simply shelved the set completely. Someone ought to tell them that this would be just as offensive to us as releasing it censored; if not more so.

Go right ahead.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Go right ahead.

He already did.

 

[dana martin]

anything?? anything?? not a word in quite some time, just wandering what is happing with this release