Talking, collecting and preserving classic film.
https://www.nitrateville.com/
See! There is a God!entredeuxguerres wrote:She did, actually, suggesting you'd already downed too many Martinis before watching Private Lives.Harlett O'Dowd wrote:One good thing about Norma - she never tried to sing.
Just kidding...though I'm sure the brazenly un-PC ethos of these films must be viewed with horror by most in the British gov't...as of course it is with most in the Washington establishment.silentmovies742 wrote: It's nothing to do with the government.
I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about. Show Boat has been out of print on home video in the states for about two decades. It's not like there is a blanket ban on Hollywood movies here but, on the other hand, rights issues clearly get in the way when it comes to some of the more minor films available via the warner archive in america. If there isn't a big enough market for these films in America for them to be factory pressed, I'm not quite sure why you would think it would be profitable for a company to release them over here when our population (and therefore amount of consumers) is around 20% of that in America.entredeuxguerres wrote:Just kidding...though I'm sure the brazenly un-PC ethos of these films must be viewed with horror by most in the British gov't...as of course it is with most in the Washington establishment.silentmovies742 wrote: It's nothing to do with the government.
But I'm not kidding about the surprising failure of British entrepreneurs to obtain, by hook or crook, copies of such pictures as are commonly available here & sell or otherwise circulate them there. Afgan hash reaches Britain in vast quantities, along with drugs from other remote places, but not old American movies.
No? Ah, don't know if it's kind of me to disabuse you of your innocence ("humankind cannot bear very much reality," Eliot said)...but maybe it would behoove you to learn the American facts of home-video life; which is that everything broadcast on TCM, & other movie-broadcasting networks, or once available on VHS, Laser Disk, etc., is now readily & cheaply available on DVD from free-market ("grey-market," if you prefer the pejorative) distributors.silentmovies742 wrote:I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....
Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?entredeuxguerres wrote:No? Ah, don't know if it's kind of me to disabuse you of your innocence ("humankind cannot bear very much reality," Eliot said)...but maybe it would behoove you to learn the American facts of home-video life; which is that everything broadcast on TCM, & other movie-broadcasting networks, or once available on VHS, Laser Disk, etc., is now readily & cheaply available on DVD from free-market ("grey-market," if you prefer the pejorative) distributors.silentmovies742 wrote:I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....
"Grey Market" isn't pejorative, "Bootleggers" are the pejorative term. And while us collectors/obsessives will have traded a copy of an offair from TCM years back, Joe and Josephine Public have merely been waiting to see the James Whale-directed Showboat to appear on the shelves of whatever high street shop they frequent, as even now Paul Robeson still has a following here. Regarding the difficulties in obtaining legit releases of 30's Hollywood product on DVD, up until a year ago and the recent efforts of Network DVD, the chance of finding a 30's British film on DVD over here was far more remote.entredeuxguerres wrote:No? Ah, don't know if it's kind of me to disabuse you of your innocence ("humankind cannot bear very much reality," Eliot said)...but maybe it would behoove you to learn the American facts of home-video life; which is that everything broadcast on TCM, & other movie-broadcasting networks, or once available on VHS, Laser Disk, etc., is now readily & cheaply available on DVD from free-market ("grey-market," if you prefer the pejorative) distributors.silentmovies742 wrote:I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....
That is very true - although having now seen some of those 30s British films, I know why some of them weren't released earlier! That said, Network's effort in this area over the last couple of years has to be applauded. Who knows, in the near future we might see the tally of British silents not directed by Hitchcock rise over the half dozen mark on dvd!Penfold wrote:"Grey Market" isn't pejorative, "Bootleggers" are the pejorative term. And while us collectors/obsessives will have traded a copy of an offair from TCM years back, Joe and Josephine Public have merely been waiting to see the James Whale-directed Showboat to appear on the shelves of whatever high street shop they frequent, as even now Paul Robeson still has a following here. Regarding the difficulties in obtaining legit releases of 30's Hollywood product on DVD, up until a year ago and the recent efforts of Network DVD, the chance of finding a 30's British film on DVD over here was far more remote.entredeuxguerres wrote:No? Ah, don't know if it's kind of me to disabuse you of your innocence ("humankind cannot bear very much reality," Eliot said)...but maybe it would behoove you to learn the American facts of home-video life; which is that everything broadcast on TCM, & other movie-broadcasting networks, or once available on VHS, Laser Disk, etc., is now readily & cheaply available on DVD from free-market ("grey-market," if you prefer the pejorative) distributors.silentmovies742 wrote:I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....
Well, by whatever name they're known, why are they in such short supply (as UK friends have told me), when the US purveyors are happy to mail worldwide? Cost of postage, due to recent outrageous price hikes, is something of a deterrent, but when there's no alternative...silentmovies742 wrote: Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?
They are not in short supply - anyone can pick them up on ebay or ioffer if they want to. But, perhaps we prefer the real thing to a copy made by a guy in his bedroom? If I wanted a copy of a film I'd find a torrent and download it, I sure as hell wouldn't pay someone $15 for the privilege of giving it to me on a blue disc. As it happens, I (and I'm sure most here) much prefer a genuine article. I'm not sure why that should be hard for someone to understand - especially in a thread about warner archive releases.entredeuxguerres wrote:Well, by whatever name they're known, why are they in such short supply (as UK friends have told me), when the US purveyors are happy to mail worldwide? Cost of postage, due to recent outrageous price hikes, is something of a deterrent, but when there's no alternative...silentmovies742 wrote: Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?
What IS hard for this someone to understand is how one distinguishes between the "genuine article" & the "blue disk" after pressing the "play" button; without considering differences in packaging, I mean.silentmovies742 wrote: As it happens, I (and I'm sure most here) much prefer a genuine article. I'm not sure why that should be hard for someone to understand - especially in a thread about warner archive releases.
The facts are these: if we buy films from bootleggers instead of the genuine articles when they are available (or likely to become available), then we are putting at risk the release of further films of this ilk. If a film is never likely to be released (because of condition, for example, or even because the studio doesn't have an archive-like series through which it would be released), then that's a different story altogether. However, in the case of a film like Show Boat, it was always going to be released at some point, and to buy it through a bootlegger would inevitably have been one less sale for Warner.entredeuxguerres wrote:What IS hard for this someone to understand is how one distinguishes between the "genuine article" & the "blue disk" after pressing the "play" button; without considering differences in packaging, I mean.silentmovies742 wrote: As it happens, I (and I'm sure most here) much prefer a genuine article. I'm not sure why that should be hard for someone to understand - especially in a thread about warner archive releases.
Furthermore, if you believe the really scarce early ('28-'32) talkies are available on ebay & ioffer, it's evident you haven't tried to find them (which would be distasteful to you anyway, I gather). And if you seriously believe the kinds of obscure films I'm referring to (the ones I dote on) are EVER going to be available via WA, or any similar producer...well, let's hope you're right, but I think your optimism exceeds good logic.
If you're satisfied with not seeing many fascinating early pictures unavailable except as "outlaws," I envy your self-restraint, because mine is the appetite which grows by what it feeds upon.
Aye, there's the rub--can you imagine films like Bachelor Apartment or Lawful Larceny, two particular favorites of mine, along with scores of similar obscurities, becoming, in a million years, "official releases"?silentmovies742 wrote:The facts are these: if we buy films from bootleggers instead of the genuine articles when they are available (or likely to become available)...
entredeuxguerres wrote: Aye, there's the rub--can you imagine films like Bachelor Apartment or Lawful Larceny, two particular favorites of mine, along with scores of similar obscurities, becoming, in a million years, "official releases"?
Well, in that case, in the highly unlikely event I'm still around, I'll be happy to buy them from WA--because the best prints of these (and scores of others) currently available are washed-out 16mm copies that look like they were filmed under water.Jim Reid wrote:entredeuxguerres wrote: Aye, there's the rub--can you imagine films like Bachelor Apartment or Lawful Larceny, two particular favorites of mine, along with scores of similar obscurities, becoming, in a million years, "official releases"?
Yes I can. Both these titles are owned by Warners and George Feltenstein has said many times that he expects every film they own to be released when all is said and done.
I bet you've not got "Letty Lynton" (1932) M-G-M. (LOL)Jim Reid wrote:entredeuxguerres wrote: Aye, there's the rub--can you imagine films like Bachelor Apartment or Lawful Larceny, two particular favorites of mine, along with scores of similar obscurities, becoming, in a million years, "official releases"?
Yes I can. Both these titles are owned by Warners and George Feltenstein has said many times that he expects every film they own to be released when all is said and done.
Over the years, I have read on this forum endless times where "this film will never be released" used as an excuse to break the law. The majority of the titles they mention are now on my shelves in nice studio sanctioned DVDS.
Maybe he doesn't...but I know someone who does. (Though it lacks, to be brutally honest, the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.)David Alp wrote:I bet you've not got "Letty Lynton" (1932) M-G-M. (LOL)
AFAIK, all prints of OUR DANCING DAUGHTERS are soft. I've seen a very old 16mm rental print and it was the same. Unless there is archival material sourced from a different 35mm print, I don't believe there is anything better.Brooksie wrote:Yay, Our Blushing Brides! I can't understand why they don't make a nice boxed set or package of the three Our Something Something films. From memory, the Warner Archive print of Our Dancing Daughters was a tad soft. Restoration? Well, we can dream ...
Yep, and all existing prints of OUR DANCING DAUGHTERS have that printed in hair, too. MGM gets kudos for instituting a program fairly early on to transfer all their nitrate to safety film, but sad to say, their lab work was not all that great. I knew a fellow who worked in the MGM lab back in the 1960s and 70s and he said a lot of the work was rushed. MGM wanted the stuff copied, but they wanted it done quickly and spending the least amount of money.Danny Burk wrote:AFAIK, all prints of OUR DANCING DAUGHTERS are soft. I've seen a very old 16mm rental print and it was the same. Unless there is archival material sourced from a different 35mm print, I don't believe there is anything better.Brooksie wrote:Yay, Our Blushing Brides! I can't understand why they don't make a nice boxed set or package of the three Our Something Something films. From memory, the Warner Archive print of Our Dancing Daughters was a tad soft. Restoration? Well, we can dream ...
Since I'll watch anything with Ann Sothern in it, I've naturally had to accommodate myself to Gene Raymond, who, otherwise, I'd have found no attraction. Can't say I've now become a "huge fan," but at least I don't find him too hard to take anymore; so long, that is, as he doesn't SING...which all too often some tone-deal studio exec (I guess) thought he should do.Harold Aherne wrote:Released a couple of weeks ago: a pair of Ann Sothern-Gene Raymond features, The Smartest Girl in Town (1936) and She's Got Everything (1937).
-HA
That webpage is definitely required reading by anyone who doesn't understand what 1080, 720, 480, i, p, and various other digital video terms mean.Mike Gebert wrote:There are some questions you don't have to ask the head of an archive:
http://www.ebay.com/gds/What-is-1080p-H ... 566/g.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank