Warner Archive Show Boat!

[s.w.a.c.]

Or even what's to stop someone just making their own copies by just photocopying the artwork sleeve in colour, and popping it into a plastic DVD case; and then copying the DVD-R and then selling that?

Nothing, judging by some of the dealers' rooms I've seen at film conventions, it's already happening!

[David Alp]

Or even what's to stop someone just making their own copies by just photocopying the artwork sleeve in colour, and popping it into a plastic DVD case; and then copying the DVD-R and then selling that?

Nothing, judging by some of the dealers' rooms I've seen at film conventions, it's already happening!

You're joking?? Surely not with the Warner Archive collection? Are you allowed to say what titles you have seen done like that?? (I mean, don't give the sellers names etc, just what titles..?)

[s.w.a.c.]

Or even what's to stop someone just making their own copies by just photocopying the artwork sleeve in colour, and popping it into a plastic DVD case; and then copying the DVD-R and then selling that?

Nothing, judging by some of the dealers' rooms I've seen at film conventions, it's already happening!

You're joking?? Surely not with the Warner Archive collection? Are you allowed to say what titles you have seen done like that?? (I mean, don't give the sellers names etc, just what titles..?)

I couldn't tell you off the top of my head, it's been a year since I've been to such an event, but I have seen pirate copies of WAC titles being sold (the cases were open, and I could tell they were just burned copies with colour inkjet covers). I've also seen "grey market" (OK, bootleg) copies of films that aren't direct copies of WAC editions, but the titles are the same, and maybe they've been sitting around the dealer's basement since before they were officially issued.

[Marr&Colton]

This is called COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT when anything other than PD movies are dubbed and sold either on eBay or at
movie conventions. I personally know of one of those sellers who was contacted by authorities and had quite a time and a huge expense to get clear of that trouble! Sooner or later the DVD pirates will be caught---even though some can go years
thinking they are OK.

[Paul Penna]

I have seen pirate copies of WAC titles being sold (the cases were open, and I could tell they were just burned copies with colour inkjet covers).

That's not necessarily an indication of piracy, since the WAC product is burned (with the exception of a few pressed titles) and the covers inkjet-printed.

[Connoisseur]

First time on DVD? I own - in English language - a DVD from Brazil of this movie: "Magnolia o barco das ilusoes" - not a DVD-R.. I think its from 2005..

[s.w.a.c.]

I have seen pirate copies of WAC titles being sold (the cases were open, and I could tell they were just burned copies with colour inkjet covers).

That's not necessarily an indication of piracy, since the WAC product is burned (with the exception of a few pressed titles) and the covers inkjet-printed.

Yes, but in this case the discs themselves are clearly store-bought blanks with the titles written on them in marker. Maybe the logic the dealers are using is that since the films are super-old and not sold in stores, this is somehow acceptable as an under-the-table endeavour. It's discouraging to see, since it seems the WAC is the only way we're going to get to see the bulk of what's in that sizeable collection of titles and pirate copies only undermine their efforts.

Someday I'll probably be forced to make the transition to streaming, but living in Canada, my options in that realm seem fairly limited (and my internet connection isn't the greatest either).

[LouieD]

Sooner or later the DVD pirates will be caught---even though some can go years
thinking they are OK.

I hate to tell you but the Feds aren't going to go after one dealer at a convention, they like to get the big scores and get their names in the paper. It happens like every five years, they make a big show so we can all see what a great job they're doing and everyone goes about their business. Been going on for years in this cycle.

[azjazzman]

Sooner or later the DVD pirates will be caught---even though some can go years
thinking they are OK.

I hate to tell you but the Feds aren't going to go after one dealer at a convention, they like to get the big scores and get their names in the paper. It happens like every five years, they make a big show so we can all see what a great job they're doing and everyone goes about their business. Been going on for years in this cycle.

I hate to tell you, but Warners is the one company that aggressively goes after pirates on a regular basis. They have attorneys send out cease and desist letters to ebay and other internet sellers all the time. And they have many sympathetic friends in the collector community that are happy to report copyright violations to them. That includes violations seen at film convention dealers rooms and even forums such as Nitrateville.

[rodney4130]

In my experience, convention goers will turn a blind eye and support a fellow attendee and dealer, whether the title in question is 'legit' or not. Probably goes back to all of the years spent trying to see things that the studios didn't think anyone wanted to see.

[LouieD]

I hate to tell you, but Warners is the one company that aggressively goes after pirates on a regular basis. They have attorneys send out cease and desist letters to ebay and other internet sellers all the time. And they have many sympathetic friends in the collector community that are happy to report copyright violations to them. That includes violations seen at film convention dealers rooms and even forums such as Nitrateville.

I've never seen it or ever heard it. Give some examples please.

[David Alp]

Well I bought a pirate copy of "Follow Thru" (1929) in Technicolor off Ebay a few years ago. It wasn't very expensive? Only about $10 I think??? The quality was not great? It was much the same as what you see on Youtube. I could tell it had been copied from a VHS tape as it had those VHS "rolls" and "flickers" every so often.... But what are we to do when we want to SEE these films and the Studio's just will not release them??? It's the only way sometimes.

The same thing happened with a copy of "Love Among The Millionaires" Paramount (1930) with Clara Bow and Stanley Smith. I couldn't tell it was a bootleg until I played it as the artwork was really good and convincing; it looked like a proper DVD. But you can always tell if you smudge the printed paint on the disc.

The other thing that happened to me years ago (in about 2006 ?) was that I found a copy of the Judy Garland movie "The Clock" (1945) on Ebay, and I put a bid on it as it had not had a legit DVD release at the time. Anyway I never got it because suddenly ebay took it off!!!! They must have been tipped off by Warners? I got a message saying "Sorry the item you were watching has been removed".... (All was well because a few months later "The Clock" was released on DVD anyway).

[silentmovies742]

Show Boat doesn't appear to have shown up on either Oldies or Amazon for us folks outside of the USA to buy - are there any other sites that sell WA releases and ship abroad?

[s.w.a.c.]

Show Boat doesn't appear to have shown up on either Oldies or Amazon for us folks outside of the USA to buy - are there any other sites that sell WA releases and ship abroad?

As someone else in this thread pointed out, Warner Archives sells their titles exclusively for a few weeks or so before letting outside retailers sell them. Just keep an eye on Oldies.com, Movies Unlimited and Deep Discount DVDs, it'll turn up on one of those sites before long (or any other site that carries the WAC titles with any regularity).

[bigshot]

The future of Warner Archive is streaming. WAS is the best reason to own a Roku box. The image and sound quality are fantastic and there's tons of high definition content that isn't available on blu-ray. I don't buy the WA DVDs any more. I just watch them in hidef on WAS.

[Changsham]

The future of Warner Archive is streaming. WAS is the best reason to own a Roku box. The image and sound quality are fantastic and there's tons of high definition content that isn't available on blu-ray. I don't buy the WA DVDs any more. I just watch them in hidef on WAS.

Well I hope not. OK if you live in the USA but the rest of the world still needs the physical media thanks to all the ludicrious copyright issues. Without resellers like Deep Discount, Amazon and others we would never have access.

[Jim Reid]

I bought a Roku just so I could get the Warner Achive streaming channel. After 3 months I cancelled it. The quality was horrible, full of digital artifacts and every film they had I already owned on DVD. Doubtful it was my connection or the Roku box because Netflix, HBO GO and every other channel looked fantastic. I sent them several messages telling them of the quality issue and go no responses.

[Paul Penna]

I bought a Roku just so I could get the Warner Achive streaming channel. After 3 months I cancelled it. The quality was horrible, full of digital artifacts and every film they had I already owned on DVD. Doubtful it was my connection or the Roku box because Netflix, HBO GO and every other channel looked fantastic. I sent them several messages telling them of the quality issue and go no responses.

I'm getting excellent quality from WAS. Is your Roku a 1? You only get HD with Roku 2 and 3 boxes. I didn't know that at first, but after I swapped out my 1 for a 3 and had WAS de-register the 1 the quality improved markedly.

[Jim Reid]

No. Mine's a 3.

[bigshot]

I use a Roku 3 with a 15/5 connection to the internet using Verizon Fios (not terribly fast). I bought the WA blu-ray of Jumbo and compared it to the WA streamed version... couldn't detect any difference at all. I've heard people complaining about problems with streaming services, but I think the problem is with the way their internet service provider connects them, not the streaming service itself.

[rudyfan]

I bought a Roku just so I could get the Warner Achive streaming channel. After 3 months I cancelled it. The quality was horrible, full of digital artifacts and every film they had I already owned on DVD. Doubtful it was my connection or the Roku box because Netflix, HBO GO and every other channel looked fantastic. I sent them several messages telling them of the quality issue and go no responses.

I found the same with WAS on my Roku. I also cancelled it because I did not find the content I was interested in seeing was all that different from what I had in the home collection or what screened on TCM.

[bigshot]

You must not care about 1080 resolution, because a lot of WAS is in hi def and isn't available anywhere else in that resolution.

[earlytalkiebuffRob]

Interesting thread on the SHOW BOAT front. Had no idea as to problems on 1951 version tho' not seen it for quite a while and no problems then. Guess it depends on whether seen on tv (and what size screen) or cinema as well. Remember a clip being featured in THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT (1974) on the enormous screen at the Dominion in London.

And very good about the 1929 disks as when I saw it a few years ago the mute section(s) spoilt this generally underrated and entertaining picture. It struck me that it should have used contemporary recording to plug the gap(s) whilst making clear it wasn't the original soundtrack. And has any on the missing film footage been found? Whatever the case, it is good to have again, particularly as it was always listed as 'lost' in the past.

[entredeuxguerres]

You must not care about 1080 resolution, because a lot of WAS is in hi def and isn't available anywhere else in that resolution.

I damn sure don't! And I care even less about the endlessly fascinating (to the terminally bored, I assume) subject of 2K vs 4K vs 8K.

[coolcatdaddy]

You must not care about 1080 resolution, because a lot of WAS is in hi def and isn't available anywhere else in that resolution.

Warners is releasing some of their Warner Archive titles to Vudu in 1080 resolution for streaming rental or download purchase.

I'm using a PS3 for streaming, so Warner Archive Streaming is a "no go" for me right now.

[Donald Binks]

You must not care about 1080 resolution, because a lot of WAS is in hi def and isn't available anywhere else in that resolution.

I damn sure don't! And I care even less about the endlessly fascinating (to the terminally bored, I assume) subject of 2K vs 4K vs 8K.

Crikey! There was a time when one was lucky to see any old picture!

Whilst all the restorations are absolutely marvelous and a credit to those involved - if I was really interested in seeing a picture, I would still put up with what was available.

Same as for 78 rpm gramophone records - I haven't waited until each of these has been acoustically enhanced on to a CD.

I wonder if there are people out there who will write in and complain that they saw a small white dot or blemish on frame no 36,745 of a film?!

[entredeuxguerres]

Same as for 78 rpm gramophone records - I haven't waited until each of these has been acoustically enhanced on to a CD.

I no longer have any 78s or a turntable to play them on, but among my very favorite recordings are the early opera series "Prima Voce" from Nimbus Records. I suppose these have been acoustically enhanced to some degree, but they certainly aren't "hi-def." Many others I have recorded from original 78s played on You Tube, which are of course entirely unenhanced.

[bigshot]

I have a 1080p Epson digital projector and a screen that measures 10 feet across. The difference between standard definition TV and 1080p is huge. If you're still living with a 24 inch CRT TV set, 1080p will make very little difference to you, but if you have projection, it's like the difference between watching a movie on TV and seeing it at a movie theater.

Warner Archive Streaming is packed with 1080 transfers of movies that aren't available on blu-ray. When I lower the lights and drop the screen, it's like having a really good revival theater screening restored prints right in my living room. Billy Rose's Jumbo is a total jaw dropper. The colors, the clarity, the widescreen aspect ratio, the multichannel audio that places sound precisely with the images on the screen... everything about it is stunning. And it's just as good streaming as on blu-ray.

Resolution matters, but only if you have the equipment to take advantage of it. Someday if you happen to visit someone who has a setup capable of doing justice to it, you'll understand what we're talking about when we jump for joy having a favorite movie in our own home that looks and sounds just like seeing it in a theater... sometimes even better.

This isn't like having movies on home video... it's like having movies.

[bigshot]

among my very favorite recordings are the early opera series "Prima Voce" from Nimbus Records. I suppose these have been acoustically enhanced to some degree, but they certainly aren't "hi-def."

The Nimbus historical transfers employed a CD based surround sound multichannel format that few people have the ability to decode. They recorded top of the line acoustic gramophones playing the records in small performance halls with both direct and indirect sound reproducing the whole 360 degrees. In two channel, it sounds nice, with a little extra reverberation. But with the right equipment, reproduced in 5:1, the sound on them is phenominal.

Both video and sound reproduction has improved significantly in the past few years. 5:1 sound is to stereo what stereo was to mono. And home video has advanced to the point where it is better in many respects than theatrical screenings.

[bigshot]

Warners is releasing some of their Warner Archive titles to Vudu in 1080 resolution for streaming rental or download purchase.

That's great news. I would be very interested if they offered the option to purchase and download 1080p files of films on WAS.