Warner Archive for 2014

[Harlett O'Dowd]

One good thing about Norma - she never tried to sing.

She did, actually, suggesting you'd already downed too many Martinis before watching Private Lives.

See! There is a God!

[entredeuxguerres]

It's nothing to do with the government.

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.

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.

[Harold Aherne]

A couple more notes on Show Boat: according to the WAC newsletter, the film is remastered and initial quantities will be pressed.

-HA

[silentmovies742]

It's nothing to do with the government.

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.

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.

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]

I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....

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]

I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....

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.

Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?

[Penfold]

I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....

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.

"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.

[silentmovies742]

I'm not quite sure what films you are actually talking about....

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.

"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.

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!

[entredeuxguerres]

Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?

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]

Why don't you just say bootlegs and done with it?

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...

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]

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.

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.

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.

[silentmovies742]

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.

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.

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.

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]

The facts are these: if we buy films from bootleggers instead of the genuine articles when they are available (or likely to become available)...

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"?

Quite true that pictures of the status of Show Boat are "going to be released at some point," even if that means waiting decades. But depriving myself of the many times I've enjoyed it in the past would be a very bitter pill to swallow, even if it could be known for a certainty (impossible, of course) that on such & such a date, the "genuine article" would be available for purchase. Human lifetimes, moreover (if I may be permitted to bring up an unpleasant reality), aren't generally of indefinite duration.

[Jim Reid]

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.

[entredeuxguerres]

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.

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.

[David Alp]

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.

I bet you've not got "Letty Lynton" (1932) M-G-M. (LOL)

[entredeuxguerres]

I bet you've not got "Letty Lynton" (1932) M-G-M. (LOL)

Maybe he doesn't...but I know someone who does. (Though it lacks, to be brutally honest, the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.)

[Harold Aherne]

The four previously mentioned Joan Crawford titles are available today (Montana Moon, Our Blushing Brides, I Live My Life, The Bride Wore Red), as well as The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (1937). Almost all of her talkies are now available on DVD, save for Letty Lynton and They All Kissed the Bride (which is part of the Columbia library).

-HA

[Brooksie]

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 ...

[Danny Burk]

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 ...

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.

[azjazzman]

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 ...

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.

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.

The OUR DANCING DAUGHTERS nitrate was already starting to go and all that we are left with is the print you see on the Warner Archive DVD.

[Harold Aherne]

Available today is a triple feature of The Big House: the well-known original and two alternate-language editions, El presidio and Révolte dans la prison, the latter with Charles Boyer.

-HA

[Harold Aherne]

Five Richard Dix titles are available in today's batch: The Public Defender (1931), Ace of Aces (1933), His Greatest Gamble (1934), Reno (1939) and Men Against the Sky (1940).

-HA

[Harold Aherne]

Two Norma Shearers are out today, The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (1929) and Her Cardboard Lover (1942).

-HA

[s.w.a.c.]

There's a Warner Archive sale on now at http://www.Oldies.com, probably won't find the newest of the new titles, but might be able to fill some gaps. Finally knuckled down and picked up those Eddie Cantor titles.

[Harold Aherne]

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).

Out today are four Clark Gable titles: Hell Divers (1931), After Office Hours (1935), Parnell (1937) and Test Pilot (1938).

-HA

[entredeuxguerres]

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

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.

[David Alp]

Quote from George Feltenstein (from further up on this same thread):

Recently, we launched Warner Archive Instant, a new streaming service specializing in hard-to-find Hollywood classics - many available in 1080p HD that are not on Blu-ray disc. Our mission is to bring you more than 90 years of film from the Warner library

Anyway; a few questions!

1: Will this new streaming service be available in the UK????

2: If not. Why not??!!!!! It's not fair!

3: Now 1080p ??? A couple of queries?? Is that as clear as a blu-ray when watched on a large TV screen?? Or only as clear as a DVD?? (Also; I've noticed lots and lots of new Youtube clips are coming up as 1080p and I'm wondering to myself if they would also be as clear as blu-ray if I were to watch it on my television???) So the real question is, what exactly is 1080p??

[Mike Gebert]

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

[Christopher Jacobs]

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

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.

However, it doesn't go into the fact that so-called "high-definition" video that comes over the air, over a cable, or over the internet, is very highly compressed, compared with what you get on a properly encoded Blu-ray, which itself is still highly compressed compared with what you see in a digital cinema, which is also substantially compressed over what was actually shot and edited. This saves broadcast or internet bandwidth as well as memory requirements and processor speed but degrades what you see, often severely. Digital compression can be pretty amazing and gets better every year, but in unskilled hands and when taken to extremes (as most cable channels like to do), it destroys the integrity of the image.

Again, some people (especially those who like to keep smaller file size HD digital copies of movies on flash drives and hard drives) apparently are unable to notice the compression artifacts (which typically tend to look like a swarm of insects around anything that moves) and find HD streaming video and "digital copies" perfectly adequate. Digital compression artifacts, especially for sporting events and anything with fast action, frequently make what started out as a high-definition 1080i image or 720p image actually look worse on your HDTV set than a good standard-definition 480i or 480p image that has a high and steady bit rate in its data stream.

This may be why some people who don't understand how much compression that TV stations and internet streaming services employ for what they claim to be HD content (compared with the lower compression and much higher bitrates used on most Blu-rays) don't believe Blu-rays will look significantly better than DVDs, since their HDTV broadcasts may actually look worse! DVDs provide a maximum picture quality of 480 pixels tall by 720 pixels wide (stretched or squeezed to match the aspect ratio). This is the maximum resolution of a standard definition broadcast video signal that has been only moderately improved since 1936, but which could never be seen outside of professional studio monitors until better TV sets that could actually display what was broadcast started selling at lower prices in the 1990s and early 2000s. By that time HDTV had started and within a decade home TV sets switched to higher definition. People with satisfied with older TV sets sometimes don't care about the difference and sometimes are shocked at the drastic improvement over what they've been seeing on TV for the past 60-80 years. But since a good DVD on a modern TV set typically looks so much better than old over-the-air TV broadcasts on 20th century consumer-grade TV sets, many people still may not notice that a Blu-ray (which displays six times more picture information than a DVD) looks any better to them, especially if they sit across the room from a small HDTV set.

It's great that Warner Archive is transferring more and more films to 1080p files. I really hope that means they will step up their Blu-ray editions of pre-1980 (especially pre-1960 and pre-1940) titles. Good HDTV and HD streaming can actually look quite impressive, but it still pales by comparison to a good Blu-ray on a big screen, which sensitive eyes might find also has some noticeable compression compared with a good DCP file in a good digital cinema. (All digital and all HD is not created alike!)