"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Oliver K]

Hi Penton-Man,

I searched for a loooong time yesterday and could only find a few selected numbers so maybe you can help me out here as actually some of the number I found where posted earlier in this thread.

Is there some kind of resource that gives accumulated sales figures for Blu-Ray or even DVD titles that do not sell in the top 20 of any given year ? I am talking about titles like The Sand Pebbles, Battle of the Bulge or The Professionals. I am asking because I have a feeling that with certain classic titles the studios have a hard time to break even and it would also be interesting from the viewpoint of smaller companies like The Criterion Collection, that need to get by with lower numbers for most of their titles.

Just today on HTF somebody posted that Weinstein does not continue its Miriam series with the two remaining Bronston Epics as Fall of the Roman Empire did not sell as good as expected so I wonder how hard it would be to make ends meet with lesser known classic titles like The Professionals or The Sand Pebbles on Blu-Ray when even DVD sales are too low for some rather prominent titles.

[Squozen]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I'm not gone for good! Still the games moderator. I've just taken 12 months off work to go travelling and what-not. For the next six months I'll be working at a market research firm in Oz so I'll probably have a lot of free time (something I could get used to!).

Sydney or Melbourne?

[David Forbes]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

In all honesty David, I’m just hoping that the Ravens don’t get blown out and it turns out to be an entertaining Championship game to the very end. I think it’s a tall order to beat the Steelers in the first place…………and in Pittsburg , that will be very, very difficult.

The Steelers are apparently favored by 5 points and that may even be a conservative line, if Terrell Suggs isn’t healthy and doesn’t play….. or has to play with something like a rotator cuff or labral tear of his shoulder.

Penton, I'm hoping for a good game. It should be a bruising, low-scoring defensive grudge-match. At least I hope so! It will be interesting to see if Willie Parker can keep his running game going. That's going to be key.

And your joke was pretty funny, though I thought the punch-line was going to be something about ravens flying in over the walls.

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

Is there some kind of resource that gives accumulated sales figures for Blu-Ray or even DVD titles that do not sell in the top 20 of any given year ? I am talking about titles like The Sand Pebbles, Battle of the Bulge or The Professionals. I am asking because I have a feeling that with certain classic titles the studios have a hard time to break even and it would also be interesting from the viewpoint of smaller companies like The Criterion Collection, that need to get by with lower numbers for most of their titles.

Just today on HTF somebody posted that Weinstein does not continue its Miriam series with the two remaining Bronston Epics as Fall of the Roman Empire did not sell as good as expected so I wonder how hard it would be to make ends meet with lesser known classic titles like The Professionals or The Sand Pebbles on Blu-Ray when even DVD sales are too low for some rather prominent titles.

Yes, there is a Nielson tracking service among others.

http://www.nielsen.com/solutions/videoscan.html

As I understand it, break-even for a standard def disc is around 7,500 units, with Blu being twice that. With today's much more tech savvy marketplace, a quality disc is generally better reviewed (at least by those who know what they're looking at) and sales numbers are aided by positive press.

The lack of proper transfers for the Bronston films is a sad situation. Cost vs. quality seems to have won out. As transferred, the Bronston films would not have been good material for Blu-ray. These are wonderful productions, that did not receive fair treatment on home video. Had quality been more than just half decent, numbers could have been far greater.

Make no mistake, properly handled -- and these films are NOT in need of any real restoration -- they would make glorious Blu-ray releases of distinction.

RAH

[Objectivity]

Originally Posted by David Forbes

Penton, I'm hoping for a good game. It should be a bruising, low-scoring defensive grudge-match. At least I hope so! It will be interesting to see if Willie Parker can keep his running game going. That's going to be key.

And your joke was pretty funny, though I thought the punch-line was going to be something about ravens flying in over the walls.

I've a die-hard Ravens fan, but I agree. Low scoring and violent.

I think injuries will play a big part. Not only with Suggs and Rice and many others on the Ravens, but also in-game. The last time the two teams played in Pittsburgh, Baltimore knocked out Parker and Mendenhall in the first half.

As long as the game isn't decided on a phantom touchdown where the player is in the end zone but the ball isn't, it should be a good game. Sad thing is, that bad call is the reason this game is in Pittsburgh and not Baltimore and their seeding wasn't flipped.

To keep on topic. What are the chances of getting the Super Bowl on disc, blu-ray or standard?

[kpkelley]

RAH or Penton,

I had a question about the OAR of The Last Emperor released by Criterion. I believe the theatrical presentation was 2.35:1, but the Criterion disc is 2.00:1 supposedly because Vittorio Storaro believed that home video couldn't properly recreate the detail of the film at it's original aspect ratio. Do you know if this information is accurate? If so, is there any word on a release of the film in 2.35:1 for those of us who would want it?

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=426

[David Forbes]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

As long as the game isn't decided on a phantom touchdown where the player is in the end zone but the ball isn't, it should be a good game. Sad thing is, that bad call is the reason this game is in Pittsburgh and not Baltimore and their seeding wasn't flipped.

To keep on topic. What are the chances of getting the Super Bowl on disc, blu-ray or standard?

Well, it can be argued the only reason the Ravens beat the Chargers was they were kept alive by a non-call on the obvious delay of game by Flacco. But I digress!

I just want a hard-hitting smackdown.

Back to Blu-ray, I want to comment that I finally got to sit down and watch hours and hours of BLADE RUNNER (my first purchase back in August before my home theater was even started), and I LOVED it! The FINAL CUT was exquisite, and the workprint was one of the most interesting 'archival' pieces of film I've ever seen.

[Objectivity]

Originally Posted by David Forbes

Well, it can be argued the only reason the Ravens beat the Chargers was they were kept alive by a non-call on the obvious delay of game by Flacco. But I digress!

I agree. However, you can't say that one play changes the game. For all we know, they get called for delay of game, run the same play, and still get the first down or more.

These things tend to balance out. In the first meeting with Tennessee, Baltimore lost on a bad call.

Originally Posted by David Forbes

I just want a hard-hitting smackdown.

I want a Ravens win. If Pittsburgh wants to put on kid gloves, I'd be fine with that, as long as Ravens win.


I just wish they would put out full games on DVD/Blu, not just highlights.

[Jeff Kleist]

Vittorio Storaro is a longtime advocate of the 2:1 ratio, because he finds scope letterboxing too small. Univisium, a 3-perf full negative system

He's a great cinematographer, but you can see how his single thought and love is for the theatrical presentation, and he misses a lot of the technical hurdles to realizing it at home Of course he's also talking before home 24p was a reality

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Vittorio Storaro is a longtime advocate of the 2:1 ratio, because he finds scope letterboxing too small. Univisium, a 3-perf full negative system

He's a great cinematographer, but you can see how his single thought and love is for the theatrical presentation, and he misses a lot of the technical hurdles to realizing it at home Of course he's also talking before home 24p was a reality

So, was The Last Emperor filmed for scope or 2:1?

[Jeff Kleist]

Storraro did the same thing on his other movies. His intended ratio for home viewing is 2:1

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Storraro did the same thing on his other movies. His intended ratio for home viewing is 2:1

Are we likely to see the Theatrical versions of these on home video? I'm sure people who have scope home theatres, like Mr. Sturgeon, would appreciate that the film would be presented in it's OAR.

[Jeff Kleist]

Are we likely to see the Theatrical versions of these on home video? I'm sure people who have scope home theatres, like Mr. Sturgeon, would appreciate that the film would be presented in it's OAR.

No. Just like Robert Rodriguez opens his movies up from scope to 16:9 at home, this is how he wants things, so it can be considered OAR

[Bobby Henderson]

I think Vittorio Storaro needs to revisit this 2:1 idea.

When Vittorio Storaro first decided to use the 2:1 framing method most home video viewers were watching movies on standard 4:3 television sets and hardly anyone watching movies in high definition at all. It has probably been more than a decade since he made this choice. The black bars with a 2.39:1 ratio movie shown on a 4:3 television are pretty big, so there is a valid point with making a 2:1 compromise.

Today, the home viewing environment is different. Many more people have large HDTV sets than ever before. The Blu-ray format shows 6 times the native pixel count of DVD. Letter box black bars for 2.39:1 movies are not very obtrusive at all. Even the black bars for 2.55:1 movies like Sleeping Beauty aren't all that large in proportion to the screen. Black bars for 1.85:1 movies are barely visible.

In short, today's 16x9 HDTV monitors are much more friendly to the idea of showing a movie in its original aspect ratio.

The other problem I have with the 2:1 philosophy is the "one size fits all" approach. As an illustrator I would be kind of pissed if someone told me I could only create drawings or paintings within a certain shape of canvas. That's pretty restrictive.

Flat and Scope ratios both have a very different visual feel to them. They require different compositional approaches to be properly affective and visually pleasing. Even production design and set decoration has to adjust for the different framing. In trying to fudge somewhere in between you get "play it safe" composition -by far my biggest complaint with most Super35 lensed movies.

I know good 'scope composition when I see it -and when some of the image is cropped off at the ends I sense that as well and don't like it very much. It's not much different than HBO doing minor panning and scanning work to crop anamorphic filmed movies to 1.77:1 on HBO-HD.

[Jeff Kleist]

Bobby, I totally agree with you, unfortunately I don't think he's going to change his mind

He's a brilliant cinematographer (I'd love to talk to him about Dune sometime, it really does look like he was shooting a stage play, especially with the greens). I just wish he was a little more flexible when it comes to this.

In the end, he's the boss of his work, and we have to respect that

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

No. Just like Robert Rodriguez opens his movies up from scope to 16:9 at home, this is how he wants things, so it can be considered OAR

AFAIK he only did that for Once Upon a Time in Mexico, which was WAYY too tight (compositionally) theatrically.

On the flipside is Roger Donaldson's The World's Fastest Indian, 2.35 theatrically, 1.78 on BD & DVD, and 2.35 on HDNet Movies. It looks great 2.35 (matches the profile of the bike perfectly).

In the end, he's the boss of his work, and we have to respect that

Except I'm not sure if the directors fully grasp what he's doing. Bertolucci is so old now and Coppola may not be aware how it could look on a 16:9 screen.

[Jeff Kleist]

AFAIK he only did that for Once Upon a Time in Mexico, which was WAYY too tight (compositionally) theatrically.

He did it on Planet Terror as well

Except I'm not sure if the directors fully grasp what he's doing. Bertolucci is so old now and Coppola may not be aware how it could look on a 16:9 screen.

You may very well be right, but he's still the boss of the movies. Coppola I believe likes to work in the British fashion where the cinematographer has huge control over all aspects of the image. They've also been working together for what, 30 years?

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

I think Vittorio Storaro needs to revisit this 2:1 idea.

.........

Yes. Should not be limited by the “old" technology. I feel that panoramic-view always appeals to humans than boxy-view. The nature is panoramic not boxy.

2.35:1 (21:9) could be the future aspect of super-wide TVs. This is a goldmine for the manufacturers (as well as for the studios if think strategically).

http://www.computerbild.de/artikel/a...s-3844758.html

Blackbar subtitles will be a big issue for the future super-wide TVs since current blu-ray technology cannot manage blackbar subtitles. It appears that Sony, WB and BDA need to reconsider black-bar-subtitle strategy.

[Bobby Henderson]

Storaro may be the "boss" when it comes to the DP work on his movies. However, the problem is movies like The Last Emperor, Apocalypse Now and Tucker: A Man & His Dream were not originally filmed in a 2:1 aspect ratio. Their OAR was 2.35:1. Those movies were originally composed for 2.35:1 and I certainly believe they look better in 2.35:1.

Cropped down to a 2:1 aspect ratio, I feel like someone is trying to make a 'scope movie look like a flat movie.

Regarding Robert Rodriquez' opening of the frame to 1.77:1, I don't have much of a problem with that. The movies are using the same "play it safe" rules in composition seen all too often with Super35. And they weren't even shot on film. So I feel the 'scope treatment of video imagery is even more pretentious than what goes on with Super35.

A specialized HDTV camera fitted with Panavision lenses is still going to have a native 1.77:1 image. Considering the limited amount of native image detail (due to what is lost in the Bayer pattern effect), it's not so great cropping video-sourced imagery to 2.39:1 and transferring it to 'scope release prints. It really stinks when a HD video image is blown up to IMAX. That original video imagery can still look very good on a HDTV screen at home.

[Anthony P]

If you are implying he got laid off that's not the case, he's just gone travelling and enjoying his youth

good to hear