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

[phansson]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Shucks.
In all seriousness, since you’ve been following me for some time, truth be told, I’ve earned two doctorates (in the sciences rather than the arts) which were obtained during excruciating formal education from different accredited institutions - which I guess, qualifies me as a “doctor” and at the very least, means that I can pile it higher and deeper than 99.9% of folks out there, when I’m in the whimsical mood.
So, it would not be incorrect to address me as Dr. Penton but, I’ve never been a stickler for correct salutation etiquette on the internet.

Or that, in one of my most favorite sci-fi movies of all time (i.e. Contact), that all of the digital effects work was contracted to Sony Picture Imageworks, of which about 300 shots stayed in-house while the others were farmed out to auxiliary places like ILM, Weta, Mac-Guff, etc.
On the contrary, I would be perfectly happy to only remember during that particular motion picture, that the filmmakers shot scenes on Super8 for the *home movie look* when Ellie is playing with her father or washing the car……or that, overall, the beginning of the motion picture is softer due to more filtration than towards the end because of the Director’s creative notion that as the story progresses, Ellie finds more clarity in life, and thusly, so should the audience in the imagery.

From now on I shall address you as Dr. Penton!

Contact IMHO is one of the better sci fi movies of all time. It is entirely believable and most of the acting is top notch. I can't really take McConaughey as an advisor to the president though. Of course he was Clintons advisor, so they could go out "trimming" together.

[saprano]

Penton, one word of advice for sony; stay away from flipper disc.

Do that and i'll continue buying their blurays.

If uni has this planned forall of their releases, no more uni movies for me. i mean do these companies not have faith in BD anymore?

I'll just use that money for more sony titles.

Good day sir.

[Bobby Henderson]

All I can figure is Universal must be gathering some rather unique people into its market focus study groups. And I say "unique" meaning people who have little to no experience with home theater products.

Honestly, I really do not understand the fixation some people have with needing to cram anything and everything possible related to a movie onto only one disc. IDIOTS!!! This is exactly where this flipper nonsense is emerging.

A couple weeks ago I spent about $30 for TWO Pixar movie titles features Four discs in both cases. I got the Blu-ray version. I got a separate DVD version. I got DVD copy version. And that's not to mention a second Blu-ray disc filled with high definition quality extras. Disney obviously has a clue. Universal? They understand an issue is there waiting to be solved. IMHO, they're going about it in the wrong way. Disney has the right idea. So what if the kid scuffs up the DVD-9 in the SUV's mobile DVD player. Go buy another copy from Wally World for $6 to replace it. The Blu-ray remains undamaged.'

Oh. BTW, Natalie Portman is freaking boss. She's quite pretty. So is Anne Hathaway. Maybe I have a thing for brunettes. I thought I had a thing for red heads (they're just too damned tempermental).

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

All I can figure is Universal must be gathering some rather unique people into its market focus study groups. And I say "unique" meaning people who have little to no experience with home theater products.

Honestly, I really do not understand the fixation some people have with needing to cram anything and everything possible related to a movie onto only one disc. IDIOTS!!! This is exactly where this flipper nonsense is emerging.

A couple weeks ago I spent about $30 for TWO Pixar movie titles features Four discs in both cases. I got the Blu-ray version. I got a separate DVD version. I got DVD copy version. And that's not to mention a second Blu-ray disc filled with high definition quality extras. Disney obviously has a clue. Universal? They understand an issue is there waiting to be solved. IMHO, they're going about it in the wrong way. Disney has the right idea. So what if the kid scuffs up the DVD-9 in the SUV's mobile DVD player. Go buy another copy from Wally World for $6 to replace it. The Blu-ray remains undamaged.'

HEAR HEAR!!

You took the words out of my mouth on the last paragraph! I started to mention that same thing earlier, but was busy and left it alone...

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Oh. BTW, Natalie Portman is freaking boss. She's quite pretty. So is Anne Hathaway. Maybe I have a thing for brunettes. I thought I had a thing for red heads (they're just too damned tempermental).

HEAR HEAR! You're on a roll... well, except for the redhead thing (very few exceptions there for my part)...

~Alan

[Bullseye]

Penton is there any chance of Sony extending the deal with MGM on Bond?

[Jeff Kleist]

There is not. While there might be a continuation of Craig's tenure, Sony will not be releasing it unless they buy the whole company

[Bullseye]

If MGM are in trouble why not sell the rights for the next 2 or 3 movies until they get back into shape. This way at lease they have some income.

[Jeff Kleist]

Because they're already in deep, and Bond is their biggest asset. It's still the same people making the movies, regardless of whose name is on it (the Broccolis) anyway

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

There was a lot of evidence this past weekend at places like Best Buy and Target that blu-ray adoption is taking off in a big way this holiday. Black Friday advertised blu-rays were selling out while their DVD counterparts lingered.

This said, I wonder if any studio is considering single sku releases (Not like Universal) where a DVD bonus disk is an afterthough and there is not a seperate DVD sku to further nudge folks to BD adoption?

Seperately, on NPR this weekend they had a commentator exclaiming that Blu-Ray won't be hollywood's next best hope because they had to commoditize it too quickly and the prices crashed out faster and harder than was expected or hoped for. Thoughts?

I would say that in general, most of the highest ranking studio executives believe that there's already been too rapid a price erosion in Blu-ray, so the studios/content providers are not making the price point which was originally hoped for in order to make up for lost DVD revenue.

It’s believed that the entertainment industry at large has pretty much given away high definition to consumers. They haven't really charged a premium for it on television. That makes consumers more likely to buy Blu-ray but, less likely to pay a premium for it.

But don’t feel sorry for any of the Hollywood studios (except maybe MGM and Paramount - who I think registered a loss of close to $150 million in the first half of this year) because every 10 years or so, a new technology or means of distribution shows up and there's a big growth in the business because that’s yet another way to exploit the library.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by phansson

From now on I shall address you as Dr. Penton!

Contact IMHO is one of the better sci fi movies of all time. It is entirely believable and most of the acting is top notch. I can't really take McConaughey as an advisor to the president though. Of course he was Clintons advisor, so they could go out "trimming" together.

I don’t know what you mean.
Do you mean that it’s a little far fetched to believe that a President could have a spiritual advisor like Palmer Joss……or, do you mean that Matthew M. was poorly cast or didn’t act well in that role?

For some perspective, something to keep in mind is that back when he was cast in 1996/97, the most previous feature film to that which I guess he was most well known for was A Time to Kill (1996), which I think could be considered his breakthrough performance at that time in his career?

Did you have a problem with his portrayal as the lawyer “Jake” in A Time to Kill…..that being another serious/intellectual type role?

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I would say that in general, most of the highest ranking studio executives believe that there's already been too rapid a price erosion in Blu-ray, so the studios/content providers are not making the price point which was originally hoped for in order to make up for lost DVD revenue.

It’s believed that the entertainment industry at large has pretty much given away high definition to consumers. They haven't really charged a premium for it on television. That makes consumers more likely to buy Blu-ray but, less likely to pay a premium for it.

But don’t feel sorry for any of the Hollywood studios (except maybe MGM and Paramount - who I think registered a loss of close to $150 million in the first half of this year) because every 10 years or so, a new technology or means of distribution shows up and there's a big growth in the business because that’s yet another way to exploit the library.

That's a very honest post Penton, fair play

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I don’t know what you mean.
Do you mean that it’s a little far fetched to believe that a President could have a spiritual advisor like Palmer Joss……or, do you mean that Matthew M. was poorly cast or didn’t act well in that role?

For some perspective, something to keep in mind is that back when he was cast in 1996/97, the most previous feature film to that which I guess he was most well known for was A Time to Kill (1996), which I think could be considered his breakthrough performance at that time in his career?

Did you have a problem with his portrayal as the lawyer “Jake” in A Time to Kill…..that being another serious/intellectual type role?

His roles in Contact and A Time to Kill are his two best IMHO. This decade hasn't been too kind to him though in the roles he's chosen to undertake, but he's made a fair amount of cash

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I would say that in general, most of the highest ranking studio executives believe that there's already been too rapid a price erosion in Blu-ray, so the studios/content providers are not making the price point which was originally hoped for in order to make up for lost DVD revenue.

It’s believed that the entertainment industry at large has pretty much given away high definition to consumers. They haven't really charged a premium for it on television. That makes consumers more likely to buy Blu-ray but, less likely to pay a premium for it.

But don’t feel sorry for any of the Hollywood studios (except maybe MGM and Paramount - who I think registered a loss of close to $150 million in the first half of this year) because every 10 years or so, a new technology or means of distribution shows up and there's a big growth in the business because that’s yet another way to exploit the library.

I think part of the problem was the way they priced it initially.

Instead of having affordable 'release week' pricing like we did on DVD, the prices were much closer to the MSRP until there was 'promotional' sale like a BOGO. I ended up falling into a pattern of waiting for promotional sales and I quickly found out that sometimes within days of release Amazon had quickly discounted prices.

But I think the studios are finding out that for most movies the price barrier especially on new releases is $20. Much like it was on DVD. Sure HD is better but there are a lot of other technologies that have improved over the last ten years and prices have not necessarily gone up. Look at what you can do on your cell phone now. Look at how much processing power your PCs have today. Compare the prices of those with equipment you bought over 10 years ago.

The studios were foolish to think that consumers were going to pay a 2x or more premium to get HD content. Cable can get away with it because they have a monopoly in most areas, but as many have found out, you can get your locals in HD OTA or in the ClearQAM without paying a premium.

The cable companies now are fearful of services like Hulu. More power to the consumers fighting the gouging tactics of big corporations.

Don't get me wrong, I really like BD but I refuse to pay more than $20/disc unless it is something really special. And I quit buying DVD in 2005. So for me its either BD or nothing.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by phansson

What did SPHE decide to do with the subtitle issue? I have heard that Angels and Demons has subtitles in the black bars. Is this going to continue to be the stance with Sony releases?

No.
The repositioned sub change (to the placement of all subtitles inside the active picture all the time) was just delayed. It should be in place for titles released in the next 8 weeks or so.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Any news in your neck of the woods for this ?.........
http://www.inconcert3d.com/

Actually now that you mention it...it's coming to the Digital 3D cinema right here in St. Catharines so I don't even need to travel for it like I do to see the real band (thousands of miles and counting to date)!


Got some news back on that release, one source said management/label didn't think doing a Blu-ray was worth it at this time so I'm guessing Sony weren't involved with it like they were Radio City. Sadly, because of the running time, there isn't even going to be a 2.0 PCM 24-bit track like the last few DMB DVD's, it's limited to Dolby for stereo and 5.1...so this release officially sucks for those of us with a keener sense of fidelity.

Oh well, hopefully after Blu-ray goes through the roof this Christmas they'll change their minds and line up the 2003 Central Park show for reissue on Blu, I know that one was shot in HD too.

Thanks for the reminder on the 3D, definitely something to look forward to as the blizzards approach.

[Penton-Man]

^
I figured you would be at least slightly interested.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by The Big Blue

Camels? Seriously? I think we finally know who Penton is.

The critters seem to think so.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...84#post2607384

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

....But don’t feel sorry for any of the Hollywood studios (except maybe MGM and Paramount - who I think registered a loss of close to $150 million in the first half of this year) because every 10 years or so, a new technology or means of distribution shows up and there's a big growth in the business because that’s yet another way to exploit the library.

Sony has done very well this year . Sony's Worldwide Haul $3.36 Billion

[sharkshark]

Sorry to bud in, but I thought I'd amuse myself and take this opportunity to quickly post from my room aboard a yacht moored off Salt Island, where I spent the day diving the Rhone (as made famous by a certain Jacqueline Bisset and her wet t-shirt).

I even, uh, "penetrated" the old girl (the ship, that is), from keel to stern

Consider this a virtual postcard, Penton, from a fellow diver.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Sorry to bud in, but I thought I'd amuse myself and take this opportunity to quickly post from my room aboard a yacht moored off Salt Island, where I spent the day diving the Rhone (as made famous by a certain Jacqueline Bisset and her wet t-shirt).

I even, uh, "penetrated" the old girl (the ship, that is), from keel to stern

Consider this a virtual postcard, Penton, from a fellow diver.

Diving, now we are talking .