BDs That Are Out of Print (OOP)

[davevh84]

Please add this blu-ray movie to the OOP list. Thank You

165265_large.jpg

[Mikezilla3k]

You can also add this sine it's unavailable from Funimation's store:

[houseca]

I wonder what is going to happen to all of Woody Allen films on the heels of Allen v Farrow? What studio owns them now? Most of them were issued by MGM... so they are now with Disney?

I don't see any new editions coming out for a long time.

Is this a case where it is argued you must separate the artist from the art? It definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out.

[filmbuffTX]

Originally Posted by houseca

I wonder what is going to happen to all of Woody Allen films on the heels of Allen v Farrow? What studio owns them now? Most of them were issued by MGM... so they are now with Disney?

I don't see any new editions coming out for a long time.

Is this a case where it is argued you must separate the artist from the art? It definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out.

MGM's home video distribution deal with FOX/Disney ended on June 30th, 2020. They have a new deal with Warner Bros.

Several of Woody's films are with Sony, Dreamworks (Paramount), and Amazon.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by houseca

I wonder what is going to happen to all of Woody Allen films on the heels of Allen v Farrow? What studio owns them now? Most of them were issued by MGM... so they are now with Disney?

MGM's home video distribution deal with Fox ended not long ago. They apparently have a new distribution deal with Warner Bros.

MGM only issued a few of his films, most of them they licensed out to other companies, like Twilight Time.

Originally Posted by houseca

I don't see any new editions coming out for a long time.

Is this a case where it is argued you must separate the artist from the art? It definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out.

We shall see.

Manhattan and Annie Hall were both remastered in 4K a few years back, but those remasters have never been released on BD anywhere in the world. If at all, it's possible they might get releases in Europe at some point.

[SpaceBlackKnight]

There was a rumor going around that Criterion had Manhattan, Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters, and Sleeper. The former two had 4k masters completed by MGM, while Criterion were working on 4k scans for the the latter two. Not sure if Criterion are still planning to release them given Allen's recent controversies.

I also heard MGM were offering up the remaining WA titles that were previously licenced to Twilight Time, but no one is willing to go near them due to obvious reasons.

[CelestialAgent]

Originally Posted by houseca

I wonder what is going to happen to all of Woody Allen films on the heels of Allen v Farrow? What studio owns them now? Most of them were issued by MGM... so they are now with Disney?

I don't see any new editions coming out for a long time.

Is this a case where it is argued you must separate the artist from the art? It definitely will be interesting to see how it turns out.

Disney do own the rights to a couple of Allens e.g. Bullets Over Broadway, so no chance of a new edition for those ones

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by CelestialAgent

Disney do own the rights to a couple of Allens e.g. Bullets Over Broadway, so no chance of a new edition for those ones

Bullets over Broadway was Miramax, so it's no longer Disney, it's Paramount now.

Disney does own Don't Drink the Water, because it was a television film for ABC.

They also own Melinda and Melinda, because it was Fox.

[ShellBeacher]

The answer is... they are spread all over the place, but are unlikely (like many titles) to show up on physical media again. HBOMax has no problem co-producing an incendiary doc and also keeping numerous Allen titles available in its streaming catalogue, and Amazon similarly canceled a newer deal with Allen, yet offers numerous titles (including his Amazon-exclusive "Crisis in Six Scenes") and older titles through whatever licensing deals it retains with various distributors/catalogues...as well as, now, ironically, "A Rainy Day in New York."

I think they will continue to be available/exist in streaming catalogues, but that is it.

[neo_reloaded]

Streaming is more likely to react to any pressure / ongoing cultural conversations than discs are. Streaming immediately for free on a service that 100 million people already have accounts for is much more available to the public at large than a $40 MSRP disc you have to order online, and all of the various issues over the last few years (new warnings on Gone With The Wind and The Muppets, missing Muppets episodes, Dumbo/Peter Pan no longer in kid accounts, missing blackface episodes for The Office, Community, 30 Rock, etc.) have all been updated only for streaming. The disc releases have not been pulled or modified, and the various panic-buyings have turned out to be unnecessary. I consider it akin to when things used to be 'modified for television' - streaming is the new mass-market insta-culture.

I don't think anyone will care if/when some distributor releases 4k restorations of Allen's most famous works on Blu-ray...

[dylrichard02]

Originally Posted by SpaceBlackKnight

There was a rumor going around that Criterion had Manhattan, Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters, and Sleeper. The former two had 4k masters completed by MGM, while Criterion were working on 4k scans for the the latter two. Not sure if Criterion are still planning to release them given Allen's recent controversies.

I also heard MGM were offering up the remaining WA titles that were previously licenced to Twilight Time, but no one is willing to go near them due to obvious reasons.

Not a fan of Allen as a person, but I really like Annie Hall. I think Criterion should release the 4 MGM with 4K remasters, if not just Annie Hall.

[Captain N]

Originally Posted by theEXORCIST

If people waited for so long to buy a title that was in print why would they jump on it as soon as it goes oop, especially a popular title will eventually go back in print If they wait a couple of years. Its because they want something thats rare. Collectors will pay 10x for a bluray if it has a rare slipcover or a plastic toy if it has a rare color variant. Its part of the collector mentality, I paid lots of money for 1st print books that I could've got for a lot less in a reprint paperback just to have it in my collection.

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

Not necessarily true at all. Plenty of titles have never come back into print.
Some jump since they are afraid prices might get even worse or it might end up barely ever for sale. You never quite know. Often prices may eventually get a bit lower and things might not be too terribly hard to find. But some titles just boom totally dry up and prices go even higher and the title ends up like one copy showing up every few years.

I tend to agree with WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW that most people who buy a movie when it goes up is because they want to watch/own it, and conclude that if they don't buy it now, that it'll just go even higher out of their price range. This happened to me on a few movies I wanted to see/own, but found out that they were released years ago and are oop. I waited -- only to see the prices edge higher, with no re-release in sight -- so I pick it up before it gets even more untenable/unreasonable.

[meremortal]

Panic buying is nothing new. Just look at the frenzy with toilet paper a few times during the pandemic. With blus, I can kind of see where people are coming from. They may be thinking, "I better go ahead and buy it now before it REALLY balloons." It's probably more emotionally driven than anything, though, and a sense of regret with the thought of it being an unattainable title. People don't like being told they can't have something.

[SpaceBlackKnight]

Originally Posted by Mikezilla3k

You can also add this sine it's unavailable from Funimation's store:

TBH, I'm sure the Neon Genesis Evangelion stuff Funi had put out will be reissued in the near future. After all, GKids has the licence for what seems to be all of Evangelion (after that long legal battle with Hideaki Anno and what remains of Gainax) and they seem to prefer redubbing stuff to their taste. I recall hearing that Anno was disgusted with the dubs Fini made for the movies they put out. I imagine they're redubbing them with the current NGE dub cast and some may want to hold on to Funi's releases for their dubs.

[neo_reloaded]

The "controversy" with Criterion seems like a pretty even-keeled discussion of a blindspot, with willingness from all involved to try to address it. None of this has any relation to NOT releasing films from straight while male directors in general or Allen in particular. A "huge impact" is pretty relative when the baseline was 9 films from black directors out of 1034 releases. Hard to go anywhere but up from there.

[houseca]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

It seems like a pretty even-keeled discussion of a blindspot, with willingness from all involved to try to address it. None of this has any relation to NOT releasing films from straight while male directors in general or Allen in particular. A "huge impact" is pretty relative when the baseline was 9 films from black directors out of 1034 releases. Hard to go anywhere but up from there.

New films in recent years should be fairly represented because the population of filmmakers are much more diverse. Since older films, especially the 1960's and before were mostly made by white men, at least a very high % of the "critically acclaimed" titles. Over time, this will even out. But when a large portion of the catalogue is the 1980's and before, then what do you expect?

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by houseca

New films in recent years should be fairly represented because the population of filmmakers are much more diverse. Since older films, especially the 1960's and before were mostly made by white men, at least a very high % of the "critically acclaimed" titles. Over time, this will even out. But when a large portion of the catalogue is the 1980's and before, then what do you expect?

That is certainly part of it, but there do exist older films from black directors, both in the US and worldwide, and "rediscovering" or re-presenting some of these films should arguably be part of the mission statement, not just echoing pre-existing ideas about which films were "important." And Criterion has certainly not shied away from modern films - they aren't plentiful enough to overshadow the older films, sure, but they still dwarf the 9 total films from black directors.

I'm in no way trying to "pile on" to Criterion here, and my main response to this is that it didn't seem like a huge controversy to me but rather a reasonable discussion with good-faith consideration on all sides. Addressing this criticism would not in any way prevent Criterion from continuing to release films from a vast array of straight white male directors, both old and new. It's not a zero-sum situation.

[houseca]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

That is certainly part of it, but there do exist older films from black directors, both in the US and worldwide, and "rediscovering" or re-presenting some of these films should arguably be part of the mission statement, not just echoing pre-existing ideas about which films were "important." And Criterion has certainly not shied away from modern films - they aren't plentiful enough to overshadow the older films, sure, but they still dwarf the 9 total films from black directors.

I'm in no way trying to "pile on" to Criterion here, and my main response to this is that it didn't seem like a huge controversy to me but rather a reasonable discussion with good-faith consideration on all sides. Addressing this criticism would not in any way prevent Criterion from continuing to release films from a vast array of straight white male directors, both old and new. It's not a zero-sum situation.

Agreed, I think we are basically talking about the same thing.

[CelestialAgent]

Originally Posted by dylrichard02

Not a fan of Allen as a person, but I really like Annie Hall. I think Criterion should release the 4 MGM with 4K remasters, if not just Annie Hall.

Are there any other 4K remasters of films MGM are sitting on but doing nothing with?

Originally Posted by meremortal

Panic buying is nothing new. Just look at the frenzy with toilet paper a few times during the pandemic. With blus, I can kind of see where people are coming from. They may be thinking, "I better go ahead and buy it now before it REALLY balloons." It's probably more emotionally driven than anything, though, and a sense of regret with the thought of it being an unattainable title. People don't like being told they can't have something.

I definitely understand people panic buying Fox/MGM/Paramount releases/sublicenses though.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Panic buying is nothing new. Just look at the frenzy with toilet paper a few times during the pandemic.

Much of the infamous toilet paper shortage was actually due more to supply chain issues, as were many other shortages.

The first big shortage of TP was because basically half the TP market was geared to home use, and half the TP market was geared to office/restaurant/retail use, and the rolls sold for each use are different sizes and travel through a separate network of suppliers and retailers, so they couldn't switch things over easily and quickly when suddenly 100% of the demand was purely for home use. Here's a good article:

https://marker.medium.com/amp/p/c812...kFRwQvtx-mW9Kg

I'm not trying to be a jerk in proving a point, I just feel like A) those people who were trying to stock up were not all crazy, there was no telling if stores would remain regularly supplied and B) the complicated and boring truth makes the public look slightly less terrible, which is always a good thing.

In the same way, people who panic buy BDs do so because they've seen the result in the past of failing to do so, when discs suddenly skyrocket in price.