Twilight Time Discussion Thread

[Blu Titan]

Can we please get back to discussing the label's releases?

[ddwall]

Did anyone here that Twilight Time is releasing Count Yorga? I saw it mentioned in another thread. Oh I think I'm going to order First men in the moon.

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by ddwall

Did anyone here that Twilight Time is releasing Count Yorga? I saw it mentioned in another thread. Oh I think I'm going to order First men in the moon.

It has been said that they have the first Yorga film. But nothing official - only if or when they announce it.. rumors swirl all the time

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by LucasM2012

Except in all previous media, there was no 'competition' from streaming.

But there's always been competition from other more 'convenient' formats and delivery systems that supersede them, and in this case it's streaming. Which is why we're lucky that there are still boutique labels like TT still releasing titles the studios can't make pay themselves.

For example, going back to TT's origins, even in the heyday of physical media Fox never released The Egyptian themselves even after prepping it and it wasn't until TT dug up the master that it finally got a retail release. And looking at this month's releases alone, there's not a film in that batch younger than 41 years so it's not as if the studios haven't had the time put them out themselves. The chances of getting BDs of box-office flops like Night of the Generals, Solomon and Sheba or The Bounty without small labels that like the films enough to see beyond the bottom line and know there are a number of people who love those kinds of movies have never been lower.

[krasnoludek]

Originally Posted by biglou114

Has anybody else's order of Love and Death ship yet?

Yes. My order, which had Love and Death and several other preorders and the signed Heaven and Earth, shipped yesterday. Still sitting in Virginia, though, according to USPS.

[dorothyv]

Signed Heaven and Earth promo:

[LucasM2012]

Originally Posted by Aclea

But there's always been competition from other more 'convenient' formats and delivery systems that supersede them, and in this case it's streaming. Which is why we're lucky that there are still boutique labels like TT still releasing titles the studios can't make pay themselves.

I'm not sure what you are arguing with... not what I said, certainly, because it doesn't relate to what I wrote in direct response to another post.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by LucasM2012

I'm not sure what you are arguing with... not what I said, certainly, because it doesn't relate to what I wrote in direct response to another post.

It's a direct response to your opening line in the post I replied to:

Except in all previous media, there was no 'competition' from streaming.

But there was always competition from another newer, more convenient delivery system, and streaming is primarily just another newer, more convenient rental delivery system (albeit one with supposed ownership capabilities), which was always the driving factor in physical media. Every single home format has always seen competition not just between retail and rental but between the established format and the one that becomes more popular because it's more convenient -

9.5mm to 16mm
16mm to 8mm
8mm to VHS
VHS to DVD/Blu-ray
DVD/Blu-ray to streaming

In every case there was always a newer, cheaper and more convenient alternative to compete with it. Streaming is simply a continuation of that pattern. And with every format there are people who try to keep the format going by producing an increasingly premium retail priced product after it has lost any mass market momentum and studio support it has.

[StingingVelvet]

The majority of customers always choose convenience over anything else, and price right after that. Not a surprise streaming is the future.

[cgurley]

Originally Posted by dorothyv

Signed Heaven and Earth promo:

Really bummed I missed out on this, due to a family obligation. First signed promo that I missed. (Don't suppose anybody has one they would be willing to trade?)

[Aclea]

But was it really Oliver Stone's signature? If you look at the 'O' the writing clearly goes back and to the left - back and to the left - totally inconstant with the shot from the Oliver Stone On History book signing:



So what happens then? Pandemonium. So what really happened that day? Let's just for a moment speculate, shall we..?

[krasnoludek]

Originally Posted by Aclea

But was it really Oliver Stone's signature. If you look at the 'O' the writing clearly goes back and to the left - back and to the left - totally inconstant with the shot from the Oliver Stone On History book signing:

So what happens then? Pandemonium. So what really happened that day? Let's just for a moment speculate, shall we..?

LOL, this had me laughing pretty hard.

[LucasM2012]

Originally Posted by Aclea

It's a direct response to your opening line in the post I replied to:

"Except in *_all_* previous media, there was no 'competition' from streaming."

But there was always competition from another newer, more convenient delivery system, and streaming is primarily just another newer, more convenient rental delivery system (albeit one with supposed ownership capabilities), which was always the driving factor in physical media. Every single home format has always seen competition not just between retail and rental but between the established format and the one that becomes more popular because it's more convenient -

9.5mm to 16mm
16mm to 8mm
8mm to VHS
VHS to DVD/Blu-ray
DVD/Blu-ray to streaming

In every case there was always a newer, cheaper and more convenient alternative to compete with it. Streaming is simply a continuation of that pattern. And with every format there are people who try to keep the format going by producing an increasingly premium retail priced product after it has lost any mass market momentum and studio support it has.

If you read my whole post, not just my first line, and the post that it was in response to, you will see that I was saying that small labels (like TT) are the only way to get non-blockbusters released now, because - unlike all prior media - people now have a concurrently available source where they can get access to their favorite films instead of (and cheaper than) buying hard copies of films they like. That concurrent competition of 'easy access' is very different from the lack of easy access to see films at any time which was what was present when 8mm, VHS, DVD, etc. were how people obtained 'anytime' watching. And, when people didn't buy the VHS or DVDs, they went out and rented physical copies, which also resulted in physical object sales for the companies involved. At that time only cable TV came remotely close to streaming (with premium pay channels having a whopping 4-12 new films a month so not remotely comparable to streaming). So I was saying that all this is why Blu-rays will never hit the 'sales peak' that the other poster was saying was inevitable [his 'Stage Two' in his description].

It had nothing at all to do with a subsequent format supplanting the prior one. That is inevitable. But streaming is a concurrent, not a subsequent, format by which people watch films. And it does not require any physical copy to exist, so does not contribute to physical sales - which was my point: why studios will never mass-release films on hard disc any longer.

It really pays to read entire posts, and what discussion they are continuing, not just reading opening lines, before responding to them. Because what you wrote bore virtually no connection to what my point was.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by LucasM2012

If you read my whole post

I did: I simply don't agree with your conclusions. However, you claimed my response had no relation to anything in your post, which was not the case.

unlike all prior media - people now have a concurrently available source where they can get access to their favorite films instead of (and cheaper than) buying hard copies of films they like

Yet there have always been concurrently available rental sources and they were almost always more popular than retail. They may not have been instant, but people historically preferred to rent copies of films from libraries rather than buy 'hard copies.' What we've seen is simply a gradual refinement of the technology so that the rental process becomes faster, cheaper and takes up less space (to the point where it takes up virtually no space).

That concurrent competition of 'easy access' is very different from the lack of easy access to see films at any time which was what was present when 8mm, VHS, DVD, etc. were how people obtained 'anytime' watching.

Yet each of those formats was easier and more popular than its predecessor - and more widely taken up despite claims of a lack of easy access. It was actually pretty easy to obtain films on 8mm by the 70s and 80s between stores and mail order, with nearly all the major studios having their own Super 8mm divisions, but once the prices went down (and for a while the larger market meant that Super 8mm was actually a cheaper way to buy or rent than video) the fact that video rental was easier and cheaper killed off that market.

So I was saying that all this is why Blu-rays will never hit the 'sales peak' that the other poster was saying was inevitable [his 'Stage Two' in his description].

For someone who complains about others not reading his posts, you seem to be far more guilty of that. Far from some mythical 'other poster,' the post you are referring to and responding to was mine. Even so, it's not an especially valid argument. It doesn't matter that BD hasn't had the same kind of volume of sales that DVD did (not what was claimed any more than anyone ever claimed that, say, laser disc hit the same peak volume as DVD) Blu-ray has pretty much had whatever sales peak it will reach as far as the studios seem concerned, just as laser disc did by the late 90s. We may still be in the twilight of stage 2 (there are plenty of major titles from major studios at low prices), but already studios are cutting back on what they plan to release and that's beginning to have an effect on pricing.

streaming is a concurrent, not a subsequent, format by which people watch films

And so has been every format at one time or another: there is always a concurrent period when two or more formats co-exist before one supplants the other (and at one time there were distributors releasing on VHS, laser disc and DVD simultaneously, with some also betting on CDi). VHS didn't suddenly stop and then after a respectable period of mourning DVD began: the one gradually supplanted the other. The appearance of streaming as a concurrent format is simply a continuation of past market trends, but it's already clear it's the one that the public is choosing to adopt.

And it does not require any physical copy to exist, so does not contribute to physical sales - which was my point: why studios will never mass-release films on hard disc any longer.

Which doesn't contradict anything in the original post of mine you replied to even if it reaches a similar conclusion for different reasons: you think the lack of a physical copy is the deciding factor for studios in no longer mass releasing back-catalog titles (even though profit margins are higher on physical media) where I go with the force of history and the proven pattern of the popularity of new delivery systems being the reason (because volume is becoming higher).

As you say, it really pays to read entire posts, and what discussion they are continuing - especially when you berating the very person whose post you were responding to.

[cmleidi]

AS GOOD AS IT GETS is down to 41 copies.

[JoeDeM]

Originally Posted by cmleidi

AS GOOD AS IT GETS is down to 41 copies.

Still surprised this has taken this long and yet people will whine that they missed out when it's gone.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by JoeDeM

Still surprised this has taken this long and yet people will whine that they missed out when it's gone.

It probably took this long to sell given that there is also an international version available.

[CinemaBlu]

Originally Posted by JoeDeM

Still surprised this has taken this long and yet people will whine that they missed out when it's gone.

I don't think so. Won't TT lose the rights to As Good as it Gets in a few months? Which means it may get a wider release elsewhere.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by CinemaBlu

I don't think so. Won't TT lose the rights to As Good as it Gets in a few months? Which means it may get a wider release elsewhere.

TT only has North American rights for 3 years, unless they renew them, which does come up around June 2015. However, Sony released this title internationally in Europe and Asia several years ago.

https://www.blu-ray.com/search/?quic...n=bluraymovies

[CinemaBlu]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

I'm not sure I understood your post but TT only has North American rights for 3 years, unless they renew them, which does come up around June 2015. However, Sony released this title internationally in Europe and Asia several years ago.

https://www.blu-ray.com/search/?quic...n=bluraymovies

Exactly. They'll lose the rights and some other distributer would be able to acquire them and rerelease the film.

EDIT:
I'm talking about North American rights.