Scream Factory Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[omahajon]

I've gotten plenty of SF releases recently, from new releases like Robot Jox and the Sleepaway Camp sequels, to older titles I finally got the cash to get like The Burning, New Year's Evil.

I'm definitely getting Demon Knight and the cover art is fine. Old EC cover type of art, would made the film look like a cartoon or niche.

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by jshaide

Just realized the new list for Collector's Editions appears to be 34.99.

Maybe Shout are saving up for a new compressionist?

[Hellraiserfan]

Originally Posted by markgway

maybe shout are saving up for a new compressionist?

[k_huntington]

Originally Posted by Markgway

Maybe Shout are saving up for a new compressionist?

where do i apply?

[returnofthemack]

I have no problem with criterion and arrow having a high MSRP but the product scream puts out there doesn't justify the higher price tag. Get the product right and most people won't complain about higher prices.

[NeMo_ET]

Now maybe that Universal is sharing a little, Shout/Scream can pick up the Skulls? Not really a horror, but one I've been waiting for!

[jaws3dfan]

Originally Posted by NeMo_ET

Now maybe that Universal is sharing a little, Shout/Scream can pick up the Skulls? Not really a horror, but one I've been waiting for!

or Maybe Jaws 2 and 3 because its obvious Universal has no interest in releasing them on BD

[k_huntington]

so after looking at this year's lineup, (past, present, and future) my main complaint:

dear sf:
please limit to 1 release a week.
-me

like, 3 seperate releases today? really? (i know they are all IFC movies, but still...) and the sleepaways came out both on the same day, tales from the crypts both on the same day, love at first bite double/vampires kiss double, animal and phantom of the opera, blacula double and exterminators, those are just a few. i could go on, but i'm lazy.

now i know they've done multiple releases before, but it seems like twice a month they are doing that this year. come on guys! give us some reprieve

[Donl1282]

Originally Posted by jaws3dfan

or Maybe Jaws 2 and 3 because its obvious Universal has no interest in releasing them on BD

Yeah seriously, if Universal won't release them on BD, why won't they license them?

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by Donl1282

Yeah seriously, if Universal won't release them on BD, why won't they license them?

Because they're assets. The Jaws sequels may be considered B films by the studio but they're still part of an important franchise by association (to the original film). Universal does not seem interested in giving the films their own release, which means fans will have to keep the DVDs and hope for a change of heart (or new management). The Thing probably falls into the same category.

[demonknight]

Man, you know what I'm surprised nobody's brought up lately? Jaws 2.

[Donl1282]

Originally Posted by demonknight

Man, you know what I'm surprised nobody's brought up lately? Jaws 2.

Nah that's Jaws 5.

[Undeadcow]

People who do not think Universal will license the Jaws sequels... should consider the Halloween sequels and Psycho sequels (not to mention Army of Darkness) already licensed from Universal as evidence that the popularity of a franchise is not a disqualifying factor.

[Donl1282]

Originally Posted by Undeadcow

People who do not think Universal will license the Jaws sequels... should consider the Halloween sequels and Psycho sequels (not to mention Army of Darkness) already licensed from Universal as evidence that anything could happen and evidence that the popularity of a franchise is not a disqualifying factor.

I really hope so. Maybe they will be 3 of the 10 titles to be announced on Friday.

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by Undeadcow

People who do not think Universal will license the Jaws sequels... should consider the Halloween sequels and Psycho sequels (not to mention Army of Darkness) already licensed from Universal as evidence that the popularity of a franchise is not a disqualifying factor.

Weve already covered this thanks, go back a few pages. When Jeff Nelson says *we tried, Universal wont license them to us* on several occasions during this new deal with Universal, that should be the end of it. Universal could see the Jaws sequels as something they can cash in on whenever they want to. These might be untouchable , which there are titles like that. If The Thing is not part of the deal Id call that one untouchable too. Halloween III and the Psycho sequels may not be considered as mainstream as Jaws for one thing. And there is a rumor of Universal doing them

Jaws discussion at this point =

[Undeadcow]

Jaws sequels are decidedly not a dead horse when you consider Scream Factory does have a pattern of denying releases that they actually have. I agree Jaws sequels aren't a 'must have' top tier wishlist item so there's not basis for EXPECTING them but the hushing people up about potential titles is odd given there's no reason to disqualify the Jaws sequels (or The Thing, or any other Universal/MGM title) any more than we should have disqualified Night of the Demons, Halloween III, Tales From the Crypts, Psychos, or numerous other actual SF releases that are higher profile and were denied by SF reps.

Originally Posted by dsman71

...When Jeff Nelson says *we tried, Universal wont license them to us* on several occasions during this new deal with Universal, that should be the end of it....

Some people act like the authority on things here when everyone's opinions are fair game.

...let me rephrase that in some manner 'authorities' here might understand "my top secret inside source that may or may not be real tells me vague information that I really can't share but suggests Jaws sequels could be fair game; I'll confirm if I was right after the announcements."

[Donl1282]

Originally Posted by dsman71

Weve already covered this thanks, go back a few pages. When Jeff Nelson says *we tried, Universal wont license them to us* on several occasions during this new deal with Universal, that should be the end of it. Universal could see the Jaws sequels as something they can cash in on whenever they want to. These might be untouchable , which there are titles like that. If The Thing is not part of the deal Id call that one untouchable too. Halloween III and the Psycho sequels may not be considered as mainstream as Jaws for one thing. And there is a rumor of Universal doing them

Jaws discussion at this point =

This is a dumb question but let's say if Universal licenses the films they can still release them on their own right? Halloween 3 is getting a release by Universal and SF has the license to the film.

[Undeadcow]

Originally Posted by Donl1282

This is a dumb question but let's say if Universal licenses the films they can still release them on their own right? Halloween 3 is getting a release by Universal and SF has the license to the film.

It's correct that films can and have gotten multiple HD releases; also it's unconfirmed speculation guesswork that Universal sees the Jaws sequels as some sort of future 'get rich' property. Obviously films get released at times of maximum expected profit but there's no evidence that the Jaws franchise is any different than the Halloween, Psycho, Mad Max, etc properties that have already been licensed out. No one at Universal has commented on the matter and even Scream Factory's denial has been vague - we actually know very little solid details to cross off these films (even if there's a mountain of other more probable imminent SF releases).

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by Undeadcow

Jaws sequels are decidedly not a dead horse when you consider Scream Factory does have a pattern of denying releases that they actually have. I agree Jaws sequels aren't a 'must have' top tier wishlist item so there's not basis for EXPECTING them but the hushing people up about potential titles is odd given there's no reason to disqualify the Jaws sequels (or The Thing, or any other Universal/MGM title) any more than we should have disqualified Night of the Demons, Halloween III, Tales From the Crypts, Psychos, or numerous other actual SF releases that are higher profile and were denied by SF reps.Some people act like the authority on things here when everyone's opinions are fair game.

...let me rephrase that in some manner 'authorities' here might understand "my top secret inside source that may or may not be real tells me vague information that I really can't share but suggests Jaws sequels could be fair game; I'll confirm if I was right after the announcements."

Nothing like reading tired posts that border on naive. Some people know more than you do, but you have a problem with it and now you sound like a crybaby. If Jeff says on his Facebook page *we tried to get the JAWS sequels and Universal wont let us have them* does that sound like vague information to you ? Thats not a source, thats the scream rep lol. And private information is just that - its private, not to be shared as much as Id like to. I dont want to lose friends over it

Scream has a denial pattern ? Halloween III, the one and only time that Cliff did not tell the truth. Some titles have been said *we cant get them at this time* and later they did. That has never been the case with Jaws. Do you need like 1000 *we cant get them* posts for you to understand ?

Time to ignore your posts because nothing good will come out of it. I have no desire to go back and forth over silly luxuries. These are movies, not life events !

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by Donl1282

This is a dumb question but let's say if Universal licenses the films they can still release them on their own right? Halloween 3 is getting a release by Universal and SF has the license to the film.

Yes, they have done that with the Shadow and Halloween III.