Scream Factory Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

It was rereleased by Olive, so I don't see it getting a third release.

Agreed... 2 releases (one of which is still in print) is enough for now. Let's work on the rest of the Universal Catalog (Tales From the Hood!) first.

[ingmog]

Does anyone else wish that SF would put the barcode for the release on their reversible covers as well? I usually use the reversible cover on releases that have a slip, and would prefer to have the barcode showing through the cut out on the back rather than part of the image or text.

Not a big deal at all, but was just curious.

[BarnDoor]

Originally Posted by zbinks

Before we get too far ahead of ourselves:

I did see that, but I'm left wondering why A) Living in Oblivion would have the same French rights holder as The Bear; and B) Why Shout would say that they were licenced from Sony.

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

I did see that, but I'm left wondering why A) Living in Oblivion would have the same French rights holder as The Bear; and B) Why Shout would say that they were licenced from Sony.

Because theyre telling you what they feel fans should know without adding anything complicated. Why should anyone care if they came from a French rights holder ? You should be asking Misterlime all these questions because he knows all of your inquiries

[BarnDoor]

Originally Posted by dsman71

Because theyre telling you what they feel fans should know without adding anything complicated. Why should anyone care if they came from a French rights holder ? You should be asking Misterlime all these questions because he knows all of your inquiries

Why not just dodge the question, or say that they were part of a specific deal involving a French rights holder, so it doesn't set horror fans' tongues wagging about a potential Scream deal with Sony? "Why should anyone care if they came from a French rights holder?" Exactly - you've answered your own question there. I'm sure they're fed up as it is with telling people that certain titles are unavailable to them, so this will only exacerbate that.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by ingmog

Does anyone else wish that SF would put the barcode for the release on their reversible covers as well? I usually use the reversible cover on releases that have a slip, and would prefer to have the barcode showing through the cut out on the back rather than part of the image or text.

Not a big deal at all, but was just curious.

I've always wondered why they don't put it on the reversible side like other studios/labels.

[Undeadcow]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

Brainscan

Say no more, Brainscan is a total guilty pleasure that needs a blu-ray asap.

Originally Posted by ingmog

Does anyone else wish that SF would put the barcode for the release on their reversible covers as well? I usually use the reversible cover on releases that have a slip, and would prefer to have the barcode showing through the cut out on the back rather than part of the image or text.

Not a big deal at all, but was just curious.

I can see your point but considering the point of the barcode is to allow sale of the item it's really only needed on the initial side; ultimately barcodes maul the image and distract from presentation so personally I'm glad it's not on both (I much prefer the original theatrical art side as it is). I can't imagine how many cool art designs are restricted by barcodes. I think it'd only be a bummer if you tried to resell your SF releases to a store that scans in used items.

[dsman71]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

Why not just dodge the question, or say that they were part of a specific deal involving a French rights holder, so it doesn't set horror fans' tongues wagging about a potential Scream deal with Sony? "Why should anyone care if they came from a French rights holder?" Exactly - you've answered your own question there. I'm sure they're fed up as it is with telling people that certain titles are unavailable to them, so this will only exacerbate that.

Shout probably feels that you dont need to know that. And quite honestly you probably dont. And even if they did say it came from a French distributor, knowing all entitlement fans , they would start requesting and nagging shout movies from Francois Truffaut and other French horrors like Brotherhood of the Wolf !
Its a no win situation. I didnt answer my own question, just stating the answer for you as to why. Not that it really matters

[BarnDoor]

Originally Posted by dsman71

Shout probably feels that you dont need to know that. And quite honestly you probably dont. And even if they did say it came from a French distributor, knowing all entitlement fans , they would start requesting and nagging shout movies from Francois Truffaut and other French horrors like Brotherhood of the Wolf !
Its a no win situation. I didnt answer my own question, just stating the answer for you as to why. Not that it really matters

It's a simple question - were the films licensed from Sony, or from a French company? And if it is the latter, then why tell us it's the former? Shout's rep apparently thinks it is Sony and, as such, that's what we have been told. And this answer would have been perfectly satisfactory had Mister Lime not contested the point. Is the Shout rep merely mistaken? Perhaps. Of course, as I said before, even if one or two of these films have been licensed from Sony, it doesn't automatically mean that Shout can get their hands on the rest of their catalogue. Could this be another Warner Bros-style situation, where they've made special allowance for a release because of a specific request, presumably by the director? But nevertheless, any deal with Sony would obviously be an important development.

To prevent speculation, Scream might have simply directed the question to Shout and omitted the 'they did' part. In any case, I don't see why this issue can't be cleared up easily enough. I have asked Mister Lime and hopefully he responds.

[flavo5000]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

Agreed... 2 releases (one of which is still in print) is enough for now. Let's work on the rest of the Universal Catalog (Tales From the Hood!) first.

+1 for Tales from the Hood!

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

... Is the Shout rep merely mistaken? ...

Even if they were mistaken, why provide any answer if they didn't know for sure. No need to guess. They could've stated they weren't sure or checked with the appropriate folks.

[Brad1963]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

I did see that, but I'm left wondering why A) Living in Oblivion would have the same French rights holder as The Bear; and B) Why Shout would say that they were licenced from Sony.

Maybe Shout will recieve the elements from Sony even though they licensed from the actual rights holder.

[Lajcan]

Tue Vincent Price Collection on Amazon.ca just dropped from $70 down to $53.49. It still says they will ship within 1 to 2 months. Just a head up to anybody who wants to give it a chamce or anyone who has already ordered it you can contact customer services and get a price drop

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Lajcan

Tue Vincent Price Collection on Amazon.ca just dropped from $70 down to $53.49. It still says they will ship within 1 to 2 months. Just a head up to anybody who wants to give it a chamce or anyone who has already ordered it you can contact customer services and get a price drop

It will never ship. They aren't getting any more.

[Lajcan]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

It will never ship. They aren't getting any more.

Doesn't hurt to try though

[edwoodjr]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

Even if they were mistaken, why provide any answer if they didn't know for sure. No need to guess. They could've stated they weren't sure or checked with the appropriate folks.

If they were genuinely mistaken, as in incorrectly interpreting information or their information was mistaken, they believed they had the correct answer, but didn't. So for them this wasn't a guess or there wasn't issue of being "sure." Apparently they just didn't quite comprehend the exact specifics as well as they thought they did. Seems like a pretty common occurrence in all walks of life.

[bipbop13]

Does anyone know who owns the double feature "Hell Comes To Frogtown & Defcon 4"?

[zbinks]

Originally Posted by bipbop13

Does anyone know who owns the double feature "Hell Comes To Frogtown & Defcon 4"?

Lakeshore Entertainment. Their catalog is currently licensed to RLJ Entertatinment (Image Entertainment).

[kdawq]

Originally Posted by schwano

Mines a bit unique as I ditch all slipcovers (CEs), special packaging (Nightbreed, Halloween), and use only blu cases (Halloween). I also include particular Shout! genre titles that blend in well.

that is EPIC bro!

[ingmog]

Originally Posted by Undeadcow

Say no more, Brainscan is a total guilty pleasure that needs a blu-ray asap. I can see your point but considering the point of the barcode is to allow sale of the item it's really only needed on the initial side; ultimately barcodes maul the image and distract from presentation so personally I'm glad it's not on both (I much prefer the original theatrical art side as it is). I can't imagine how many cool art designs are restricted by barcodes. I think it'd only be a bummer if you tried to resell your SF releases to a store that scans in used items.

You're correct about the point of the barcode, but when it just throws me off to have the slipcover over the reversible art and see part of the image and text through the opening in the slip for the barcode. Maybe if they somehow put an image to fit in that spot specifically?

In any case, not a big deal at all and I was just curious if anyone else even thought about this.