Scream Factory Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[tangerinewolf]

Originally Posted by SonnybytheSea

I'm only referring to stand-alone Blu-Ray discs by Shout/Scream for the remainder of the Warner/Sony William Castle films! I'm aware of House on Haunted Hill already being in The Vincent Price Collection Volume 2, I'm more referencing that SF should do a single release of the film. I'm not interested ina region 2 UK releases either, nor the Mill Creek double feature Blu-Rays!!!

If SF have been complaining lately about low sales regarding older horror movies, then they should be doing more box sets like A William Castle Box Set or a Val Lewton Box Set etc... They have more then 20+ horror films pre-1960s, so I assume some must sell for SF to keep getting licenses for them!!!!

Sorry, I was only trying to reach out and be helpful. You sound very angry!

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by tangerinewolf

No, as I stated in another post, I got my information from The Isle of the Dead Cancellation thread. It was stated by two Shout/Scream officials in a long podcast that the cancellation of IOTD was "implied" to low sales of "The Body Snachers" but they definitely did not confirm that it had anything to do with an inferior print or any such problems. Their original statement really explained nothing! I retract my original general statement that they were complaining at all older films not selling well. I was referring to their statement that "The Body Snacher" didn't sell well. Shout/Scream continues to evade all of the real issues. But that doesn't surprise me.

Unless you can provide evidence I stand by my original post. Its common knowledge that Scream factory often announces titles before inspecting the elements they have acquired and have postponed releases in the past for this very reason as they searched out new sources. What they havent done is announce a title and then cancel it because of low sales.

Release decisions are made far enough in advance that there would be no reason to go through the effort of acquiring a title, preparing it for release, and then cancelling it because a different unrelated title didnt sell well.

I'm fine conceding that other reasons could be behind the cancelation (it's possible that ownership rights or some other rights issue came up after the title was announced) but I'm quite confident it had nothing to do with the sales of a different title.

[OceanBlue]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

No slipcover. It's within the realm of possibility that a UK label might strike a deal with Paramount just like Shout did but are you willing to wait indefinitely?

Don't think I would wait a long time, in case the title goes out of print. There are other Shout titles I've wanted to get for a while (another slasher, The Seduction, and the Charles Bronson-starring 10 to Midnight, and then there's next year's two-disc release of My Bloody Valentine). My gut feeling is that these films won't get a release in the UK, even though I would like if that happened (haven't ordered from Diabolik in a long time, because of the item and shipping costs).

[MTRodaba2468]

Originally Posted by JasonMichael

Thanks for mentioning those towers. I'd never heard of them. I am thinking of getting a bunch for all my CDs and video collection.

Same here. Thanks for the heads up.

[tangerinewolf]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

Unless you can provide evidence I stand by my original post. Its common knowledge that Scream factory often announces titles before inspecting the elements they have acquired and have postponed releases in the past for this very reason as they searched out new sources. What they havent done is announce a title and then cancel it because of low sales.

Release decisions are made far enough in advance that there would be no reason to go through the effort of acquiring a title, preparing it for release, and then cancelling it because a different unrelated title didnt sell well.

I'm fine conceding that other reasons could be behind the cancelation (it's possible that ownership rights or some other rights issue came up after the title was announced) but I'm quite confident it had nothing to do with the sales of a different title.

I don't know what other kind of proof I can give you! Go over to the Isle of the Dead thread. Obviously you haven't done that yet. Read through the posts, if you have the time. A member posted there that they heard through a podcast that IOTD was cancelled because of bad sales of TBS, coming from Shout/Scream representatives and they made no mention about an unusable print or any other excuse. Jesus, I am repeating my previous post! I saw that post and it's a good enough explanation for me! Check it out, will you?

[SonnybytheSea]

Originally Posted by tangerinewolf

Sorry, I was only trying to reach out and be helpful. You sound very angry!

No apology needed, I'm not angry! just trying to make my original post more clear is all....

[MTRodaba2468]

Originally Posted by tangerinewolf

I don't know what other kind of proof I can give you! Go over to the Isle of the Dead thread. Obviously you haven't done that yet. Read through the posts, if you have the time. A member posted there that they heard through a podcast that IOTD was cancelled because of bad sales of TBS, coming from Shout/Scream representatives and they made no mention about an unusable print or any other excuse. Jesus, I am repeating my previous post! I saw that post and it's a good enough explanation for me! Check it out, will you?

I just read through the thread. This is the post I saw along those lines (outside of the post YOU made)...

Originally Posted by happydood

I just finished listening to the epic 3 hour long Shockwaves podcast that featured the Scream Factory duo and they were asked if there was one title that they were disappointed didn't do as well as expected and it was The Body Snatcher. I'm wondering if Leopard Man was so far into production that they put it out anyway and then pulled Isle Of The Dead because of this.

He didn't say they "implied" in the podcast that it was cancelled due to another title's sales. He said that they were disappointed in the sales for The Leopard Man, and then HE speculated if maybe that had something to do with this title's cancellation. That really isn't evidence for this take at all.

Furthermore, now knowing it was the Shock Waves podcast, I can confirm, having also listened to it, that at no point in the discussion did Isle of the Dead ever come up during the discussion of The Body Snatcher's sales.

As TripleHBK said, when Scream/Shout makes those types of announcements, it's usually due to an issue with production, either with film elements, or unforeseen licensing issues. As of late, it's never been due to low sales of similar titles.

[deltatauhobbit]

Originally Posted by Michael24

I've enjoyed The Relic ever since I saw it in the theater when I was in high school. Very fun monster movie and still held up as such when I last saw it maybe a few years ago on some movie channel I stumbled across late one night. There is some CGI in it, mostly for when the monster needs to be fully seen, otherwise it's mostly animatronic and puppetry work.

The Relic is a solid creature feature with a couple good leads in Tom Sizemore and Penelope Ann Miller. The CGI effects were a bit dodgy, as a lot of 90's CGI tends to be. Since Peter Hyams acts as director and cinematographer, most of his films aren't well lit so the lack of light helps cover up any CGI shortcomings. The practical effects from Stan Winston and his studio are of course very good. I own the current Blu-ray and would definitely pick up a better collector's edition of this film.

I remember watching The Relic in theaters with my dad. He had read the book by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child beforehand (which makes me curious why more of their books haven't been adapted yet, many of them would work quite well in film). The movie takes a few deviations from the book, one of which is fairly major, the character played by

[Show spoiler]James Whitmore, the elderly department head, dies in the movie but in the book survives and actually becomes a villain in the sequel book Reliquary. In that book he decides to refine the plant that turns people into monsters so he can gain the use of his legs again but also creates a horde of CHUD-like monsters that roam the sewers.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by deltatauhobbit

The Relic is a solid creature feature with a couple good leads in Tom Sizemore and Penelope Ann Miller. The CGI effects were a bit dodgy, as a lot of 90's CGI tends to be. Since Peter Hyams acts as director and cinematographer, most of his films aren't well lit so the lack of light helps cover up any CGI shortcomings. The practical effects from Stan Winston and his studio are of course very good.

I usually notice bad CGI right away but, for the life of me, I don't remember seeing dodgy effects in The Relic. Maybe the low lighting really does a good job of hiding them . Speaking of Peter Hyams, I really liked his 2005 film A Sound of Thunder but that film was an epic fail in the special effects department. The film was barely released theatrically with unfinished effects (at least they looked unfinished lol) and the worst greenscreen work you're ever going to see in a movie. Despite the flaws I found the film hugely entertaining as turn-your-brain-off popcorn fun.

[Mr. Thomsen]

Originally Posted by Killer Meteor

Noted horror historian Tom Weaver generally dislikes Hammer gothics.

As do a lot of other of the so-called 'monster kids,' who grew up on the Shock Theater package of classic Universal horror on TV during the late 1950s and into the 1960s.

The dislike for Hammer is nothing compared to the sometimes outright contempt I have seen from the same crowd for the Italian gothic horror movies of the 1960s though.

A lot of old, horror interested boomers seem to put Universal horror on a piedestal, and then accept very little of anything else outside American horror up to the early 1960s.

In that regard, the boomers are really not much different than people in this thread who have no interest in anything outside horror from the 1980-90s. It is just a different decade or different decades they focus on.

[Luke Dodge748]

Originally Posted by Mr. Thomsen

As do a lot of other of the so-called 'monster kids,' who grew up on the Shock Theater package of classic Universal horror on TV during the late 1950s and into the 1960s.

The dislike for Hammer is nothing compared to the sometimes outright contempt I have seen from the same crowd for the Italian gothic horror movies of the 1960s though.

A lot of old, horror interested boomers seem to put Universal horror on a piedestal, and then accept very little of anything else outside American horror up to the early 1960s.

In that regard, the boomers are really not much different than people in this thread who have no interest in anything outside horror from the 1980-90s. It is just a different decade or different decades they focus on.

While this may suck or just hurt your feelings, not everyone "gets" something from decades outside of perhaps when they grew up watching movies. It took me til my late-30s/early 40s to appreciate anything other than American films...because that's what I knew, outside of late night monster television. Now Criterion helps me to find movies outside of my wheelhouse. It is what it is. Not everyone who likes movies likes all movies...

[Thomas Veil]

If anyone is trying to find some sort of pattern or age group to point at for not liking certain eras or whatever it's useless. People are all different.

For example I'm 55 and grew up on watching classic universal horror etc but to be honest those movies just don't do anything for me anymore. I find them cheesy and the acting over the top and frankly some things make me cringe when I see them in older movies (and I'm not even a PC type of guy).
I have fond memories of liking them when I was a kid but just don't now.

That's just my personal opinion and could care less if you do like them and in fact encourage you to collect what you enjoy. There is something for everyone. For me it's 80's and 90's and even some recent stuff but I bounce around and can be picky and selective even in those eras. I just tend to connect more with movies in time frames I actually lived in (exception mid 60's through mid 70's, just to young to feel connected).

Anyway just enjoy and worry about what you like, that's all that matters.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Mr. Thomsen

As do a lot of other of the so-called 'monster kids,' who grew up on the Shock Theater package of classic Universal horror on TV during the late 1950s and into the 1960s.

The dislike for Hammer is nothing compared to the sometimes outright contempt I have seen from the same crowd for the Italian gothic horror movies of the 1960s though.

A lot of old, horror interested boomers seem to put Universal horror on a piedestal, and then accept very little of anything else outside American horror up to the early 1960s.

In that regard, the boomers are really not much different than people in this thread who have no interest in anything outside horror from the 1980-90s. It is just a different decade or different decades they focus on.

That moment when the OK Boomer-Millennial feud spills over into the world of nerdy horror movie fandom.

[deltatauhobbit]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

I usually notice bad CGI right away but, for the life of me, I don't remember seeing dodgy effects in The Relic. Maybe the low lighting really does a good job of hiding them . Speaking of Peter Hyams, I really liked his 2005 film A Sound of Thunder but that film was an epic fail in the special effects department. The film was barely released theatrically with unfinished effects (at least they looked unfinished lol) and the worst greenscreen work you're ever going to see in a movie. Despite the flaws I found the film hugely entertaining as turn-your-brain-off popcorn fun.

Oh man, I agree with that. A Sound of Thunder is atrocious when it comes to CGI and greenscreen work. It honestly looks worse than typical Syfy movies made today and yet supposedly that film had a budget of 80 million. I don't know what they spent it on though, maybe Ben Kingsley hairpiece is actually CGI and it's the most detailed piece of CGI ever created with all those individual white hairs haha. I still have vivid memories of the characters walking along the sidewalk of future Chicago and it looks bad, soooooooooooo bad.

With that said, I also enjoyed A Sound of Thunder as a shut off your brain flick. The only reason it works on any level is because it's based on a great Ray Bradbury story. Although, The Butterfly Effect did a better job of the concept and that doesn't include action or dinosaurs so A Sound of Thunder should have started out with an advantage.

To date, the best Peter Hyams film is Timecop and should pretty much be treated as a matter of fact haha.

[Michael24]

Oh, I'll never forget stumbling across A Sound of Thunder on a movie channel one day years ago and thinking "What some Syfy-level crap." When I saw it was directed by Peter Hyams I was utterly astonished. I've seen a number of his films and have almost always enjoyed them. But my favorite has always been Outland with Sean Connery.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by Thomas Veil

If anyone is trying to find some sort of pattern or age group to point at for not liking certain eras or whatever it's useless. People are all different.

For example I'm 55 and grew up on watching classic universal horror etc but to be honest those movies just don't do anything for me anymore. I find them cheesy and the acting over the top and frankly some things make me cringe when I see them in older movies (and I'm not even a PC type of guy).
I have fond memories of liking them when I was a kid but just don't now.

That's just my personal opinion and could care less if you do like them and in fact encourage you to collect what you enjoy. There is something for everyone. For me it's 80's and 90's and even some recent stuff but I bounce around and can be picky and selective even in those eras. I just tend to connect more with movies in time frames I actually lived in (exception mid 60's through mid 70's, just to young to feel connected).

Anyway just enjoy and worry about what you like, that's all that matters.

Many of us have stated our preferences but I doubt there's too many of us close-minded enough to dismiss different eras of filmmaking. I love 80's slashers but I just purchased It's A Wonderful Life on UHD

[TripleHBK]

My "golden era" of horror is 1975 - 1996. I was born in 82 and am a huge fan of Jim Henson and the rubber monster style of filmmaking seen during this era. With that said I am Constantly looking for films from other era's. My appreciation for 1970s cinema has grown tremendously over the years as has my enjoyment of films outside the US. With that said, While I'm willing to drop $24 - $35 on a slasher or a film from the 80s, I am in general not willing to do so for older films as my enjoyment of them isn't on that same level as that found with the "golden era" I enjoy.

Now, I would absolutely LOVE to own a complete hammer horror collection. I love watching films of pretty much all eras, but I'm not willing to spend that same $24-$35 per film on these films as I am the "golden era" stuff. This then is a problem as while the interest is certainly there. The finances are not, so as a result I have to wait to pick up hammer titles when they reach price levels I like (likely below what Scream Factory would enjoy). I feel like I'm probably not alone in this thinking which helps to illustrate the larger problem facing Scream Factory in that, they simply cannot continue to sell all titles for the same price points when they are not all viewed/wanted/enjoyed the same ways.

[Slob]

A boomer weighing in.
TV was still all b&w until I was 8 years old. Black and white films were still being released theatrically on a routine basis. We would watch old movies on tv and they were no different really than new tv shows. We didn't really discern the age of the stuff. We would watch old horror/monster movies on the late show, Three Stooges after school, Outer Limits and Twilight Zone in b&w prime time and it was all the same to us.
In the sixties we went to the drive-ins and gobbled up the Hammer stuff, and the AIP stuff with or without Vincent Price. Color movies would be double featured with b&w movies and we didn't care.
By the seventies we were driving and eating up all the low budget hooror stuff at the drive in. Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Hills Have Eyes, Black Christmas, etc.
The original Halloween was a benchmark. After it's success, the decline of the drive-in, and the pop culture popularity of Stephen King in the early 80s it just didn't seem the same. The big studios began to produce and distribute horror as major releases. Took all the fun out of it. Not to mention we were in our mid twenties by the time Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, King adaptations, etc. were the rage.
There's a definite generational factor. Hell, I was 20 when Star Wars was released and we went to see it on LSD.

[BurningAstronaut]

Scream just tweeted:

*Out-of-print* & *Low stock Alert*
We recently found 50 units each of both OOP titles LEVIATHAN and DISTURBING BEHAVIOR. Get them while they last @
LEVIATHAN
DISTURBING BEHAVIOR

[Gacivory]

Millennial here and only saw the Hammer and the Universal movies in the last few years and really like ones from each!