Rollerball (1975) (Standard [SOLD OUT] + Encore Editions) (Limited Edition)

[meremortal]

Good news for the diehard fans if it is officially announced, but I'll stick with the dvd I already have. At this point in the blu ray lifespan it'd take a really strong catalog title to warrant $30.

[chriszilla]

Originally Posted by mar3o

It certainly isn't because people don't buy catalog titles because all the people who bought DVDs of their favorite films are still fans of their favorite films, and many would be willing to upgrade if they were available.

Believe me, I would really like to agree with you, as we share the same sentiments on film collecting, I believe. But I'm sorry, stores aren't stocking catalog titles because the demand for them just isn't there. People like you and I who collect physical media, particularly media of a classic nature, are a dwindling breed. Just because you know of some family members or friends who would buy stuff like ROLLERBALL if it was on the shelf of their local Target or Wal-Mart, doesn't mean that those titles would turn a big profit, as much as I hate to say it. You need to examine the entire financial model of releasing classic films nowadays, to understand why the studios are behaving as they do.

You and I are in agreement on a lot of things, but you seem to feel that if stores would simply stock classic titles that they would sell in appreciable numbers. The sales figures for all of the great classic films that have been released thus far in the format argue otherwise. There are many reasons for this. For many, the need to upgrade to Blu just isn't there, as to these people, the quality of DVD is "good enough." Also, the continued expansion of streaming content has (in many people's minds) eliminated the need for purchasing of physical media. I could go on, but will just end it here. I'll simply say that if you had access to sales data for classic films on Blu-Ray, you'd be shocked and disappointed at the numbers. And I'm talking about great titles in the format's earlier years, when stock was more readily available in brick and mortar stores. As I said, there's a very good reason why older titles have slowed to a trickle in the format. We are very close to a situation where ONLY a handful of boutique labels, and MOD titles, will be all we will have to choose from when buying the films we love.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by chriszilla

Believe me, I would really like to agree with you, as we share the same sentiments on film collecting, I believe. But I'm sorry, stores aren't stocking catalog titles because the demand for them just isn't there. People like you and I who collect physical media, particularly media of a classic nature, are a dwindling breed. Just because you know of some family members or friends who would buy stuff like ROLLERBALL if it was on the shelf of their local Target or Wal-Mart, doesn't mean that those titles would turn a big profit, as much as I hate to say it. You need to examine the entire financial model of releasing classic films nowadays, to understand why the studios are behaving as they do.

You and I are in agreement on a lot of things, but you seem to feel that if stores would simply stock classic titles that they would sell in appreciable numbers. The sales figures for all of the great classic films that have been released thus far in the format argue otherwise. There are many reasons for this. For many, the need to upgrade to Blu just isn't there, as to these people, the quality of DVD is "good enough." Also, the continued expansion of streaming content has (in many people's minds) eliminated the need for purchasing of physical media. I could go on, but will just end it here. I'll simply say that if you had access to sales data for classic films on Blu-Ray, you'd be shocked and disappointed at the numbers. And I'm talking about great titles in the format's earlier years, when stock was more readily available in brick and mortar stores. As I said, there's a very good reason why older titles have slowed to a trickle in the format. We are very close to a situation where ONLY a handful of boutique labels, and MOD titles, will be all we will have to choose from when buying the films we love.

The thought of catalog sales being so dismal is very depressing to me as a fan of older films (and newer ones too). I really wonder if part of why the sales are so poor now is due to losing people's trust or faith in the format after so many disappointments with quality. I've dealt with everything from poor color timing and bad compression to bad discs, scratched discs, broken menus, wrong aspect ratios, stacked discs, and a host of other issues since I started buying blu-rays. And yet I still have faith in them to some degree because I love it when they get it right. But I'm sure we've all been burned before with hosts of screw-ups with releases, and over time I do get frustrated and sometimes want to back off from the format. Then I see another favorite announced and I can't help but get excited again.

Shame that people are willing to abandon a high-quality format (when done right) for low-bitrate streaming with no surround and no extras. People are nuts. People are buying 50-inch tvs in Best Buy but want to feed it low-bitrate streamed films. plus lots of cable companies impose download caps - people are going to regret it some day that they didn't support physical media, when they realize they've hit their monthly cap and can't stream any more films for the month, and they no longer are in possession of their films when the servers drop their favorite titles from the streaming catalog.

Anyways it's sad to think physical media is disappearing when it should be more popular than ever considering the quality we can attain now. I guess quality is low on people's priority sadly.

[JimDiGriz]

This one is a no-go for me anyway as its region-locked. What I find hard to understand though is that plenty of other smaller, less important, more obscure films have found their way to blu-ray and this one hasnt had a proper mainstream release. Its a prime slice of 70s sci-fi dystopia which I would think would have more of an audience than say Silent Running (which I also love and own) and is probably on a par with the likes of Logan's Run or Westworld.

And Ill be honest - I really dont expect to pay a lot of money for a back catalogue release like this. I paid £11 for the really nice Silent Running steelbook and that would be my limit on a title like this.

[HotRats]

The godawful 2002 film gets a global release on blu but the classic 1975 original gets farmed out to an American niche label. How much do film company execs get paid?

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

This one is a no-go for me anyway as its region-locked. What I find hard to understand though is that plenty of other smaller, less important, more obscure films have found their way to blu-ray and this one hasnt had a proper mainstream release. Its a prime slice of 70s sci-fi dystopia which I would think would have more of an audience than say Silent Running (which I also love and own) and is probably on a par with the likes of Logan's Run or Westworld.

And Ill be honest - I really dont expect to pay a lot of money for a back catalogue release like this. I paid £11 for the really nice Silent Running steelbook and that would be my limit on a title like this.

Good point - I see Logan's run in stores regularly. So obviously somebody felt that Logan's Run had an audience and was worthy of a full retail release. What makes Rollerball any different? How many people daily are out looking for Logan's Run? Probably very few, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be available for those that do. The same should apply for this film.

I love Silent Running too by the way, and I own the Eureka blu-ray. I bought it when it was released because I figured it may be a while (or never) before we see it in the states. That's another title that got 2 DVD releases over here but we can't even get it once on blu-ray.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by HotRats

The godawful 2002 film gets a global release on blu but the classic 1975 original gets farmed out to an American niche label. How much do film company execs get paid?

Yep - I really think this film is being underestimated. Will it sell as well as say Star Trek: Into Darkness or Man of Steel? Of course not. But it would do okay I believe over time. These catalog titles don't sell immediately off the shelf like new releases do - these sell slowly over time, and I don't think studios want to bother with that slow trickle of sales any more. They want the big releases that get big sales immediately, not a slow trickle from catalog titles. I guess we better scoop up all the catalog titles we can while they still get any release at all, before the studios abandon catalog titles entirely.

[Seymour]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Good point - I see Logan's run in stores regularly. So obviously somebody felt that Logan's Run had an audience and was worthy of a full retail release. What makes Rollerball any different? How many people daily are out looking for Logan's Run? Probably very few, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be available for those that do. The same should apply for this film.

The difference, of course, is that WB owns Logan's Run and MGM owns Rollerball. Knowing that, plus the fact that WB doesn't license stuff out while MGM have been farming titles out like crazy (to Shout, Criterion, and now Twilight Time)--it's not that hard to understand.

But yeah, if Rollerball happened to be with WB, it would've most likely had a regular catalog release. MGM, Fox, and Sony all have deals in place with TT, and I wouldn't be surprised if Universal jumped on board, as well. WB (and Disney for that matter), not so much.

[Viper187]

Originally Posted by Seymour

The difference, of course, is that WB owns Logan's Run and MGM owns Rollerball. Knowing that, plus the fact that WB doesn't license stuff out while MGM have been farming titles out like crazy (to Shout, Criterion, and now Twilight Time)--it's not that hard to understand.

But yeah, if Rollerball happened to be with WB, it would've most likely had a regular catalog release. MGM, Fox, and Sony all have deals in place with TT, and I wouldn't be surprised if Universal jumped on board, as well. WB (and Disney for that matter), not so much.

Who the hell owns Catch Me if You Can (1989)? I'd like to at least see a DVD-R release of the goddamn thing in my lifetime. It was written/produced by Stephen Sommers and still never made it beyond VHS.

[Cliff]

Originally Posted by mar3o

The thought of catalog sales being so dismal is very depressing to me as a fan of older films (and newer ones too). I really wonder if part of why the sales are so poor now is due to losing people's trust or faith in the format after so many disappointments with quality. I've dealt with everything from poor color timing and bad compression to bad discs, scratched discs, broken menus, wrong aspect ratios, stacked discs, and a host of other issues since I started buying blu-rays. And yet I still have faith in them to some degree because I love it when they get it right. But I'm sure we've all been burned before with hosts of screw-ups with releases, and over time I do get frustrated and sometimes want to back off from the format. Then I see another favorite announced and I can't help but get excited again.

Shame that people are willing to abandon a high-quality format (when done right) for low-bitrate streaming with no surround and no extras. People are nuts. People are buying 50-inch tvs in Best Buy but want to feed it low-bitrate streamed films. plus lots of cable companies impose download caps - people are going to regret it some day that they didn't support physical media, when they realize they've hit their monthly cap and can't stream any more films for the month, and they no longer are in possession of their films when the servers drop their favorite titles from the streaming catalog.

Anyways it's sad to think physical media is disappearing when it should be more popular than ever considering the quality we can attain now. I guess quality is low on people's priority sadly.

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

[mdonovan]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

What truly sucks ... Only ONE player in this market .. And thus a monopoly. No competition leads to lower quality and higher prices.

[chriszilla]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

Brilliant post, Cliff! Thanks for stating so eloquently what I've been saying in a few other threads.

The laserdisc analogy is spot on, and as someone who was an enthusiast of that format, I'm delighted to get 1080p versions of films I love on Blu-Ray for $30, when I can easily remember paying $100 20 years ago(!) for the same film.

[JoeDeM]

Great post Cliff, I completely agree.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

Very well thought-out post.

The only issue with people not caring about HD movies/blu-ray is that at some point they will start caring about quality. When everybody's "good enough' DVDs start looking truly unwatchable on their large-screen sets, then people are going to start to get upset when they start to realize more that their non-anamorphic DVDs only play in a little window in the middle of their screen, and the only way to see their favorite films full-screen again is to buy it in an HD format. I think many people still have no idea about how all that works, and I bet every day people realize for the first time that their "good enough" non-anamorphic DVDs suddenly aren't good enough for their new HDTV they just bought. Virtually everybody has HDTV's now, and those that don't soon will, as their old sets die. People may not think they care about quality, but right now their anamorphic DVDs still look pretty good upscaled on an HDTV, even as big as 55". But what happens when the industry starts pushing 4k years from now, like they did with 1080p HDTV? How will all their favorite films on their "good enough" DVDs look then? I have no desire to buy into 4k, and I hope it goes nowhere honestly, but if that's what they insist on selling and pushing, eventually that's where we're gonna end up 6, 8, maybe 10 years from now.

I also think that probably more people are into blu-ray than you hint at here in your post. I agree that it hasn't achieved the popularity of DVD, but I was out shopping the day after Black Friday, and stores like Wal-mart were packed with people looking through the blu-rays for the deals. I don't think laserdisc ever approached that level of popularity, ever.

And I think people have a legitimate right to not like the Twilight Time model. I'm not lying when I say as a film fan I think a title like Rollerball should be on a shelf next to Logan's Run and other great Sci-fi films that are on the store shelves. Whether or not I like or want to buy a particular film from TT or not, I still don't like the limited-run business model. At least Warner Archives makes them as they go - I bought Deathtrap last year for myself on blu-ray through Warner's archive program, and I ordered another copy a few weeks back for a Christmas gift for somebody. If that movie was owned by another studio, it either could have been sold out if given to TT or likely never released at all. At least through Warner a year later I still could legally buy another copy. The TT business model locks up catalog titles in multi-year deals that guarantees they can't be sold once they run out until their license expires. At least through Warner people can actually buy their favorite films.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by chriszilla

Brilliant post, Cliff! Thanks for stating so eloquently what I've been saying in a few other threads.

The laserdisc analogy is spot on, and as someone who was an enthusiast of that format, I'm delighted to get 1080p versions of films I love on Blu-Ray for $30, when I can easily remember paying $100 20 years ago(!) for the same film.

I'm 43. I never bought into the laserdisc format - I was in my late teens/early 20's then and had no money for such things. I mostly rented VHS tapes and taped my own movies off tv until I got into DVD and blu-ray. So not everybody out there who buys blu-rays were laserdisc junkies. To us, the price of DVDs is what we expect a movie to cost. Sure, VHS films cost as much as $90 when VHS first started out, but do you think people now care or even know about that? They expect films to cost around $15-$25, and that's because that's what the average price of a DVD settled on. You can offer a higher quality format like blu-ray, and charge more if you like, but if you think you're going to stock them in large quantities in stores and expect the same people that bought DVDs to buy blu-rays, the studios need to realize that people expect the movies to still cost around the same price. To most people, it's still the same-sized disc, with a movie and maybe some extras on it. HD or not, DVD has people used to expecting their movies to cost around that $15-$25 mark.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

You don't like to be concise do you?

[Musicguy]

Originally Posted by chriszilla

Believe me, I would really like to agree with you, as we share the same sentiments on film collecting, I believe. But I'm sorry, stores aren't stocking catalog titles because the demand for them just isn't there. People like you and I who collect physical media, particularly media of a classic nature, are a dwindling breed. Just because you know of some family members or friends who would buy stuff like ROLLERBALL if it was on the shelf of their local Target or Wal-Mart, doesn't mean that those titles would turn a big profit, as much as I hate to say it. You need to examine the entire financial model of releasing classic films nowadays, to understand why the studios are behaving as they do.

You and I are in agreement on a lot of things, but you seem to feel that if stores would simply stock classic titles that they would sell in appreciable numbers. The sales figures for all of the great classic films that have been released thus far in the format argue otherwise. There are many reasons for this. For many, the need to upgrade to Blu just isn't there, as to these people, the quality of DVD is "good enough." Also, the continued expansion of streaming content has (in many people's minds) eliminated the need for purchasing of physical media. I could go on, but will just end it here. I'll simply say that if you had access to sales data for classic films on Blu-Ray, you'd be shocked and disappointed at the numbers. And I'm talking about great titles in the format's earlier years, when stock was more readily available in brick and mortar stores. As I said, there's a very good reason why older titles have slowed to a trickle in the format. We are very close to a situation where ONLY a handful of boutique labels, and MOD titles, will be all we will have to choose from when buying the films we love.

This is partially true, yes catalog doesn't sell anywhere near what a recently released theatrical film sells - but the fact that most stores do not sell catalog titles limits the sales of those titles...especially Twilight Time...most people who shop at Walmart and Best Buy have never heard of Twilight Time...Unbelieveable you say??????....Besides have you ever tried to find a catalog title at Walmart - they are usually thrown in a bin with a hundred other titles and you have to dig in and one never knows what's going to be in there - not the best way to purchase a film.

Best Buy has 3 sections Action, Children and Comedy, Oh yes and some stores have horror, good luck finding "The Godfather" which section does that fall under?

That leaves Barnes and Noble - which is pricey. True the studios are pushing for downloads - it's cheaper for them, they cut out the middle man and they don't have to worry about inventory - there is none!. Of course they want us to download - Hey, they'd have you milk the cow too if the stores would shelter and feed them!

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Cliff

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors.

And guess who doesn't: Blu-ray.
There's a problem with that LaserDisc analogy:LaserDisc was the best-kept secret in home theater. Casual moviebuffs--most of whom wondered why it didn't record programs--didn't find out the advantages it had over VHS until the mid 90's or so (by which point it had already been out for twelve years), and those "niche" fans had to order it by mail, because you often didn't have to take off your shoes to count the number of accessible retail outlets in your state. The most mainstream "starter" laserdisk available to the mass public was the horrendously designed RCA, and while it may have won a few suburban converts to the idea of flat movies, it didn't build or keep them.
Eventually we found out that LaserDisc referred to Pioneer and Voyager--And by the time Siskel & Ebert let us in on the "secret", guess who'd already arrived to take all the credit for better sound/picture, indestructible media and no rewinding.

Why you are STILL saying "Blu-ray's a fad" like you did nine years ago, I do not know. Maybe you just overslept. Or just need to think up some new material.
But it's a whole lot easier to buy movies on Blu-ray than it was a while ago.

The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers.

They absolutely DO NOT HAVE TO CARE. If they buy a movie, it's on Blu-ray.
In much the same way that they find it hard to buy a movie on VHS today.

Originally Posted by mar3o

And I think people have a legitimate right to not like the Twilight Time model. I'm not lying when I say as a film fan I think a title like Rollerball should be on a shelf next to Logan's Run and other great Sci-fi films that are on the store shelves. Whether or not I like or want to buy a particular film from TT or not, I still don't like the limited-run business model. At least Warner Archives makes them as they go - I bought Deathtrap last year for myself on blu-ray through Warner's archive program, and I ordered another copy a few weeks back for a Christmas gift for somebody. If that movie was owned by another studio, it either could have been sold out if given to TT or likely never released at all. At least through Warner a year later I still could legally buy another copy. The TT business model locks up catalog titles in multi-year deals that guarantees they can't be sold once they run out until their license expires. At least through Warner people can actually buy their favorite films.

Exactly: The TT complaint isn't about buying movies, it's about not being able to buy movies.
So, not every movie sells out like Christine...What if they do?
If TT kept the licenses to their movies as Warner-style MOD's , they'd be able to sell a few more to the, quote-fingers, "few" people who want a copy--But in trying to make a statement about the hand-wringing view they have of the industry at the moment, they're taking their own movies and a portion of their own customer base hostage over it.

[Musicguy]

I should add Barnes and Noble is on it's way out, I'd be surprised if the chain is around in 5 years - all other book store chains have gone under, no nobody buys books anymore (Borders Books is sorely missed by me!)

Wal-Mart has one or two aisles of Blu-ray and DVD product and maybe one or two bins (where heaps of product are thrown upon each other), Target may have two or three aisles.

Compared to Tower Records/Video which had whole departments or stores devoted to DVD product...sames with Virgin - whole floors of DVD product, plus we had Good Guys and Circuit City (those stores are now gone due to on-line competition, mis-management and Best Buy's desire to eliminate the competition by stocking every DVD title released then limiting their selection once the competition went under - Yay! Let's hear it for Best Buy (I give them 5 years at most before they call it quits - the quality of their stores has hit rock bottom over and people know it)

There is no shelf space anymore - Wal-Mart, Target and Best Buy call all the shots for retail product at this point and they can only stock the top 40 hits (which is the latest theatrical release blockbuster and Disney kid stuff which appeals to their moms) The studios hate dealing with them (remember Wal-Mart wanted Pan and Scan copies of the DVD for Joe Six Pack)

Anyone interested in film has to buy on-line. Most of those know of Amazon. Less know of the other on-line retailers. Even less know of Twilight Time. Don't believe me, go ahead, ask Grandma!!!

[ScorpionReleasing]

Originally Posted by Cliff

Of course it is... that's why MP3s and compressed iTunes 'cloud' streams have all but put the nail in the CD market. In 2000, when DVD and CD sales were healthy and stores were regularly stocking physical media, Eminem released The Marshall Mathers LP and saw first week sales of 1.76 million copies. Last month he released The Marshall Mathers LP 2 to first week sales of 792,000 copies. It's no coincidence that this drastic drop in numbers parallels the severe drop in physical availability. There's a food chain... People stop buying things, stores therefore stop selling things, studios therefore stop producing things. But make no mistake, CONSUMERS are on the top of this food chain.

I said this 9 years ago (before the release of either HD format) and it's becoming ever more true: Blu-ray is destined to be the LaserDisc to DVD's VHS. Meaning, while the studios were certainly hoping and praying that Blu-ray was going to go mass market and carry on where DVD was starting to falter, that was never really going to happen. Blu-ray was and is a niche format. It primarily serves a very specific base... quality junkies and collectors. Well, guess who fit that description 20 years ago? LaserDisc collectors. The mass population absolutely DOES NOT CARE about the increased quality of BD over DVD. They absolutely DO NOT CARE to rebuy movies they already own. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about supplements. They absolutely DO NOT CARE about things like lossless audio or retaining a movie's grain structure or the increased resolution that Blu-ray offers. But in order to fill the cracks in the crumbling DVD dam, the studios needed these same people to repeat their buying habits on a totally new format. It's why Sony built Blu-ray into the PS3 and why they were all falling over themselves to slash prices on movies in order to "artificially" build up the format's user base. But what happened is that even with $10 discs and all the "buy one get one free" promos they could shovel out, those people absolutely DID NOT CARE. It's easy to miss, because we all exist inside this enthusiast community and its walls, how little people actually care about Blu-ray or movies in general. I'll start talking to someone about movies or Blu-ray (at a doctor's office, for instance) and I'll very quickly be reminded that our enthusiasm isn't shared by most people (a guy at a sandwich place was talking to me about all the GCI in Ghost Rider- I assume he was talking about the CGI). It's just not on most people's radar, and neither is an HD version of a cult movie from 1975.

So back to the LaserDisc analogy. Well, when demand is low, prices go up. In the LaserDisc era, we understood that. We were getting better than what everyone else was getting and there was a premium attached to that. We were the first, before anyone else, to care about THX or Dolby AC3 or widescreen or special features. We were the ones that cared that we were getting 400 lines of resolution when everyone else was getting 240 lines on VHS. And we paid for that superiority in our video format. Typically a standard LaserDisc release (of a new or old title, the age of the movie was irrelevant to its price) was $40 retail and this was bought at a shop with no discounting. If you wanted to buy The Mask when it was a new release, it cost you $40. When Willow (from 1988) was released widescreen in 1995 (and contained nothing but the movie) it was $70. We typically paid $10-20 more for a DTS version over a Dolby Digital or stereo version (when The Rock was released in '96 it was $40, when they re-released it 2 YEARS LATER in DTS it was $60 and when Criterion did their version in 1997 *which are all the same supplements that are currently on the BD you can now get for about $11* it was $125). The majority of LaserDisc buyers didn't believe in a "one price fits all" and we understood that this hobby wasn't cheap. We looked at the cover before we looked at the price tag. They didn't deserve a Wal-Mart dump bin so that people could go dumpster diving for a movie, ANY MOVIE, so long as it's only $5. So when I read someone say, "Movies are only worth so much" that's someone that clearly doesn't see movies as an enthusiasm... they see it as a product to collect with limited value. That's your average consumer. We're not average. And back in the LaserDisc days, when sales of titles were insignificant next to their VHS sales, the studios farmed and licenced this stuff out to 3rd parties. Image Entertainment was the GO TO for almost all of the best stuff on LD. They handled all of Disney's, Warner's, Fox's, Universal's, and MGM's releases (amongst others). Pioneer handled Paramount, the Artisan stuff (which became Lionsgate) including Terminator 2, Stargate, and Cliffhanger, and some of Universal's OTHER releases. In fact the move from LD to DVD almost killed Image as the studios started taking back their titles and handling everything in-house because DVD had quickly become lucrative for them where LaserDisc hadn't been worth their time. Now we're back to the beginning with the studios finding a lot of releases on BD not worth their time and once again licensing them out to Twilight Time, Mill Creek, Shout Factory and, ironically, Image.

And now, as before, it's time for enthusiasts to figure out what is of value to them. Anyone can easily buy Fright Night or Night of the Living Dead in 1080p for about $14 on iTunes or Vudu (you could also buy Christine at the time it was released by TT, but it's since been reduced to "rental only" status). There ARE alternatives out there for people who feel $30 for a hard copy is more than they value that particular movie or missed out on the 3000 copy window. But this notion that the monetary value of a film on Blu-ray is in direct correlation to it's age is stupid. The idea that White House Down, a horrible movie from this past summer, is worth more than Maverick, a fantastic movie that's nearly 20 years old, is complete random. The problem with these Twilight Time threads is that it devolves into the same old belly-aching from people who A) don't understand the home video industry or the details of Twilight Time's methods, B) like to exaggerate and outright lie to make their point ("$30 for a horrible release with no extras?!?" even though Twilight Time has typically included all of the supplements available. Fright Night is frequently sighted, but without acknowledging that it NEVER had supplements on DVD either), and C) say they hate the limited edition model but that's really a smokescreen for being pissed about the price. Think about it... the people in here complaining about Rollerball ONLY being 3000... They KNOW this is coming. If you sign up for emails or regularly check in with Facebook or this forum the chances of missing out on a title are extremely rare. It's not going to sell out in a day. Certainly no one who really wants As Good As It Gets has missed out on it and that's only been available for 18 months. Enemy Mine is a movie many predicted would sell out immediately and it's still available over a year later. And let's be honest... of the super-fast, "OH MY GOD!!" blink and you'll miss it sell outs... there's only been 1... Christine. Fright Night took a few weeks to sell out and Night of the Living Dead took 8 days. The panic that some people want to sell just isn't there in reality. But even if it was, LOTS of things are limited or sell out. I recently attended a sold out screening of Raiders of the Lost Ark where Spielberg did a Q&A. Should he be required to keep doing Q&As until EVERYONE who wants has an opportunity to buy a ticket? Sometimes, just like in life, you miss out on things. But for Viper to say that the studios just don't listen is asinine. They've been listening loud and clear and what they heard was the majority of people NOT interested in buying old titles on Blu-ray.

Enter Twilight Time...

Couldn't said it better myself.