Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by octagon

Maybe or maybe he just doesn't want his name on that episode anymore.

I'm not crazy about the fact that Disney would apparently like to pretend that Song of the South doesn't exist anymore but it doesn't belong to me. It belongs to them.

And if they no longer want to be associated with it that's kind of their call.

I see your point, but I'm just not a fan of any content - particularly any that has been available for quite some time and is beloved by many - being censored and locked away.

You and I already disagree to some extent on these things. You are more on the side of those who own and control the content doing whatever they want with it, including locking it away if they so choose. And to an extent, I understand that view point.

But in my case, while I have no problem at all with the content owners/creators profiting from their content and I think they rightfully should, I am a big believer in that once it is released, in some way (be it big or small) is becomes part of the culture and therefore there is a responsibility to make it reasonably, readily available. I know that doesn't always happen for various reasons (be it censorship over controversy like this case or Song of the South, due to content being tied up in complicated ownership/rights issues, or instances of some content having little to no popularity to justify the cost of making it readily available, etc.), but something like this Simpsons episode should not have this happen to it. The bigger, more popular, and well known the content, the bigger the responsibility of making it available is IMO. The fact that it is going to most likely be removed from anyone who previously bought that season digitally should be a crime IMO (I know it is not one, I just think it should be, even if they want to remove it from additional future purchases, which I'm of course still not thrilled with).


The other issue here is that Brooks is one of the producers of the show. He's heavily involved, but to my knowledge doesn't actually own the show. So his personal wishes of no longer wanting to be associated with some past show really shouldn't be a deciding factor. Granted, the owners of the content (Fox) are likely agreeing to this, so ultimately it is likely with their approval and agreement. But him not wanting to be a part of it wouldn't be a factor if Fox, as the owners of the show, otherwise wanted to continue making it available. He can denounce it all he wants, it doesn't mean he wasn't involved in the first place, it doesn't mean that the content owner necessarily has to agree to lock away/censor the content, nor does it mean people will magically forget about it even if it gets locked away.

At the end of the day I just see the whole thing as being ridiculous. Especially considering that these accusations towards Michael Jackson are nothing new. They just came back up again because of the documentary. It's funny that they didn't pull this episode back when the accusations were originally circulating.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by octagon

I'd be happy to discuss this interview. Do you have a link?



Maybe or maybe he just doesn't want his name on that episode anymore.

I'm not crazy about the fact that Disney would apparently like to pretend that Song of the South doesn't exist anymore but it doesn't belong to me. It belongs to them.

And if they no longer want to be associated with it that's kind of their call.

It was removed along with a crapload of other posts in the Digital Bits thread. It was a post with a link. Sorry.

Do you honestly need evidence though? A new streaming service is coming out with ten minute segments made for mobile. The heads of Warnermedia (apparently) want HBO shows and others (Game Of Thrones was mentioned) cut into byte size chunks for mobile. Soon, on mobile, everything will be just ten minute highlights or extended recaps. Yet, you still doubt this future is coming? Kids just want to watch something so they can comment on social media. Highlights and ten minute episodes are perfect for that. The younger demographic dont care about multi episode, in depth quality entertainment. That’s why Youtube rules.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Anthony, to get a idea where my fears lie, let’s scrap this current conversation if that’s ok. I have a few questions for you.

a few implies more than one. Don't know if you mean them sequentially or if you just forgot the rest of them

1. If Blu-ray, DVD or 4K disc ceased to exist, would you still collect films?

that is a tough question, namely because it is missing the punch line.
let me answer it this way.
if I have "control" over the new media the same I have now then the answer is an absolute yes, the same way I have been doing so far upgrading from one format to the next.
if I don't have "control" (digital/ physical media with a necessary call home feature) then talking about collecting does not even make sense IMHO and I always laugh at people saying they have a VUDU collection. You just bought the right to rent the film for as long as they allow you to watch it.
But whatever the future holds, the copies that I have in my home I will still be able to watch them.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

The distribution rights to deep catalog titles don't cost anything if you already own them.
Go back and reread the post(s) to which I was responding. We were talking studios making (or not making) their catalog titles available if those titles weren't profitable.
I'm suggesting a future in which titles don't have to be particularly profitable in order for studios to make them available because the costs of making them available would be virtually nil.
Is that future certain? Of course not. But I think it's entirely plausible.
Studios are already dabbling with their own streaming services and the costs of providing those services are bound to go down.
It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to envision an environment in which even the deepest, darkest most obscure corners of Warner's catalog library is readily available because it costs next to nothing for Warner to make them available so whatever revenues they generate is all gravy.
But who knows.

It does not take a great deal of imagination to envision myself named king of the world sitting in my chair watching a film surrounded by beautiful women one of them feeding me my popcorn, the other some candies, the other some drink....
What is important isn’t what can easily be imagined, but how close to reality it can become.
In a best case scenario where the “owner” decides to make it available on youtube, then you might have a point. It is relatively easy for a company like WB to try their own digital distribution and maybe it will succeed, But once you get to obscure titles held by small/independent studios it becomes harder for them to do it. Plus this super fractured market you are discussing will make availability useless by obscurity. Plus “Owner” is a nice simple word but distribution rights are a complex world. For example when Lucas made Star Wars (aka a new hope) it was decided Fox will have the full distribution rights and Lucas the merchandising rights. With the next two films things changed. That is why when Disney bought Lucas films 6 stayed with Fox, 7/8 stayed with Fox up to 2020 and new films went to Disney from the get go. Since then there was the Fox deal from Disney so my story is a bit moot but the reality that ist shows is still there. And the simple film ownership/distribution rights isn’t the end all there have been films that have been pulled/ needed to be edit due to distribution rights issues in the content itself .

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by DVD Phreak

Apple didn't delete that guy's movies. Some of his movies had region restriction. That guy changed his residency, and that was the reason for the removal of those titles. Apple support should've probably explained to him better. But this was NOT a case of Apple removing titles you had bought due to licensing issues.

But the bigger issue is that Apple indeed CAN remove your titles that way. Vudu and Amazon too. Their user agreements state that they can remove titles if they lose rights to stream the titles. It may rarely happen, but it can.

If all depends on what the right holders want to do. They may prevent sales of certain titles but not streaming, or they may prevent both sales and streaming. If the right holders really don't want people to see certain titles, even people who have bought the titles, they CAN, because they are the ultimate owners.

Same goes for the digital game business. If Steam decides to remove a game from your library so you can never download it again even if you have bought it, it CAN. But it also rarely happens.

I'm guessing there has to be some extraordinary circumstance that causes the right owner to exercise this "nuclear option." A simple licensing expiration may not do.

I used to work for a large multinational and back then I traveled internationally a lot. When I would go visit a plant or office for the first time in a different country I would always ask for the nearest place I can buy movies. I have a decent international collection built that way.


Do I get the legal reason apple did what they did? absolutely, do I think apple did the wrong thing. No legally they were obliged to do it. But the reality is the same the guy paid and thought he bought those movies and then they were gone and if he wants to watch them again he needs to find them again and buy them again. On the other hand all those movies I bought on my trips and were region locked I can still watch them.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Sure your Discs will last, but what about the Hardware Manufacturers? Some of the major ones are out of the game, and they are starting to have some problems. Do you think they will continue support in a declining Disc Market?

LOL what an ignorant thing to say. Let me put it this way Columbia records stopped producing music on wax cylinders in 1912 I f someone is interested they can still find used wax cylinder players if they want one.

[Phillip c. Niethe]

I will be going down with the ship, I've seen previews for shows that look Amazing that I would drop major Cash on for a physical copy. I bought both Stranger Things seasons as well as Daredevil but I will skip Man in The high Castle, LOTR, and Lost in Space because I refuse to spend money and not get any physical thing in return. When the discs stop getting pressed then I'll expand my foreign collection as well as classic films. And then I will revert back to audios and good old leather and paper books... I really wish all those high tech hackers would go after Streaming and online sales to the point where people go back to Block Buster's, Movie Galleries, and Malls.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by NightMovie901

That is awesome. I started with a 300bps manual connect modem that was a great improvement over the 110bps acoustic coupler modems before it.
Bandwidth will always to grow:

I remember those days, and I agree BW will keep on growing, but you are forgetting two other realities.

1) back then you would dial in for free and the BBS machine would allow you to use different tools to access the “internet”. In the 90’s I was paying 15$ for dial up because no one offered free internet any more, then 20$ for ADSL and as I require more BW the prices have also been going up.
2) Back then you had CDs then DVDs, BD’s, UHD BD....what we expects keeps on growing in bitrate and capacity.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by NightMovie901

Wanted to add one more thing


Imagine if you will 15 years from now when your movie viewing platform connects to your content device using a QR47 wireless connection which your Blu-ray player obviously doesn't have ...

You still have a VHS player hooked up? 8-Track tape audio player? Cassette? DAT drive? 1.44 Floppy Drive? etc.


I think you see where I'm going with this - nothing is really forever

I still sometimes play my Atari games on my 4k projector. Unless you are an idiot finding a way to connect an old device to new tech is never very hard.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by NightMovie901

Certainly a reasonable argument. VHS tapes are still playable but are they worth having at this point?

for me, the answer is not really, movies are cheap and I will much rather re-buy them on a better looking format. On the other hand I know a guy that is 93 and lives in a retirement home, he sure enjoys watching his old tapes.

Think about this too: if the format were to change and all your movies needed to be “converted” which method would make that the easiest?

I have no idea what this even means. If you are asking how easiy it is to buy a DVD of a film I had on VHS, on BD a film I had on DVD, on UHD BD a film I had on BD, the answer is very easy. But does the media matter? If someone bought a film in HD on Vudu won't they need to re-buy it in UHD just like I will?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by NightMovie901

Unfortunately, the masses determine the direction we go.

No the masses determine the direction the masses take, inteligent people determine the direction inteligent people take, dumb people determine the direction dumb people take, rich people determine the direction rich people take, poor people determine the direction poor people take, athletic people determine the direction athletic people take...….


the masses might like eating fast food but I don't so I don't and there are plenty of places for me to eat out, the masses don't drive luxury sports cars, neither do I but that does not stop people that want one from buying one, the masses don't buy records or probably CDs but those two are still available for those that want. The masses are only relevant to sheep because they need to follow the herd for the rest of the world if it meets up with the masses cool, if not then that is cool as well.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

a few implies more than one. Don't know if you mean them sequentially or if you just forgot the rest of them

that is a tough question, namely because it is missing the punch line.
let me answer it this way.
if I have "control" over the new media the same I have now then the answer is an absolute yes, the same way I have been doing so far upgrading from one format to the next.
if I don't have "control" (digital/ physical media with a necessary call home feature) then talking about collecting does not even make sense IMHO and I always laugh at people saying they have a VUDU collection. You just bought the right to rent the film for as long as they allow you to watch it.
But whatever the future holds, the copies that I have in my home I will still be able to watch them.

Yeah, it doesn’t work when you wait a few days for a reply. Forget it.

[UpsetSmiley]

So Fox have pulled The Simpsons Season 3 episode 'Stark Raving Dad' from circulation including from the online 'Simpsons World' service. And it doesn't stop there, future re-issues of the DVD boxsets will exclude it according to numerous sources. With the downfall of Ultraviolet, this is why streaming services are unreliable.

What's to stop studios from editing or in other words censoring films and TV shows from the past to reflect modern sensibilities? This sets a dangerous precedent for future generations getting interested in cinema.

[CV19]

Originally Posted by UpsetSmiley

What's to stop studios from editing or in other words censoring films and TV shows from the past to reflect modern sensibilities?

Again, one of the huge advantages from owning your own physical copy. If I was into streaming, this would be of great concern to me that not only could they pull out a film whenever they choose to, but they could also censor a show/film to pacify the politically correct brigade. Perhaps I'm being too negative, but it's just my suspicion.

[NightMovie901]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I remember those days, and I agree BW will keep on growing, but you are forgetting two other realities.

1) back then you would dial in for free and the BBS machine would allow you to use different tools to access the “internet”. In the 90’s I was paying 15$ for dial up because no one offered free internet any more, then 20$ for ADSL and as I require more BW the prices have also been going up.
2) Back then you had CDs then DVDs, BD’s, UHD BD....what we expects keeps on growing in bitrate and capacity.

OK, I'll be your Huckleberry ... at least for a little bit

1. This is 100% tied to where you live. While you were getting $20 ADSL there were lots of people paying $65 for the same. Obviously prices go up and down and if you were to calculate on on K/bs basis it is certainly cheaper than ever right now.

2. 100% agree

[NightMovie901]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I still sometimes play my Atari games on my 4k projector. Unless you are an idiot finding a way to connect an old device to new tech is never very hard.

Currently

[NightMovie901]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

If someone bought a film in HD on Vudu won't they need to re-buy it in UHD just like I will?

Maybe not. Remember when Apple did a one time upgrade for people and made their HD movies 4K? It could happen again. (easily)

[NightMovie901]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

No the masses determine the direction the masses take, inteligent people determine the direction inteligent people take, dumb people determine the direction dumb people take, rich people determine the direction rich people take, poor people determine the direction poor people take, athletic people determine the direction athletic people take...….


the masses might like eating fast food but I don't so I don't and there are plenty of places for me to eat out, the masses don't drive luxury sports cars, neither do I but that does not stop people that want one from buying one, the masses don't buy records or probably CDs but those two are still available for those that want. The masses are only relevant to sheep because they need to follow the herd for the rest of the world if it meets up with the masses cool, if not then that is cool as well.

Business executives don't sit in meetings and discuss what products some one-off guy will buy. They are interesting in what 80% or more of the people will buy and design and market to that audience accordingly.

They don't have a gazillion McDonald's because most people don't eat there. They have that many because most people DO eat there. Of course their are niche markets and they have businesses that cater to them (Lamborghini for example) but they don't dictate the standards.

The above argument is just WAY off base in my opinion.

[veritas]

As a 90s kid this has been one of the best years blu ray I have seen. I mean so far they have a blu ray release this year for road to el dorado, chicken run, mighty morphin power rangers, dragon ball z, goofy movie, goofy movie 2, batman the animated series (released late 2018 but not really find able in standard till almost 2019), pokemon indigo league, mobile fighter g gundam, shark tale and a new broly movie. Its only march and this set of catalog releases already surpass 2018 in my eyes.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Article here.

Disney plans to move all legacy original movie franchises such as The Lion King, 101 Damatians, Bambi and The Little Mermaid from its “vault” and onto the pending Disney+ subscription streaming service.

No mention of Fox content, would would assume a lot of Fox catalog content will be on Disney+.