Warner Brothers Archive Collection (DVDs only)

[strangerinparadise]

I understand your frustration all too well. It appears that the only way we can influence the major studios is to gang up on them, i.e. swamping them with requests for their sins of omission. Attacking them for not releasing our most desired titles appears to be a misguided effort, although I can sympathize with those who do. Sometimes paying lip service may take us a long way...

[Tommaso]

White Shadows in the South Seas (1928)

This little gem should have been considered by MoC as an ideal companion piece to Murnau's "Tabu". Too bad it now only appears in this rip-off 'edition'. Let's hope they at least got the transfer right...

[Saturnome]

My memory is a bit hazy but Wild Oranges is a very fine film. I guess it got me because I thought the big bully looked like a friend of mine, but I remember the wonderful settings.

And Kaplan's predictions of a "silent classics" package looks quite accurate to me. We'll see films like Sjostrom's He Who Gets Slapped and The Scarlet Letter thrown in the archive collection, with a small chance of getting The Wind on a real DVD, packed with what they think could deserve the incredible priviledge of being released on a DVD. And in a cheap packaging

It's pretty much that or they (crowd, wind, etc) will never get released at all.

[HerrSchreck]

Whadda ya wanna bet BEN HUR (1925) & etc (count on at least one double dip being forced upon consumers) as "Silent Classics," still musty with the grab-bag logic and the best marketing brio that the sales staff of 1992 was able to muster!

The silent version of Ben Hur came out as a bonus disc in the Special Edition (of the Wyler version's release )... with the technicolor sequences & original tints restored.

Otherwise I essentially agree with your rant above... but I'm all raged out about Warner viz silents. I've been schticking on the Vidors, the forever promised/never-delivered Chaney Box and Greed, etc, since they first promised them in the first (then second, etc) HTF chat they announced them in (was it 05? or 06? that it was "forthcoming by the holidays?").

[HarryLong]

Anyone want to make a slight wager on when the equally-much-announced-as-forthcoming THE DEVILS will show up in the Archive...?

[Adam]

Dear Warner Archives,

Thanks to your stupid fucking extra-thick DVD-R label, I Love Melvin is now stuck in my MacBook. I like the movie and all, but this is less than convenient. In closing, you got me. Good one. Now, tell me more about how this Burn-On-Demand system of yours is just as good as regular discs.

Yours,
DH

Christ, none of the tricks I've found online work for getting this stupid thing out. That 10 for $99.95 special isn't much of a deal when you have to figure in a trip to the Mac store for repairs. Thanks again Warners for capping off a perfect year by ruining my laptop!

There is something about the drives on the MacBook Pros that isn't good. After only a week or two, it already has difficulty ejecting all discs. And one DVD I tried putting in but even to my eye & hand feld slightly thicker & heavier than the normal disc wouldn't be taken by the drive - it always ejected it. Bad job Apple.

[jsteffe]

Ya know, I've been using my Dell laptop for almost five years and have never had this kind of problem with the DVD drive. And it was a lot cheaper than those fancy Mac jobs, too. Just sayin'...

[fiddlesticks]

Ya know, I've been using my Dell laptop for almost five years and have never had this kind of problem with the DVD drive. And it was a lot cheaper than those fancy Mac jobs, too. Just sayin'...

In other words, if you want to make wedding cakes, don't get an Easy-Bake Oven. :-"

[Murdoch]

Ya know, I've been using my Dell laptop for almost five years and have never had this kind of problem with the DVD drive.

Me neither, but I've had a problem with about everything else!

[Wittsdream]

I understand your frustration all too well. It appears that the only way we can influence the major studios is to gang up on them, i.e. swamping them with requests for their sins of omission. Attacking them for not releasing our most desired titles appears to be a misguided effort, although I can sympathize with those who do. Sometimes paying lip service may take us a long way...

There's a very simple, yet thoroughly predictable way of circumventing Warner Bros. "screw you" to the consumer: tape the broadcasts of these films off of TCM and call it a day! 1) Get a TiVo or DVR that records these programs 2) Hook up your cable box to a DVD recorder 3) Maximize the quality of the program by recording onto dual-layer discs. You can achieve a dual-layer manual burn by simply choosing a logical mid-point in the tv broadcast for a side change (studio manufactured dvds pause in much the same way during a layer change), then record one layer at a time. For a 120 minute film, it took me 135 minutes of time investment to pull off a seamless dual-layer edit with my Panasonic recorder, complete with chapter stops and title menu. It's not rocket science, and the buffoons at Culver City in the "Golden State" aren't doing it any differently.

I've done side-by-side comparisons of a few of my "TCM burns" of WB titles vs. their "official" Archive collection offerings, and found that the quality is virtually identical. For instance, my TCM copy of H.M. Pullham Esquire, a 120 minute film recorded onto a dual layer (8.4 GB) dvd looks as good or better than the Archive Collection version that registers a measly bitrate of 4.2 for its single-layer offering. In other words, the amount of "virtual" information presented to us in either format is the same, whether it's maximizing an over-the-air broadcast (480 or 1080) at the highest bitrate OR settling for a low bitrate version of a studio copy culled from their non-HD video master.

The only exception I've made to this rule is when an anamorphic presentation of a film is offered by the Archive, as in the case of Party Girl or Wichita, thereby taking advantage of a resolution exceeding that of a letterboxed TCM presentation.

Besides, most of my copies come with perfectly-timed "intros" and "outros" from TCM host Robert Osborne, something you don't even get with the predominantly bare-bones Archive Collection.

If Warner Bros. wants to treat its glorious artists of the past in such a manner, resulting in less than optimal presentations of these films to the public that pays its rent, send a "fuck you" right back and don't pay a dime for their product, instead opting to tape any or all of these films courtesy of TCM and other cable providers. It'll cost you a buck for the blank, and two hours of your time, assuming you are already a cable tv subscriber.

I'd trade in relatively unassuming logos popping up every 20 minutes during a broadcast for $20 back in my pocket without blinking, especially in this economy.

[What A Disgrace]

I've finally taken a break from Netflix in order to take advantage of Classicflix's renting program, just in time for more Vidor to be dumped in the archive. I feel very conflicted.

My first discs shipped Monday night, and have yet to arrive, but I'm hoping to get home from work and have them waiting for me. As much as I hate the Archive idea, I'm positively peeing my pants in anticipation, because The Strawberry Blonde is one of my first titles, along with Wichita, and Universal's Remember the Night.

[George Kaplan]

There's a very simple, yet thoroughly predictable way of circumventing Warner Bros. "screw you" to the consumer: tape the broadcasts of these films off of TCM and call it a day!...

Excellent advice Wittsdream. Thank you. I may try this very soon.

[Jonathan S]

The only exception I've made to this rule is when an anamorphic presentation of a film is offered by the Archive, as in the case of Party Girl or Wichita, thereby taking advantage of a resolution exceeding that of a letterboxed TCM presentation.

Do TCM not broadcast anamorphically then? All the UK TV channels I watch (though I don't have UK TCM) have done for years and I record all widescreen films and programmes in anamorphic mode.

[Dr Amicus]

TCM UK aren't anamorphic, and neither is (or at least was) Cinemoi - which is a bit crap as they charge £9.99 a month.

[HarryLong]

There's a very simple, yet thoroughly predictable way of circumventing Warner Bros. "screw you" to the consumer: tape the broadcasts of these films off of TCM and call it a day!...

Excellent advice Wittsdream. Thank you. I may try this very soon.

And I second the advice (in fact I might even have posted much the same comment back when WB first announced their Archive burns). I think I read sopmewhere that WB insisted these DVDRs would be of superior quality to an off-air burn, but after looking at those screen-caps of a page or so ago, I am not convinced.
One caveat, however. Based on reports from some acquaintances, TCM might be copyguarding their signal Whether this is true everywhere or just with certain cable companies I don't know. I do know that some DVDR recordings made within the past month or so go black after the opening credits (while the sound remains intact) and only return to an image on the closing credits or have gotten a message from their recorder about protected content.

[Napier]

I have a full DVR off of TCM. So they are definitely not blacking out broadcasts. And this will do just fine for me, as I refuse to buy the DVD-R crap from Warner.

[HarryLong]

I have a full DVR off of TCM. So they are definitely not blacking out broadcasts.

Not in your area, possibly, but it seems the signal is being copyguarded in some areas.
Thankfully my Veeblefetzer 5000 makes this a moot point if they're doing it in my neck of the woods.

[George Kaplan]

Christ George! why the fuck wouldnt you, when the rest of the planet gets some total crap, less tyhan 2 gig VHS resolved shit as some sort of limited avenue of their fucking catalogue..

To be blunt, the downloads of the TCM product were (and sometimes still are) superior to the full dvdr specs. err.. on the many and several download sites.

David, I was responding more rhetorically than anything else. Solidarity forever, and that sort of thing.
I have a DVR, though I've not attempted recording to a dual layer disc with the mid-program side change as Wittsdream describes.

David, FYI, I have just torrent-downloaded what appears to be a decent version of "7 Women", a film I'm sorry to say I've never seen - hence my not entering into the discussion, elsewhere, about it in relation to Robin Wood's views.

[HerrSchreck]

I've seen some simply dazzling broadcast tapes from TCM, esp w the advent of digital cable transmissions, and I've never heard of copy protected signals (or copy protected signals that became an issue to overcome.. I simply haven't heard of it period).

The effect of downloading and digital in general on the arts has been terrible, and it may be putting the cart before the horse (or damning the radiation and not the bomb? or, uh..), but the catalogue-breadth of these WB DVDR's is simply getting absurd... and if this is WB's strategy of combatting a tough market.. well-- salud to the market I guess is the message for SD. This whole routine smacks of some unappreciated housewife in a turgid 1950's melodrama getting back at her husband by cooking slop instead of her usual loving roasts, and putting it down on the table in dirty, chipped dishes.

Consumer, at dinner table: "Wait a minnit, WB, whoah, whoah, whoah, come here, sit down... something's not right here... what's the problem?? Why are you behaving like this?"

First, a stiff walkover and sitdown of WB, in apron and housewifey proper dress in powder blue. Then a lipquiver.

WB: "Well, nothing..."

Consumer: "Oh come on, there must be something.. this is the second night in a row you've served me braised workboot for dinner."

WB lipquiver. Eyes well up. Then the damn bursts:

WB: "Well it's... I... feel so... ignored and unappreciated! You've been seeing that floozy Torrent Hound every night-- I know! You don't think I know but I know!" Rises and tears off apron, eyes buggy. "I know everything! I see all. A cinch! It's all a cinch for me! Poor pathetic fools!" Throws head back in cruel laughter. Stops and points at consumer, lowering chin and glaring ominously, one eye half open: "But you shall pay! I'll have you rue the day you ever dreamed of taking me for granted. You wait and see.... Three Seastrom's on one one DVDr! Greed and the Merry Widow on one disc... heh heh heh heh heh..."

Consumer: (rises slowly, peering back) "The poor bugger has gone mad. Sad, very sad..." (Shakes head, leaves.)

WB: "Wait!!! I didn't mean that!! I didn't mean any of that-- hah hah, wasn't that a funny joke I just made? HONEY!! COME BAAAAAACK!" Shriek fades into an echo down a long windy street.

David, FYI, I have just torrent-downloaded what appears to be a decent version of "7 Women", .

You'd probably want to keep specifics (title, tracker, etc) of that kind of thing on the DL.

[HarryLong]

and I've never heard of copy protected signals (or copy protected signals that became an issue to overcome.. I simply haven't heard of it period)

You mean regarding TCM or at all?
Because I discovered - before I got my Veeblefetzer - the OnDemand programming from my cable company is copyguarded. And there were news stories some years back that premium services like HBO were going to copyguard their signals.

By the way, HerrSchreck -- you missed your calling. You shoulda written for Douglas Sirk.

[HerrSchreck]

Well, I should correct that-- of course I've heard of copy protection, and I know that cable used to use a Macrovision/esque type thing, so it would look like a copy of a protected VHS if you tried to record. But with the advent of torrenting etc, and with all my friends who tape broadcasts (you guys may remember me mentioning a friend whose 4 room apt was waist-high in VHS, the entire place, but for carved walkways through the mass of black plastic) I've never heard of anyone failing in an attempt to capture a film from television because of copy protection. I haven't heard of it as an obstacle to TV taping since at least the 1990's.

Mind you, this mean nothing besides that actual fact in the statement: I haven't head anything about it. Has no bearing on the reality, and other people's experience....

[fiddlesticks]

I have a full DVR off of TCM. So they are definitely not blacking out broadcasts.

Not in your area, possibly, but it seems the signal is being copyguarded in some areas.
Thankfully my Veeblefetzer 5000 makes this a moot point if they're doing it in my neck of the woods.

This sounds like something you might have seen advertised in MAD Magazine back in the 1960s. I see you can even get a Left-Handed Veeblefetzer, although, sadly, it's not a 5000.

[HarryLong]

I haven't heard of it as an obstacle to TV taping since at least the 1990's.

So far as I know it isn't an obstacle to taping - bit it is to making DVDRs...

This sounds like something you might have seen advertised in MAD Magazine back in the 1960s. I see you can even get a Left-Handed Veeblefetzer, although, sadly, it's not a 5000.

Um, the name is borrowed from Harvey Kurtzman to protect the guilty...

[HarryLong]

You can tape to VHS without a problem, but if you feed your cable signal directly into a DVD recorder, then the copy protection manifests during playback?

Sooner than that. A few seconds after pressing the Record button some kind of message will pop up. It varies from machine to machine. I've seen "You do not have permission to copy this" and "Protected material. You are not allowed to copy this" and the DVD recorder aborts the recording.
Now, one friend of mine claims that she can tape a protected broadcast & then DVDR from that without any problem.
Curiously, back in my Beta days I could copy any VHS tape I rented without a problem but the copy protection encoded onto the Beta & made copying onto a VHS tape impossible. I would have thought that a similar set of circumstances would be the case with making a DVDR of a VHS tape from a protected source, but ...

[Yojimbo]

(you guys may remember me mentioning a friend whose 4 room apt was waist-high in VHS, the entire place, but for carved walkways through the mass of black plastic) ...

did he keep any in his bath?
I remember an article in, I think, the BBC's 'Radio Times' where the interviewee showed a picture of her sizeable bath which was chock-full of books
Presumably she had to temporarily relocate them elsewhere but at least I can happily declare that despite my excessive films/books/music collection I can still quite comfortably negotiate every room in my apartment