Warner Brothers Archive Collection (DVDs only)

[HerrSchreck]

Haggai is certainly correct on this-- WB used to be very good about getting their licensed/non-WB catalog holdings out there in excellent editions... certainly part of the reason that back in the DVD glory-days (say early to mid 2000's) WB were considered far and away the best studio line of dvds. The studio that has been really, excessively criminal in neglecting not only their silent holdings but all of the non primary-studio line of titles in their vaults MUST be Universal... so so many Paramount titles wasting away in the vaults, and even their meat and potatoes classics in the main line (Sternberg, all the non Dracula/Frankenstein horror titles, i e classics like Ulmers Black Cat, plus any and all else that has been released as a Franchise collection) get released on a double flipper disc set with no context or commentary beyond a theatrical trailer (if you're lucky). Universal silent films? Pteh, you must be dreaming.

WB looks shoddy in their dumping to the Archive line so many sound classics and all these Sjostrom and Vidor silents (and nobody has been more vocal in his frustration over the years about the endless promises about the second Chaney box, plus the aforementioned titles pklus GREED)... but they did at least get some of this stuff out, and their boxsets devoted to noirs (much of it RKO), their classic horror holdings-- lets not forget that wonderful, mostly MGM box set with MAD LOVE, DEVIL DOLL, MARK oF THE VAMPIRE, the devilish Karloff FU MANCHU, etc, plus that great flipper set for the two WAX MUSEUM titles-- plus the RKO Lewtons, etc, WB were rolling rather nicely there for awhile, giving CC a run for their money with low cost, high quality editions crammed with extras for context.

Now, in the age of torrenting and neutered, unenforceable intellectual property laws, we will never see the market saturation-- true cineaste heaven-- that we saw in th emid 2000's.

[HarryLong]

Universal silent films? Pteh, you must be dreaming.

Except from some other company. Image got (arguably) the two biggest guns in Universal's silent catalogue - HUNCHBACK and PHANTOM - while Kino got CAT AND THE CANARY and the criminally under-rated MAN WHO LAUGHS.

Now, in the age of torrenting and neutered, unenforceable intellectual property laws, we will never see the market saturation-- true cineaste heaven-- that we saw in th emid 2000's.

I knew this on some level, but seeing it stated flat-out like that makes me feel as if I just watched my dog get run over.

[Gregory]

...WB used to be very good about getting their licensed/non-WB catalog holdings out there in excellent editions... certainly part of the reason that back in the DVD glory-days (say early to mid 2000's) WB were considered far and away the best studio line of dvds.

I used to get really impatient with Warner even in the "glory days." It took them an eternity to get the Astaire-Rogers films out (2005 for the first handful, the rest over a year later). They didn't really start releasing film noir until 2004 and then only 5 films per year in those first few sets. It seemed like there was huge demand for film noir for years that they all but missed out on, considering their vast holdings. Same with pre-code films: it took them until the end of 2006 to begin gradually releasing the Forbidden Hollywood stuff. No need to mention their sitting on their silent holdings.
Now, I know they were releasing a lot of catalog titles and were generally better than the other studios at maintaining a steady stream of quality releases. Nonetheless, it seems like their holdings were too bloated for them to even release most of the stuff for which there was a good level of demand. Quite a few of their films that were commercially viable enough for release in the UK or France never got released here, or are coming out now on Warner Archive. My point is (see below)

Universal... even their meat and potatoes classics in the main line (Sternberg, all the non Dracula/Frankenstein horror titles, i e classics like Ulmers Black Cat, plus any and all else that has been released as a Franchise collection) get released on a double flipper disc set with no context or commentary beyond a theatrical trailer (if you're lucky).

...I would have rather seen Warner do more of that type of basic practical set if it would have gotten more of their holdings out there. If they'd taken a cue from Universal, releasing basic two-disc sets of some of their lower-profile titles with good transfers and no extras, we could have picked up sets of four or five films for $20 each, or less, which is now the price to get one of those titles via Warner Archive.

[Jonathan S]

...I would have rather seen Warner do more of that type of basic practical set if it would have gotten more of their holdings out there. If they'd taken a cue from Universal, releasing basic two-disc sets of some of their lower-profile titles with good transfers and no extras, we could have picked up sets of four or five films for $20 each, or less, which is now the price to get one of those titles via Warner Archive.

To a large extent, I agree, although Universal botched many of their earlier releases with badly pressed DVD-18s (until I got one myself, I wrongly assumed this was a player incompatibility problem). But I rarely have time to listen to commentaries, especially the kind that tell me where every bit player was born and the 99 other films they appeared in. I can also do without "making-of" documentaries where gushing film professors and present-day directors compete with each other to praise the film to the skies and are intercut with such dizzying Eisenstein-like rapidity that they appear to finish each other's sentences. Warner are not alone in this of course, but I much preferred Universal's earlier documentaries for their Hitchcock series where more people who worked on the films were featured and some criticism was permitted. Ironically, the best extras Warner provided were often the feature-length TCM profiles of stars and directors (usually already in the can so costing little extra time or money) and particularly the Photoplay documentaries on Chaney, Garbo, Merian C. Cooper, etc.

I continue to be amazed by the enthusiasm with which most members on other film forums embrace Warner Archive. When I belonged to HTF, it almost gave me the impression of a Warner shill site with mild criticism met with a rebuke of "trolling" by the moderators (even after the Warner "chats" stopped). Every week I read about problems with Warner Archive discs - even one recent claim that a disc which played fine at first will after a few months no longer do so, despite careful storage and handling (anyone else found this?) Yet the same people who complain are still buying them dozens at a time. So far, I've only bought the Robert Benchley set, which I accept could never have got a pressed retail release (two of the three discs - none of them floaters - had significant scratches, despite being bought new, but they do play... at present).

[Props55]

Excellent recap of the soaring heights and plunging depths of cineaste heaven and hell circa 2000-2010! Thanks to Herr Schreck, Harry Long, Gregory and Jonathan S. for their observations as these four posts encapsulate the highs and lows, great expectations and smashed dreams of us all. And I understand Harry's feelings all too well as I got that "kick in the gut/dog run over" epiphany around the time of the Archives introduction. If anyone wanted a concise overview of this period in cineaste home video you've all covered the essentials so well in such concise form.

[HarryLong]

If anyone wanted a concise overview of this period in cineaste home video you've all covered the essentials so well in such concise form.

And it was, sad to say, a very concise period. I don't recall precisely when DVDs were introduced, but I got my first computer capable of playing them in about 1998 & started buying then. Bought my first player a bit later. (Curiously I never bought all that much on VHS; I did far more taping from broadcasts. Of course, it took a few years for DVD recorders to come about.) There was a real gusher of classic (and current) releases - partly to get product on the shelf to prompt people to buy the machines - and it was film-lovers' heaven... for only about a decade. And now: pft!
[Cue: "Those Were the Days, My Friend."]

[ianungstad]

Infamous, Long Buried Looney Tunes “The Censored Eleven” Coming To DVD

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/10/12/ ... ng-to-dvd/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[colinr0380]

I've thought that this might be in the works ever since Jerry Beck gave a ringing endorsement ("one of their greatest spoofs of all") to Coal Black in one of the features on the fifth volume of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection (the "Once Upon A Looney Tune" featurette). However the illustrative clip used there seemed obviously unrestored, so perhaps that was just a testing of the waters before the real work began.

[Saturnome]

Weren't they screened at a TCM film festival thing a few months ago? Were they restored?
The only worthwhile short is Coal Black IMO, but it's a good thing they release it, that's certainly something the archive is made for (unlike the Lon Chaney set! augh!) Maybe they'll include more.

[Gregory]

something the archive is made for

On the contrary, it seems like these cartoons are what special features were made for, which could provide some measure of criticism and cultural context (something far beyond a Whoopi Goldberg disclaimer). Not that Warner's special features used to go that deep -- my expectations are too high as usual. Slipping these out there in an on-demand edition (which I assume means no extra features) seems like a wasted opportunity at best, and downright cowardly at worst. But we've already been through this before when they dropped Jolson's Mammy in the Archive.

[Saturnome]

I agree on the special features, but I am so very sure we only had the choice between this and nothing. Warner doesn't want a copy of this with their logo on it in a Wal-Mart. That's why I think the archives is the only way they could release it. It may still come with a Whoopi Goldberg intro and some "we don't agree with this but release it anyway" on the back of the package. The best I can imagine is a booklet with some information. Anything else is way too wild.

[Gregory]

I agree. I'm not naive enough to think that the major studios play the role of authentic curators. They're doing mock-curatorial practice, largely by following the model Criterion established in the laserdisc days. But the name of the game is profits, and there are times when they need to protect the image of their brand.

[dx23]

Warner has not confirmed or denied the rumor, but now that this made the NY Post, we can now expect some form of overblown controversy about the release.

[domino harvey]

Lang's Moonfleet and William Castle's Macabre now relegated to Archive Hell. This had the opposite effect of Warner's intent and pushed me to finally pick up the R2 of Moonfleet

[whaleallright]

Good! The Bernard Eisenschitz visual essays on the French MOONFLEET disc are among the best supplements I've ever seen. The fruit of very diligent archival research and a rich command of film history.

[Jonathan S]

Several people on different forums are reporting major authoring flaws in recent Warner Archive releases of silent films. Example:

I received two copies of THE MAGICIAN today from the Warner Archive, one for me and one for a mate, and both copies appear to suffer from weird combing and motion-blurring artifacts. I tried them on my Samsung Blu-ray player with LCD, and also on a plain vanilla DVD player on a CRT, and they play funky on both setups. I've seen a copy of the TCM broadcast, and it plays just fine, so it ain't the telecine, it's gotta be the authoring of the DVD files. Changing the progressive settings doesn't help; it plays messed up on both settings. If you play it at 1/8th slow-mo speed, every few frames it does the chow-chow-chow, like the cats in the old commercials, back a frame and forward again. It is not my setup that is causing the problem; the authoring of this DVD is defective.

Other problem titles include Beau Brummel and The Prisoner of Zenda (1922):

...whenever anything moves horizontally in the frame, there is a very definite video stutter about twice a second. It sort of looks like a freeze frame and is constant throughout the discs. Prisoner of Zenda is worse than The Magician. I have viewed both discs on a variety of players and HDTVs...

One theory is the transfers were interlaced but have been de-interlaced without removing the pulldown. Warner haven't responded yet.

[Finch]

Beaver on Stranger on the Third Floor

This looks rather nice. Presumably this was originally supposed to be a pressed DVD?

[Jonathan S]

Probably... until Warner discovered they could charge as much for one DVD-R as you'd pay in a sale for one of their pressed noir sets of 5-10 films! It does look good, though I'm quite happy with the BBC print on one of my own DVD-Rs. From the caps I'd say they have similar definition, though perhaps the Warner has been cleaned up more.

Edit: The BBC print does suffer from an abrupt cut (especially in the sound) at the end of the nightmare sequence (exactly two-thirds into the film), jumping from the elderly neighbour saying, "My, my, quite an occasion, isn't it!?" to a close up of the hero repeating, "He's alive!" I suspect this is an old UK censor cut to eliminate execution imagery. Can anyone who has the full version - from any source - confirm what, if anything, comes between? The BBC copy runs 60m 15s (with 4% PAL speed-up) against Warner's 63m 56s (according to Beaver) so over a minute could be missing.

[Ashirg]

On Warner Archive disc, after the neighbor says ""My, my, quite an occasion, isn't it!?", there is a shot of police officers strapping the hero (Mike) to the chair and his head is down. He lifts his head, points his finger and says "Look! Look! He's Alive!" But it lasts only a few seconds that are missing.

[Jonathan S]

Thanks. Yes, that shot (or at least that part of it) is missing from the BBC print. Although I won't be buying it, it's good to know the Warner copy is complete - not a foregone conclusion as apparently their recent Archive issue of The Cyclops is missing a crucial shot included in earlier editions from other sources. It's slightly surprising how many of these very obvious censor cuts remain in current prints - for decades the BBC showed the mutilated UK print of The Body Snatcher and, as I mentioned in another thread, their Seventh Victim is still censored.

[domino harvey]

A bunch of "value packs" on sale right now

[Saturnome]

I don't know how the Archive's He Who Gets Slapped will turn out, but the French DVD is ugly as hell. Worse, the intertitles are in French (that, in my case, I don't mind much), black fonts on a white (or most of the time, a pale purple tint) background to make sure you go blind.

[domino harvey]

Frank Tashlin's masterpiece Susan Slept Here is but the latest casualty

[Ovader]

From Twitter: Veterans Day Sale- 30% OFF (almost) EVERYTHING and Free Shipping (new releases excluded)

[Gregory]

I don't plan to order, but I wonder if today's sale would stack with the coupon code smodcast for $5 off the order.