Criterion and Fox / MGM / Universal

The scuttlebutt on Criterion, Eclipse, and Janus Films. Lists and polls are STRONGLY discouraged.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#326 Post by knives » Sun Sep 01, 2019 5:11 pm

Peyton Place is better than half the collection and a big enough film that the dismissal seems odd.

Apperson
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:47 pm
Location: Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#327 Post by Apperson » Sun Sep 01, 2019 5:23 pm

I've been wanting some kind of Region-B release for years based on domino's write-up, but there was a pretty recent Twilight Time version (as is two years after 1984 recent).

Arthur House
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:20 pm

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#328 Post by Arthur House » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:53 pm

Those most recent Fox titles were presumably in the pipeline pre-Disney. Disney has recently more or less shuttered the Fox theatrical rep department, which doesn't entirely bode well for them licensing stuff.

Keeping in the spirit of the thread, some other titles to consider if Disney plays ball:

An Unmarried Woman
Harry & Tonto
Willie & Phil
A Wedding
Titles from the Murnau/Borzage box.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#329 Post by domino harvey » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:56 pm

I don’t think A Wedding is with Fox anymore. Fallen Angel is forthcoming from TT, but they seem about one step away from shuttering so maybe not

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#330 Post by FrauBlucher » Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:10 pm

That f*@king mouse. Disney truly sucks. It's absurd that they will no longer license Fox films to repertory theaters.

This from Glenn Erickson (although he is unaware of Roma's pending release)
And more distressing rumors are afoot. There were more merger-related layoffs at 20th Fox just a day or so ago, many from their home video department. The word online is that repertory theaters are being told that Fox titles will no longer be made available to them. And just yesterday I heard from a European home video executive, that Fox is no longer licensing its films to him. Is that policy the same for other vendors? Placing paranoia aside, we can figure out for ourselves that Disney isn’t plotting to rake in millions by making Sonja Henie musicals and other Fox oldies only available via its streaming site. The launch of Disney’s streaming platform is revolving around its new Marvel and Star Wars TV series.

Just the same, this might indeed be the beginning of the strangling of hard media, which the big companies have been treating like a necessary irritant for at least ten years. An unanswered question here is, how will this impact MGM discs, when Disney inherits Fox’s home video distribution contract? Already we have Netflix, that seems to purposely not make discs of many of its shows. The choice seems to be hit and miss. The first seasons of the Netflix Marvel shows Daredevil, Jessica Jones and Luke Cage eventually made it to Blu-ray in the U.S., but no sign of the second or third seasons, and no sign of Iron Fist, The Punisher or The Defenders. (Some of these have been released on disc overseas.) The Netflix Lost in Space reboot has also appeared on disc. But no sign whatsoever of Roma, The Ballad of Buster Skruggs, Okja, etc. on disc.

I think this is definitely the ‘disruptive’ mode of marketing that happens when a broad field of providers dwindles down to a few behemoth companies — the biggest power no longer just competes on the level of products, it uses its heft to demolish all other competing delivery systems. The idea is to make theaters kowtow to studio demands, and to eliminate most discs. Why go to all the trouble of making a product, when you can instead sell limited access from the web? For the consumer, it may eventually come down to a choice of subscribing to ten different streaming companies, or nothing. What’s available will be at the whim of corporate overseers.

We used to say that movies have lives of their own, but the streaming model may make most of them less accessible than ever. Netflix wiped out Blockbuster with its mail-rent system, and then dropped all but a few of its deep library, both for hard rental, and then on its streaming site. Just think, it will be just like before home video: movies will distributed or withheld, and changed as deemed fit — without our being informed. Hundreds of Fox movies from the 1930s that are already difficult to see, will be shoved deeper into storage, because the corporate committees will deem them to have insufficient profitability to be made available. And since we’ll have nothing permanent in our hands with which to compare an altered presentation, we’ll have to accept the ‘intellectual rights holder’s’ version of the truth. You know, like the ‘rumor’ that there ever was a movie simply called Star Wars, without the ‘Episode IV: A New Hope’ alterations.

With that in mind, the CineSavant office contains twenty years’ worth of older Fox DVDs and Blu-rays of variable quality. They may suddenly jump in value!

But I’d rather that those discs were not about to become rare, that they will instead continue to be readily available to be owned.

Thanks for your reportage Mr. Hunt.

And thanks for reading! — Glenn Erickson

Arthur House
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:20 pm

Re: Fox and Universal Licenses

#331 Post by Arthur House » Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:13 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:56 pm
I don’t think A Wedding is with Fox anymore. Fallen Angel is forthcoming from TT, but they seem about one step away from shuttering so maybe not
Who would have A Wedding then? Anchor Bay did an ultra-cheap DVD (no features or menus!) not long after the Fox Altman Box and individual release discs went OOP.

Post Reply