I never felt the urge to touch a movie.
Owningā¦
Is there a difference between a theatrical release and a streaming experience? Donāt think so, no. For the producers and the studios itās the same if we spend $ 15 on a theatre admission or VOD. And Iām sure there will still be DVD editions to buy for the collectors among us.
If we talk about a physical/material thing the DVD or Blueray is of course a thing we can touch - but for many younger people that is actually more a kind of ballast than something to aspire to. Physical space is an increasingly expensive commodity in our urban society.
People alive today are the first humans who are literally able to document their entire lives through the media they consumed - but to what avail? Itās stuff we carry with us over the decades and only a fracture of it would mean the same to others. Not even our relatives might share our feelings and interests.
I could easily imagine younger folks leaving most of the actual physical experience of owning things behind, especially the vast collections of vinyl and CDs, DVDs and Bluerays we still tend to keep. This may be difficult to understand for us - yet itās probably a realistic option for future generations.
1 Like
On the other handā¦ Iām still waiting for the physical 4K release of the older Bond movies, untill now only the Craig movies were released.
2 Likes
At a guess that will probably happen once a bigger segment of customers has the necessary equipment. Maybe around Christmas 2022, I should think.
1 Like
Just asking: 4Kā¦ is it really necessary?
From what I have seen films that are remastered with that process do not look like the original anymore if those are older than 20 years, due to adjustments that are made concerning color and sharpness. Grain is reduced or even eliminated, resulting in a thorough altering of the intended effect.
And while Iām all for restoring damaged prints - but can my over 50 year old eyes really see the difference between a sharp blu ray and a 4 K transfer?
1 Like
I donāt think that many more people will buy it in the next future.
Why releasing the Craig movies, but not the other ones?
All the other great ones are already out there: Star Wars, Jaws, Ghostbusters, next month Indiana Jones.
If they are waiting much longer it will be outdated by 8K.
No, itās not realy, realy necessary. If you are happy with blu ray, or even dvd than thatās ok too, but if you want your movies in the best possible quality than 4K is for now the best choice. They realy look great in 4K.
You already know that, because you saw 4K versions on blu ray of Dr. No, Goldfinger, OHMSS etc.
Also movies like Star Wars, Apocalypse Now and The Shining look fantastic in 4K. I have never seen them this good.
Simple answer is the rest need work to be supported by the format, and when itās a very niche product it really isnāt worth the money.
They are already in 4K, you can stream them in that format.
Also the two movies, TSWLM and Eyes Only, which were rereleased in the cinema in 2017 to honour Roger Moore were in 4K.
1 Like
An announcement could be made as early as this week.
2 Likes
In which case Iām guessing Sony are good to release 4K discs, but perhaps Studio Distribution Services, LLC arenāt cleared to?
I suppose at the core itās a marketing decision, release them in a big package for a major event. Letās face it, many fans already have their collection in one of the upper quality formats. Going one step further wonāt make the big difference for them. Without major new material most probably wonāt re-buy just for the added looks.
Or - and thatās possibly a development throughout the audience - people just donāt watch them 20, 30 times any more. Instead, they can stream them in high quality format and be happy with it.
If youāre a journalist or film student and write about a particular scene, film, director, then you might need to have the product readily available for frame-by-frame analysis on repeated sittings. But otherwise itās really a matter of personal perspective and preference whether to have these as 4k (or however many ks more) versions at home.
1 Like
Update from Deadline Hollywood: the deal (which is allegedly worth USD$9 billion) is close to being finalized.
EDIT: Didnāt know that Red_Snow already posted this news via a Wall Street Journal article. This article link is for those who do not have a WSJ subscription.
2 Likes
I wouldnāt say that itās necessary, and I doubt that Iād shell out the necessary funds to secure the entire run of the franchise, but having them available in 4K is an option that Iād like to have. I havenāt had much experience with older films in this format, but in my admittedly non-expert opinion, I thought that Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters II looked phenomenal in the format when I saw them last year. To me, it really felt like watching them for the first time all over again, and Iāve seen both films on the Blu-ray format.
Now, itās not such a big jump where I need to upgrade a lot of films that I already have, like I did for a lot of DVDs when the jump to Blu-ray occurred, but for films that I really like, itās definitely an option that I would want to have.
2 Likes
And I suppose that sums up the 4k option for the majority, something nice to have for a select few films, not necessarily for the entire collection. Early adopters and tech nerds may swap their whole library - but thatās not necessarily such a huge part of the potential market.
1 Like
EON actually own the rights, but they need the Jaq half of Danjaq to agree to make films. The Dan hold ALL of Flemingās works, but MGM, as of this moment, own half the ability to do anything with them on film. That bit is what Amazon would get.
Itās basically a whole load of legal bollocks.
What happens when Flemingās novels enter the public domain in 2035?
After 2035 any studio would be free to the adapt the novels. Amazon/MGM/EON would still hold the copyright to the previous Bond films made up to that point (for many more decades to comes) along the James Bond theme, gunbarrel logo, and many other bits of iconography but when it came to making NEW Bond films they would no longer have a monopoly.
Unless Amazon/Disney/WB etc., persuade the governments of the world to extend copyright protection past 70 years after an authors death.
Iām aware copyright law varies from region to region so some of my info maybe slightly inaccurate but the question remains what happens when Bond goes the route of Sherlock Holmes? Would EON want to close up shop if others could make Bond movies? Or do they carry on as the home of the āRealā James Bond?
I honestly think this is the biggest question hanging over the series yet few are talking about it.
Itād be 2033 in normal circumstances, however, the later initial publication dates of the books across the globe complicates that (something the Arthur Conan Doyle estate have abused heavily for lawsuits)
Howeverā¦
All the things a general audience associate with Bond (Gun barrel logo, the Q gadgets, bond theme etc) is all Eon, not Fleming, so they actually loose shockingly little, to the point where any future adaptation making use of Fleming being public domain could easily go the way of the two non-Eon Casino Royale adaptations and fade into obscurityā¦does anyone actually think NSNA wouldāve been saved from that without Connery?
1 Like
True but Casino Royale (2006) proved you could make a fantastic Bond film without many of those iconic elements. It certainly gives rival filmmakers something to aim for. Iām sure some will be bad, many forgettable, some weird āJames Bond vs Dracula,ā etc., but a few might even be quite good.
I could certainly see a 1950s set Bond tv series like Agatha Christieās Poirot being successful. Thatās something that could very comfortable coexist with EONās future Bond films as theyād be set in different eras.
Who knows what will happen, but I think the next couple of decades will be quite interesting.
1 Like
I imagine thereās already lawyers looking into this. Expect Danjaq (registered in the US) to push hard on the 97 years after publication rule for copyright, as that gives them up to 2050 before specific things start falling away.
1 Like
If we look at the legal calamities surrounding THUNDERBALL and its remake (WARHEAD, NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN) and THE SPY WHO LOVED MEās script (supposedly significant parallels to the McClory production) then I donāt think a studio with a modicum of common sense would be eager to throw themselves into a potential nightmare of one more such adventure.
Stepping on Eonās toes is not something to aspire to when itās far less trouble to just cook up your own thing - or buy a potential franchise like U.N.C.L.E or Matt Helm or Clancyās and start from scratch. The most successful* of the past decade was probably the Bourne effort, something that had hardly anything to do with the source material. Scoop up a property with little heft outside the authorās name and make of it whatever you want.
*Evidently wrong, that would be Mission Impossible. Which illustrates my point.
3 Likes
EON has imprinted the identity of a Bond film on worldwide audiences.
Someone trying to make movie versions out of FlemingĀ“s novels will first face the problem EON managed to solve: the novels are unfilmable the way they are. They have to get adapted and enhanced. Especially today. And EON has already done it. Would anyone want to see another āStar Warsā, now made byā¦ someone else?
Anybody trying to throw a āliteralā adaptation of a Fleming novel onto the market - or do just another variation will end up like all those DTV films on the bottom of the bargain bin inā¦ oh, there arenāt any video stores anymore, right? So, maybeā¦ for free streaming titles nobody ever watches except during pandemics when everything else is already too familiar?
1 Like