That’s what I like doing. Digital is convenient but acquiring a physical collection is part of the fun and satisfaction of being a fan, at least to me.
2 Likes
Too many discs will clutter the most spacious shelves. I prefer paring down to the essentials and purchase digital for the rest.
However…
During the last year I restocked on films I wanted to watch but weren’t available on any platform (or without the original language). Tracking down copies has become quite tricky because many films have disappeared from the market, even from high profile directors starring megastars.
So, right now, my advice is keep your discs, collect the classics and stream the rest.
Although - one more caveat: streaming needs a lot of electricity and is contributing to climate change. So, stream as little as possible.
4 Likes
I only just found out about the environmental impact of streaming. Really shocking. I guess the manufacture and transport of discs is pretty grim too though. I guess we all need to start thinking more carefully about energy so it’s good to see others thinking about it.
4 Likes
Yes, I didn´ know about that, either.
Best thing: not to indulge in anything, unfortunately. Then again, it´s the industry which should offer better, more efficient ways for consumers to, well, consume. Of course, industries always just go the cheapest way, regardless of any consequences.
So, it´s up to us, again. Maybe we should rather elect politicians who care about the environment, hence our future. Just a thought.
1 Like
In regards to Amazon, the entertainment streaming is a drop in ocean for their servers heavy use… AWS Cloud for Government
2 Likes
Also, Bitcoin. HUGE SERVERS running just to create the illusion of money. Horrible.
4 Likes
What I meant though was that while MGM still owns the exclusive distribution rights to the Bond films made by EON), it is Danjaq that owns the actual legal rights.
And when Harry Saltzman sold his half of Danjaq to Cubby Broccoli back in the day, that made Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson the ones with the true power in so far as Bond is concerned (again, IIRC).
What would be the true power in the Bond-continuum?
Fact is, only the Broccolis and the studio together can make a Bond film. Previously, the Broccolis used to be the stable part exerting their creative control over their property. MGM - or at times Sony - may have expressed own plans, the final product needed the approval of the Broccoli family and the studio played along.
Now we have a slightly changed balance though. Amazon doesn’t need a fresh Bond production. In fact, their stocks hardly even moved after the deal was announced. Amazon could probably wait until 2045 before they might even ponder another production. Not that they will, but they surely could.
Eon house on the other hand doesn’t necessarily need another Bond film either. It’s not that they actively pushed for churning them out these last twenty years. They have time - and they actually made the most money when their films were a rare occurrence.
Now might be a time where both sides are dependent not just on the other but also on their own discretion and common sense. The true power might be not having to make a show of it.
2 Likes
Here are the most important bits of the WSJ article posted by Arbogast777:
The siblings are so critical to MGM’s value that they were told of the pending sale days before it closed, according to a person familiar with the negotiations. Amazon executive Mike Hopkins, who handled negotiations with MGM, reached out to the producers as well to assure their property would be in good hands. Jen Salke, the Amazon executive who oversees original content, already had a relationship with Ms. Broccoli, which will also ease the transition.
Already, Ms. Broccoli and Mr. Wilson have said they still plan to release the series’ films in theaters. The first test of the new owner’s relationship with the pair comes with the 25th Bond film, No Time to Die, which after several Covid-related delays is set to hit theaters in October.
…A representative for Eon didn’t respond to requests for comment.
…Associates believe children of both executives could step into the roles when they retire, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The two are also content staying behind the scenes amid the hubbub of the merger. After news of the Amazon-MGM deal was released, they released only a brief statement: ‘We are committed to continuing to make James Bond films for the world-wide theatrical audience.’
Though pent-up demand for movies could contribute to box-office success for No Time to Die, the last installment, Spectre, met a lukewarm domestic reception in 2015. Markets outside the U.S. have steadily accounted for more of the overall profitability of recent films.
…Apple Inc. and Comcast Corp.'s Universal Pictures have made overtures to the siblings over the past several years, according to people familiar with the matter, exploring whether they’d be open to a buyout and yielding control. They have rebuffed those efforts and others to expand the James Bond ‘universe’ into lucrative—but potentially reputation-damaging—side projects and spinoffs.
The Wilson-Broccoli entity rejected an overture from late casino magnate Kirk Kerkorian to build a Bond-themed hotel and casino, according to a person familiar with the matter. A potential spinoff movie series based on Jinx, a character portrayed by Halle Berry in 2002’s Die Another Day, never got off the ground.
Their next outing, No Time to Die, is one reason MGM is being sold at all. At one point, Eon considered selling the movie to a streaming service rather than wait for theaters to reopen. Amazon was among those potential would-be buyers, according to a person familiar with the matter, and among the early reasons executives from the tech company met with MGM brass.
5 Likes
It good not to put it all in one basket. But is there going to be times we the consumers/shoppers will not get a new or old movie on physical media. That we will have to either join a streaming service just to watch it or buy it. That streaming service is telling us that the only way. If we decide not to be with that streaming service we can’t watch that movie or TV series anymore say like the 9th time or 22nd time. It like they are in control how it should be for us. The same with TV shows, it might never go to their networks or syndication. I remember three or four years ago, there was tech or media news. That Apple’s iTune can remove or delete any movies people buy there. That you don’t own, or it more how we see fit for you. Of course people who do not have a huge DVD/Blu-ray collection like say 500 + or 2000 + will not care. They would be fine with what ever happens, how the streaming company or studio see fit. They don’t even go hunt for a movie on DVD or Blu-ray at good price to save money or the version they like/want.
Could it be in the whole streaming thing some movies or TV series will not be there at all or get lost of never. Say like someone out there wants to watch the Tin Man, T-Man, one of the season of the Odd Couple, Seven Days In May, Charade, Born In East L.A., Family Ties, Hunter, High Noon, etc… But there is no rerelease of it out there in stores, or put on streaming.
Isn’t this already the case?
Content producers and media houses have always decided how they offer their product. We can take it or leave it - and that’s already all the options we have as a solitary customer. I can’t demand that the films I want to buy come out on a videodisc or Betamax tape - that happens only if the market for such formats is big enough for the production of such niche products.
It all follows the laws of the market and, sad as it may be for the individual, there’s only ever a chance for the physical product as long as enough people want them.
That’s not to say the extinction of these products is inevitable. Vinyl proves that even a supposedly outdated technology can survive in a niche existence long enough until it dripped back into the mainstream. It probably never again will gain the importance it once had - but it’s a solid enough segment of the market and unlikely to disappear.
3 Likes
Well worth a read.
2 Likes
A very worthwhile read.
I fear that it’s only a matter of time before Logan’s fears become reality. Barbara and Michael might be able to keep Amazon at bay, but once they’re no longer running the franchise, or once they’ve branched out into other things a bit more successfully than they have in recent years, that very well could change. At that point, it’s potentially a very bleak future for Bond as the character we know him to be.
…because MGM and Sony are famous paragons of honesty and artistic integrity?
2 Likes
I may live to eat my words, but I have no concerns. The conventions of Bond are far too entrenched to be cocked up now: the main outcome of this news is financial security and that’s a good thing. Now sign up Cavill for 5 films and let’s get rolling.
4 Likes
Between The Witcher, Highlander and Enola Holmes he might not have the time
1 Like
But what character would that be? After all those years and many changes in direction, vision and tone, what character are we talking about?
I’ve now heard - and voiced myself - concerns about the series for many years. Decades even, if memory serves as it reaches back into the abyss of the years between LICENCE TO KILL and GOLDENEYE. We’re always afraid of Bond turning into something vaguely uncomfortable, like, a generic action hero or a money machine or a vehicle to turn brand trash into cash in an instant. If the suits have their way.
Well…
Then I’ve heard the argument from the opposite side, the usual suspects moaning and wailing about Bond turned into a posterboy for Barbara Broccoli’s vision. How all that fine women slapping and ordering to fetch shoes is in danger when Ms Broccoli has her way and how Bond just won’t be fun any more when he’s awake and not some icon for rampant idiocy any more.
I’m a great defender of idiocy myself - there’s usually one idiot more in the room than we count - but I wouldn’t want it to become the civilisation standard. Not even the standard of entertainment.
Are we perhaps missing the point - that Bond is a product? A product containing whatever it is the current times are calling for, Cold War or Detente or light comedy. The difference to other products is not so much the ingredients or the quality but the promotion.
6 Likes
I find that Logan piece to be needlessly alarmist. Yes, his concerns could come to pass. But what’s the alternative? To continue under a studio that files for bankruptcy every few years, with the result being a mere two Bond films per decade?
Oh, and let’s not forget that Logan’s earlier drafts on SP were deemed not up to snuff, to the point that BB and MGW needed to bring back P & W to turn it into something filmable (yes, I know this happened again, and arguably more severely, with what is now NTTD). And the finished product left most of us disappointed.
So forgive me if, rather than decry a hypothetical negative outcome of the sale, I instead choose to rejoice in the fact that the Bond series is finally on secure financial footing moving forward.
5 Likes
I’d also like to add this his concerns are not specific to Amazon could be applied to whichever major studio EON aligns with. So unless Barbara and Michael are able to become completely independent then a certain level or corporate oversight will always be in Bond’s future.
6 Likes
I love Logan. Great read.