Escapay wrote:But just because the next mainstream format comes along doesn't mean they are obligated to immediately release their entire catalogue into that format, even if fans want it.
But it's not even about "Someday,
A Light in the Forest will be available to own on a normally-priced DVD". It's about, "
Beauty and the Beast may never see the light of day again in the original version". And, yes, I know that the VHS and Laserdiscs are out there- just go on Amazon Marketplace or Half.com. Ugh, I was going to make a point, but I kind of forgot it... Also, many people have never had a laserdisc player, and many people's VCRs died and haven't bought another one. Let me try to think of how I was going to word my thought... It was going to be something about if Disney said that they would never again release a certain title after the current DVD/Blu-ray is vaulted. But I don't remember what my thought was after that. So nevermind, I guess.
And I know that Disney isn't obligated, necessarily, to release each and every movie on each and every new format. But the films (and I'm really talking about live-action films that have yet to be released on DVD) are kind of being ignored. I mean, yay for DMC Exclusives, you know? Some of these movies (like
The Castaway Cowboy, which was recently released to DVD) have expensive used VHS tapes on the market...normal people don't want to spend $50+ on a used movie, let alone a VHS tape. One could argue, if Disney cares about their movies, they'd want to release them. I mean, in some ways, we need to be grateful that the wrong-aspect-ratio, barebones DVDs of some films were released...at least we have them to own and can watch them whenever we want. The original version of
Beauty and the Beast doesn't get that option. Are you (you meaning anyone) glad that
The Journey of Natty Gann was released to DVD? But why? It looks just like it would on the VCR! I'm glad that it was released on DVD. As I said earlier, VHS tapes wear out, VCRs wear out. DVD is a more durable media that isn't likely to wear out.
Escapay wrote:But the final decision on its release is Disney's and whether they feel it's financially viable to release it. At the end of the day, every release is judged by how much money it will make, not how much it will satisfy the fans who ask for it.
This is a case of I didn't read your next sentence after what I quoted above.
We were kind of getting at the same thing. At the same time, how much money does Disney expect to get from the DMC Exclusives? Those aren't necessarily the most sought-out titles in the Disney catalog. It's very nice of them, though, to respect the films and give them an audience.
Escapay wrote:"it's our god-given right as fans to get the film the way we want it."
I think it's also about giving the film respect. Yes, I get that the company had a release date, and that everyone working on the film had to complete it by then, including using some shortcuts, maybe. And I know, respecting an inanimate object- Amy, what are you on? But...ugh, I don't know how to word it. Like on TCM, it's great that those films are getting an audience, not just sitting in a vault somewhere not being watched. Many of the films on TCM aren't available, either at all, or at least not on DVD, so you'd have to search for a used VHS tape. And I know that B&tB, either the original or Special Edition version, is available. We should be grateful that B&tB got a Platinum Edition DVD in 2002. I am- I was glad to replace my VHS tape. And there are some nice documentaries on the disc. Yes, part of the argument is the fans are upset that we're not being given the version that we fell in love with. Part of it, to me, anyway, is that the original version isn't being given the respect that it deserves. I mean, it does have historical context. That version of the film, the version that the filmmakers and Disney supposedly deemed worthy of a release, was the first film in history to be nominated for Best Picture! I mean, that says something about the film.
Changing gears a bit:
How many of you think that, had the current changes been there from the start, that the film still would have been nomimated for Best Picture? Would it have mattered at all? It's still essentially the same film. I mean, if you don't mention the backgrounds or reanimation, the only new thing is the "Human Again" sequence. Do you think that that is a hindrance to the film, that it makes it worse? The backgrounds and the reanimation do change the tone of the film. It isn't as dark, maybe, as it should be, maybe not as serious.
Escapay wrote:A lost film would be something like Greta Garbo's The Divine Woman (of which only 9 minutes exist) or the many films of Theda Bara that are completely lost (only 3 exist in their entirety, and she was in over 40 films).
I was actually reading about lost films the other day, coincedentally. I guess I should have used the term "commercially unavailable film", so my bad on using the wrong term. Wikipedia lists
Song of the South as a "commercially unavailable film". It does exist on home video, so do you disagree with calling SOTS a "commercially unavailable film"? Also on Wikipedia as a "commercially unavailable film":
The 1970 Beatles film Let It Be has been out of commercial release for more than two decades. It was available from Magnetic Home Video (and later from CBS/FOX Home Video) on VHS and laserdisc, last available around 1984.
Would you disagree that
Let It Be is a commercially unavailable film?
pap64 wrote:We all know what Lucas did. He took the Star Wars films, made them, re-made them, deleted things, added things, updated things etc. etc. until the fans got fed up with it and moved on. And to a certain extend, I agree. I mean I understand that as an artist you have the right to redo your work and fix what you couldn't do the first time. BUT, you CAN fall victim to your own vanity and insecurity, meaning that what was already a fine looking piece of art gets diminished by the constant changes.
I think you HAVE to agree that it can get to the point where the creators just lose it. Not saying that the Beauty and the Beast creators ARE ruining the film. In fact, this new release just seems to be the 2001 version in HD and digital 3D. Just stating that there's the fear that what was once special might lose its appeal due to the creators constantly changing it.
Very good point, and very well said. I, too, will be looking forward to Albert's reply!
2099net wrote:Just because the Cogsworth sequence was included in the original film doesn't mean it was artistically what the creative team or artist wanted.
2099net wrote:Of course, in reality I suspect both options are just as bad as each other due to the time gap between animations. Its unrealistic to expect the animator to duplicate his best work on a character after so many years away and I also suspect the Special Edition budget didn't allow for more than 2 or 3 attempts to correct the scene... meaning the replacement was probably just as rushed and unsatisfactory in the eyes of the animator.
I completely agree. Did the new Cogsworth animation fulfill the directors' dreams that were left unfulfilled with the 1991 version? We know that the directors (and Alan Menken, and I guess the whole creative team) were pleased with the inclusion of "Human Again". It also makes one wonder, what else were the filmmakers unhappy with? Had they the time and the money, would they have changed the film even further than they did for the Special Edition?
And do you all feel just as strongly about the changes made to TLM,
Aladdin, and TLK, or is B&tB extra special for some reason? I'll be the first to admit that the priest's absent knee sticks out like a sore thumb, just like the alligators in TLK. And, again, I still immensely enjoy the films, but I still notice these things.
About the coloring: Did the directors have an issue with the original colors? I mean more so the shadows and whatnot, I suppose. Like, were the filmmakers unhappy that the Beast was in shadows before Belle asks him to step out into the light? Was it always their intent to have him be not as shadowy? Or was that out of their hands, done by technicians? I wonder their thoughts on that. I think they'd probably say, "Oh, sure, that was always our intent", because I can't imagine them saying bad things about the Special Edition for some reason.
