Twilight Time Says Goodbye; $4-$11 Price Reductions

[Monterey Jack]

I'd buy Body Double for a reasonable price out of sake of De Palma completism, but for a stinging $35, nuh-uh. It's one of De Palma's weakest thrillers (I even like The Black Dahlia more ), and I just can't justify spending $35 on it when that money would get me seven Blu-Rays during Best Buy's "Upgrade & Save" program or almost two film scores from the specialy labels.

[AndyDursin]

I used to like BODY DOUBLE, but when I watched it again last year, it did nothing for me. One of those I grew up liking but the last time, meh....not so much.

[Monterey Jack]

Craig Wasson's wan leading performance is what kills it for me. Plus, it's basically an amalgam of De Palma cliches lifted from his earlier, better thrillers, only with an extra dose of skeevy misogyny (the ugly "drillbit" murder setpiece in particular). Aside from the unintentionally riotous "Relax" Frankie Goes To Hollywood number, there's little to distinguish it from other De Palma movies. Fine Pino Donaggio score, but I can listen to that outside of the movie whenever I want. I'll probably be sticking to the DVD with this one...too rich for my blood.

[AndyDursin]

Wasson was the black hole at the center of GHOST STORY too. He had those leading roles and that was pretty much it -- understandably.

[esteban miranda]

Twilight Time's business model seems to work well for them and more power to them but it does pretty much eliminate "blind buys" at those price levels (and I have many, many movies on DVD that I bought sight unseen, mostly if I like the actors). These prices really do force one to place a very high value on a movie. I guess it's just a matter of "what's it worth to you?" I have several favorite films and I would not pay these prices for the best of them.

[Eric Paddon]

And I'll be honest about a couple other gripes. You think for those prices we could at least have some better cover art than we've gotten for some of these releases? The "Bye Bye Birdie" one was dreadful and the B/W style Flint covers don't even hint at the splashy colorful world the films belong to. I also could do with less of the pretentiousness I've seen in some of the Kirgo liner notes.

[John Johnson]

The only Twilight release I have is The Egyptian, which I still haven't watched. I tend to find their titles a bit too expensive.

[Monterey Jack]

Twilight Time's business model seems to work well for them and more power to them but it does pretty much eliminate "blind buys" at those price levels (and I have many, many movies on DVD that I bought sight unseen, mostly if I like the actors). These prices really do force one to place a very high value on a movie. I guess it's just a matter of "what's it worth to you?" I have several favorite films and I would not pay these prices for the best of them.

With other "specialty" labels like Olive Films and Shout Factory and even Warner's burn-on-demand series routinely releasing similar "niche" titles for under $20 (usually w/free shipping at Amazon), Twilight Time's $35 pricetags are fairly ludicrous. Even pricey Criterion titles go on sale for 50% off or even more a few times per year (I grabbed Rosemary's Baby for $17.99 last week). I'm a cheap bastard, and I kind of have to be, considering how little money I have left over for such niceties as Blu-Rays, CDs and books after I take care of the bills and keeping myself fed, so seeing titles I'd usually grab being so unfairly priced and limited just ticks me off. And there are usually very few extras to make the price at least somewhat bearable...Christine had commentary, deleted scenes and a few featurettes, but they were all cribbed from the previous DVD SE. Most TT titles have an isolated score, liner notes and maybe a trailer.

[Eric Paddon]

And of course with "Major Dundee" they don't even duplicate what the DVD offered, period (sorry, but what happened there, really ticks me off).

I think though maybe what this experience is finally convincing of is how I shouldn't be so instinctively thinking that just because a movie I have on DVD and have watched a couple times or so in all the years I've had it gets reissued on Blu-Ray that I *should* automatically get it to be then watched maybe once or twice in the next few years. I also made a decision to move all the DVD movies I had with good artwork on the disc out of the cases and into albums for easier storage convenience so that allowed me to remove the element of Blu-Ray packaging being a space saver and that means that I can instead concentrate on Blu-Ray titles that are of *special* and not run-of-the-mill interest. "Ten Commandments", "Ben Hur", the Bond movies were great releases that made me glad I finally got a Blu-Ray player. I've gotten my share of bargain releases too that were nice but the TT price model is becoming a reminder of how I think one should ask oneself how far is one willing to go to upgrade for the sake of upgrading just as we have to grapple with that question every time a CD gets reissued.

[AndyDursin]

As with buying any movie, there are select titles I would actually shell out $100 if I had to -- while there are others I find myself struggling with to justify a $5 price tag. That's something that comes with figuring out what kind of collection you want to own and what kinds of films you find yourself revisiting. For me, I like owning movies I actually WATCH -- they may not be all 5-star Criterion releases (though I have a few of those), but they're films I have a connection with and that I find myself revisiting frequently.

When I read these constant arguments over TT's pricing -- I certainly understand why people bail on buying them. For me, if it's a film I'm going to watch, and a film I love like FRIGHT NIGHT, I don't care about the cost. $15 more than what the Warner Archive charges for a film I love -- not a "blind buy" of some film I've never seen -- is a no-brainer for me. And really that's what TT's pricing and their releases are geared towards: people who love these films, who want to own them in their collection, and who don't blink over the cost. (And it's not as if they're $50 or $100!). They are not geared towards the "blind buy" crew, or someone who is on the fence as to whether or not they should own the movie. That's why they're being pressed in low quantities in the first place, because the latter instances aren't the audience they're trying to reach.

If the price tag is too much, and you can't afford it, I get that. But when I read the hair-pulling outrage that exists over and over from all corners of the internet, I simply think these consumers are missing the big picture. And I also believe people are so, so spoiled today. Blu-Ray owners, especially these kids (20 somethings and under) on the Blu-ray.com message board, absolutely believe they are ENTITLED to owning every film in existence -- in a 1080p transfer -- for under $10. It is their divine right, and if it's not provided to them, then a disservice has been committed -- an atrocity in the name of cinema -- because, of course, it's the way the world ought to be. It ought to be in HD, it ought to be $5, and they should be able to have it. Even if they've never seen it, even if they actually know so little about the movie that they can't even read reviews about it before-hand (how many times do you see these people go "should I buy it? What's it about? Who's in it?" -- so lazy they can't even google the damn title!), it doesn't matter. They just OUGHT to have it available to them, in HD, in lossless audio, for $5, if the whim to buy it strikes them.

I hate going back to the laserdisc era, but goodness, I didn't buy EVERY film that came out -- I couldn't possibly afford to. Somehow I managed to live just fine without buying every movie that got released. I used to watch movies on TV. I used to rent discs. I didn't think it was my divine right that every catalog disc that ever got released was $5.

Buyers have gotten used to making "blind buys" with Blu-Rays that cost $5-$10, but this format is odd in that it sort of became priced at a "sell through" level very quickly -- all the while, the overall growth of the format itself hasn't been commensurate with that pricing. Yes, it's grown, yes it's a viable market for some titles -- but DVDs never cost $5 right off the bat. VHS titles never cost $5 off the bat. Laserdiscs never cost less than $40 really when first released. Blu-Rays didn't sell in the numbers of those formats initially (and still hasn't!) but were priced at a loss to spur growth artificially. The end result were all these cheap catalog titles that didn't sell, but were priced to move, and people becoming used to paying cheap prices for quality product. In the end it has hurt the format's development in a certain degree, no question about it, because studios saw the bottom line and were scared off. It's why catalog releases have dried up or stopped completely from some majors.

It's hard to take candy away from babies, but that's just what we're seeing now when it comes to catalog releases. Major studios bailed on releasing catalog product, so these smaller labels -- whether it's Image, Anchor Bay, Olive, Twilight Time, Echo Bridge, Mill Creek, etc. -- have come in and applied their own, separate business models to the format. They don't all work the same way, they don't all have the same bottom line expectations and pricing models. Expecting them to operate and price titles in a similar manner is likewise a bit much.

Olive is FLOODING the market with some of the most obscure catalog stuff I've ever seen -- their movies are targeting a demographic so old that I can't imagine most of their audience even owns an HDTV (never mind a Blu-Ray player). Their titles are trending towards the '40s and '50s more and more although sales numbers of catalog content that sells (any surprise movies like Fright Night, Christine and Night of the Living Dead were TT's fastest selling copies?) tells you the total reverse. I don't know if it's because they have a limited time to work with the Paramount license, or if they're holding these disc runs to a minimum -- but I certainly can't imagine Olive is selling huge numbers of the obscure product they are releasing, OR that it's a recipe for long-term success. On the other hand, we have Mill Creek releasing cheap catalog content -- but they have a different business model than every one else, they have a distribution deal with Walmart and can afford to sell their product (apparently) at dirt-cheap levels.

The thing to remember in this is that we're at an evolution, a crossroads, in the BD format right now, so who is making the right decisions -- or not -- remains to be seen.

I do love this format and am a huge supporter of it. I see a difference between SD and HD on most every title I come across...only on the truly bad transfers do I not see the Blu-Ray being worth the upgrade. (Obviously for some, they may not see a difference, especially if they are using a smaller TV).

Ultimately, consumers make up their own minds on what to buy or not buy. I don't fault people for not wanting to pay $35 for certain films...but there is no divine right to ownership, and it's up to the individual to make their own personal decision as to whether to buy a certain title or not. But none of us are running these smaller labels, where the profit margins and business models are different.

Expecting TT to adopt the same business model as these other labels isn't reasonable (they don't have a distribution pipeline with Walmart, they aren't backed by Warner Bros.)...but then again, very little in the conversation over the Blu-Ray medium right now really sees the forest for the trees, so to speak.

My advice to any consumer is simple: just buy what you want, and can afford...just don't write a teary-eyed complaint letter that you are ENTITLED to every movie, that the jackals running TT are gouging out the wallets of every consumer, that they are doing an INJUSTICE to the cinema gods because not every title is something you can find in the Walmart $5 dollar bin. We're entering the Wild West of the Blu-Ray format, and as the format evolves, we'll see eventually who is left standing, and who made the right calls, because we're still in a nebulous, odd time when it comes to getting older catalog titles out in this format.

[mkaroly]

For me at this time in my life, I have to be picky and choosy about what I purchase. If I was still working full time and had extra funds to take risks with in movie purchases, there are several TT BRs I would venture to buy. But now, in order for me to buy something (whether from TT or someone else), I have to really want the movie, and it needs to be something I will watch several times in order to justify the expense. ST:TNG BR sets at $75+ dollars per set? Easily justifiable since I will watch those over and over again. I will get my money's worth. Some of the TT discs (and other labels) are tempting, but I am unwilling to risk it. Even if TT lowered their prices, in order for me to purchase anything from them (or anyone else) it would have to be a film in which I am completely sold-out for.

For me it comes down to how much I want the film in high-def. Criterion titles would be my TT in a way; I could buy several of their films but the cost is prohibitive. Even when they go on sale, I have to ask myself whether I really NEED this film on BR or if I can survive without it. As much as I'd like LATE SPRING on BR (since I am vested in Ozu films as I love his stuff), is it really necessary? Up to now, the answer has been 'no'.

[AndyDursin]

Attractive fall roster announced...THE OTHER is a very creepy film. Not something I "enjoy" watching, but a very well made, disturbing little thriller worth at least one viewing.

DRUMS ALONG THE MOHAWK (1939) BLU-RAY w/Becoming John Ford (2007) - Sept 10th

ALAMO BAY (1985) BLU-RAY - Sept 10th

MINDWARP (1992) BLU-RAY - Oct 8th

THE OTHER (1972) BLU-RAY - Oct 8th

OLIVER! (1968) BLU-RAY - Nov 12th

THE WAY WE WERE (1973) BLU-RAY - Nov 12th

JANE EYRE (1944) BLU-RAY - Nov 12th

[Eric Paddon]

Pass on ALL of them.

[jkholm]

OLIVER is the one that most excites me. Always liked that one.

Never even heard of ALAMO BAY or MINDWARP.

[AndyDursin]

ALAMO BAY was a well-reviewed mid '80s drama with Ed Harris and Amy Madigan -- I remember that much at least, though I don't recall ever seeing it. Just Siskel & Ebert reviewing it at some point.

MINDWARP I confess I didn't remember a thing about. It's an early '90s video horror flick with Bruce Campbell and Angus Scrimm from "Phantasm" -- I must've seen it but don't recall anything about it. Still, with those actors, TT ought to generate some sales around Halloween despite its obscurity.

I'm excited for DRUMS ALONG THE MOHAWK and OLIVER, plus THE OTHER. THE WAY WE WERE ought to do very well also.