[78-L] So what? was Re: Warner Home Video to release Shorts via Archive Series

[Jeff Sultanof]

Harold,

That's why I specified the MGM Our Gangs. I love the Roach Our Gangs (later
known as the Little Rascals) made from 1922-38. I meant that I had no
interest in the post 1938 Our Gangs after Roach sold the franchise to MGM.
Most of the shorts made from 1938-43 are pretty pathetic.

Jeff Sultanof

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Harold Aherne <leotolstoy_75 at yahoo.com>wrote:

> To complete my rudely (self-) interrupted thoughts,
>
> And even if you're an Our Gang hater, I really do encourage you to look at
> some of the
> silent entries in the series with talented kids like Mickey Daniels and
> Mary Kornman...
> they, at least, haven't become pop-culture clichés and their performances
> are very
> natural and unaffected.
>
> -Harold (who is, of course, keeping his fingers crossed for several
> Vitaphone sets, and
> who also wouldn't mind seeing more of the late 20s MGM variety 2-reelers).
>
>
> --- On Tue, 9/1/09, Harold Aherne <leotolstoy_75 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Harold Aherne <leotolstoy_75 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [78-L] So what? was Re: Warner Home Video to release Shorts
> via Archive Series
> To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Date: Tuesday, September 1, 2009, 11:10 PM
>
>
>
> One of the stated purposes of the Warner Archive program, as I understand
> it, is
> to release *everything* in their library--well, with a few qualifications
> (e.g. titles
> that have problems with underlying literary or music rights, like Letty
> Lynton or
> Night Flight, won't be available until/unless the snags are untangled. And
> the creation
> of these DVD-Rs is predicated on having an acceptable video master
> prepared, so
> any titles that exist only in film prints will also take some time to
> appear). Notice
> the quote directly from George Feltenstein in the following piece (sixth
> paragraph):
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/dvd/2009-03-22-classic-films-on-demand_N.htm
>
> It's hard to say how market-driven the WA program actually is. Material
> that sells better
> *might* encourage similar films to appear more quickly...or perhaps they'd
> get released
> anyway. Since there is little to no unsold stock involved with producing on
> demand copies,
> the financial concerns that might exist with retail releases of the MGM Our
> Gang series
> or Vitaphone subjects doesn't really apply. It seems to me that WB is
> releasing these
> first because of the familiar brand name, the publicity value for their
> program, and the likelihood that media attention to this release might
> encourage Warner Archive
> fence-sitters to jump off.
>
> In a quote published at http://tiny.cc/UYrde, Feltenstein says, “It’s our
> first of what will be very many short subject collections in our library
> from Warner Archive [...] We have a treasure trove of this type of short
> subject material. We have been beleaguered, in a good way, with consumer
> requests for all sorts of things.”
>
> And even if you're an Our Gang hater, I really do encourage you to look at
> some of the
> silent entries in the series with talented kids like Mickey Daniels and
> Mary Kornman...
> they, at least, haven't become pop-culture
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 9/1/09, David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>