Dementeleus Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Sad news for anyone who likes classic movies, and seems like a lousy business decision by MGM. Basically, they don't want to spend the money to restore the fading prints, and they don't want to allow anyone else to pay for the restoration either. Here is a sample frame of what the best available print looked like five years ago: Full commentary here: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/052814_1330 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kvikk Lunsj Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 such sad news 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 A fucking shame/travesty 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 29, 2014 Author Share Posted May 29, 2014 The article encourages people to contact MGM. Perhaps it'll convince them to change their mind. @MGM_Studios https://www.facebook.com/mgm 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rorschach Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 I still have it on DVD as a double feature with The Magnificent Seven. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Founder / Operator Shawn Robbins Posted May 29, 2014 Founder / Operator Share Posted May 29, 2014 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fancyarcher Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Awful news. Hopefully MGM reconsiders. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAR Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Sadly it comes down to money. If MGM thought they could move enough units of the Alamo this would have been restored. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 That really is a shame. They should sell it to WB and let WB restore it. WB already owns the pre-1986 MGM library, so losing 1 United Artists film shouldn't hurt MGM that much. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMovieman Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Sadly it comes down to money. If MGM thought they could move enough units of the Alamo this would have been restored. Yet they also won't allow anyone else to pay to restore it either which doesn't make a whole lot of sense versus just letting it die like that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CloneWars Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Ehh, MGM won't be around much longer anyway...All they have is the Hobbit movies with WB, and I don't think they get much of a cut from that. What has MGM done these days movie-wise? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 29, 2014 Author Share Posted May 29, 2014 Ehh, MGM won't be around much longer anyway...All they have is the Hobbit movies with WB, and I don't think they get much of a cut from that. What has MGM done these days movie-wise? MGM's in better shape these days than it has been in recent years. It's not going anywhere. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) MGM's in better shape these days than it has been in recent years. It's not going anywhere. I feel that MGM is a takeover target. They aren't a major studio anymore. They don't have their pre-1986 film catalog. However, they have their post 1986 film catalog, they bought Orion so they have that film catalog, and they have the entire United Artists film catalog. Therefore, MGM does have some value. Edited May 30, 2014 by Walt Disney 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilmac Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Sad news for anyone who likes classic movies, and seems like a lousy business decision by MGM. Basically, they don't want to spend the money to restore the fading prints, and they don't want to allow anyone else to pay for the restoration either. Here is a sample frame of what the best available print looked like five years ago: Full commentary here: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/052814_1330 Why NOT let others do it for them??? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainJackSparrow Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Fucking monsters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 A goddamn disgrace if I've ever seen one. Shame on you, MGM. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 They should have just let it die and seen if anyone noticed, I bet we wouldn't have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Panda Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 One of the tragic flaws of capitalism is that if something isn't seen as profitable the industry usually doesn't see a purpose in keeping it around. It's a shame. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blankments Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 This disgusts me 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted June 29, 2014 Author Share Posted June 29, 2014 There's a letter going around (drafted, of all people, by Jeffrey Wells), asking MGM to allow an independently-funded restoration of the movie. So far J.J. Abrams, Matt Reeves, Rian Johnson, and the Three Amigos (del Toro, Cuaron, Inarritu) have signed it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
