Business Models: Twilight Time vs. Other Boutique Labels

[matrixschmatrix]

Whoa don't drag Olive into this, Olive puts out obscure movies on blu that one can get for like $15, I sure as hell don't want that transferred to some in house studio streaming service

[EddieLarkin]

Would anyone really prefer to see even Twilight Time's catalogue as stream only?

[HJackson]

Whoa don't drag Olive into this, Olive puts out obscure movies on blu that one can get for like $15, I sure as hell don't want that transferred to some in house studio streaming service

Yup, Olive are saints. Was very tempted to dive into the run on Body Double the other day (before they magically found another third of their stock), but just treated myself to an Olive title instead. Keeps my hands clean. Hopefully Sony see this title sold well and do business with Arrow - it's my favourite De Palma and an Arrow release would be a treat.

[jedgeco]

So better the films go unreleased?

Not at all, at least in my opinion. I understand that the folks running the label are doing this as a glorified hobby. But it seems to be proving more popular than they expected, so they're going to have to make a decision: Scale up, or scale down.

[Orlac]

If Twilight Time didn't exist, I expect we'd have seen the Sony titles via Mill Creek, Image, Shout Factory, Criterion...

[Taketori Washizu]

Fair enough. Lumping Olive Films in with TT would be unfair. They have much more affordable prices, but at the same time Olive doesn't have a patch on Criterion, Kino, Shout Factory etc. in terms of overall presentation. Sure, bare bones releases on their titles are better than nothing. However, when a landmark like Johnny Guitar comes out on BLU; I want a loaded disc that does justice to a Nicholas Ray masterpiece. It should be a lot better than what exists.

[peerpee]

Not every great film can luxuriate in a Criterion-style release. We all want that, but it takes months and much money to put together a great edition. It's not realistically going to happen.

Yes, Olive are saints and their business model makes a complete mockery of Twilight Time's "hobbyists" who are "protecting their investment" with each release.

How many times do they have to successfully protect their investment before they can step it up and do what Olive do?

[Moe Dickstein]

I think one key difference with Olive and TT is that Olive are a lot less picky about the transfers they are willing to release

[knives]

Excuse me? That's not even the obvious difference between the two companies and even Olive's worst transfer isn't as bad as TT's Violent Saturday.

[Gregory]

Singling out a letterboxed DVD release (when that was the only option TT had to release) as if it says anything representative about TT's transfers in general seems obviously unfair. The track record of TT's blu-rays has been pretty good, as far as I've seen.
Hard to say with any credibility what Olive's worst transfer is unless one has seen them all, but based on my experiences with the ones I've watched (such as Johnny Guitar and the Preminger set), I tend to go in with low expectations, expecting to see something that looks like a solid DVD at best. Olive's main credits are the depths of the catalog they're getting out there and the prices of their releases at ImportCDs. I've yet to see an Olive transfer that really impressed me, though I have several waiting in the kevyip.

[kingofthejungle]

I think Olive's transfers of Rio Grande and The Sun Shines Bright are damn near perfect (as are the Wayne b-westerns, which have obviously been restored), and in my experience the average Olive disc looks like what one might expect from a very good to excellent print screened in a repertory theater. I much prefer a nicely crisp, untouched transfer with some instances of dirt to over-scrubbed nonsense. I haven't seen the Preminger box, but the most disappointing release I've seen was Johnny Guitar, which was still much better than what was available previously.

Olive does present nice looking versions of most of their films, thanks to Fox and Sony, but the Pony Soldier transfer is easily as bad as anything Olive has put out. It has dirt, horrible instances of poor color registration, and is generally of such poor quality that I don't think the Blu-Ray format benefits the picture in the least -- this would have been perfectly acceptable as a Fox Archives DVD-R.

[EddieLarkin]

The problem I have with Olive is that they seem to put little consideration into what they're actually releasing. Their one criterion for a release appears to be "Do we have the rights to it?". We've seen over 200 BDs from them in a two year period, and I think a bit more time on a smaller number of releases would be better for everyone, not least because yes, their transfer batting average does not approach TTs (not to mention amateur mistakes like incorrect ARs and the use of old HD masters despite newer ones being available. I'm also still smarting over how their putting out Betty Boop!).

TT on the other hand, apart from the few titles Sony asks them to release, at least appear to be picking films they themselves are fans of. Usually it's a "lost" CinemaScope title, or something starring Glenn Ford, Kim Novak, Jennifer Jones, James Coburn <insert other Hollywood staple here>, or it has a score they like.

Whatever is to be made of their opposing business models, it has always seemed to me like TT are the film fans trying to help some of their faves see the light of day again, whilst Olive come across as the "business".

[knives]

We're now not liking companies for releasing too many things? That seems ridiculous.

[EddieLarkin]

We're now not liking companies for releasing too many things? That seems ridiculous.

Too many things to the detriment of their overall output quality, I think makes sense, no?

And when I say quality I don't just mean presentation, but the sorts of films they choose to release. Who exactly is the audience for something like The Atomic Kid? Why does it need a really sub-par Blu-ray release?

Again, their criterion appears to be "We can release it so we will release it". It just seems a bit wasteful. How about dropping a couple of their really rubbish releases to spend the extra on a nice edition of The Big Combo instead, with new essays and a new interview/commentary? That is how Criterion became who they are today, not by shoveling out a hundred mostly sub par releases a year.

[domino harvey]

How dare a company release a lot of films with different audiences!

[matrixschmatrix]

A.) Olive's presumably making money on the 40,000 programmer John Wayne westerns they've put out, and nobody's getting screwed on the deal, so that seems fine, and B.) if they were more selective, they might not have gotten around to things like Cloak and Dagger or Strangers in the Night, so why would I complain about it?

The logic of 'they should do fewer movies with more effort' doesn't seem like it would apply unless the releases were actually subpar, which they very rarely are- as it is, they're every bit as good as Twilight Time's, 10x easier to order, and half the price or less. I was upset when they (allegedly) turned down a ready made Tag Gallagher supplement for Letter from an Unknown Woman, but for the most part, it's as though there were a version of Criterion putting out a dozen of the $30 price point releases a month. That's far from something to be unhappy about.

[knives]

Mickey Rooney fans I suppose. None of us here have any right to be the arbitrator of taste especially for when any reasonable algorithm to cull these releases could wind up hurting a baby (how do we know that the Ray isn't a worse seller than your example). This culling argument comes across especially silly when looking at how Olive does go above and beyond when it does count like with the Fords and Altman. Also considering what Olive is charging is basically in line with a bare bones Criterion release complaining via a comparison with them doesn't hold water. I wish they would allow extras (though my biggest concern is subtitles on english language films), but at least they are pricing in league with what they put out. In a lot of ways as a company I see them like Second Run and I'm sure they'd make an argument of business (primarily blind buys) similar to what they do. Now Second Run is a far better company given the allowance for removable subs and insistence on a booklet, but that doesn't make Olive shit either.

[EddieLarkin]

The Atomic Kid may not have been the best example, as evidently it was the films first digital format release. That's fair game in my book, regardless of a films quality.

Admittedly I have seen first hand more TT discs than Olive, and can speak to the quality level of the former company more than I can the latter. But from the reviews on Blu-ray.com, HTF and Robert Harris' comments, I do not get the best impression overall.

Can we all agree that their slipcovers are ridiculous? They're all too big for the cases and get crushed in shipping as a result. I chuck 'em.

And since unleashing the Republic catalogue they've delved even further into the auteurist depths than any of us could have ever hoped for - Lewis, Fregonese, Auer... the list goes on. This is programming by a dedicated psot auteruist who knwos and cares about classic American cinema. And their devotion to straight "B" catalogue programming like the Republic westerns is invaluable, no matter the director may be Edward Ludwig or whoever.

I'll try to look deeper into their catalogue David, perhaps I've missed out on a few key titles. They release so much I don't seem to be able to keep up!

[vsski]

The main thing I don't like about Olive is that their foreign titles have non-removable subs (1900 being the exception due to mutliple language tracks), but other than that, it is hard to argue with the breadth of output for the price point even if they have no extras (which I agree in some cases is a real shame, but frankly the movie for me is always the most important aspect). And while I wouldn't be surprised if many of their titles haven't sold more than 3000 copies either, at least they don't create a ridiculous scalper market.

[EddieLarkin]

I don't have the same problem with TTs pricing or having to use SAE as others do here, but even I am getting increasingly despondent of the limits being set now that the company is becoming more and more popular.

[Orlac]

Olive released Fire Maidens of Outer Space. That makes them gods on earth!

[HJackson]

but frankly the movie for me is always the most important aspect

I've never really understood the Cult of Extras. I would never turn them down, and sometimes they make a great product absolutely indispensable (MoC's The Lost Weekend is an obvious example), but when it comes down to it I'm there for the film. When I order a bluie of The Sun Shines Bright, it's because I want to see The Sun Shines Bright. If I want 'extras', I'll read Tag Gallagher or Joseph McBride.

[Gregory]

What if it's a film about which Gallagher and others have published nothing, and this release is one of the few chances that something like a visual essay would be presented?

[knives]

Then that's a misfortune that shows the imperfection of the model (though that really could be said even about some recent Criterion releases like Jubal).

[HJackson]

What if it's a film about which Gallagher and others have published nothing, and this release is one of the few chances that something like a visual essay would be presented?

If it's a film about which literally nothing has been published, I don't really see an extras-laden release coming from any quarters.