Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
CinemaInternational

RIP 20th Century Fox

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, TopBilled said:

Not sure what you mean by sputnik design...care to elaborate?

See above posts, in particular the first image posted by Gershwin Fan.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I'm sincerely interested in what is driving these negative views?   What is there to be afraid of?

 

Just look at what AT&T has done to the pricing at Direct TV Now. Prices start at $50/month. All the way up to $135/month. They seem to think dropping in HBO or Cinemax is worth paying for.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Michael Rennie said:

Just look at what AT&T has done to the pricing at Direct TV Now. Prices start at $50/month. All the way up to $135/month. They seem to think dropping in HBO or Cinemax is worth paying for.

I could see why they wouldn't want to lowball themselves in other markets/divisions.  The temptation is there, given the Netflix model, but they are looking at long term sustainability.  In the end they don't want to have another flash in the pan overvalued dot com company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gershwin fan said:

The old logo looks pretty futuristic for its day.

universal-centennial-1940s-logo_rgb-2-cu

and the accompanying music was and is still terrific.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Michael Rennie said:

Just look at what AT&T has done to the pricing at Direct TV Now. Prices start at $50/month. All the way up to $135/month. They seem to think dropping in HBO or Cinemax is worth paying for.

It appears one concern you have is that Disney will increase the cost to lease 'golden era' Fox films and this will lead to less access for us consumers.     But if the overall concern of these takeovers is corporate greed,  it wouldn't be wise for Disney to raise the cost 'to high',  to where they end up making less revenue because less networks are leasing their products.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sgt_Markoff said:

Good observation. Few people recall the first dot com bubble that busted, these days.

Some do--
Bubbles happen when people overreact that something NEW and NEATO! they absolutely don't understand, but that Those Young Kids Are Into, will officially become "the Future" that will sooner or later replace every industry it touches, and even if you don't understand what you're buying, some expert in the field has been all over CNBC explaining why it's Too Big To Fail.  The folks who dove into "Self-driving cars!" last year, "Bitcoin!" the year before, and "Alibaba!" the year before that are now looking at "New applications for AI!"...Whatever those are.

And BION, eight years after Comcast/NBC/Universal decided to become a "media giant", and everyone first started cancelling their [censored] [censored]in' cable-bundle subscriptions that Comcast could wrap up tightly in a [censored] [censored] and [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored][censored]  😈, those same gullible investors are now wondering whether "Hey...This company says they're starting a new streaming service!  This could be a hot area for startups!"

😓

Which brings us back to Disney and Fox, and why everyone went nutso over Filmstruck, just to thumb their nose at Netflix and Amazon:  The more that real movies disappear off the third-party ex-00's startup services, because the studios became too guarded of their movie libraries, starved the third-parties out and forced them to fend for themselves with foreign "Originals", the more that streaming is going to become a Game of Studios, with Warner and Universal competing against the mighty Disney/Fox for their libraries' share of the streaming-scape...For movie fans, Winter Is Coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Which brings us back to Disney and Fox, and why everyone went nutso over Filmstruck, just to thumb their nose at Netflix and Amazon:  The more that real movies disappear off the third-party ex-00's startup services, because the studios became too guarded of their movie libraries, starved the third-parties out and forced them to fend for themselves with foreign "Originals", the more that streaming is going to become a Game of Studios, with Warner and Universal competing against the mighty Disney/Fox for their libraries' share of the streaming-scape...For movie fans, Winter Is Coming.

Ah,   I get it;  yea,  spring is here but it is getting colder! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Fox's opening logo in 1940:

 

In the CinemaScope era, the 0 was always tiled on its side (made it look like an olive). This applied to almost all Fox films from late 1953 through the late 60s except the Todd-AO spectaculars (Sound of Music, Can-Can, The Agony and the Ecstasy, Cleopatra etc.). And the tilted 0 version continued through the 80s after that, although it was in tandem with a regular version in the 80s.
GW361H143

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

In the CinemaScope era, the 0 was always tiled on its side (made it look like an olive). This applied to almost all Fox films from late 1953 through the late 60s except the Todd-AO spectaculars (Sound of Music, Can-Can, The Agony and the Ecstasy, Cleopatra etc.). And the tilted 0 version continued through the 80s after that, although it was in tandem with a regular version in the 80s.
GW361H143

Is there a reason for the tilted 'O'...? Just an attempt to be a bit more stylized, maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TopBilled said:

Is there a reason for the tilted 'O'...? Just an attempt to be a bit more stylized, maybe?

According to what I see here on a website all about movie logos, it was done to "widen" the logo up for the new aspect ratio of widescreen. But as we see here, there is a lot of blue space on both sides of the sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CinemaInternational said:

According to what I see here on a website all about movie logos, it was done to "widen" the logo up for the new aspect ratio of widescreen. But as we see here, there is a lot of blue space on both sides of the sign.

Yes. They should have stretched the text out, or used a larger font in order to help fill in those side margins.

We should point out that some CinemaScope films were in black-and-white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TopBilled said:

Yes. They should have stretched the text out, or used a larger font in order to help fill in those side margins.

Some films in the  late 60s and 70s that were in regular 1.85 widescreen (as opposed to Panavision at 2.4 widescreen) often had it zoomed in so that the logo almost completely filled up the screen.

 GW243H142

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TopBilled said:

We should point out that some CinemaScope films were in black-and-white.

Indeed. Some of the most famous examples include Zorba the Greek, Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte, The Diary of Anne Frank, The Longest Day, The Hustler, Compulsion, The Three Faces of Eve, and The Innocents.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CinemaInternational said:

Indeed. Some of the most famous examples include Zorba the Greek, Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte, The Diary of Anne Frank, The Longest Day, The Hustler, Compulsion, The Three Faces of Eve, and The Innocents.

THE LAND UNKNOWN (1957)

:D

    Image result for the land unknown 1957   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

    

I'm sincerely interested in what is driving these negative views?   What is there to be afraid of?

 

A lot of people simply don't want or are afraid of change. Sure, sometimes change can be bad, but many times it's better. The way I see it, change is going to happen of regardless of what we want, so let's just see where it takes us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Michael Rennie said:

It is unfortunate the movies we watch on TCM, all depends on fees. I suspect the movies we see the most are the most affordable ones. I've heard others here say, "No TCM won't play that. It would cost too much."

Keep in mind they are rental "packages" with a few A list titles grouped with several Bs and a few stinkers. One of the most expensive "packages" is whatever one includes CASABLANCA, which is why it's not shown very often. Who knows what else is bundled in that package?

I think what most of us are worried about this merger is:

Movie studios moving further away from being owned by movie makers who have personal input (with some integrity) on a project.

Oversaturation of some classic movies & crass exploitation of iconic stars like the aforementioned stormtroopers in princess parades/ MM&MM artwork/ Shirley Temple examples.

And most importantly, discounting all the old classic films they now own, keeping them hidden away or only available at a high cost (ie via subscribing to their premium channels or "on demand" DVD burns)

All of this is due to a very big "disconnect" huge conglomerates have with real people. This really undermines our humanity and our cultural arts. Funny, Louis B Mayer, Jack Warner, Carl Laemmle and all the moguls could own entire movie studios, yet still have an opinion, a hand in movie making decisions.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

 

And most importantly, discounting all the old classic films they now own, keeping them hidden away or only available at a high cost (ie via subscribing to their premium channels or "on demand" DVD burns)

All of this is due to a very big "disconnect" huge conglomerates have with real people. This really undermines our humanity and our cultural arts. Funny, Louis B Mayer, Jack Warner, Carl Laemmle and all the moguls could own entire movie studios, yet still have an opinion, a hand in movie making decisions.

Disney was always very strategic about releasing their films to home video, both VHS and DVD. Major releases, such as the great animated features, were released for a limited time and then withdrawn, signaling to parents that unless they wanted to endure the wrath of their kids they should buy it NOW. That whole model has changed since those days, but I bet Disney will still find ways to put an element of suspense into their releasing strategy, keeping the primo stuff in the "Vault", so that each one they let out temporarily becomes an event. I'm not exactly sure how that would transfer to the Fox catalog, except to note that they can now shelve the Star Wars movies whenever they feel like it, waiting for a new generation with a pent-up demand. I'd been thinking Disney may have been after Shirley Temple, but now I'm realizing that after securing the right to make future Star Wars films, they now get the old ones too. Speaking of Shirley, any bets that we'll still be able to see black-and-white Shirley? Black and white seems to be anathema to so many young people now that I'd be willing to bet it will be colorized Shirley all the way. And will Miracle on 34th St. be hoarded even more than it is now?

I'm hoping that the general bias against "old" anything, including films, would encourage Disney to make the old Fox films easily accessible to their dwindling audience (us), because otherwise they don't have many options for profiting from them. Disney will need us because we're the ones who put a value on what they have.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disney Shuts Down Fox 2000 Division

disney-shuts-down-fox-2000-division-696x

In a surprise decision in the immediate wake of its acquisition of 20th Century Fox, Disney Studios is shutting down the Fox 2000 division.

The group has championed mid-range releases and underserved demographics, and indications were it was going to remain intact after the merger even if its content was likely to be shuffled more towards Disney+ and Hulu.

The division has also produced numerous critical and/or commercial hits in recent years including “Hidden Figures,” “Life of Pi,” “The Fault in Our Stars,” “Love, Simon,” and “The Hate U Give”.

Joe Wright’s “The Woman in the Window” starring Amy Adams and Gary Oldman will be the final film released by the label when it arrives in cinemas in October. The news follows a day of departures at Fox as numerous execs have been given their marching orders.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/disney-shuts-down-fox-2000-division/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LawrenceA said:

Disney Shuts Down Fox 2000 Division

disney-shuts-down-fox-2000-division-696x

In a surprise decision in the immediate wake of its acquisition of 20th Century Fox, Disney Studios is shutting down the Fox 2000 division.

The group has championed mid-range releases and underserved demographics, and indications were it was going to remain intact after the merger even if its content was likely to be shuffled more towards Disney+ and Hulu.

The division has also produced numerous critical and/or commercial hits in recent years including “Hidden Figures,” “Life of Pi,” “The Fault in Our Stars,” “Love, Simon,” and “The Hate U Give”.

Joe Wright’s “The Woman in the Window” starring Amy Adams and Gary Oldman will be the final film released by the label when it arrives in cinemas in October. The news follows a day of departures at Fox as numerous execs have been given their marching orders.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/disney-shuts-down-fox-2000-division/

In many ways, Fox 2000 was the main reason why the main branch of Fox had renewed energy in the last few years. it's a nasty blow to thoughtful major-studio moviemaking. This is really bad news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2019 at 3:33 PM, CinemaInternational said:

In the CinemaScope era, the 0 was always tiled on its side (made it look like an olive). This applied to almost all Fox films from late 1953 through the late 60s except the Todd-AO spectaculars (Sound of Music, Can-Can, The Agony and the Ecstasy, Cleopatra etc.). And the tilted 0 version continued through the 80s after that, although it was in tandem with a regular version in the 80s.
GW361H143

Little known fact:

The tilting of the zero in the later 20th Century Fox logos was actually the result of a seismic tremor registering 4.8 on the Richter Scale that rolled through the studio lot on October 29th, 1953.

(...see?!...told ya this was little known, didn't I?!)

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...