Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

TCM in danger? Warners launches streaming service for classic movies


yanceycravat
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is no April Fool Joke -

 

I;m surprised no one has posted this before. From CNN

 

h2. Netflix, Hulu and their rivals are locked in a constant battle to score new content. But classic movies and TV can get lost in the fray -- and Warner Bros. is launching a streaming service aimed at that niche.

 

For $10 per month, [Warner Archive Instant|http://instant.warnerarchive.com/] allows users to stream content from the 1920s through the 1990s. The catalog includes what the company says are "rare, hard-to-find" TV shows and movies from Warner Bros., MGM, RKO and Allied Artists. Offerings include a 1921 adaptation of "The Scarlet Letter" and 1991's "Until the End of the World" with William Hurt.

 

 

The monthly price tag is $2 more than both Netflix ([NFLX|http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=NFLX&source=story_quote_link]) and Hulu Plus. But Warner Bros., which is owned by CNNMoney parent company Time Warner ([TWX|http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=TWX&source=story_quote_link], [Fortune 500|http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/snapshots/10472.html?iid=EL]), is promoting the rarity of its catalog as its selling point. Warner Archive Instant's FAQ page refers many times to "other streaming services" lacking its classic titles.

 

 

Archive Instant features only 122 titles at launch, but Warner Bros. says new content will be "regularly added." The service also lacks compatibility with most devices at launch. Archive Instant users can stream via the website, but the service works with only one connected-TV device: Roku.

 

 

Only Roku users will be able to stream the high-definition versions of the handful of titles with that option. The Web version of Archive Instant won't stream in HD.

 

 

Archive Instant will also feature monthly streaming movie or TV marathons built around a common theme or interest. bug.gif[ |http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/03/technology/warner-bros-archive-instant/?source=cnn_bin#TOP]

 

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/03/technology/warner-bros-archive-instant/?source=cnn_bin

 

Yancey

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the notice from them yesterday and checked out the available items - it took all of a few seconds. I may use the trial period to watch some old TV episodes, but there's no way that I'm paying the freight until they have at least 1,000 available titles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with clore,the abysmal lack of content makes $10 bucks/mo. too expensive for the service at this point.But given WB's HUGE library,in addition to titles from MGM,RKO,and AA,this service could turn into a goldmine for rare and forgotten movies.

 

There used to be a lot of really good movies on tv in the late 50's,60's,and 70's that just disappeared over time and haven't been shown on tv in many years,nor did they make it to DVD,and am 'hoping' that some of those old movies eventually show up on WB's streaming service. B-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read in another forum about one of those who had been a beta tester for the past few months for the Instant Archive. He couldn't believe that the content had not changed at all from the test period for which he wasn't paying a fee.

 

I think they're going to find out that they need to bulk up pronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=clore wrote:H}{quote}e couldn't believe that the content had not changed at all from the test period for which he wasn't paying a fee.

>

> I think they're going to find out that they need to bulk up pronto.

>

I read a post in another forum that WB has recently been making deals with Netflix and Amazon to show their movies.The poster's concern is that the service WB is offering to Roku is nothing more than the titles the other services don't want. IOW....WB's throw-away's. ]:) I sincerely hope the poster is wrong!!!!

 

Another poster who is trying out his 2 wk.free trial,and watching on his PC says that all 20 movies he's watched...ALL OF THEM,have displayed a problem with the video stream.He says the timing is off,and the movement of people and objects looks un-natural.I know what he means,i've seen that myself and it's Really annoying!! ]:)

WB better straighten THAT problem out real quick or they'll have a lot of P***** OFF customers!!

He had other critisizims of the video quality too,over compression was one.I don't remember the others.He says he's been in contact with WB relating his problems and they're listening and seem to be concerned.I hope so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

123 titles will not get WB 10 bucks a month from anybody.

However, if Warner Bros. were to put their entire catalog that is more than 10 years old in a subscription service at that price, and manage to sign on Columbia, Sam Goldwyn Company films, and Universal - all of the companies for which they have distribution rights for their classic films - this would be something that could eventually replace TCM.

 

Just think - you could "build your own TCM". The people who want to watch the more modern stuff can. Those of us who prefer the studio system era can watch only the old stuff. What would be lost is the sense of community - that others are watching what you are watching.

 

Right now my husband and I have Netflix streaming. 8 bucks a month and we can see great older and newer shows, mini-series we haven't seen in years, etc. We're both always saying that it is just like cable when it first appeared in our youth - no commercials , no shamwows, no reality TV, just pick your genre and watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also ruins the usefulness of curation. Streaming isn't necessarily a bad thing as an extra option but we're moving into a system that is only "watch what you want, when you want, and only what you want...f*** everything else!" It makes it that much easier for people to wrap themselves up in a very limited range of content.

 

The whole system will further marginalize anything that isn't popular - it might be available (although the selection out there doesn't leave me optimistic) but no one is going to know about it other than people who already know and that number will continually diminish, even faster than it currently is.

 

(And, naturally, I'm against any system that will lead to the end of my right to purchase and own the things that I appreciate and use at my own disposal.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=JonasEB wrote:}{quote}It also ruins the usefulness of curation. Streaming isn't necessarily a bad thing as an extra option but we're moving into a system that is only "watch what you want, when you want, and only what you want...f*** everything else!" It makes it that much easier for people to wrap themselves up in a very limited range of content.

>

> The whole system will further marginalize anything that isn't popular - it might be available (although the selection out there doesn't leave me optimistic) but no one is going to know about it other than people who already know and that number will continually diminish, even faster than it currently is.

>

>

> (And, naturally, I'm against any system that will lead to the end of my right to purchase and own the things that I appreciate and use at my own disposal.)

>

I too like to hold the media in my hot little hands and know it's mine forever, I wouldn't want streaming to replace that, but with Amazon Prime and Netflix and now Warner Archive starting a streaming service, that may be what it's coming to whether I like it or not.

 

About the system marginalizing anything that is not popular, well cable pretty much has hollowed out any diversity in programming over the last 5-10 years anyways. All the channels are paid programming at night and even part of the day, anything made before 1995-2000 is considered too old to bother with, and then there are sports and reality TV and that's about it. If TCM were to go away or change format I'd cancel my Directv and go strictly streaming since TCM is the only channel where I can do anything close to exploration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=calvinnme wrote:}{quote}About the system marginalizing anything that is not popular, well cable pretty much has hollowed out any diversity in programming over the last 5-10 years anyways.

That's true. The Turner networks in the 90s were among the best examples of what could be done with television. Especially TCM and Cartoon Network - channels with unique identities that preserved important parts of America's film culture (alas, one is dead but thankfully we still have the other.)

 

But it's all over. Now every other channel is just a clone of the last. Corporate buy-outs and assimilation have seen to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=calvinnme wrote:

> }{quote} I too like to hold the media in my hot little hands and know it's mine forever, I wouldn't want streaming to replace that, but with Amazon Prime and Netflix and now Warner Archive starting a streaming service, that may be what it's coming to whether I like it or not.

Streaming doesn't replace your ability to hold the media in your hot little hands.You can still buy/record movies just like you always have.

It's just a change in how you access your tv/movie viewing.

Probably the biggest reason people are moving to streaming is cuz cable/sat. has become too expensive for many people,partly because of the nearly incessant price increases that cable/sat.demand,and because people just don't have the money we used to have because of the economic depression we've been in for the past 5 yrs.

Streaming is very cheap.My monthly bill for streaming is $8 bucks/mo.for Netflix.Add a coupla bucks if i rent a movie from Vudu or Amazon.I have ~30 channels programmed into my Roku player,and they're all free and there's a ton of good content there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have all sorts of channels built into my Smart Tv and my new BluRay player and have yet to check out any of them. I figure that there will be time for that once I give up cable.

 

Last night was a reminder of why I'm looking to give up the cord. I was recording NOWHERE TO GO while watching it. The reason I was watching it is because too many times while recording a late night film, I end up with an on-screen message between 2-3am telling me to push any button within the next 60 seconds if I wish to continue watching the channel.

 

Well, if I'm not attending the machine, I'll end up with blank screen. That didn't happen last night, nor did I get the emergency broadcast screech. Instead, the cable box rebooted itself halfway through the film and as the process is a lengthy one, I now have 12 minutes of blank screen where I should have a movie.

 

Murphy's Law I suppose, such things seem to happen more when I want to save something than when I'm just watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote}Last night was a reminder of why I'm looking to give up the cord. I was recording NOWHERE TO GO while watching it. The reason I was watching it is because too many times while recording a late night film, I end up with an on-screen message betwen 2-3am telling me to push any button within the next 60 seconds if I wish to continue watching the channel.

> Well, if I'm not attending the machine, I'll end up with blank screen.

LOLOL!!! I must have had that very same thing happen to me a hundred times when i had Dish.It used to P*** me OFF to wake up in the morning,check the recording i (thought) i made overnight only to find that i had recorded the beginning of the movie,the rest of the recording being the Dish logo floating around the tv screen.What a bummer!! ]:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=jr33928 wrote:}{quote}

> > {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote}Last night was a reminder of why I'm looking to give up the cord. I was recording NOWHERE TO GO while watching it. The reason I was watching it is because too many times while recording a late night film, I end up with an on-screen message betwen 2-3am telling me to push any button within the next 60 seconds if I wish to continue watching the channel.

> > Well, if I'm not attending the machine, I'll end up with blank screen.

> LOLOL!!! I must have had that very same thing happen to me a hundred times when i had Dish.It used to P*** me OFF to wake up in the morning,check the recording i (thought) i made overnight only to find that i had recorded the beginning of the movie,the rest of the recording being the Dish logo floating around the tv screen.What a bummer!! ]:)

This has nothing to do with errant cable boxes, but I had a movie not record because my Directv dish, perched high on my three story house, became completely covered in slushy snow Sunday Night/Monday morning. This is a freak event in Fredericksburg to have snow on March 25. The movie that the snowstorm destroyed??? The ironically titled "Spring Is Here". Aaaaaaargh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=BigFanOfClassics wrote:}{quote}I must be very old-fashioned. I have no idea what's meant by "streaming".

>

> I like my VHS, DVD, and TV set.

>

I love the way nobody bothered to respond to this person's post and explain to them what "streaming" means.

 

"BigFanOfClassics", I am not the best person to explain "streaming" to you, since I barely know what it is myself, and have never used it. But I believe it has something to do with watching something straight from the internet, either on your computer or somehow directed from your internet receptor to your tv screen. Here's a more detailed explanation of what it is, on good ol' Wiki:

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_media

 

 

But I agree with the second statement in your post.

 

ps: The word "streaming" always reminds me of someone with a runny nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> > {quote:title=BigFanOfClassics wrote:}{quote}I must be very old-fashioned. I have no idea what's meant by "streaming".

> >

> > I like my VHS, DVD, and TV set.

> >

> I love the way nobody bothered to respond to this person's post and explain what "streaming" is to them.

>

> "BigFanOfClassics", I am not the best person to explain "streaming" to you, since I barely know what it is myself, and have never used it. But I believe it has something to do with watching something straight from the internet, either on your computer or somehow directed from your internet receptor to your tv screen. Here's a more detailed explanation of what it is, on good ol' Wiki:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_media

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> But I agree with the second statement in your post.

>

>

>

>

>

> ps: The word "streaming" always reminds me of someone with a runny nose.

>

MissWonderly and BigFanOfClassics,if you have ever watched a YT video on your computer then you have streamed.A streaming video player like a Roku is a simple device that when connected to the internet allows you to watch tv from online sources carried by Roku through your tv set.But it's diff.than watching tv by cable/sat.cuz the channels are diff.The "channels" or "apps" i have programmed into my Roku are usually developed by private people or "developers"The new Warner Archive Instant channel is developed by Warner.These "channels" may carry any manner of content from various sources.Some "channels" carry many sub-channels within the main channel.

At this time most channels are free,but there are some pay channels too.With a Roku you can find any topic under the sun,you name the subject and there'll be at least one channel covering it,but there's usually more than one channel for any given subject.For instance,there are more than 150 channels covering religion.I probably have 30 channels covering the topic of cooking.There are exersize channels,channels for gun owners,nature channels,political channels foreign news channels like Al jazeera(English language)RT(Russian tv English language)....there's even a channel that caters to homosexuals and their lifestyle.You name the subject and you can stream it with a Roku.

But the most popular reason for streaming is for movies.Movies,movies everywhere,and most are free.

 

BigFanOfClassics i like my DVD player and tv set too.You don't have to give them up.Streaming off the internet through a device like a Roku streaming media player doesn't negate the need for a tv set,just the opposite cuz you'll need it to watch your stuff.With a streaming media player you don't need to use your computer,all content is delivered directly to your tv via the internet connected media player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating stuff.

 

So one buys a Roku box - $49.99-$99.99 - and then that's it? Or are there monthly fees?

 

And is it idiot proof? For those of us who still haven't connected our laptops to our televisions, I mean.

 

The idea of competition for the overpriced arrogant cable companies is a joy to ponder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=willbefree25 wrote:}{quote}Fascinating stuff.

>

> So one buys a Roku box - $49.99-$99.99 - and then that's it? Or are there monthly fees?

>

> And is it idiot proof? For those of us who still haven't connected our laptops to our televisions, I mean.

>

> The idea of competition for the overpriced arrogant cable companies is a joy to ponder.

Yes,that's all you do.Choose which model you want.The Roku 3 just came out~3wks.ago.Unfortunately they eliminated the analog jack and HDMI is the sole output,so if you have an older tv w/o an HDMI port you'll want to buy one of their older models. I own a Roku 2XS,it's the next latest model.It has an analog jack so it's compatible with older tv's.

Roku handles resolutions from 480i-1080p.

Roku players are probably the easiest media player around.Not TOTALLY idiot-proof...but close.

And you don't connect your laptop to a Roku.You connect it either wired(R2XS only) or wireless(all models)to the internet,then connect the Roku either thru an AVR(for great DD+)or directly to your tv using either the HDMI or analog connections.There are NO monthly fees,most channels are free.There are pay channels but YOU CHOOSE whether to buy/pay for them.I pay $8 bucks.mo.for Netflix,Vudu and Amazon are VOD.I paid for one channel,it was a lifetime sub.,it cost $1.99!!!! :^0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with a Roku, can you do the following:

 

1. Have it stream onto your large screen TV?

 

2. Be able to get TCM on it?

 

3. And with a DVD recorder, record DVDs (not just record onto a DVR) just as you can with a TV with a cable contract today?

 

4. All without paying FIOS or a cable or satellite company?

 

That almost sounds too good to be true, but then again, so did TCM and DVD recorders not that long ago.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> This is a freak event in Fredericksburg to have snow on March 25. The movie that the snowstorm destroyed??? The ironically titled "Spring Is Here". Aaaaaaargh.

 

You didn't miss much. I recorded it the last time it was on back in 2006 or so, and it was so boring I fast-forwarded through the musical numbers!

 

I don't think they've run *Tanned Legs* (which I recorded the same morning) since then, either. At least that one had some legs and Dagwood Bumstead. (On the other hand, the last time they had a tribute to Lake earlier this year, they showed some different not-particularly-good movies.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...