"Thats The Way It Is" 2-disc=Crap edition.

I was able to lend 4 of the new dvds from a friend who bought them all.....he didnt get Tickle me,not released in europe?
Anyway just watching TTWII edition as we speak and must say the quality is even worse than I imagined. (regarding outtakes)
Picture is no better than the bootlegs that was offered 2 years ago.....in fact bootleg had at least stereo sound.
I`ll take back what I said earlier......now I wont even buy this when it hits sale bin.
Jailhouse rock release rocks though....highly recommended.
Personally I will wait and buy the blu-ray version in september.

(...)
Anyway just watching TTWII edition as we speak and must say the quality is even worse than I imagined. (regarding outtakes)(...)

What is the quality of the original movie like? Is it actually better than the VHS version?

KingElvis,

Good choice on waiting for the Blu-Ray version of Jailhouse Rock. It will be the best-ever release of this film no doubt.

Jovan;

The quality is better than the old VHS version, but its still far from what would could be considered a quality product. The original version of TTWWI deserves much better than this and there is NO excuse not to have re-stored both sound and picture on this.

Just ask Matthew, he´ll give you plenty of excuses why...


Sincerely MB280E

Here up in the North of Europe...We get the 2 discs in truely 5:1 stereo. Plus more unreleased stuff!

Just ask Matthew, he´ll give you plenty of excuses why...


Sincerely MB280E

The astute will read my posts and notice I have given reasons why this release appears as it does. How many more times to I need to write that the original TTWII is in mono, there isn't a stereo version and thus it would need to be created. Do you think this is a simple, non-time consuming and cost effective task?

Now where did I put my torch and pitchfork......

Please note that all links point to posts in this thread.

I have not purchased the new DVD set so I base this post solely on the provided information, but there is no denying that this release of the films is the best yet. Never before have we gotten the original film and the 2001 “special edition” (SE) in one package, with bonus footage to boot. There is no point in history when consumers new to this material were better served. This is fact. That having been said, the grumbling is both expected and justified because consumers are once again getting the absolute minimum and only the smallest of enticements to buy this material again. Once again, fans are expected to be satisfied with compromise in one way or another to get (some of) what they want. That is the great injustice being done here.

Consider, for example, that the bonus footage listed here was already printed on the inside flap of the SE set but not included on the disc. Yes, it’s great that we are finally getting this material – the justification for the complaints is that we didn’t get this material seven years ago, on the actual anniversary of the material. To now find that this material is apparently in inferior quality is another justified reason to complain. (But not necessarily that there are only twelve out of dozens upon dozens of bonus selections.) Another justified reason is the fact that the SE cover lists “Little Sister/Get Back,” “Hey Jude,” and “Something” when the 2007 print apparently does not include these performances. As Pete Dube points out here, there is more material available, already edited for mass-release and lying in the vaults that is not included here. Should this material have been included? Maybe, maybe not – but it would at least justify a tag like “Special Edition” when, in reality, this is a “value pack” of two previous releases, one a decade old. As Cryogenic points out, this is an effort to “cash in” on the anniversary, and is not the gift we were supposed to get excited about. People are not just complaining about an inferior product – they are also complaining that they’ll be asked to purchase a slightly less inferior product in future, ad infinitum. Furthermore, I agree with RKSNASHVILLE that consumers are essentially being “held hostage” – or perhaps, being blackmailed is a better word – since several sources have already stated that the sales of one product will determine the fate of future products. The “poor” sales of the SE are supposedly to blame for lack of other product since.

Elvissessions.com states here that fans are satisfied with bootlegs that are “crap copies with crap video and crap sound” whilst complaining about “cleaned-up” legitimate releases, but this is not a fair comparison. Fans ignore the “crap” quality of the bootlegs because that is the concession to make for illegal releases. Warner Brothers (WB) has the original negatives and the facilities and the budget to make this material “the best quality we've ever seen” so the report that this is not the case (DJL described some of the outtakes as “somewhat difficult to see”; “shockingly bad,” says Jeff d; “no better than the bootlegs,” says KingElvis) is a legitimate, justified reason for complaint. The bar is far higher. And, as Cryogenic points out, this is not a case of unrealistic expectations: WB simply “cannot be bothered to significantly improve on bootlegs.” That is a justified reason to complain. This is, in Matthew’s words, “just another release in their schedule.” He states that “not a great deal was done with the original ‘Star Wars’ movies when they were tacked onto the recent 2 disc releases of the Special Edition DVDs” – but I don’t see this as any sort of defense of Warner’s actions. I am far from a fan of the Star Wars movies, but when I saw the original prints on DVD after having watched the remastered films, I was appalled at the poor quality – and I am only marginally interested. To then suggest that the original film “becomes obsolete to anyone other than the passionate Elvis fan” is ludicrous because this would mean that all remakes are more valuable than the originals. That’s Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (1967) out, I’m afraid – after all, we have Guess Who (2005) now. Having a respectable print of the original should not be a “bonus,” as Matthew puts it and remakes do not “replace” originals.

I don't think the big conglomerates pay much attention to us, the fringe fanboys.

And who can blame them? It's the same with the hardcore fans of every musician, film, etc. NOTHING is every good enough.

I'm sure my wish list is as long as everyone else's (multi-angle capability, please. mixing board function to isolate audio tracks, please. three dozen commentary tracks -- at least -- please.)

But let's step back and look at it.

It is unfair to say that “nothing is ever good enough.” Certainly hardcore fans want more than they are likely to get, but firms should acknowledge that there is a certain baseline quality that should go into a product, and if the product is consistently sub par, then the complaints are consistently justified. Your analysis of events (below) is misleading and inaccurate, not least of all because you only mention that people complained and don’t mention the actual complaints.

1.
US: We want a recut, updated, revised, refreshed version with new added material. This is a screen classic that deserves special attention.
THEM: OK, here you go.
US: BOO!!! (long list of complaints follows.) We won't buy this piece of crap.

The only complaint about the SE DVD that justifies not buying it is that it didn’t have the hour-long set of extras that were announced – presumably grumbling fans were aware that a future edition of the DVD would include this footage, and they didn’t want to purchase the film twice. Enter this new edition…

2.
US: This is a classic film, it shouldn't be recut, we want the original version on DVD. NOW, please.
THEM: Ummmmm, but you said ... Oh, OK, here you go.
US: BOOOO!!!! (cue complaints.) Who wants this crap; we're not buying it -- maybe we'll find a cutout copy later. And anyway, we already have the special edition, so who needs it anyway.

As far as I know, this never happened. The original was released on DVD in 1997, not after the SE was released. The original DVD was not remastered and the sound, despite the notice on the case, was only in mono.

3.
US: We want more outtakes, more new material, more added footage. NOW! DVD. Gimme!
THEM: Sigh, we know where this is headed, but OK, here you go.
US: BOOO!!!!! (fresh complaints and cries that they never listen to us and they never give us what we want.) We absolutely refuse to buy this and we're going to come to your house and kill your dog. Then we'll go back home and watch our bootleg copies of all the outtakes anyway, so take your cleaned-up straight-from-the-masters versions and shove 'em.

What DVD are you referring to here? This never happened.

4.
US: We want all of the above -- everything all at once -- in one package and we want it to cost less than the average nuclear family pays at McDonald's for a trip through the drive-through.
THEM: You're shitting us, right? Fine, OK. Let's see how we can work the math on this thing. .... OK, here you go, happy now?
US: BOO!!! Never, never, never. Absolutely we will not have any part of this.

But at this point, fans have already purchased the original DVD, the new DVD without the bonus footage, and are now expected to buy the unchanged original DVD, the unchanged new DVD, and the bonus features they were promised six years ago. By your reasoning, fans should have been satisfied if only a small part of the catalogue had been issued on CD in the Eighties, which would have garnered complaints from the fan base. “At least you get something,” you’d say, “the interest in this material is marginal.” Then the entire original catalogue would have been issued in electronically reprocessed stereo, which would have garnered complaints from the fan base. “At least you have it all now,” you’d say, “isn’t this what you want?” Then they’d re-release it in mono, which would have garnered complaints from the fan base. “But you didn’t want it in reprocessed stereo,” you’d say, “you guys are never satisfied!” There is a baseline level of quality that their product should meet, and until this is done, complaints are to be expected. Only after this baseline has been met (i.e., a respectable image- and sound-quality by current standards) can further complaints be considered nitpicking (i.e., DTS over Dolby 5.1). Price is not the issue here. (As for the price thing, not every country is selling this release for $14, either. Amazon.co.uk and Play.com, for example [known for their respectable prices], are both asking $26. Multiply by three when you consider the double double-dip – and that’s just on DVD.)

As a separate point, the bonus songs are being labeled “outtakes,” but this is unfair to the material. True, the footage didn’t make it into the final cut of the film, but let’s not forget that these are merely filmed performances of a live artist. The songs that didn’t make it into the film were not “outtakes” to the people in the audience. None of the filmed live performances is B-grade material, so elvislennon’s statement that “the general public doesn't want to see Elvis over and over singing nearly the same songs over and over” is misleading. Not only are they not forced to watch the bonus footage, but there are numerous performances not in either film (“There Goes My Everything,” “Make the World Go Away,” “Don't Cry Daddy,” etc.) and the reason to purchase these films in the first place is to watch Elvis perform.

As I said at the beginning, this is the best release of this material yet. But there are numerous, fully justified reasons to complain about a product that could have been significantly better, especially when one considers that this is WB’s third effort on DVD. What we are getting now could have been released back in 1997, and should have been released in 2000 alongside the CD set. That this didn’t happen isn’t hardcore fans’ insatiability; it is the result of cashing in on fans’ thirst for new material and loyalty to the artist.

Matthew’s words, “just another release in their schedule.” He states that “not a great deal was done with the original ‘Star Wars’ movies when they were tacked onto the recent 2 disc releases of the Special Edition DVDs” – but I don’t see this as any sort of defense of Warner’s actions. I am far from a fan of the Star Wars movies, but when I saw the original prints on DVD after having watched the remastered films, I was appalled at the poor quality – and I am only marginally interested. To then suggest that the original film “becomes obsolete to anyone other than the passionate Elvis fan” is ludicrous because this would mean that all remakes are more valuable than the originals. That’s Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (1967) out, I’m afraid – after all, we have Guess Who (2005) now. Having a respectable print of the original should not be a “bonus,” as Matthew puts it and remakes do not “replace” originals.

Firstly your reference to “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” and “Guess Who” is in error, these are two separately filmed movies. This is not an example of a movie having its original elements revisited in a effort to improve the quality of flow, visuals, and sound.

Now on with the show: Perhaps I haven't made my position clear. My point has been all along that this release has no greater importance to MGM than any other catalogue movie. I used "Star Wars" as an example of a world renowned movie franchise that despite its importance not a great deal of time, money, and effort was spent on restoring the original movie versions to a greater quality. Indeed, George Locus had previously stated when the Special Editions came out that these are the movies, "there are no original versions".

My comment that the original TTWII becomes obsolete was probably not clear enough; I was merely trying to establish a point that as far as MGM are concerned their true TTWII is the Special Edition created in 2000. The original version therefore to them is of little importance beyond being used as a bonus feature on this DVD. I have never once stated that the original TTWII should only be used as a bonus feature, only reasoned why it has been.

With regards to your comment that this would mean all remakes are more valuable than their originals is rather a blanket statement and one that I most certainly never made. My remarks clearly have been in reference to TTWII, a rather (and I sorry if this offends anyone but this is a reality check here) unimportant movie in the grand scheme of things as far as MGM and indeed the greater movie world are concerned. I would go as far to say that we as fans were really rather fortunate that a restoration was green lit as all back in 2000! This further compounds my point above.

Cue flaming that I'm not a true Elvis fan and all that playground malarkey. As a fan I would welcome with opens arms an official multidisc experience of TTWII, as a realist I never once expected this to happen so therefore am not disappointed that it hasn’t.

Firstly your reference to “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” and “Guess Who” is in error, these are two separately filmed movies. This is not an example of a movie having its original elements revisited in a effort to improve the quality of flow, visuals, and sound.

But where do you draw the line between what is an original element worth preserving and what is not? You could easily make the argument that the 2005 remake is an “effort to improve the quality of flow, visuals, and sound” for modern audiences – perhaps even more so. That doesn’t justify not remastering the original for DVD. Once a movie has been released it effectively becomes public domain and the audience should be able to enjoy it at all times in future.

Now on with the show: Perhaps I haven't made my position clear. My point has been all along that this release has no greater importance to MGM than any other catalogue movie.

But you say this as if all catalogue movies get this kind of poor treatment. And you make it sound as if all movies that have “no greater importance to MGM” don’t merit a quality product. Furthermore, aren’t these re-prints supposed to be expensive? Isn’t that why we can’t keep Elvis Is Back! in stores? That’s another reason to complain: these back-and-forth arguments presented by these companies about why fans can’t get what they want. We supposedly can’t get On Tour on DVD because it doesn’t sell well, but it doesn’t sell well because they keep releasing lousy products. They keep making lousy products because their previous (lousy) products didn’t sell well, and that is apparently our fault!

I used "Star Wars" as an example of a world renowned movie franchise that despite its importance not a great deal of time, money, and effort was spent on restoring the original movie versions to a greater quality. Indeed, George Locus had previously stated when the Special Editions came out that these are the movies, "there are no original versions".

And this is an outrage. Their behavior is not justified.

My comment that the original TTWII becomes obsolete was probably not clear enough; I was merely trying to establish a point that as far as MGM are concerned their true TTWII is the Special Edition created in 2000. The original version therefore to them is of little importance beyond being used as a bonus feature on this DVD. I have never once stated that the original TTWII should only be used as a bonus feature, only reasoned why it has been.

Then MGM are wrong – see my “public domain”-comment above. And, as pointed out by Cryogenic, this is disrespectful to all the people involved in the original.

I would go as far to say that we as fans were really rather fortunate that a restoration was green lit as all back in 2000!

This I agree with, but it also supports my point about releasing a good product. The new film is excellent, when MGM could have gone the cheaper route and just edited out the poorer parts and created a “light” edition of the film (which would have been horrendous, obviously). Serious effort went into the making of the film so why can’t serious effort go into making the DVD?

Cue flaming that I'm not a true Elvis fan and all that playground malarkey. As a fan I would welcome with opens arms an official multidisc experience of TTWII, as a realist I never once expected this to happen so therefore am not disappointed that it hasn’t.

I abhor this behavior too and I hope I’ll never catch myself engaging in it. I would consider myself a realist as well, and I certainly don’t expect hours and hours of carefully edited material on these discs. Some people here have mentioned expecting a five- or six-disc edition of On Tour and I’m fully aware that this will never happen either. And as I stated above, to an extent there are no complaints from me about the actual product we’re getting (my only complaint would be that the picture and sound are not cleaned up). But the way we got here is despicable and you can’t chalk it all up to “big business.” Fans shouldn’t have to continually be burned by large firms simply for being fans of something.

Firstly your reference to “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” and “Guess Who” is in error, these are two separately filmed movies. This is not an example of a movie having its original elements revisited in a effort to improve the quality of flow, visuals, and sound.

But where do you draw the line between what is an original element worth preserving and what is not? You could easily make the argument that the 2005 remake is an “effort to improve the quality of flow, visuals, and sound” for modern audiences – perhaps even more so.

I’m afraid I totally disagree with your stance here. There is a HUGE difference between going back to an original movie and re-editing it, adding effects etc and remaking a movie with brand new stars ala “The Italian Job”.

I just looked at some of the outtakes on the new double disc, "That's The Way It Is," and they are far worse, quality wise, than I even expected after reading this threat. I can't imagine what happened. Last year Graceland released a multi-disc set called "The Ultimate Film Collection" and on it was a "bonus" disc, including, among others, "Bridge Over Troubled Water," which was cut from the special edition. It was perfect - letterbox, 5.1 sound and crystal clear picture. So, what happened? I can't believe that this (what we got) is deliberate. It has to be some technical snafu.

Mystery Train

Hi can anyone post some screengrabs of the bonus material to give us an idea of how bad it looks? On a scale of 1 to 10, how crappy is it?

Hi can anyone post some screengrabs of the bonus material to give us an idea of how bad it looks? On a scale of 1 to 10, how crappy is it?

To get an idea of how bad some of the out-takes look... put on the orginal TTWII vhs and put on you darkest pair of sunglasses to watch it... and that will give you an idea! NOT KIDDING!

JEFF d
EP fan

Last edited by JEFF d on Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

jailhouse rock is a little better but not much. the film is clean but the transfer is the same as the one on all the dvd issues.
widescreen sucks on it.
the 1983 vhs and colorized vhs are best.
like e says during the true love travels rehearsal . you never do anything right.

Hi can anyone post some screengrabs of the bonus material to give us an idea of how bad it looks? On a scale of 1 to 10, how crappy is it?

elvissessions.com wrote:
1.
US: We want a recut, updated, revised, refreshed version with new added material. This is a screen classic that deserves special attention.
THEM: OK, here you go.
US: BOO!!! (long list of complaints follows.) We won't buy this piece of crap.


The only complaint about the SE DVD that justifies not buying it is that it didn’t have the hour-long set of extras that were announced – presumably grumbling fans were aware that a future edition of the DVD would include this footage, and they didn’t want to purchase the film twice. Enter this new edition…

Peter, you do not consider the ommission of " Just cant help belivin" a reason for complaint ? - it was- for most fans - the highlight of the movie, and followed closely by the the performances of " bridge" ..and not to forget - for want of a stronger word - the idiotic editing out of the shoulder shaking routine on " Suspicious Minds"...

The only reason I can accept for WB not re-inserting these songs ( remastered and available to WB) in the SE for 2007 would be the publsihing/ royalty costs...but these songs are on the original movie version offered in the same pack, so royalty probably was not an issue.

The only reason that I might buy this set is for the song " Stranger in the Crowd" - but if the quality of this cut is on par with what was on the import market, then I will pass, as thankfully, I already have both the versions put out by WB.

Hi can anyone post some screengrabs of the bonus material to give us an idea of how bad it looks? On a scale of 1 to 10, how crappy is it?

Wow thats terrible ive seen better on the bootleg versions this is got to be the worst and from warner this is an insult to us all im leaving this dvd out of my collection

Jess

Peter, you do not consider the ommission of " Just cant help belivin" a reason for complaint ? - it was- for most fans - the highlight of the movie, and followed closely by the the performances of " bridge" ..and not to forget - for want of a stronger word - the idiotic editing out of the shoulder shaking routine on " Suspicious Minds"...

This was disappointing, sure, and probably poor judgement on Schmidlin's part. But this is more a critique rather than a complaint. Even so, I do not see this as a reason not to have purchased the SE DVD back in 2001.

so what about the other scattered performances that were included with the 'lost performances' video?

"ELvis-that's the way it is" will never be released in an all inclusive box set the way things are going.

I would rather have 20 hours of OK quality unreleased bootleg footage dvd's than what we are getting from the studio's.

by the looks of things me to its bad when bootleg stuff is as good as what warner is giving us makes you think what elvis on tour will be like if and when we get it


jess

"elvis on tour" will more than likely be a barebones edition. I am not expecting much. They would rather have those unreleased performances fade away, than take the time and money to release them in a professional manner.

"elvis on tour" will more than likely be a barebones edition. I am not expecting much.

So there shouldn't be any complaints then if/when it hits the shelf?

Phew.

any idea on the dates of additional footage?

You don't have to say you love me
Eating secuence - are these from July 14 or 15?
Cattle call + Baby let's play house+ don't - these come from 29, right?
Farther along - august 4?
Oh happy day - same thing or the 7-th?
I just can't help believin' - okay, we already have that on the original edition, so where does it come from? is this the opening night or what?
Walk a mile in my shoes - have seen info on this in this topic...
I've lost you ,Sweet Caroline - already have them on the old version.... what are the dates?

I Just Can´t Help Believin´ - August 11th. 1970 dinner show

Walk A Mile In My Shoes - August 11th. 1970 midnight show

I´ve Lost You - August 12th. 1970 dinner show

Sweet Caroline - August 12th. 1970 midnight show


Sincerely MB280E