Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

Invelos Forums->Posts by ObiKen Page: 1 2  Previous   Next
Message Details
OK, so it's a game console connected to a TV solution that will be upgraded.  Unfortunately, you won't be able to add 4K Disc IDs in DVD Profiler with that setup.
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 350
4K UHD discs provide improved resolution, but it is only more noticeable on large screens ( > 65 inches). However, the biggest wow factor comes from the expansion in the colour spectrum and contrast range from High Dynamic Range (HDR or Dolby Vision).

If I was Addicted2DVD, I would be focussing on the hardware upgrade path first.  Don't do this right then you will be disappointed, no matter what title you buy.

Is the requirement to watch 4K UHD discs and 4K games on a 4K TV (LCD/OLED, with HDR10 and Dolby Vision support) via a games console (such as Sony's upcoming PS5) OR from a computer connected to a 4K computer monitor (with HDR support)?
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 350
My understanding is that Disney dropped the "Fox" name from two film production companies it acquired after the acquisition of 21st Century Fox in 2019, namely:

  20th Century Fox film studio ==> 20th Century Studios
  Fox Searchlight Pictures      ==>  Searchlight Pictures

These names will appear as production company names on future film releases, but it has no bearing whatsoever on the theatrical film studio name of past releases from 20th Century Fox Film Corporation.
Topic Replies: 15, Topic Views: 576
No, I am referring to the print version I am watching on the disc, and it will show me the theatrical release studio for that print version in the film's credits.
Topic Replies: 15, Topic Views: 576
The third option is not only the simplest, it is also consistent with the rules, namely, "The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself".

I have seen in the credits in many 4K/Blu-ray combo sets, where the 4K film is the US theatrical release version and the Blu-ray film is the International release version, resulting in different studio information in the Parent/Child profiles.

People are confusing the film we see in a picture theatre and its theatrical release studio to the film that we actually see on a disc.

We are suppose to profile the film on the disc, not profile the profile.
Topic Replies: 15, Topic Views: 576
OK, I think I understand, the above credits should not be treated as separate credits (well, there was no "by" after the first credit and there were no inter-connecting words, such as "From" or "And", linking the credits), it should be instead, interpreted as a single contiguous credit.  Hence OMB. Is that right?
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 816
They received proper writing credits because their original screenplay formed a substantial basis for the new film, far greater than the contributions from the new screenwriter.

A writer cannot just add a sentence or character to the original work and claim screenwriting credits for the new film.  The new writer has to prove their contribution to the original screenplay was significant and it is up to the WGA Arbitration Committee to determine the appropriate writing credit.

So, it is possible to have the original screenplay credits in a new film, just look at the 1998 version of Psycho, you will see only the original writing credits from the 1962 version.

T!M says the original screenplay now serves as the "original material" for the new screenplay, but what if there is little change and the original screenplay is substantially the new screenplay?

This is why we have writing credits for original screenplays credited in film remakes.
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 816
My understanding is that the film, "After the Wedding", was a 2019 USA production and the writing credits displayed would have been subject to the Writers Guild of America (WGA) arbitration procedures.

The WGA Arbitration Committee determines whether prior writer(s) are entitled to receive writing credit.

In particular, the WGA Theatrical Credits Procedures Guide (page 19) states the following for remakes:

"In the case of remakes, any writer who has received writing credit under the Guild's jurisdiction in connection with a prior version of the motion picture is a participating writer on the remake. As such, those prior writers are entitled to participate in the credit determination process and are eligible to receive writing credit pursuant to the rules for determining writing credits. The final shooting script written by a prior writer(s) shall be considered literary material."

" In the case of a remake, credit may be accorded to the credited writer(s) of the prior motion picture as follows:
a.  The Arbitration Committee can elect to give the prior writer(s) no credit of any kind.
b.  The Arbitration Committee can elect to give the prior writer(s) a “based on” credit only.
c.  The Arbitration Committee can elect to give the prior writer(s) a writing credit only.  In that instance, the prior writer(s) cannot receive any more credit than they received on the original. 
d.  The Arbitration Committee can elect to give the prior writer(s) both a writing credit and a “based on” credit. 

Remakes shall be considered non-original screenplays under Section III.A.4.a.i. of this Manual."

If Bart Freundlich produced a non-original screenplay then he would need to have contributed more than 33% of the 2019 film's screenplay to be entitled (by arbitration) to "Screenplay by" credit.

Other examples of remakes using original film writers:

So, to answer Movieman's question, the displayed writing credits are legitimate credits for "Story by" and "Screenplay by" and should be entered as such in DVD Profiler (in order of appearance).
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 816
My understanding is the Disc IDs rule covering dual-sided discs is not applicable in a box set situation, because it is not a single title spanning both sides.

The box set rules clearly states that sets containing 2 different films, one on each side of a dual-sided disc, are to be entered as individual Disc ID profiles in line with standard Contribution Rules (hence, Side A for Disc ID).
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 693
Just upgraded PC from Win 10 Ver 1903 ==> Ver 1909 (OS Build 18363.476) today.

Tested various DVDs, BDs and 4Ks with the following results:

4K = OK.
BD = OK.
DVD = same Disc IDs as Version 1809 and 1903.
Topic Replies: 91, Topic Views: 6299
I have a simple question (I hope).

If the film premiered at the El Capitan Theatre in Hollywood on 11-Apr-2012:

and was subsequently exhibited:
28-Apr-2012 USA (Tribeca Film festival)
04-May-2012 USA

which one becomes the source for determining the original release title?

If it's the premiere, who in the DVDP community went to that?
Topic Replies: 73, Topic Views: 4236
My understanding is "Disney Presents" may now represent the "Disney" branded subsidiary company (Disney Live Action) belonging to the Walt Disney Studios: https://www.waltdisneystudios.com/our-businesses/

I could not find any reference to "Walt Disney Pictures" as a company in the new business structure (after the acquisition of Fox studios by the company).

In addition, the Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures company handles theatrical distribution, marketing and promotion for films produced by the Walt Disney Studios (which includes subsidiary companies Disney, Walt Disney Animation Studios, Pixar Animation Studios, Marvel Studios, Lucasfilm, 20th Century Fox, Fox 2000 Pictures, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Blue Sky Studios).

The roles of the distributor and subsidiary production studios in this company do not overlap, so list them if they are credited, as per DVDP rules, that is:

Theatrical Release Studio = Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Production Company = (any of the subsidiary production companies listed under Walt Disney Studios)
Topic Replies: 63, Topic Views: 3985
It is seen on Australian home media releases as:  Distributed by The Walt Disney Company (Australia) Pty Ltd

So it would be entered as a media company with the whole name (no abbreviation) minus locality-specific suffix (Australia) and minus company suffix (Pty Ltd), that is, "The Walt Disney Company".

This media company name should not be confused with Disney's theatrical distribution companies.

For a historical run-down of which companies Disney used for theatrical film distribution, read the following forum discussion:

Hope that helps.
Topic Replies: 63, Topic Views: 3985
There are some who assert "The Avengers" is the original film title - this is a myth!

I was surprised no one could find a definitive reference to prove the original title was "Marvel's The Avengers".

Rules such as possessives, font sizes and quotes for the original title in the film's screen credits are irrelevant?  Those rules ONLY apply to the printed title on the front cover.

Its the movie producer who determines the film's title, and there is nothing stopping them from embedding a brand name (such as Marvel, Disney, MGM) in the title, some existing legitimate examples being DISNEY's THE KID (2000) and DISNEY'S A CHRISTMAS CAROL (2009).

So lets look at the facts, the film's screen credits:

1. The opening credits at run time (00:11:45) displays the following title page:

At this stage, I still wasn't sure.

2. The end credits at run time (02:22:06) displays the film's copyright:
"Marvel's The Avengers", the Movie © 2012 MVL Film Finance LLC.

The film title is in quotes in the copyright credits, that is unambiguous.

So what other corroborative evidence could I find?

3. The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) nominated the film "Marvel's The Avengers" for an Academy Award for BEST VISUAL EFFECTS for 2012 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/85th_Academy_Awards#Awards).

Go to the Official Academy Awards database:

Enter the title The Avengers and click search, you get one result:

Marvel's The Avengers
Marvel Studios Production; Walt Disney.
2012 (85th)  VISUAL EFFECTS -- Janek Sirrs, Jeff White, Guy Williams and Dan Sudick

Yes, its an American production and I think AMPAS are in a better position to know the correct original title for the film. Its this title that gets engraved on the plaque at the bottom of the Oscar statuette.

The film credits (both title page and copyright) verify the film's title as "Marvel's The Avengers" and the Academy Awards corroborate this title.

They are the reasons why I am currently voting NO to huskersport's attempt to remove "Marvel's The Avengers" from original title on an Australian profile (titled on the front cover "The Avengers"), as per the rules: "For profiles which have an alternate title displayed on the cover, use the title from the film's credits."
Topic Replies: 73, Topic Views: 4236
The abbreviation rule is still relevant and viable, as it is ONLY invoked when the full name displayed in the credits is truncated in the profile.  It doesn't get invoked the other way around, that is, change the credited name into a fuller name that was never displayed in the credits.

The rule example never implied "Disney" by itself was an abbreviation, nor did it imply "Disney" was actually "Walt Disney Pictures".

Just don't truncate "Walt Disney Pictures" to "Disney" (or Walt, Walt Disney, Walt Pictures, Disney Pictures for that matter)!

Gamemaster provided two screenshots, the first is just an opening vanity logo and is not part of the text-based opening credits. The second screenshot (Disney Presents) is the start of the opening credits.

For recent Disney movies, if you look at the text-based end credits closely, particularly at the very end, you will often find the distribution company, production companies followed by the closing vanity logos.
Topic Replies: 63, Topic Views: 3985
True, but the screeners will be more informed to make the right decision, and you never know, some of the "no" voters may be persuaded to change their mind.
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 568
Cannot view your image, but if it is the media banner then this is what I do (hope it helps):
Adding new high quality scan of correct FRONT cover that includes original media banner ("4K ULTRA HD + BLU-RAY").

Current truncated front cover scan is non-compliant as it is a cropped image of the original front cover insert.

Please note the following rule in the Cover Images section:
"HD DVD and Blu-Ray discs in either HD Slim or HD Keep Case type cases without slip covers should be scanned without the HD banner."

was meant to stop people scanning the whole HD Keep Case.

The following two links will help clarify this matter:
a. HD Banner - http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=832956
b. Blu-ray Logo - http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=443029
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 568
Genre is a recurring style, pattern or theme you recognise straight-away when watching a film.

"Classic" is not really a genre because it is not recognisable straight-away, it is formed over time, cross-overs many main genre types and has no recurring style, pattern or theme.

It's definitely a film category, but just not a genre.
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 1944
Excluding bonus feature films, my understanding is that "checking multiple media types" flags the profile as a "combo set" and ALLOWS the creation of OPTIONAL child profiles in a standard main feature profile.  Don't check them then you cannot create a child profile.

With regards to normal profile and bonus material, my understanding is it is limited to the following types:
- standard single main feature profile for a SINGLE disc with main feature/bonus material.
- standard 2-Disc set single main feature profile with main feature/bonus material on disc 1 and bonus material ONLY on disc 2.

A combo set is neither a box set nor does it contain a "bonus feature film".

It cannot be treated as a 2-Disc set because the second disk is not bonus material ONLY, it comprises a "main feature" with bonus material and is subject to its own profile (which is optional in the combo set rules).

In the case of a 4K/Blu-ray combo set, the bonus material found on the Blu-ray disc is associated to the main feature found on the Blu-ray disc and would be subject to the standard rules for any single main feature profile.

So that leaves the 4K disc to be subject to a standard single main feature profile on a single disc, which is exactly what is written in the combo set rules.

Primetime21's understanding of the combo set rules is correct.
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 1197
I thought Ken Cole's definitions were covering outer SLIP types for box sets, in which case, they are straight-forward and simple to implement and eliminate the need to discuss/interpret the physical construction and extraction methods of the outer slip enclosure.

Put simply:
- the outer slip enclosure for a box set is a SLIP COVER if there is only one inner enclosure type.
- the outer slip enclosure for a box set is a SLIP CASE if there are two or more inner enclosure types.

But the original question posed by GSyren was for a non-box set profile that contained a single digipak with an outer enclosure whose slip type (Cover or Case) was being debated.

Some people view the physical attributes of the outer slip enclosure as the determining factor for selecting slip case, whereas Ken Cole's definitions are physically neutral, it doesn't matter whether it is cardboard, paper, has one opening or two, slides over the top/bottom or slides side-to-side or into.

For me, Ken Cole's definition for a SLIP COVER is equally consistent for non-box set scenarios as well.
Topic Replies: 26, Topic Views: 1993
I agree that multiple short films should not be considered as "Episodes", rather, they are distinct films.

I also agree that multiple short theatrical films on a single disc are a box set and we have to create profiles for each film. 

But hang on, we cannot create alternate Disc IDs for short films.

So, the question is, how do we adhere to both rules at the same time?

As everyone has suggested, we create a single Disc ID profile, but the point being discussed is on the use of episode dividers with references to the TV set rule, which MadMartian has pointed out, is not applicable.

On the other hand, the standard rule for DIVIDERS states you can use Episode dividers for TV show episodes, distinct films, or other logical episodic distinction.

So my recommendation is to do what CubbyUps said, plus list the short film titles in the overview.
Topic Replies: 17, Topic Views: 4176
I agree with scotthm, we must follow the rules.

However, what I am suggesting is, we use the copyright information in the film's credit, if no other screen credits exist to identify a production company.

The copyright owner of a film was either the producer or a production company.

Hughes Productions was listed in the opening credits of "The Outlaw" at the 46 second mark as the film's copyright owner.
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 2319
I agree with your observations and empathise with your dilemma.

However, there's an old adage about databases, garbage in, garbage out, so leave it out if you can't verify the accuracy of your data.

Researching takes some time which most people don't have.

For example, in the case of American films, particularly older films, I will often refer to the American Film Institute (AFI) Catalog of Feature Films (1893-1993) and then corroborate with another entity, such as IMDB or Wikipedia.

For the film, The Outlaw, I also looked up the Library of Congress Catalog of Copyright Entries: Cumulative Series. Motion Pictures 1940–1949 (https://archive.org/details/motionpict19401949librrich/page/n5) and found the following entry on page 306:
THE OUTLAW. Released through United
Artists, c1941. Presented by Howard
Hughes. 115 min., sd.
Credits: Director, Howard Hughes;
screenplay, Jules Furthman; music direc-
tor, Victor Young; photographer, Gregg
Toland; film editor, Wallace Grissell.
© Hughes Productions; 15Feb41; LP177.

Since both AFI and IMDB list "Hughes Productions" in the production company credits:
AFI ==> https://catalog.afi.com/Film/603-THE-OUTLAW?sid=dc7acdb5-9043-4418-a5c2-403a78b60641&sr=8.778264&cp=1&pos=1
IMDB ==> https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0036241/companycredits?ref_=tt_dt_co

and the original copyright holder was Hughes Productions, I would submit "Hughes Productions" in the profile as the production company for the film.

Hope that helps you in some way.
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 2319
I believe the original copyright version displayed "Hughes Productions" in the credits and was released by RKO Radio Pictures/United Artists Corporation.

A Public Domain version of a movie would probably redact any credit references to the original production companies that held copyright. In the case of The Outlaw, the film went into public domain in 1971 when the copyright was not renewed.
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 2319
Ran mediagogg's DVDInfo (1.05) program (don't have AnyDVD) and got the same new DiscIDs as DVDP on Win10 ver 1903 (not unexpected, as his program was based on Microsoft's DIRECTSHOW API).

I thought AnyDVD was the culprit in the past and it was solved when they created a registry setting to  white-list DVDP to allow the GetDiscID call to retrieve the correct DiscID.

Subsequently checked AnyDVD's change log (https://www.redfox.bz/download/changes_anydvd.txt) and I found AnyDVD fixed the discrepancy with DiscIDs in AnyDVD version (23-Jan-2008), in particular:

- New (DVD): Added hooking of the IDvdInfo2::GetDiscID interface. All 32-bit
  applications which use DiscIDs will retrieve the correct DiscID, even if
  AnyDVD is running (e.g., Windows MCE 2005, Windows Media Player, Invelos
  DVD Profiler, MyMovies, etc.)
Topic Replies: 91, Topic Views: 6299
Invelos Forums->Posts by ObiKen Page: 1 2  Previous   Next