The 2004 WB Pilot

Don't know if this has been mentioned on this site before but there is a very good review of the Dark Shadows Vol 1 DVD release.  The site is called TVShowsOnDvd.Com.  The fellow that reviews the first 10 episodes (I'm sorry but can't remember his name)  had been introduced to the series by his wife who had been a fan in the early days. He talked about how his wife raved about how good the show was and how she ran home from school, etc. This guy has a really interesting take on the show and if you haven't read it, I highly recommend that you do. This site also might be a format for talking up getting the WB pilot released as a DVD. People are voting for TV related things that they want to see on DVDs.

Don't know if this has been mentioned on this site before but there is a very good review of the Dark Shadows Vol 1 DVD release.  The site is called TVShowsOnDvd.Com.

Thanks!  A link to the review can be found here:

Re: an extensive review

There is also a review on the 2nd set here's the link
http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/sitereviews.cfm?ReviewID=85&ReleaseID=1326

This guy really seems to like the show.
Misa

Wonder how the WB would react (minus its legal concerns) to the DS 2004 pilot being leaked on the internet like in the case with the WB's Global Frequency pilot-who's writer seems to think is not a bad thing (outside of the legal concerns) as it could lead to a release on DVD etc.... Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot and then judge the WB's decision to pass on the pilot. Whats fair is fair. Of course this is all a "what if" post.

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,67986,00.html

Wonder how the WB would react (minus its legal concerns) to the DS 2004 pilot being leaked on the internet like in the case with the WB's Global Frequency pilot-who's writer seems to think is not a bad thing (outside of the legal concerns) as it could lead to a release on DVD etc.... Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot and then judge the WB's decision to pass on the pilot. Whats fair is fair. Of course this is all a "what if" post.

I think the answer to how they would react is in this quote from the article:  "Whether the pilot was picked up or not, it is still the property of Warner Bros. Entertainment and we take the protection of all of our intellectual property seriously," said Craig Hoffman, a company spokesman. "While Warner Bros. Entertainment values feedback from consumers, copyright infringement is not a productive way to try to influence a corporate decision."

I understand you're just speculating, so this is nothing personal, but I don't see how this issue (leaking TV pilots via P2P) can be separated from any legal risks, which include injunctions, costs, damages, and even criminal sanctions.  That having been said, would I pay to legally download the pilot if WB were to release it?  In a New York minute.  However, I think the WB execs have already shown that they can't recognize a good idea even when it's right in front of their faces.   :-

I think the answer to how they would react is in this quote from the article:  "Whether the pilot was picked up or not, it is still the property of Warner Bros. Entertainment and we take the protection of all of our intellectual property seriously," said Craig Hoffman, a company spokesman. "While Warner Bros. Entertainment values feedback from consumers, copyright infringement is not a productive way to try to influence a corporate decision."

I understand you're just speculating, so this is nothing personal, but I don't see how this issue (leaking TV pilots via P2P) can be separated from any legal risks, which include injunctions, costs, damages, and even criminal sanctions.  That having been said, would I pay to legally download the pilot if WB were to release it?  In a New York minute.  However, I think the WB execs have already shown that they can't recognize a good idea even when it's right in front of their faces.   :-

I do agree absolutely with your position and we are on the same page. The WB first had said negative things about the pilot and more recently did a 180 and admitted it was a mistake on its part to have passed on the DS pilot. What the powers that be did with the leaking of the Global Frequency's pilot for the sole purpose of attempting to create a positive buzz was downright unethical and illegal. That being said, it will be interesting to see if the WB is persuaded by the results of the "positive" reaction to the GF pilot. Apparently, its producer is very proud of the pilot and has not given up on convincing the WB to take it as a series.
 Yes the WB executives clearly do not have the ability to see a good pilot when its right before its noses. And I am talking about the DS pilot. lol

Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot...

No, the public doesn't have any right to see it.  It's the property of a private corporation, and what they choose to do with it, or who they choose to show it to is entirely their call.

Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot...

No, the public doesn't have any right to see it.  It's the property of a private corporation, and what they choose to do with it, or who they choose to show it to is entirely their call.

I would appreciate in the future if you do not take my words out of context. You are better than that. My statement was not based on a legal foundation but one on a moral basis and I used the word "perhaps". I clearly indicated in my posts in this matter that I was fully aware of the legal ramifications regarding the illegal downloading of tv pilots by someone behind the GF tv pilot. Taking someone's comments out of context to make a point is by itself unethical.

I would appreciate in the future if you do not take my words out of context. You are better than that. My statement was not based on a legal foundation but one on a moral basis and I used the word "perhaps"...

Sorry, but I don't see how I have taken anything out of context.  Even, taking your own clarification of arguing a "right" on a moral basis, I'm having a tough time following your logic.  Each to their own, though.

Sorry, but I don't see how I have taken anything out of context.  Even, taking your own clarification of arguing a "right" on a moral basis, I'm having a tough time following your logic.  Each to their own, though.

Instead of asking me to clarify my post, you responded by taking a sentence out of the initial post and issued an authoritative-like post. Only now you are stating that you are puzzled by the statement in question. You can't have it both ways. If you had requested a clarification, I would have been happy to have offered you one. I just don't subscribe to your style of taking words out of context without requesting a clarification from the poster but as you said, "each to their own, though".

When the Quote button is clicked, a direct link to the original post is created.  The purpose of this link is so that visitors can be taken to the original post should they wish to read the quote in context.  In order to conserve bandwidth, it's actually preferable that posters only quote the part of the original post that s/he is responding to, and since this feature is available context needn't be an issue.

I'll add that the topic of this current discussion appears to be the right to leak pilots onto the net vs. copyright infringement.  Unfortunately, the debate has become personal and that type of comment needs to be taken to private correspondence.  Thanks!

Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot

Just my two cents

I see this issue from an artist POV. As with any great work of art the artist may want to share it with the world and let them judge its worth. But alas there are many great works of art that are held in private hands and away from the world. Do we have the right to view those masters held by private individuals. Is it morally wrong to withhold a great treasure from the world? I mearly pose these questions as an explaination from both sides. Makeing no Judgement for either. It would be ashame if the Mona Lisa were to be sold and never seen again.

LdyAnne

"I know I'd be bloody incensed!"

I was wondering just how unfinished was the pilot? Did it have beginning credits and music? If it had music what was it like? I know that they didn't have the correct music put in yet, but was it good anyway? I can't understand why they don't spend just a bit more to patch this up and then release it. At least then maybe they could recoup some of their money. And if it sells well maybe they might think about recasting and putting the show on the air.

Misa

I was wondering just how unfinished was the pilot? Did it have beginning credits and music? If it had music what was it like? I know that they didn't have the correct music put in yet, but was it good anyway? I can't understand why they don't spend just a bit more to patch this up and then release it. At least then maybe they could recoup some of their money. And if it sells well maybe they might think about recasting and putting the show on the air.

I don't recall any music or credits. I would say it was 80% complete. Some sceens needed to be reedited (the last scene was too long for effect)

LdyAnne