1991 Series To Be Released On DVD

That's very cool.  He's been highly touted here as a candidate for the role, but I was not aware that he was a fan.  I have the impression that Tim Burton is a huge fan and wonder whether Depp sometimes watches the discs when he's hanging out at Tim B's house.

Maybe Depp caught DS in the late 70s or early 80s syndications?  I know they ran it in NYC on one of the major channels.

Steve

Hi Darren. Are you trying to depress us? lol No seriously, thanks for the reality check on the chances of a new DS series being developed again in the near future. I rather hear the truth as opposed to the "spin" that DCP and the Fest has been giving us on how close we are to another DS series or movie. It seems DC has his work cut out for him especially if the networks are tired hearing from him. If you were in Dan Curtis' shoes what would you do to get a new DS project in motion? The phone calls to the networks don't work. Curtis appears to have blown his relationship with Wells and what are the odds of Dan finding another big time producer. Johnny Depp is years away from even considering a new DS movie. Is there any course of action that you would take if you were DC? (sorry about that lol).

Hi Jim,

Sorry, not trying to depress anyone.

I don't think Curtis blew his relationship with Wells at all. I've heard nothing about any bad blood between them at all. After all, Wells was the instigator....the big time producer found Curtis.

I think its a case of a big time producer with a vision for DS has to find him.  If I were him, I'd cultivate relationships with more producers like Wells as well as film producers and directors.  I'd pitch the idea to the in-house producers like Wells and such rather than to the networks.  It may strike a chord that they probably haven't thought of.

If I were him I'd develop a tight lower budget horror film and really pour my heart and energy into it and make it something that would play well with a modern audience, and make it a real white knuckler.  You get clout in this town by making things that do well that people like. Then the powers that be come to you.

Honestly, I think he should give the reins to someone younger with a fresher perspective on the material. He's 75 and really not well versed in the films and TV shows of the last 20 years or in the current style and capabilites in storytelling. He needs to delegate it to someone he has confidence in.

Essentially, we need the Russell T. Davies of the Dark Shadows world.

Sadly, I think he had it in Verheiden, who had a solid, exciting and fresh take on the material and would have created a hell of a show.

Hey Darren I was only joking about you depressing us. I really did need to hear the truth. Thanks.

You really have some good ideas. I guess Dan has heard some of these ideas before but is set in his own ways. I do agree he needs to finally let go of DS and give someone like Verheiden total creative control on a new DS project. I do think it is possible that a producer will find him but DC has to have a fresh approach ready to be pitched. I don't know if Verheiden would consider being involved in a new DS project. I don't know if Wells has also given us the spin when he stated that he would be considering all options for a new DS. I don't know if he said that only in the context of the filmed pilot or a new project. As for a movie project I agree that it can be made with a lower costing budget but will he be able to find a distributor for it?

Clearly DC needs to be more innovative in his approach to getting DS back on the air.

BTW Is anybody going to tell Amazon that the Revival series is not set in 1966?

Clearly DC needs to be more innovative in his approach to getting DS back on the air.

DC becoming innovative - now there's a concept.    Mmm, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it! 

BTW Is anybody going to tell Amazon that the Revival series is not set in 1966?

OMG, does it say that? I didn't even notice. But why doesn't it surprise me? 

BTW Is anybody going to tell Amazon that the Revival series is not set in 1966?

OMG, does it say that? I didn't even notice. But why doesn't it surprise me?

Yes it does and did you know it sates that it stars Joan Bennett? lol

Truthfully, I only checked the price. I didn't even read their description. But the fact that they have the completely wrong series version is too much. Hello! The DVD's own title expressly says "Revival". 

Truthfully, I only checked the price. I didn't even read their description. But the fact that they have the completely wrong series version is too much. Hello! The DVD's own title expressly says "Revival". 

Well it would not be DS without a big blooper. lol But in all seriousness it could be confusing to some prospective (non DS) buyers and could cost MGM some bucks.

I can't find it anywhere else as of yet... I usually like Deep Discount DVD

Usually they've had one of the best deals, if not the best deal on the DVDs I've bought online - but it still isn't listed there.

They have it now, but, quite surprisingly, at $29.86, it's more expensive than both Amazon and DVD Planet.  :-

That's funny about the amazombie listing for the 1991 discs.  I was wondering last night at one point whether some people would buy this set thinking that it was the real thing (i. e. the Sixties show), not the remake, especially with that cover... I swear that crazy image looks more like a cartoon version of Jonathan Frid than Ben Cross...

G.

Synopsis from Sony Pictures:

http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/catalog/catalogDetail_DVD027616124258.html

While not in 5.1 Dolby Digital, it's in Widescreen.  That's a nice feature here.  It for sure won't be the extended as the videos add up to more run time then the DVD.

That cover art is sure odd.  It looks like something else entirely.

Synopsis from Sony Pictures:

Interesting to see that not even Sony can get things right as Matt Hall never directed any episodes of the series.    He wrote or co-wrote three episodes.

According the some sources of mine, the 'widescreen' notation should be a mistake.

And I hope like hell that it is a mistake on the website, because if not, its beyond a total disaster.

These shows were shot for 1.33 and composed and released on TV in that format. This is way before our recent spate of HD widescreen shows. The only correct way to present them is 1.33. Any 'widescreen' release would butcher the framing, chopping off a significant chunk of the imagery from the top and bottom of the screen. (See the season 1 KING FU release for a recent example.)

We can cross our fingers and hope they will be presented correctly, otherwise this will really blow up on the web and all of the TV and DVD forums...

Synopsis from Sony Pictures:

Interesting to see that not even Sony can get things right as Matt Hall never directed any episodes of the series.    He wrote or co-wrote three episodes.

I guess this type of misinformation is what happens when websites jump the gun prior to an official announcement from MGM. I mean Amazon has the wrong year of release for the 91 DVD release, it has the wrong studio- I think they reflect it as Columbia Tristar Homevideo; reflects the wrong actors etc.... BTW it also supports Sony's posting at its website that it will be in widescreen which Darren tells us is a really bad thing. Just wondering when an official announcement will be made.