| Author |
Message |
| Registered: January 5, 2008 |  Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tkinnen: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
How does the credit read.
All recent releases are as FUNimation Entertainment only. I have to do some research but if I remember correctly releases 4+ years old had both FUNimation Entertainment and FUNimation Productions listed, one as distributor and one as production for the dubs/subtitles.
Anime companies seem to be big on changing their credited name(s) as they add in-house production studios for dubs and subs. Thankfully it is just ADV (which will only get worse in the next few years with all their corporate shuffling) and Funi with in-house studios these days. And this thread seems as good a place as any to pose the question, since it is already showing in contrtibutions: How should we handle localization [and other such tasks common to anime releases] by the distributor? Double-billing, listed only once as distributor (even though they did more work than slapping the discs in a box,) or double-bill only if space permits? My preference is distributor only, both for uniformity and because there will still be many times when we run out of studio fields (until some later release bumps the count up to 4 or 5.) | | | | Last edited: by Transepoch |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2008 | | Posts: 467 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Transepoch: Quote:
Thankfully it is just ADV (which will only get worse in the next few years with all their corporate shuffling) and Funi with in-house studios these days. Also the whole Pioneer vs. Geneon releases. And yea I don't want to even think of how many different ways on-screen ADV has been credited as..... Quote:
And this thread seems as good a place as any to pose the question, since it is already showing in contrtibutions: How should we handle localization [and other such tasks common to anime releases] by the distributor? Double-billing, listed only once as distributor (even though they did more work than slapping the discs in a box,) or double-bill only if space permits?
My preference is distributor only, both for uniformity and because there will still be many times when we run out of studio fields (until some later release bumps the count up to 4 or 5.) If there is room I have been listing as both because they are the production studio of the US release and the Region 1 distributor which are two different rolls. I always list the original Japanese production companies first and then the US only if room. Some companies like Right Stuff still use different divisions for the production and distribution which makes it easier. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 1,380 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
They are new production arms created by Universal. The first was created to develop family-friendly DVDs and other home programming.
The second, from what little I could find, seems to be their 'straight to DVD' production arm. Thanks  | | | | Last edited: by whispering |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | The first post of this thread states "20th Century Fox Home Entertainment" as the proper name for Fox's distributing branch. However, today I encountered a contribution using "Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment". I don't care which one we use, but I do want to be consistent. So do we stick with "20th" or change them all to "Twentieth"? In light of the forthcoming wave of distributor updates, I'd like to try settle this real quick... | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: January 5, 2008 | | Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
The first post of this thread states "20th Century Fox Home Entertainment" as the proper name for Fox's distributing branch.
However, today I encountered a contribution using "Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment". I don't care which one we use, but I do want to be consistent. So do we stick with "20th" or change them all to "Twentieth"?
In light of the forthcoming wave of distributor updates, I'd like to try settle this real quick... From their website (foxhome.com,) the logo uses "20th" but spells it out in the copyright statement at the bottom. Unless there are field length issues, I think the spelled-out words control. | | | | Last edited: by Transepoch |
|
| Registered: May 27, 2007 | | Posts: 175 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hi,
What are we to do if a production company is not listed anywhere on the DVD or in the credits ? I have the DVD in front of me, and I have watched the opening titles and the ending credits. Nowhere is "The Malpaso Company" listed as the production studio. The DVD is "Sudden Impact", part of the Clint Eastwood Collection, the Dirty Harry series. I checked all 4 other Dirty Harry DVDs, and they do actually list Malpaso as the production company, but Sudden Impact does not.
According to IMDB (everybody's favourite source I see...), The Malpaso Company is the company of record for Sudden Impact but I can't find it anywhere on the actual DVD.
Second point : Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, and The Enforcer all list "A Malpaso Company Production" in the credits, but The Dead Pool has it listed as "A Malpaso Production". I presume it is the same company, but it certainly isn't listed in the same way.
Thanks,
DD. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rooster6975: Quote:
Hi,
What are we to do if a production company is not listed anywhere on the DVD or in the credits ? I have the DVD in front of me, and I have watched the opening titles and the ending credits. Nowhere is "The Malpaso Company" listed as the production studio. The DVD is "Sudden Impact", part of the Clint Eastwood Collection, the Dirty Harry series. I checked all 4 other Dirty Harry DVDs, and they do actually list Malpaso as the production company, but Sudden Impact does not.
According to IMDB (everybody's favourite source I see...), The Malpaso Company is the company of record for Sudden Impact but I can't find it anywhere on the actual DVD. If it isn't in the credits, you can't include it in the profile. Quote:
Second point : Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, and The Enforcer all list "A Malpaso Company Production" in the credits, but The Dead Pool has it listed as "A Malpaso Production". I presume it is the same company, but it certainly isn't listed in the same way. This is where the 'correct name for studios' clause comes into play. You should enter the full name, not the abbreviated one. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: May 18, 2007 | | Posts: 389 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have come across these:
MGM International Television Distribution
MGM Worldwide Television Distribution
MGM Domestic Television Distribution
I was wondering if they would be allowed as Distributor |
|
| Registered: May 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | I am curious about DreamWorks SKG
SKG are the initials of the founders:
Steven Spielberg
Jeffrey Katzenberg
David Geffen
Since this is not a suffix in the business way that LLC is, shouldn't this be included with the studio/distributor if it is presented that way on the box/disc.? |
|
| Registered: August 4, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,441 |
| | Posted: | | | | Which is the correct media publisher for Star Trek TOS DVDs?
On the cover I see only www.paramount.com/homevideo and Paramount Pictures copyright. | | | | Updated List of Accepted Birth Years |
|
| Registered: October 6, 2008 | | Posts: 1,932 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CharlieM: Quote:
I am curious about DreamWorks SKG
SKG are the initials of the founders:
Steven Spielberg
Jeffrey Katzenberg
David Geffen
Since this is not a suffix in the business way that LLC is, shouldn't this be included with the studio/distributor if it is presented that way on the box/disc.? I'm fairly certain that DreamWorks SKG is the overarching corporate entity, under which are the production companies (DreamWorks Pictures & DreamWorks Animation) and the distribution company (DreamWorks Home Entertainment). (Someone else, please chime in if I've got that wrong.) EDIT: Someone in another thread just wrote that they are now separate companies. | | | | Last edited: by CalebAndCo |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kluge: Quote:
Which is the correct media publisher for Star Trek TOS DVDs?
On the cover I see only www.paramount.com/homevideo and Paramount Pictures copyright. I would use Paramount Home Video as that was the name at the time they were released. The current name, Paramount Home Entertainment, would also be acceptable. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 97 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
The first post of this thread states "20th Century Fox Home Entertainment" as the proper name for Fox's distributing branch.
However, today I encountered a contribution using "Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment". I don't care which one we use, but I do want to be consistent. So do we stick with "20th" or change them all to "Twentieth"?
In light of the forthcoming wave of distributor updates, I'd like to try settle this real quick... I've noticed this (and might even have voted no to a few submissions that spell it out. When there was a length issue then I can understand it but it's spelled out on quite a few DVDs from Fox now "Distributed by Twentieth....." It would be nice to be consistant - for ease of searching. I know I asked this question a few months ago and was told in no uncertain terms to read the first page of this thread. I therefore take it to mean that it has to be "20th" regardless - hence this is what I am using - both in my own profiles and to judge others. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | This is no longer an issue. Ken's post here, states that he has added a filter that will automatically change '20th' into 'Twentieth' for all contributions. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: July 7, 2007 | | Posts: 284 |
| | Posted: | | | | A studio directive like we have now, simply will not do the job because somebody will have to maintain it properly and always be on top of corporate namechanges andsoforth. On top of that, if we keep the checks manual and not programmed in the software (drop-down list of available studios) there always be room for error and consistency will never be 100%. It will hoever upgrade the reliability of the data (which is pretty low at the moment). I understand it takes a lot of effort to maintain a list in the software so that will probably never come through. In my opinion, this leaves us with little else room then to stop taking liberties with the data and enter it as credited. | | | My DVD's
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive? |
|
| Registered: January 5, 2008 | | Posts: 16 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting RaymondG: Quote:
A studio directive like we have now, simply will not do the job because somebody will have to maintain it properly and always be on top of corporate namechanges andsoforth. On top of that, if we keep the checks manual and not programmed in the software (drop-down list of available studios) there always be room for error and consistency will never be 100%. It will hoever upgrade the reliability of the data (which is pretty low at the moment). I understand it takes a lot of effort to maintain a list in the software so that will probably never come through. In my opinion, this leaves us with little else room then to stop taking liberties with the data and enter it as credited. There is far less upkeep than you think, just vigilence on our part to correct them as they come up, and be consistent in our contributions. Keep in mind that everything is "as originally released." 30 years from now, all studios may become Taco Bell, but it's still 20th Century Fox to us. |
|