Does SONY Hold the Rights to all Michael Jackson's Short Films?

Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

YouTube can stream videos in HD.

Yes but they would want people to buy the Blu-Ray release. It would hurt the sales if the HD versions would be on Youtube.
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

It's a ******** shame in 2018 to see them in very low quality on Youtube knowing that all of his short movies were shot in 35mm since Beat it.

No one has to watch them on Youtube if they don't want to. You make it sound as though that's the only option.

71ofdV3rNdL._SX342_.jpg


Michael Jackson's Vision is a deluxe DVD box set by American recording artist Michael Jackson. It was released on November 22, 2010 by Epic Records, Legacy Recordings, and Jackson's own label, MJJ Productions. It includes three DVDs, featuring 4.5 hours of content of 42 music videos with newly restored color and remastered audio. Jackson referred to each of these productions as a "short film" and not a music video. This is the first time that all of Jackson's videos have been released on DVD.
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

No one has to watch them on Youtube if they don't want to. You make it sound as though that's the only option.

71ofdV3rNdL._SX342_.jpg


Michael Jackson's Vision is a deluxe DVD box set by American recording artist Michael Jackson. It was released on November 22, 2010 by Epic Records, Legacy Recordings, and Jackson's own label, MJJ Productions. It includes three DVDs, featuring 4.5 hours of content of 42 music videos with newly restored color and remastered audio. Jackson referred to each of these productions as a "short film" and not a music video. This is the first time that all of Jackson's videos have been released on DVD.

Oh god why...

Thank you but I know about this horrible supposed "fully restored" compilation box. The videos are from the same old masters than those on Youtube (with less compression and a better sound) but the PQ... is just terrible. They didn't restore anything about the PQ, it's unacceptable and not even close of a DVD quality, even for a product released in 2010.

Having see Thriller restored in 4K last October, i can assure you what we have (Vision) exploits 1% of what a 35mm film can do.
 
Last edited:
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Having see Thriller restored in 4K last October, i can assure you it's not 1% of what a 35mm film can do.


Agree 100%
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Bad was made for HD. I always thought that had some great visuals. And a Scorsese film has to be remastered.
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Oh god why...

Thank you but I know about this horrible supposed "fully restored" compilation box. The videos are from the same old masters than those on Youtube (with less compression and a better sound) but the PQ... is just terrible. They didn't restore anything about the PQ, it's unacceptable and not even close of a DVD quality, even for a product released in 2010.

Having see Thriller restored in 4K last October, i can assure you it's not 1% of what a 35mm film can do.

I was gonna say that box set is notoriously bad hahaha
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

That Vision box set was ok but I was expecting better quality because I paid over 30 euros for it. I really like the packaging. The holographic cover is great.
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Yes but they would want people to buy the Blu-Ray release. It would hurt the sales if the HD versions would be on Youtube.

Ohhhh I understand what you meant now. Sorry!
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

SONY is making money through MichaelJackson's channel on Youtube/VEVO. Those music videos aren't playing with millions of views for nothing.

For each click, is an advertisement played through Google's monetizing system.

I actually would prefer remastered vids to go Youtube, that is where all the other artist videos are at in HQ HD picking up hits.
 
HD

SONY is making money through MichaelJackson's channel on Youtube/VEVO. Those music videos aren't playing with millions of views for nothing.

For each click, is an advertisement played through Google's monetizing system.

I actually would prefer remastered vids to go Youtube, that is where all the other artist videos are at in HQ HD picking up hits.
I'm not sure the average person cares that much about HD. There's been high quality audio formats that have never caught on with most music consumers like quadrophonic, DAT, SACD, metal cassettes, DVD audio, Blu Ray audio, half-speed master, Mobile Fidelity, etc. It's like more people bought VHS than videodiscs & laserdiscs, but one of the reasons is probably that you could record on tapes and could not with the discs. HD probably doesn't make that big of a difference if a person is watching Youtube on a phone or something else small.
 
Re: HD

I'm not sure the average person cares that much about HD. There's been high quality audio formats that have never caught on with most music consumers like quadrophonic, DAT, SACD, metal cassettes, DVD audio, Blu Ray audio, half-speed master, Mobile Fidelity, etc. It's like more people bought VHS than videodiscs & laserdiscs, but one of the reasons is probably that you could record on tapes and could not with the discs. HD probably doesn't make that big of a difference if a person is watching Youtube on a phone or something else small.

I do not agree. His videos deserve to be preserved in the highest quality available for our generation and future generations. They need to be seen like he intended it. He shot those videos on film, so anything can be done. They can even create a 8k master from those reels.
 
Re: HD

I'm not sure the average person cares that much about HD. There's been high quality audio formats that have never caught on with most music consumers like quadrophonic, DAT, SACD, metal cassettes, DVD audio, Blu Ray audio, half-speed master, Mobile Fidelity, etc. It's like more people bought VHS than videodiscs & laserdiscs, but one of the reasons is probably that you could record on tapes and could not with the discs. HD probably doesn't make that big of a difference if a person is watching Youtube on a phone or something else small.

Video quality is definitely a big thing nowadays. As I've said, even basic content on YouTube is now in HD or higher. YouTube is literally the new TV for the younger generation. I can also notice a big difference between standard Def and high Def on my phone and it only has a 1080p screen. A lot of the big phones nowadays 1440p or 4k screens.
 
Re: HD

Video quality is definitely a big thing nowadays. As I've said, even basic content on YouTube is now in HD or higher. YouTube is literally the new TV for the younger generation. I can also notice a big difference between standard Def and high Def on my phone and it only has a 1080p screen. A lot of the big phones nowadays 1440p or 4k screens.
But Prince's videos have been uploaded within the past year and are not HD and there's lots of older music videos uploaded by the labels or artists that are 480. New music videos may be shot as HD, but records labels are not likely going to spend money restoring old videos or converting them to HD. In the 1980s, most videos were shot or edited on videotape. Not much can be done with that. There's many videos not uploaded to Youtube at all or they're uploaded by people who taped them off of TV. Some of them crop the picture or stretch it out to fit the widescreen, which I don't understand. :rofl:
 
Re: HD

But Prince's videos have been uploaded within the past year and are not HD and there's lots of older music videos uploaded by the labels or artists that are 480. New music videos may be shot as HD, but records labels are not likely going to spend money restoring old videos or converting them to HD. In the 1980s, most videos were shot or edited on videotape. Not much can be done with that. There's many videos not uploaded to Youtube at all or they're uploaded by people who taped them off of TV. Some of them crop the picture or stretch it out to fit the widescreen, which I don't understand. :rofl:

I agree with you that record labels are not going to do it. I still think they should though. Eventually that footage will no longer exist.
 
Re: HD

But Prince's videos have been uploaded within the past year and are not HD and there's lots of older music videos uploaded by the labels or artists that are 480. New music videos may be shot as HD, but records labels are not likely going to spend money restoring old videos or converting them to HD. In the 1980s, most videos were shot or edited on videotape. Not much can be done with that. There's many videos not uploaded to Youtube at all or they're uploaded by people who taped them off of TV. Some of them crop the picture or stretch it out to fit the widescreen, which I don't understand. :rofl:

But Michael's 80s short films are definitely on film. You can see HD clips in Moonwalker Blu-ray. They scanned a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff for Bad 25 documentary so they might have done the same for the short films. I hope so. Prince died not long ago so they haven't had time to do much with the videos. Prince didn't allow his songs to be on Youtube or something like that if I remember right so now they uploaded them to get money.
 
Last edited:
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Having see Thriller restored in 4K last October, i can assure you what we have (Vision) exploits 1% of what a 35mm film can do.

I'm glad you've had a chance to see Thriller in 4K. Others are not so lucky (yet), so they don't really know what they're missing, yeah?
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

I'm glad you've had a chance to see Thriller in 4K. Others are not so lucky (yet), so they don't really know what they're missing, yeah?

It was the best experience i had while watching MJ's.
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

Bad was made for HD. I always thought that had some great visuals. And a Scorsese film has to be remastered.

always wondered why Spike Lee in BAD25 used poor quality video-version of it AND 35 mm footage of alternative takes. If he had access to 35 mm copy of alternative takes, why not using even 35 mm copy of the short-film itself?
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

I can't wait to hear the answer to this!
always wondered why Spike Lee in BAD25 used poor quality video-version of it AND 35 mm footage of alternative takes. If he had access to 35 mm copy of alternative takes, why not using even 35 mm copy of the short-film itself?
 
Re: Does SONY hold the right's to all Michael Jackson's short films?

always wondered why Spike Lee in BAD25 used poor quality video-version of it AND 35 mm footage of alternative takes. If he had access to 35 mm copy of alternative takes, why not using even 35 mm copy of the short-film itself?

I think it was because he wanted to show something new? The quality is near perfect IMO. I think they could have simply remastered the original but I like the alternate edit also. Now we know they filmed APOM in at least other concerts besides wembley and Paris...
 
Well of course we know they rec apom in different places!?! Theres alot of pro concert footage we've seen.
 
Well of course we know they rec apom in different places!?! Theres alot of pro concert footage we've seen.

Filmed not Taped. The original APOM film only showed the European leg (Paris, Wembley). Spike Lee edit shows they Filmed US leg also (Indiana, MSQ).
 
We absolutely need MJs videos in higher quality than what we've got. Vision seemed like such a quick money grab to me. The videos sucked. The short films were shot on film until at least Black or White.

One of the biggest parts of MJs career. And the Estate can't say MJ wouldn't have done it as he released HIStory on Film the DVD!!!!
 
Back
Top