There is a contribution up that changes "Vintage Classics" to "MGM Vintage Classics" for this title:



I have two concerns about this; one general and one specific.

First of all, the contribution notes say "to match approved profiles for other titles in this series." I always get concerned when someone says "to match" something. As we all know, something being approved doesn't necessarily mean that it's correct (sadly). So changing something to match something else may possibly mean that we are actually just propagating a previous error. I believe that each contribution must stand on its own.

Secondly, nowhere on the cover does it actually say "MGM Vintage Classics". There is a Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer logo but it doesn't actually say "MGM" and it's clearly separated from "Vintage Classics".

So, what do you guys think? Is this an acceptable contribution?

Quoting The_Fox:

Quote:
if it is not mentioned somewhere, e.g. in a text or legal info on the cover that it is indeed the MGM vintage classic series, I would consider "Vintage Classics" the correct edition.

No mention of "MGM Vintage Classics" anywhere.

To me, it is neither "Vintage Classics" nor "MGM Vintage Classics". There is the "Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer logo" on the cover. There are the words "Vintage Classics" or the cover, but neither of those is an edition. "Vintage Classics" is just some text they put on the cover (not an actual edition).

I checked several MGM DVDs in my collection with similar covers and nowhere on the actual DVD disc label does it say "Vintage Classics".

I actually have a couple of doubled dipped DVDs, and the cover on one copy says "Vintage Classics" and the cover on other DVD cover does not, but both have the exact same DVD with the exact same label inside.

If the cover actually said "Vintage Classics Edition" or "MGM Vintage Classics Edition", I would accept that in the profile.

If the cover actually said "Vintage Classics Collection" or "MGM Vintage Classics Collection", I would accept that in the profile.

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
...
Secondly, nowhere on the cover does it actually say "MGM Vintage Classics". There is a Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer logo but it doesn't actually say "MGM" and it's clearly separated from "Vintage Classics".
...

The logo should not be considered as part of the edition.

Some of the earlier VHS tapes that used the same "VINTAGE CLASSICS" title had a MGM/UA logo, for example, "The Apartment":
DVD ==> https://www.amazon.com/Apartment-Jack-Lemmon/dp/B00003CX8V
VHS ==> https://www.amazon.com/Apartment-VHS-Jack-Lemmon/dp/6304308396

Interpreting Metro's "VINTAGE CLASSICS" range is similar to the way we treat STUDIOCANAL's range of "VINTAGE CLASSICS" films: https://vintageclassicsfilm.co.uk/

The only instance I've found where the edition is the logo and text is "20th Century Fox Cinema Archives", not "Cinema Archives". It is actually a registered trademark name: https://uspto.report/TM/85979859