aggiebg97

Forgive me if this is something that's been covered a bazillion times before. I'm fairly new here and don't have the time to browse through all the pages of topics.

I'm sick and tired of movies being released in two different packages (widescreen/fullscreen). I've bought several DVD's that have both versions, one on each side of the disc. Do we really need the pretty picture on one side?

All things being equal, I would rather watch most action films in widescreen, dramas and comedies I really don't care. But in my house, I like widescreen and my wife despises it. Why can't we have both versions on one disc and make this a moot point? We can watch the fullscreen version together, then I can go back and enjoy the widescreen version.

Why does the industry feel that it's better to release them in separate packaging? I think it's ridiculous.

On top of that, I think it should also be an industry standard to give the exact aspect ratio on the packaging. Many DVDs lately don't give the aspect ratio, they just say "enhanced for widescreen TV" or some other such nonsense, which doesn't tell me if it's 1.85 or 2.35.

Just my moment to rant and rave, I'm ok.....I'm better now

Thanks for listening

Pants

If you like comedies in full screen why don't you try watching Blazing Saddles in fullscreen.

I could care less about two sided discs giving idiots who don't like OAR a choice. For 20 years on VHS I didn't have a choice! The choice was made FOR ME by jackasses who hated black bars! So for two decades it was nothing but butchered transfers.

I didn't get a choice then, why should uninformed stupid people get a choice now? If they don't like it they should suffer like I did.

PixyJunket

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=240043

aggiebg97

Boy the level of maturity of that post just overwhelms me. If someone doesn't like OAR, they're automatically labeled as an "idiot" and "jackasses who hated black bars" and "uninformed stupid people".

I can see this is really a place to have indepth adult conversations where different opinions are offered.

It's just a movie dude, chill out.

You'd think I'd suggested that America should have never gotten involved in WW II or something important.

Brett44

I can never understand why some members get so upset that some consumers enjoy full screen movies. What is the big deal? I prefer movies in OAR, but I could care less if my neighbor does or not.

As for the post, I'm not sure why the industry releases two or more versions of the same film on release day. Perhaps because of all the extras included on most releases they don't have room for two versions of the film.

Brett

retihsuhnt

And the funny thing is Pants still bought the VHS tapes.

pro-bassoonist

The big deal is that if you have a disc without any disc art with both version on it, it is pretty easy to scratch or damage the surface (I suppose you do not remember the old T2 threads).

I much rather have only one version on the market as at this point "forceful education" is indeed needed. Or have one offer- one double case with the two verisions + the extras. I am sure this would be much cheaper for the studios as opposed to having two separate versions. I DO HOWEVER LIKE AND NEED THE PROTECTIVE DISCWORK ON MY DVDS!!!!

aggiebg97

Didn't think about that, very good point. As for the rest of your post, I wholeheartedly agree. I'd rather they all be widescreen so I wouldn't have to have this weekly debate with the wife. Or boxed as 2 discs, agree completely.

DonnachaOne

They are not idiots, jackasses or stupid people.

But they are uninformed, ignorant philistines (not necessarily said in a negative manner). Most people don't know the same information that correct-aspect-ratio-lovers do. There should be a widescreen vs. 1.33:1 comparison before every 1.33:1 disc.

Pants

I get upset because of 20 years of VHS tyrany where I prefered movies in OAR, but my neighbor could care less and shoved pan and scan junk down my throat. Where was the compassion then? I wanted a choice then just as you want a choice now. But no one was listening then

The Void

That's a great idea. Instead of forcing you to watch trailers, show a widescreen vs. pan & scan comparison. No more of an annoyance than trailers but I'm sure it would piss off alot of people.

Jackskeleton

You know, Widescreen VHS was more expensive, harder to find and seen as the minority selling item. They did indeed push Fullscreen on folks without a choice. Atleast now you have a choice on which you can have. I personally don't care for fullscreen but if someone likes it fine, knock yourself out finding it because I really don't care what they do. I do care when the space on my dvd is compermised because they had to fit both widescreen and full frame on the same disc eating away at space that could have been for extra's or something else.

Give me two seperate disc.If you can't read "FULL SCREEN" and "WIDE SCREEN" perhaps you shouldn't be buying the dvd in the first place.

duz

If you knew how data was stored on dvd, you'd realise that the data is safer with a dual sided disc then it is with a single sided.

gutwrencher

my thoughts also...right on the mark!

rockinghorse

Touchy subject much?

Brian McHale

I would have to partially disagree with two parts of your post. First, I know someone who is actually informed and still chooses fullscreen. He's a smart guy and he knows what he's missing and he still wants his screen filled up. When he gets a widescreen TV, he expects widescreen movies to fill that up. He's convinced that 16x9 Pan 'n' Scan will become the new norm once widescreen sets become common. So he's not uninformed or ignorant, but he wants his screen filled.

And there's one problem with having a widescreen vs. 1.33:1 comparison before widescreen movies: a lot of movies are open matte. If you start showing Joe 6-Pack how the OAR version gives him LESS picture, it's all over!

DonnachaOne

Yes, because the correct choice is so glaringly obvious - it's understandable that the prevalence of modified-to-1.33:1 transfers would infuriate people such as myself.

talemyn

To start off, welcome to the board, aggie. After a little while here, you will start to recognize the distinct personalities of some of the more prolific posters and will get to know how to read thier post. In this case, you will see that Pants can get a tad militant about the WS issue, just as I noticed that you encountered, in the other thread, that Donnacha (as well as many others here) has a tendancy towards sarcasm . . . sans smilies. This is a fantastic board, filled with great information, but you will run into some occasional personality conflict in the process . . . but the info is well worth the "cost".

Anyway, back to the topic . . . I think offering 2-disc sets is the best option . . . one with WS and one with FF. Reasons:

1) It cuts down on total production costs (fewer printings needed to satisfy both FF and WS demand, fewer package designs for the seperate releases, etc.),
2) It reduces excess inventory and stock-outs caused by more complex demand models (i.e., how many WS and FF releases to stock vs. merely how many single 2-disc releases to stock),
3) It adds more space for storage of extras because of the additional disc, and
4) It reduces confusion/aggrevation amongst consumers (e.g., which version to get, identifying which package contains WS vs. FF, the return process when you accidentally pick the wrong one . . . even worse when you -- God forbid -- open it!, etc.).

I just don't see why there is any other option.

Pants

This is a contradiction of terms. If he's "a smart guy" but still likes fullscreen, then he is not "a smart guy". At least not about aspect ratio. Choosing to watch a film in its correct Aspect Ratio isn't some kind of opinion poll, there's only one answer.

PixyJunket

Wrong.

aggiebg97

Talemyn,

Thanks for the welcome, I greatly appreciate it.

I completely and totally 100% agree with you. Why can't the DVD industry see that? It's beyond me.

sracer

Yes we do. It is difficult to handle discs solely by the edges. Especially with some DVD players that have little tabs on the hub to hold the disc in place. Having only one data side to worry about is preferrable. Not to mention that the fullscreen/widescreen indicator text on the inside ring is extremely small.

Also, having separate editions helps the companies accurately track consumer preference by sales.

Just admit that you accidentally bought a widescreen disc when you wanted the fullscreen version... it's okay... we won't laugh at you.... much.

Pants

Enlighten me.

sracer

1) It does not reduce total production costs. Rather than produce 1000 widescreen discs and 2000 fullscreen discs (as an example), they would now have to produce 3000 widescreen discs and 3000 fullscreen discs. Considering how much (read: little) thought goes into package design, the cost of producing a slightly modifed package design for the other version is negligible.

2) It won't reduce excess inventory and stock-outs. Goodburger:WS and Goodburger:FS are treated as 2 separate inventory items.

3) The additional space for extras is negligible. That "2nd disc" happens to have another copy of the movie on it...which greatly reduces the available space for extras. Let's not forget that now we're talking about different extras on the FS disc vs. the WS disc in this 2 disc set... that INCREASES the production cost vs having separate FS/WS releases with a common extras disc.

4) If someone "accidentally" picks up the wrong version, they deserve ridicule. I haven't seen a dual release where there wasn't a banner at the top of the cover that said "Fullscreen" or "Widescreen"

Dave C

How can one not interpret "uninformed, ignorant philistines" in a negative manner?

Even the best read of your comment includes "ignorant" in it.

NOUN: 1. A member of an Aegean people who settled ancient Philistia around the 12th century b.c. 2a. A smug, ignorant, especially middle-class person who is regarded as being indifferent or antagonistic to artistic and cultural values. b. One who lacks knowledge in a specific area.

Why can't people ask questions on this forum without being subjected to such animosity?