It sort of depends on what your asking? Why do you think it is wrong to do different versions? Director intent? If that is the case do you agree that Full Metal Jacket should never be in WS because Kubrick wanted it in FF? Is it because of matching OAR? In that case, do you agree that The Blair Witch Project should never be in WS because it was released in theaters in FF?

If it is due to preference alone, then, it is indeed up to each individual as to what is the right choice for them. While you and I might not be able to fathom why it someone would want to watch a movie in FF when WS is available, it's their choice.

I've never been able to figure out why anyone in their right mind would ever want to eat tofu, but more power to you if your into it. Just don't ever ask me to do it.

To be picky, technically, ignorant just means lacking knowledge of a subject.

From Merriam-Webster Online:

1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>
2 : UNAWARE, UNINFORMED

That being said, you're right . . . it does, generally, have a negative connotation (as implied in definition 1b).

Since it was my post that set off this interchange, I'll give it a try.

Just because someone doesn't care about things like shot composition or director's intent doesn't mean he's stupid, or even ignorant; it simply means he doesn't care. You can't tell someone that their preference is "wrong" (well, you could, but then YOU'd be wrong).

And this statement is not only incredibly arrogrant, but blatantly wrong. Choosing to watch a film in something other than it's OAR is a personal preference. I don't PERSONALLY agree with it, but that's MY opinion. There are other valid opinions.

"...Just because someone doesn't care about things like shot composition or director's intent doesn't mean he's stupid, or even ignorant; it simply means he doesn't care..."

...whatever...

...deep, deep sigh...

. . . . . .

Go ahead enlight me.....

**
Process vs. "usage hazard"??.....I am looking forward to hear from you how is a dual sided disc safer and more efficient than a single sided (discwork included) carrier.

Hendrik:

Swiss air not good enough for you anymore?

Gonna have to disagree with you there . . Two points here:

1) While the package design is not the majority of the cost, I would hardly call it negligible. A fair share of releases show enough difference between the FF and WS packaging to make the extra time spent by the graphic designers to develop two distinct packages, add up to a considerable amount.

2) The point about reduced production runs was sort of tied into the second point about inventory forecasting. If you estimate that approximately 2000 units are going to sell, you have to produce much less of a buffer if there is only one version than if you also have to take into account estimating how many of those 2000 units are going to sell as WS and how many are going to sell as FF. You might want a 250 unit buffer to account for mis-forecasted demand which would mean a 2250 unit production run in the first situation, but in the second situation, you might also want to buffer unforseen demand for either of the two versions, so, instead o just doing 1125 of each, you might do 1250 of each to account for that variable as well, leading to a total run of 2500. This is all simplified and hypothetical, of course. Again, this ties into production runs. If you estimate that FF and WS will do equal business, but WS does better (as the Indy set seems to be doing), you are left with excess inventory in FF and stockouts in the WS.Hmmm . . . slightly different situation than I was thinking of . . . I was comparing two 1-disc releases to one 2-disc release. In the situation that you described, you are right, that does reduce space. In the case of combining a WS and a FF 2-disc set together . . . keep the extras disc and add a 3rd disc with the FF (and a little more space for even more extras. )I'm not talking about ridicule, I'm talking about about aggrevation and time wasted returning to the store and arguing with customer service (and, therefore, customer satisfaction). As for WS and FF banners, I personally (and others who have posted such experiences on this very board), have picked up FF versions where the format designation is covered by a sticker. In any case, a single release eliminates any possibility of any confusion.

wait a sec. people are seeing only the word "screen", because a sticker is hiding the rest? what are they doing...just taking a chance for the hell of it? "well...I cant read it BUT, it might be widescreen"........ C'mon people..THINK!!!!

if people dont take the time to research what they are holding in their hands....well, they need to get bullied a little. it's the only way they will learn to slow down and get a grip. it's not this difficult. we make it a chore.

C'mon now . . . only once in almost 200 DVD purchases . . . everybody makes a mistake from time to time . . .

My beef is that the WS/FF packaging often looks too much alike.
I have been burned twice by running in to Wally world and grabbing in a hurry..grrr
wasn't that big of a deal for Gold Member but I was really mad when I put in LOTR TT and saw that it was FF

Made sure I bought the correct version of the Matrix Reloaded

Yup!

. . . . . .

So if I don't know how to read it should be okay. I should simply explain I "just don't care about" reading.

If I "just don't care about" something that makes it okay to be ignorant.

Ignorance is ignorance even if you don't care about the subject.

The analogy doesn't match, Pants . . . the people in question know how to watch movies (or "know how to read"), they just choose a format that, I think most of us would agree, is inferior. It would be like some one who knows how to read, but prefers to read abridged versions of books rather than the full thing.

As far as ignorance goes, everybody is ignorant about some subject. And, in general, what we are ignorant about is determined by one of two things: 1) lack of access to information (not som much the case here), or 2) lack of interest in the subject matter (as Brian mentioned). In an ideal world, we would all make an effort to learn about everything, but realistically, we don't have the time, so we focus on 1) the things that are most important to our survival and, with the remaining available time, 2) the things that we have an interest in.

So, while some on this board might disagree , DVD watching is certainly not a matter of survival and, unfortunately for the "ignorants" in question, in many cases, it is not of enough interest for them to use their spare time to cure their ignorance (in the purely technical sense of the word . . . no negativity implied) by learning about aspect ratios and their various benefits.

Their choice . . . we may choose otherwise, but they do not . . .

Edit: Spelling typo . . . one of my areas of ignorance.

Exactly, it's just a matter of opinion, and intelligence has nothing to do with it. Movies are entertainment, end of story. If someone gets more enjoyment from watching Pan and Scan there's nothing wrong with that. P&S hender's my enoyment of a movie, but I'm not going to insult the intelligence of people who prefer.

talemyn is quickly becoming my favorite poster.

about 2): What he was saying is that retailers have to predict how many WS and how many FS copies they are going to sell, and it isn't always accurate. So, if, say, they were to get an equal amount of each, and they sold twice as many WS as FS (I wish), they would have extra FS. Also, it's a shame when someone who wants WS can't get it because the WS copies are sold out due to the retailer overestimating the demand for FS (or outright refusing to carry any WS at all). I think separate releases are better myself, but I can see the cons of them too.

about 4): there have been several instances where the WS copy says "widescreen" on a banner on the front, but the FS has no such banner (as if it were the "standard" ). The first Harry Potter movie, The Princess Diaries, Spirit: SOTC, and of course the Anniversary Edition of Willy Wonka ATCF are examples. With many discs being WS-only, and with the majority of separate-release FS titles being labeled as such on the front, I can see where someone could assume it's WS if there is no banner on the cover.

Happy to oblige Pixy.


Yeah . . . I got burned on that one . . . boy was I pissed. Luckily, my WS copy should arrive any day now and my FS copy will appear on eBay shortly thereafter.

Still . . . bastards . . .

Update: My WS Willy Wonka arrived about 15 minutes after posting this message (along with my Indy Trilogy).

Welcome to the forum aggiebg97!

I don't like to have P&S and WS on the same disk. Instead of one movie being put on the disk, two get crammed into the same amount of space and the picture quality is not as good.

I like having two different packages released, one for each aspect ratio.

I'm pretty sure he said he liked having one version on one side, and the other on the other side. That eliminates cramming them both on one disc.

This is true for me anyways! a Single sided disc with the Artwork's INK can sometimes dry up inside the disc and defecting it you know.

...very, very deep sigh...

. . . . . .

I've never got the "damage" issue. With a one sided disc, you don't have to worry about the top, and just have to be careful with the bottom.

With a two sided disc that has P&S on one side and WS on the other, you just have to be carefull with which ever side you prefer. I mean, I could careless about scratching the P&S side personally as I'll never watch.

Thus, either way, there's only one side of the disc you have to worry about scratching and what not.

Simple solution: Get a widescreen HDTV monitor, and your wife will drop her objections to widescreen (especially anamorphic widescreen).

Not to nitpick, but this is a bad example.

When Warner put out the SE of this title, it was ONLY released as with a full frame transfer. There was a large Internet campaign to get them to change this decision and release an SE Willy Wonka with the OAR.

Which, of course, illustrates, partly, why some of us get so upset about OAR. We're constantly worried that as DVD becomes more common, OAR will become less popular and thus harder to find. This is fear is the inspiration of quite a few threads actually.

It also kills off any chance of having some art printed on the disc. then you get the confussion on which side is which.

Either way, best way possible.. just put two disc in the package. one full one wide.

But you have to admit VHS was raped with Full screen and very little choice on the matter if you cared about the proper aspect ratio in those cases were it wasn't 4:3