The Cheapening of DVD
11-02-03, 08:44 PM
#26
Suspended
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fumastan,
It was common for rental VHS tapes to have trailers before the presentation - but when tapes were re-purposed for sell-through usually (but not always) there were no trailers before them.
Now we have DVD which offers a menu (usually) before viewing a film. Since DVD is not necessarily a linear medium like VHS tape, the trailers can be added to a part of the menu and not put before or after the presentation in a linear fashion.
Putting trailers in front of a film and trying to make it so that they can't be easily skipped is a minor annoyance, but a poor marketing ploy. Most of the people who have posted to threads regarding them have seemed to be annoyed to downright ANGRY about these trailers. Can this be a good thing from a marketing standpoint?
I think not.
It was common for rental VHS tapes to have trailers before the presentation - but when tapes were re-purposed for sell-through usually (but not always) there were no trailers before them.
Now we have DVD which offers a menu (usually) before viewing a film. Since DVD is not necessarily a linear medium like VHS tape, the trailers can be added to a part of the menu and not put before or after the presentation in a linear fashion.
Putting trailers in front of a film and trying to make it so that they can't be easily skipped is a minor annoyance, but a poor marketing ploy. Most of the people who have posted to threads regarding them have seemed to be annoyed to downright ANGRY about these trailers. Can this be a good thing from a marketing standpoint?
I think not.
11-03-03, 01:13 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: The Cheapening of DVD
The thing that makes me worry most are director's cuts/extended cuts/revisionist cuts of films. When we change formats which will be available? I think it will be the new version of the film because for the most part they are given better quality releases (both A/V and extra wise). Some theatrical cuts are not even available on DVD and others really need a new release to improve the picture quality but when the SE comes out is not on it.
I fear we are going to lose the theatrical cuts of some great movies. That concerns me much more than forced trailers and inserts.
I fear we are going to lose the theatrical cuts of some great movies. That concerns me much more than forced trailers and inserts.
11-03-03, 01:29 AM
#28
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: The Cheapening of DVD
Originally posted by jough
2) No insert.
This is a problem that seems like most DVD consumers don't care about, so since it costs *some* money to make and print inserts, and since DVD buyers have shown that they don't care, in general, the insert for DVDs will likely go the way of Divx in a few years' time.
I like having a booklet that I can read offscreen that offers additional printed material about a film - essays, reviews, a cast list that I can look at while the film is in the player, a chapter list, details about the production.
I prefer to buy films that have nice inserts, and given that I want to buy a lot of movies on DVD, I'll choose those that have inserts before those that don't.
But regardless of whether you think it's a big deal or not, it's another cheapening of the DVDs that we love.
2) No insert.
This is a problem that seems like most DVD consumers don't care about, so since it costs *some* money to make and print inserts, and since DVD buyers have shown that they don't care, in general, the insert for DVDs will likely go the way of Divx in a few years' time.
I like having a booklet that I can read offscreen that offers additional printed material about a film - essays, reviews, a cast list that I can look at while the film is in the player, a chapter list, details about the production.
I prefer to buy films that have nice inserts, and given that I want to buy a lot of movies on DVD, I'll choose those that have inserts before those that don't.
But regardless of whether you think it's a big deal or not, it's another cheapening of the DVDs that we love.
Last edited by scottall; 11-03-03 at 01:33 AM.
11-03-03, 01:42 AM
#29
Suspended
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, this thread is a list of ways in which DVD has been "cheapened" in recent months. It doesn't matter how important it is relatively.
There are obviously a number of people here who care about whether a DVD has an insert - enough to warrant mentioning it.
As far as Director's Cuts -vs- Theatrical releases, that's usually a decision of the director and not a result of cheapening a DVD release.
There are obviously a number of people here who care about whether a DVD has an insert - enough to warrant mentioning it.
As far as Director's Cuts -vs- Theatrical releases, that's usually a decision of the director and not a result of cheapening a DVD release.
11-03-03, 02:15 AM
#30
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that it does cheapen the overall dvd package, but you state that that you will buy a dvd that includes an insert before you buy one without. I am assuming that you are interested in both dvds, but if you become disinterested with a dvd because it has no insert then I think that is crazy. I understand the point of the thread, but I am responding to your comments under your main point. Sorry if that is not within your thread guidelines.
11-03-03, 06:39 AM
#31
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by scottall
.... you state that that you will buy a dvd that includes an insert before you buy one without. I am assuming that you are interested in both dvds, but if you become disinterested with a dvd because it has no insert then I think that is crazy.
.... you state that that you will buy a dvd that includes an insert before you buy one without. I am assuming that you are interested in both dvds, but if you become disinterested with a dvd because it has no insert then I think that is crazy.
11-03-03, 08:57 AM
#32
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jough, I find two of your contentions absurd. While I agree that a cinephile must prefer OAR, I do not agree that a cinephile will refuse to purchase a film because it is unavailable in OAR. In my view, a true cinephile will buy the films he loves when available and upgrade when possible. Why should I be denied watching Dario Argento's Sleepless because Artisan issued it full screen? I am not going to cut off my nose to spite my face.
In addiition, I find it absurd that you would buy a DVD with an insert in preference over another without one. This is simply insane. It is the movie which matters! You seem to have lost sight of that, which is something that no true cinephile would do.
In addiition, I find it absurd that you would buy a DVD with an insert in preference over another without one. This is simply insane. It is the movie which matters! You seem to have lost sight of that, which is something that no true cinephile would do.
11-03-03, 10:13 AM
#33
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by scottall
I agree that it does cheapen the overall dvd package, but you state that that you will buy a dvd that includes an insert before you buy one without. I am assuming that you are interested in both dvds, but if you become disinterested with a dvd because it has no insert then I think that is crazy. I understand the point of the thread, but I am responding to your comments under your main point. Sorry if that is not within your thread guidelines.
I agree that it does cheapen the overall dvd package, but you state that that you will buy a dvd that includes an insert before you buy one without. I am assuming that you are interested in both dvds, but if you become disinterested with a dvd because it has no insert then I think that is crazy. I understand the point of the thread, but I am responding to your comments under your main point. Sorry if that is not within your thread guidelines.
Originally posted by EPKJ
In addiition, I find it absurd that you would buy a DVD with an insert in preference over another without one. This is simply insane. It is the movie which matters! You seem to have lost sight of that, which is something that no true cinephile would do.
In addiition, I find it absurd that you would buy a DVD with an insert in preference over another without one. This is simply insane. It is the movie which matters! You seem to have lost sight of that, which is something that no true cinephile would do.
As for the rest of the original post . . . I pretty much agree completely, with the one deviation being on the "to buy or not to buy" issue of FF only releases. I think it deepends on the release. Ishtar in FF only, I think I wait for the WS . . . actually, that's a bad example . . . I don't think even a WS release of that would get me to buy it.
Okay . . . Happy Gilmore . . . I will most likely get it when it is released in WS, but I've got a FF version on VHS, so I'll watch that until they come to their senses. However Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory . . . no contest . . . this was one I had to have immediately, so I bought it in FF and upgraded within minutes (literally) of finding out that a WS version had been made available.I think that we can all safely say that we would prefer that movies were released in OAR when they come out on DVD. I think it's more of a question of how you wait out the time period before that release . . . with no movie or with an inferior version of it. Luckily (although this maybe debated by some) I still have a lot of my VHS movies left, so I don't have to make that decision. If a movie that I want isn't out on WS DVD yet, chances are, I already have the FF version on tape and that is good enough to tide me over until they release it in WS.
11-03-03, 10:18 AM
#34
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
I personally could care less about the 'insert'--by 'insert' I mean the little front/back paper that has some credits and a chapter listing. If you mean a 'booklet', like in Brazil Criterion, or even a couple page fold out, where there's additional information on the movie, on the production, or even a 'letter to the fans' like in Dogma, that's cool. But that's not a decision rule for me.
I definitely prefer OAR, and I don't think I'd buy something that was P/Scanned, especially now that I have a widescreen tv [but even before then, I didn't, once I got into DVD.] I'd *watch* some, sure--the movie channels mostly play p/s, and while I'd never pay money for it, if it's a movie I want to see, but not enough to own, I'll check it out on HBO or whatever. I will still bitch and moan about it though.
VHS previews--Even the VHS sellthrough tapes that have previews, you can fast forward through them, so it's not quite apples to apples with the forced, nonskippable previews on some dvds.
Re: double dipping--your reasons B and C are enough for me. A DD doesn't have to be a superior transfer, but it has to be at least as good. Either more extras [preferably when the first one had none], and/or a superior transfer. Ideally both. Kind of moot point, though, because I don't think I've ever bought a double dip.
And nowadays, with DVD accounting for half the home-video market, there is absolutely no reason for a barebones/doubledip, except that the company thinks they can get away with it. There are, what, seventeen versions of the American Pie movies? If it has to be done, LotR is doing it right--announcing both at the same time, different extras, almost all very interesting, additional scenes to the picture, etc. You don't feel cheated buying only one version.
Directors cuts/theatrical cuts--that's a good one. I don't mind remastering and making something look/sound better; but I do have problems with 'changing' it. [vis ET]. Directors cut with 'added' stuff is one thing, but they should allow for the viewing of the theatrical version also. If it weren't for director's cuts, we'd only have the Happily Ever After version of Brazil.
Packaging--I agree, I hate those mulitple tape things, and plastic wrap, and security buttons inside. For an item which is honestly not that expensive. But this isn't only DVD's--cd's have been a PITA to get into for quite some time, and when we buy toys for my 1 year old son, they are attached in those boxes so well it takes us 10-20 minutes, literally, to get the silly thing out. So this is a trend in the whole 'retail' environment, unfortunately. At least they haven't gone to those *#&$# blisterpacks, I HATE those.
DVDRom--I agree with this one. I guess there are some things that make better sense on a computer, but hey, I don't have a working DVDrom [well, we do know, we just got a new computer.] [Steel Angel Kurumi, for instance, included PDF files of folding 'fortune tellers', which obviously can't be viewed on your TV.] But still.
But I would like to discuss your main contention: that these factors, and others, are 'cheapening DVD.' Some of them, yes--for films to be released *only* in P&S, not OAR, is an insult. But many of the others serve to provide attraction for the 'non-DVD' market, that is, Joe SixPack. We can either have an elitist, very limited product, that usually is very expensive and hard to find [laserdisc], or a product that offers something to many different types of people, opening the market up to new things, more time and energy spent on products, and the potential for a better overall release. Plus, it's always possible that J6P, who previously bought P&S from WalMart, would luck onto a website like this, or www.widescreen.org, etc, and say Hey, there's a whole new world out there; and that can only be a good thing, imho. And yes, they'll still be the regular folks who 'don't care' about OAR, don't consider themselves cinephiles, etc. And it's these people buying dvd's that allow me to get dvd's for an average of something like 8-11 dollars, including multi-hour TV show sets. As long as I can still get OAR, I will try to educate them, but the ultimate decision is up to them [an example of this would be my parents--they don't buy movies or have a DVD player, but I still talk widescreen/home theater to them; they are too set in their ways to really change now, but they do recognize that there is a difference. And they wondered why I needed a 60" widescreen HDTV, but they sure didn't mind watching The Bourne Identity on it.]
Of course, even with all that said, there is a fine line between, say, local stores 'cheapening' products so that there are more products, better choices, better service, and cheaper prices available; and WalMart moving into town and stomping every other store into nonexistence. We potentially face that with DVD, and that's the threat I see [allegorically] in the 'cheapening' of DVD.
I definitely prefer OAR, and I don't think I'd buy something that was P/Scanned, especially now that I have a widescreen tv [but even before then, I didn't, once I got into DVD.] I'd *watch* some, sure--the movie channels mostly play p/s, and while I'd never pay money for it, if it's a movie I want to see, but not enough to own, I'll check it out on HBO or whatever. I will still bitch and moan about it though.
VHS previews--Even the VHS sellthrough tapes that have previews, you can fast forward through them, so it's not quite apples to apples with the forced, nonskippable previews on some dvds.
Re: double dipping--your reasons B and C are enough for me. A DD doesn't have to be a superior transfer, but it has to be at least as good. Either more extras [preferably when the first one had none], and/or a superior transfer. Ideally both. Kind of moot point, though, because I don't think I've ever bought a double dip.
And nowadays, with DVD accounting for half the home-video market, there is absolutely no reason for a barebones/doubledip, except that the company thinks they can get away with it. There are, what, seventeen versions of the American Pie movies? If it has to be done, LotR is doing it right--announcing both at the same time, different extras, almost all very interesting, additional scenes to the picture, etc. You don't feel cheated buying only one version.
Directors cuts/theatrical cuts--that's a good one. I don't mind remastering and making something look/sound better; but I do have problems with 'changing' it. [vis ET]. Directors cut with 'added' stuff is one thing, but they should allow for the viewing of the theatrical version also. If it weren't for director's cuts, we'd only have the Happily Ever After version of Brazil.
Packaging--I agree, I hate those mulitple tape things, and plastic wrap, and security buttons inside. For an item which is honestly not that expensive. But this isn't only DVD's--cd's have been a PITA to get into for quite some time, and when we buy toys for my 1 year old son, they are attached in those boxes so well it takes us 10-20 minutes, literally, to get the silly thing out. So this is a trend in the whole 'retail' environment, unfortunately. At least they haven't gone to those *#&$# blisterpacks, I HATE those.
DVDRom--I agree with this one. I guess there are some things that make better sense on a computer, but hey, I don't have a working DVDrom [well, we do know, we just got a new computer.] [Steel Angel Kurumi, for instance, included PDF files of folding 'fortune tellers', which obviously can't be viewed on your TV.] But still.
But I would like to discuss your main contention: that these factors, and others, are 'cheapening DVD.' Some of them, yes--for films to be released *only* in P&S, not OAR, is an insult. But many of the others serve to provide attraction for the 'non-DVD' market, that is, Joe SixPack. We can either have an elitist, very limited product, that usually is very expensive and hard to find [laserdisc], or a product that offers something to many different types of people, opening the market up to new things, more time and energy spent on products, and the potential for a better overall release. Plus, it's always possible that J6P, who previously bought P&S from WalMart, would luck onto a website like this, or www.widescreen.org, etc, and say Hey, there's a whole new world out there; and that can only be a good thing, imho. And yes, they'll still be the regular folks who 'don't care' about OAR, don't consider themselves cinephiles, etc. And it's these people buying dvd's that allow me to get dvd's for an average of something like 8-11 dollars, including multi-hour TV show sets. As long as I can still get OAR, I will try to educate them, but the ultimate decision is up to them [an example of this would be my parents--they don't buy movies or have a DVD player, but I still talk widescreen/home theater to them; they are too set in their ways to really change now, but they do recognize that there is a difference. And they wondered why I needed a 60" widescreen HDTV, but they sure didn't mind watching The Bourne Identity on it.]
Of course, even with all that said, there is a fine line between, say, local stores 'cheapening' products so that there are more products, better choices, better service, and cheaper prices available; and WalMart moving into town and stomping every other store into nonexistence. We potentially face that with DVD, and that's the threat I see [allegorically] in the 'cheapening' of DVD.
11-03-03, 10:30 AM
#35
DVD Talk Hero
another bad thing for us cinefiles are when they skip dts but put it on another region (pirates of the carabian for instnace, the uk gets dts, same with the hulk.) dd is fine and dandy but mostly for me, dts will have sound thats louder, so i don't have to turn the volume up to loud.
11-03-03, 10:47 AM
#36
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by jough
gutwrencher,
I left transfer quality off the list because that's simply a GIVEN. And for the most part transfer quality is improving, and my list is mostly comprised of things that have been cheapening, declining, etc.
And ben12, I'm sure I can think of more ways DVD is being cheapened by studios looking to increase profits at the cost of quality, but my initial list is a good enough start.
gutwrencher,
I left transfer quality off the list because that's simply a GIVEN. And for the most part transfer quality is improving, and my list is mostly comprised of things that have been cheapening, declining, etc.
And ben12, I'm sure I can think of more ways DVD is being cheapened by studios looking to increase profits at the cost of quality, but my initial list is a good enough start.
1. Video quality is getting better every year: Pixar Titles, IJ box set, Most of the Superbit titles (not all), Snow White, The Matrix Reloaded...
-99% of all DVD come in OAR, sure there are a few that do not - Like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. This NOTHING to worry about, Full vers OAR, the studios will not stop making OAR.
-Almost all new titles are getting to be almost ref quality
-Measure the 1st few years of DVD to the DVD being release now, and you will see a HUGE jump in quality. That alone will help balance your "Cheaping of DVD".
2. Sound quality has also taken major leaps, maybe not as much as video, but there has been alot of improvement.
-I now have a system that plays DTS and my ears cannot tell much of a difference on most of the titles.
3. Extra features: TLOTR (both movies and a 3rd to come. Everything will look poor compared to TLOTR), Star Wars, BOB, Indiana Jones Box Set (I loved the extras, some may not have)...and many more.
-Most movies being filmed now have someone in charge of creating extras for the DVD from the beginning of the movie (Star Wars, TLOTR...)
-True, not all DVDs have great Extras, but not all DVDs in the beginning had great extras either. So, it would be wrong to compare them to today.
4. TV Box sets: BOB, Smallvillie, 24, Simpsons, Star Trek sets, Buffy, Looney Toons...
-Great sets that were not around when DVDs first came out.
5. Restorations: Snow White, Singing in the rain, Casablanca, Adventures of Robin Hood, Sleeping Beauty, Lion King (except fot the Morning Report song), West Side Story (which had a GREAT insert)...
-The bar continues to raised for movies being restored for DVD
Saying that you are only counting the things that are "cheapening DVD" is like only looking at money I spend every month. After awhile I would get depressed. I also need to look at how much money am making per month. Lets hope I always make a gain, not a loss per month.
Overall, I would say that DVD is a much better product today than it was 4 or 5 years ago.
Have a good day!
Last edited by Iron_Giant; 11-03-03 at 10:55 AM.
11-03-03, 10:49 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North Carolina (in two weeks!)
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: The Cheapening of DVD
What, you didn't mention flippers? Maybe this isn't a "cheapening" of the DVD. But come on, give me two layers or another disc!
Plus, it's easy enough to splice that trailer right out of there! 
Originally posted by jough
People have made the case that VHS rentals have long had trailers before them. This is true. Video RENTALS have had these trailers - but if I've purchased a disc that I'll probably watch more than once over the years, I don't want to have to sit through increasingly outdated trailers EVERY TIME.
People have made the case that VHS rentals have long had trailers before them. This is true. Video RENTALS have had these trailers - but if I've purchased a disc that I'll probably watch more than once over the years, I don't want to have to sit through increasingly outdated trailers EVERY TIME.
11-03-03, 10:51 AM
#38
Suspended
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't mention DTS because there are more DTS releases NOW than ever in R1. It's not like every DVD used to have DTS but now they're not doing a DTS transfer to save money, which again, is my point.
For a clarification, I have in the past bought the Canadian version of a disc simply because it had a better cover image (nearly always) and an insert, when the U.S. version did NOT, i.e. "Far From Heaven."
But there have also been times when I had two DVDs in my hand, could only afford to buy one of them, and remembered that one of the films didn't have an insert. I put it back on the shelf.
Of course the FILM itself is my main concern, but I love many many films, and can't afford to buy them all, so I have to choose which product to buy. Given the option, if I like both films equally, I'll choose to buy the one that's less cheapened by the above factors.
And it's not like these discs are going anywhere, or won't be released in a different (hopefully better) format/package/etc. later.
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
It's a minor annoyance but it's still something that makes the overall package cheaper, which is my point.
For a clarification, I have in the past bought the Canadian version of a disc simply because it had a better cover image (nearly always) and an insert, when the U.S. version did NOT, i.e. "Far From Heaven."
But there have also been times when I had two DVDs in my hand, could only afford to buy one of them, and remembered that one of the films didn't have an insert. I put it back on the shelf.
Of course the FILM itself is my main concern, but I love many many films, and can't afford to buy them all, so I have to choose which product to buy. Given the option, if I like both films equally, I'll choose to buy the one that's less cheapened by the above factors.
And it's not like these discs are going anywhere, or won't be released in a different (hopefully better) format/package/etc. later.
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
It's a minor annoyance but it's still something that makes the overall package cheaper, which is my point.
11-03-03, 11:11 AM
#39
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by jough
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
It's a minor annoyance but it's still something that makes the overall package cheaper, which is my point.
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
It's a minor annoyance but it's still something that makes the overall package cheaper, which is my point.
11-03-03, 12:00 PM
#40
There's another downfall about not including inserts anymore. I sold a sealed copy of The Hot Chick on Half.com and the guy left me a neutral feedback claiming I homemade shrinkwrapped the disc because there was no insert. I sent him a poilte email asking why he left me a neutral feedback without contacting me, explained that a lot of discs don't come with inserts now (including a link to our DVDtalk insert thread) and asked how I could have duplicated the security sticker on the top of the disc. He replied to it with a simple "Don't cry". I left him a negative feedback after that. So glad I now wait for feedback first whenever I sell something.
11-03-03, 01:16 PM
#41
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not mind what most of the companies are doing now with DVDs. I have not been disappointed with a release in quite some time.
1) I do not care that there are FS and WS versions available. I buy the widescreen versions, but alot of my family members have smaller televisions so they buy or rent FS. I do not agree with it, but I am glad that they have that choice.
2) As far as inserts are concerened, I hardly ever looked at them anyways. I prefer them with inserts, but I would not stop purchasing DVDs because of it.
3) I agree that snappers suck, but most companies have started changing lately. I cannot wait to see snappers go.
4) I do not mind the forced trailers. Come on, there have always been trailers (in theaters and VHS). It is simple marketing. And, many of them can be skipped.
5) I do not think double-dipping is as bad as people let on. I have upgraded many of my titles to newer versions and do not mind. Also, I have read many posts on this board, that people wish Lucas would release a barebones version of Star Wars Ep 4-6. Well, wouldn't this be double dipping according to the criteria?
6) I want anamorphic transfers and almost every release now has it. Not like it was in the past when it was hit or miss.
7&8) I also do not care about these issues. I do not really like the promotional or DVD rom stuff, but its inclusion will not keep me from purchasing a DVD. I think the DVD rom stuff will eventually go away because most people aren't using it.
I am not a cinephile or a joe six pack, but I love movies. I have about 400+ DVDs and a large HT system with widescreen TV. I realize that many people cannot afford it or take it as serious. Why should companies completely cater to these demands?
The prices of DVDs are coming down.
They are almost always releasing anamorphic transfers now.
Why do we keep hearing complaints?
I applaud their efforts to try and make everyone happy. Sure, there are going to be a few bumps in the road, but it has steadily gotten better since 1997. Besides, they are just movies!!
1) I do not care that there are FS and WS versions available. I buy the widescreen versions, but alot of my family members have smaller televisions so they buy or rent FS. I do not agree with it, but I am glad that they have that choice.
2) As far as inserts are concerened, I hardly ever looked at them anyways. I prefer them with inserts, but I would not stop purchasing DVDs because of it.
3) I agree that snappers suck, but most companies have started changing lately. I cannot wait to see snappers go.
4) I do not mind the forced trailers. Come on, there have always been trailers (in theaters and VHS). It is simple marketing. And, many of them can be skipped.
5) I do not think double-dipping is as bad as people let on. I have upgraded many of my titles to newer versions and do not mind. Also, I have read many posts on this board, that people wish Lucas would release a barebones version of Star Wars Ep 4-6. Well, wouldn't this be double dipping according to the criteria?
6) I want anamorphic transfers and almost every release now has it. Not like it was in the past when it was hit or miss.
7&8) I also do not care about these issues. I do not really like the promotional or DVD rom stuff, but its inclusion will not keep me from purchasing a DVD. I think the DVD rom stuff will eventually go away because most people aren't using it.
I am not a cinephile or a joe six pack, but I love movies. I have about 400+ DVDs and a large HT system with widescreen TV. I realize that many people cannot afford it or take it as serious. Why should companies completely cater to these demands?
The prices of DVDs are coming down.
They are almost always releasing anamorphic transfers now.
Why do we keep hearing complaints?
I applaud their efforts to try and make everyone happy. Sure, there are going to be a few bumps in the road, but it has steadily gotten better since 1997. Besides, they are just movies!!
Last edited by kmac; 11-03-03 at 01:26 PM.
11-03-03, 01:30 PM
#42
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually you could more accurately title this "The Enrichment of DVD". Even with all these legitimate gripes, the cost of a quality transfer with extra features is lower than ever before. As someone who started my digital collection with LDs, most of these issues seem fairly minor.
To use an apple/orange analogy, it's like complaining about CDs because the package is smaller...and ignoring fun things like noise, flutter, wow, etc. Ah, the young'uns are scratching their heads now.
To use an apple/orange analogy, it's like complaining about CDs because the package is smaller...and ignoring fun things like noise, flutter, wow, etc. Ah, the young'uns are scratching their heads now.
11-03-03, 01:36 PM
#43
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah - USA
Posts: 5,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MrE
...and ignoring fun things like noise, flutter, wow, etc. Ah, the young'uns are scratching their heads now.
...and ignoring fun things like noise, flutter, wow, etc. Ah, the young'uns are scratching their heads now.
. . .
11-03-03, 02:59 PM
#44
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Flava-Country!
Posts: 3,964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by jough
3/4ths wouldn't be as bad, but most "Full Frame" transfers cut off 30-45% of the image (see widescreen.org for more on film mutilation).
3/4ths wouldn't be as bad, but most "Full Frame" transfers cut off 30-45% of the image (see widescreen.org for more on film mutilation).
I would rather have the entire image, which is the point of my #1 cheapening concern.
But there have also been times when I had two DVDs in my hand, could only afford to buy one of them, and remembered that one of the films didn't have an insert. I put it back on the shelf.
Some "cinephile" you are.
Look to MGM and their midnight movies line. A whole bunch of great B-movies for under 10 bucks - and not an insert to be found in any of them. If ditching the inserts makes the discs cheaper (as in lower overall price) then great - get rid of the damn things. More power to them.
But then, I'm just one of the great unwashed and uneducated DVD masses. What do I know?
11-03-03, 03:45 PM
#45
Suspended
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
El-Kabong
But then, I'm just one of the great unwashed and uneducated DVD masses. What do I know?
But then, I'm just one of the great unwashed and uneducated DVD masses. What do I know?
I didn't say that the quality of the film has nothing to do with my decision to buy or not to buy. I said that my list of films that I want to own on DVD is greater than my income, so I have to CHOOSE which films to buy NOW. Given the option between a sub-par release in FS, with no insert, in a snapper case, with only a promotional featurette as an extra, and the new Super-Dooper SE with a beautiful transfer and nicer packaging, if I like the films the same, I'll get the SE.
If more people didn't buy the crappier releases they'd have to do a better job in the future if they want our money. There are a tonne of back catalog items that I've never picked up because newer, better releases come out every week.
At this rate, I can wait for a newer release of "Remo Williams." And if they don't ever put out a widescreen release of it on DVD, I'll wait until the HD-DVD, or whatever the next format is.
There are just too many films that I love to warrant spending my money on sub-par releases.
Last edited by jough; 11-03-03 at 03:48 PM.
11-03-03, 05:06 PM
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Flava-Country!
Posts: 3,964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by jough
Exactly.
Exactly.
And frankly, I wouldnt want to be part of this elitist anal retentive film snob club anyway. I enjoy the movies, not the freakin' box that it came in, or a silly piece of paper with chapter stops on it, or the extras that did or didn't get packed in with it.
The movie is key. Everything else is meaningless details.
11-03-03, 05:32 PM
#47
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by jough
But there have also been times when I had two DVDs in my hand, could only afford to buy one of them, and remembered that one of the films didn't have an insert. I put it back on the shelf.
...
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
But there have also been times when I had two DVDs in my hand, could only afford to buy one of them, and remembered that one of the films didn't have an insert. I put it back on the shelf.
...
True, I usually will only read an insert once, or will maybe check out the chapter list for reference when I look up a particular scene, but I can't help thinking "Cheap. Lame." when I open a DVD case to see nothing but the disc.
Instead of "The Cheapening of DVD," it sounds to me as if this thread would be better titled "The Fetishizing of Irrelevant Aspects of DVD." If a self-described "cinephile" can't help but obsess on the insert (or lack thereof) upon the opening of a DVD case, I'd rather be a clueless newbie who actually thinks about film first.
DJ
11-03-03, 05:41 PM
#48
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Woodbridge, Virginia
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jough, one thing we all have in common is that we will all die one day. I don't know how long I will live. I might live another 54 years and reach 100 or I might be killed in a car accident tomorrow. Life is too short for me to pass up buying a film I love on DVD because it isn't OAR or because it doesn't have an insert. Think about it.
11-03-03, 06:27 PM
#49
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a river in a kayak..where else?
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by El-Kabong
I enjoy the movies, not the freakin' box that it came in, or a silly piece of paper with chapter stops on it, or the extras that did or didn't get packed in with it.
The movie is key. Everything else is meaningless details.
I enjoy the movies, not the freakin' box that it came in, or a silly piece of paper with chapter stops on it, or the extras that did or didn't get packed in with it.
The movie is key. Everything else is meaningless details.
11-03-03, 07:33 PM
#50
Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by gutwrencher
bingo.
bingo.