Ed Crane

You're the man jough!

gutwrencher

half a bingo?

I'm building a perfect, personal film library. a historical document of sorts. the film is priority. anything else that comes along is just a bonus. I'm no idiot though...of course I love extras! but if it's barebones, like the recent Dragonslayer, so be it. for now.

Jericho

My opinions on these....

1) Full Screen/Pan & Scan/"Standard" Ratio Transfers

While it's true that there are more full screen releases then ever, 99% of them also have a widescreen version. I don't really see that as a bad thing. In fact, there were more movies released in JUST full screen in the early days (i.e. Happy Gilmore, Chariots of Fire) than there are now. I don't care what other people want, I just care what I want. And there's no evidence that releasing a movie in fullscreen is bad for widescreen fans unless you're careless and get the wrong DVD (something I've never done)

2) No insert.

Yeah, it looks empty w/o one, but I never actually use them so in the end I don't really care

3) Keepcase vs. Digipack/Snapper Cases

I prefer the Keepcase, but I really have no problem with Snappers or Digipacks. People have bitched about the snapper forever, but in the end all I care about is what's on the disc. Although snappers may not be as nice, I've never had any real problems with any of the snapper cases I have.

4) Forced Trailers

I actually like watching some of these, and although it ican be annoying, I find this very minor. Most can be skipped by hitting menu or chapter skip. Even the Hulk DVD I can just hit fast forward and be at the menu in 2 seconds. That's not a big deal to me.

5) Double-Dipping

By far the thing on this list I actually agree with. I have no problem with studios re-releasing early DVD releases with better transfers, extras, etc... However, with new DVDs (and I'm talking about anything in the last 3 years) re-releases thend to be just due to laziness of the studios. Today more than ever studios have a DVD planned in advance of the actual movie being released, so there's little reason not to do it right the first time. Any other way seems like a FU from the studios. Luckily this doesn't happen very much (outside of the crappy Superbit line which I largely ignore)

6) Non-Anamorphic Transfers for Widescreen Ratios

Like you said, this has actually improved since when I got into DVD in '99. Very happy

7) Promotional Special Features
Suggested by Drexl

I guess this has improved in that many early DVDs did not have any extras so at least it's something. On the other hand, it is pretty much nothing even if it is considered an "extra". I don't expect every release to be a collector's edition gem though, so I can live with what I have. And let's face it, studios don't want to bother making nice stuff for some movies.

8) DVD-ROM/Web Content en lieu of DVD-Video Content
Suggested by napstimpy

I've never actually used a DVD-Rom feature. Partly because the computer I used to own didn't even have one and partly because I watch my movies on a large widescreen TV and not a computer. I guess I don't like the idea since I've never bother to use it, but I don't know what I missing either.

All in all, I'm pretty happy with how the DVD industry has gone. I know some people have feared that as the industry grew we'd see a dumbing down of discs or more fullscreen only movies, but the opposite has happened. I see better and better discs all the time. And I like how I can go into a Walmart and get many discs cheap. The more people get into it, the better the prices seem to get. And that's pretty good in my book.

Wizdar

I don’t understand how a “cinephile” can cite Hulk when Disney has been doing this for ages. In fact, Disney invented this in the vhs era. See above.




What I find funny is that, as a troll thread, this isn’t even original.



Now you’re talking! While this isn’t exactly news, compared with the stuff in the first post, it started just yesterday.

talemyn

I don't see why everyone is jumping on jough. Can anyone honestly say that you wouldn't prefer to see all of the things that he mentioned be addressed properly in all future DVD releases? He was making a legitimate commentary of things that he, and MANY of the rest of us, all find wrong with current DVD releases.

And I don't want to hear anyone say anything about him being snobby and elitist, because, for the most part, anything that he said that could be taken that way came about after everyone started attacking him.

As I stated earlier, I agree that sometimes you do go ahead and buy FF DVD's if that is all that is available, but that was not even part of his original post. All he said was that DVD's should be released OAR.Can anyone actually say that they would not prefer their non-OAR releases to be released in OAR? That's all he was saying . . .

As for inserts, again, he only said that he wished all DVD's had them. Then he stated how he personally deals with situations in which DVD's that he is considering do not have inserts. Never once did he suggest, imply, or demand that anyone else do the same.

I agree with you jough . . . I'd like it if everyone of these things where addressed . . . even the part about non-skippable trailers, which I have previously stated (in other threads), don't really bother me. DVD's would be improved if they were gone, too.

Edit:

Quote:

Originally posted by Wizdar
What I find funny is that, as a troll thread, this isn’t even original.

And why is it that when ever anyone wants to start a legitimate discussion about something it is labelled a "troll thread". Have you ever read any of jough's other posts? Not exactly troll material for the most part.

DVDho78DTS

Yeah, when I think of jough I think Indiana Jones, Best Buy, chase Manager to Restricted Area. Bad story but a funny one.

The man is very passionate about his DVD's.

talemyn

I love that story too. BTW, jough, did you ever post whatever it was that the regional manager said he was going to send you?

The Third Jake

Yeah. Close, but not a true bingo. Maybe the four corners. (That one's for all the grandmothers out there.)

Anyway, I totally agree with you. I just wouldn't describe everything besides the movie as meaningless. Subordinate would be more like it.

jough

Yes, Disney has had forced trailers for ages, but at least on their recent big title release, "The Lion King" you can skip past them easily.

I'd still prefer they not be there at all, but I mentioned "The Hulk" because it was the hot-button issue of the week.

Sometimes I forget that people don't read any other threads but mine.

I wanted to address the small issues that I've noticed many other people were incensed about in a single thread.

EPKJ

You think that people are incensed by lack of inserts? I think that you are out of touch.

BizRodian

There have always been trailers in front of your movies? funny, this has never happened to me until a few DVDs started doing it.

El-Kabong

In a perfect world, yeah - of course I'd love every release to be a widescreen disc with a fantastic transfer and loaded to the brim with extras. Sadly we dont live in a perfect world, and I'll take what I can get.

Guess you must have read a different thread than I was, because that first post was VERY condescending to the 'joe 6-packs' - or indeed anyone who would dare tolerate a insert-less pan and scan version of their favorite film. And of course it only went down hill from there.

Of course I've always thought that the whole distinction around here between Cinephiles and J6P'ers in of itself is an elitist and snobbish view. Just because they don't like what you like doesn't give you the right to rip on them.

DonnachaOne

DVDs aren't getting any cheaper
I still see criterions that are $40
wtf up with that

gcribbs

I also want to see my dvd's in OAR

I do not want them to make a 4:3 film or Tv show into 16:9 just to make it widescreen nor do I want to see a 2.35:1 film cut down to 1.33:1 to fill someone's small TV.

I guess that makes me an elitist

I do however like to have insert free dvd's

It makes it easier to tell floaters from inserts when I shake a dvd at the store

do I own some altered dvd's- yes

Joel

Phew. This thread. It took me a while to understand the whole concept of cheapening, and now I have lots of comment swimming in my head reading all your posts. Don't know where to start writing it down . So let me highlight some comments.

Mostly I'm with you. But I really don't think it is necessary to take things this hard. For me "Cinephile" is just a freaking title. The same as "Joe-Six-Pack" thing. Some people are proud of bearing this title, while it doesn't mean anything to the others.

Well .. I will quote this ..
I'm sure jough meant no harm in creating this thread .. but when you care to ask about my first thoughts, marty888 has said it all .

Anyway. Here's my comments on the cheapening.

1) Full Screen/Pan & Scan/"Standard" Ratio Transfers
Tell me about it. I am a VCD consumer .. yeah, you heard me. So it doesn't really matter to me. Of course when it comes to DVDs, I'd still prefer widescreen version. The reason is clear. Extra money to get extra quality.

2) No insert.
It is just a printed paper. Bonus is bonus. Good to have, won't miss it if it's not there.

3) Keepcase vs. Digipack/Snapper Cases
In my limited collection, I have all the cases. Keepcase, Digipack and Snapper. No problem with that. When I buy DVDs, I look for the movies and not the cases.

4) Forced Trailers
I love trailers .

5) Double-Dipping
Haven't had to do double-dipping cause I am very slow in purchasing DVDs. Even when a studio re-releasing better versions of a movie that I have bought earlier, I don't think I will bother to buy it double. I will rent it instead, just to notify the difference.

6) Non-Anamorphic Transfers for Widescreen Ratios
Good to see all my collections are anamorphic, in coincidence. Never really give it a thought, not until I have 16:9 TV.

7) Promotional Special Features
Have no problem with this. I'd love to watch all kind of features. If one day I get bored, I can skip it.

8) DVD-ROM/Web Content en lieu of DVD-Video Content
Usually I ignore this bonus. Never want to have trouble opening it from my bro's computer.

From a Joe-Six-Pack (or a Jane, whatever), all I can say, things that are cheapening DVDs are very subjective. It depends on our expectation, on how we would like to spend our money and time on it.

Let's enjoy movies .. presented in the most suitable ways we choose to have.

talemyn

I believe that was his point . . .Interesting, because, he never mentioned J6P's until the very last line:I think that you are missing a big distinction here. Cinephiles are people who take an extreme interest in film. They study it, they research it, and they put a lot of time into knowing about and enjoying it. There is a natural inclination to be a bit defensive when people do not appreciate your interests and yet, still impact your ability to enjoy them (e.g., the proclivity for FF by J6P's can influences a cinephiles ability to find OAR releases).

I think that a great comparison is vinophiles. My uncle has an excellent understanding of and appreciation for wine. He has spent many years experiencing and learning about different wines . . . learning their subtleties . . . learning what to enjoy them with . . . learning how to enjoy them. He has every right to be indignant if he has to go the extra mile to find a decent wine because people like me will drink most anything that is put in front of me (not to mention the people who regularly enjoy Boone's Farms). He has put effort into his interest and I'm sure that he feels some level of disrespect when people don't recognize his level of dedication to his interest.

I think that the important thing to recognize is that there is a difference between cinephiles and J6P's. J6P's do not recognize the full potential of what films have to offer. They don't appreciate the intricacies that cinephiles do. That doesn't make J6P's worse people, but it does make them ignorant (using the technical definition of "resulting from or showing lack of knowledge") to everything that a film has to offer.

Yes, there is a certain level of condescention in the term Joe Six-Pack, but more than anything, it is more a playful and convenient way of saying "people who don't appreciate movies". That's the way I use it and that is the way I interpret it when other people use it. The context of it's use may show less respect, but the term in itself doesn't necessary mean anything bad (like "jock" or "techie").

Anyway . . . enough for now . . .

jough

I think it is YOU who are out of touch.
Perhaps you don't read these forums much.
I wouldn't say that they're incensed as such,
but just the same, as with the films they watch
folks 'round these parts prefer an insert with their discs to match.

There is an entire SUBFORUM devoted to the subject of inserts in DVDs and other packaging:

http://dvdtalk.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=35

And many many threads just in the past month asking about whether a title has an insert, people arguing back and forth about whether DVDs *should* have inserts.

I didn't make this agon up - I just added it to a list of common gripes people have about things that used to be STANDARD and EXPECTED and now no longer are a *given*.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=insert

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=insert

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=302534

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=insert

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=insert

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=298231

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=insert


I think I've made my point.

djtoell

Some folks. Please don't make a blanket statement that pretends to speak for the entire forum membership.

Quote:

I think I've made my point.

If your point is that a lot of people obsess on inserts, you're quite right. Of course, a whole lot of people dislike having those black bars on their TV sets, too. Safety isn't always to be found in numbers.

DJ

jough

I think I can make an easy blanket statement:

People would rather have an insert in their DVD case than NOT have one given the option.

I have yet to read a thread where someone has said "I just throw mine away. I HATE inserts!"

Don't waste your time proving me wrong by posting one now.

djtoell

Your false black-or-white dichotomy misses a third option: people who don't have a preference either way. Thus, when you state that "folks prefer inserts," you mischaracterize those who neither prefer nor hate inserts. When an insert is simply a reproduction of the cover on one side and a chapter listing on the reverse, as many if not most of them are, I neither prefer to have such an insert, no do I hate it. I couldn't care either way. Classifying me as preferring inserts given the option is therefore erroneous.

Quote:

Don't waste your time proving me wrong by posting one now.

Don't waste my time by pretending you speak for the entire universe. Just speak for yourself. I never elected you as my spokesperson, so please stop playing one.

DJ

talemyn

I have to say that I don't truely believe that "third option" exists. You may not put a lot of importance on it, but deep down, you must have a preference one way or the other. Think about it this way . . . if there was such a thing as a customizable DVD ordering service and in placing your order for the next DVD that you want to purchase, you need to choose either "With Insert" or "Without Insert" before you are allowed to place your order, which would you pick?

I think (and correct me if I'm wrong, jough) that this is what jough is getting at. If we, as the customers, could choose how DVD's were released, would we include an insert or not? I tend to agree with him that a majority of people, if given the choice, would say, "Yeah . . . go ahead and throw it in there . . ." Of course, they would probably also ask for a little more content in those inserts, but that is a slightly different question.

Anyway . . . if a CSR were to ask you, "Do you want an insert in your DVD,?" saying, "I don't care," wouldn't get you anywhere but to a follow-up of, "I'm sorry, but I need a 'Yes' or a 'No' in order to put together your DVD". Whatever your response then, either puts you in the "likes inserts" or "doesn't like inserts" group.

And I don't think jough was "speaking for" the "entire universe" . . . I believe he was making an observation based the opinions that he has seen expressed in this forum.

djtoell

Please don't tell me what I "must" feel. You're neither my father nor a psychic, so spare me the lecture and false insight.

Quote:

Think about it this way . . . if there was such a thing as a customizable DVD ordering service and in placing your order for the next DVD that you want to purchase, you need to choose either "With Insert" or "Without Insert" before you are allowed to place your order, which would you pick?

The world is not a series of 1s and 0s, of boxes that require checking. In the real world, there is a third option: no preference. I do not have to make a choice simply because you want me to. Given the option, I still don't care. Your imaginary customizable DVD service and CSR can make their own random choices for me.

Try this one out on yourself: would you prefer that your DVD's UPC number be 3-234324-342 or 3-364335-345? Do you really have a preference? How about deep down inside yourself, even if you don't place any importance on it? What if a CSR for a customizable DVD service forced you to make a choice? Would you then really have a preference? Or, is it the case that it's so incredibly irrelevant that, even if someone forces you to choose, it still doesn't matter?

One does not have to have a preference on everything. The presence of ordinary chapter listing inserts is as inconsequential to me as having a particular UPC number. If you literally force me to choose by holding a gun to me, I will (just as I would imagine you'd choose a particular UPC number in that situation), but that doesn't mean I actually have a preference.

Quote:

And I don't think jough was "speaking for" the "entire universe" . . . I believe he was making an observation based the opinions that he has seen expressed in this forum.

And his observation was that there was only one opinion that anyone, anywhere had, and that it was his. This was obviously in error.

DJ

mdm67

Hi, there!
it's an interesting thread, colliding opinions are a good thing.
sometimes they collide because they lose control.

I'd like to ask jough: you are a cinephile, you have every symptom of the illness, but what do you do when an important movie you have never seen is released on a poor DVD edition? do you give up your chance - maybe your only lifetime chance to watch it - since it received a crappy DVD release?

I'd like to ask Kabong: once you know a movie, have seen it, do you need and like to own it even when it receives a poor DVD edition? I guess you had never seen the Godzilla movies, otherwise your interest doesn't reside in the movies but in owning DVD's.

As for the rest I don't think the cheapening of DVD's is an issue, I mean: look at the threads discussed when DVD's were starting being mainstream, the main fear then was that WS releases could even disappear. I think DVD is mainstream but the cinephiles can still be satisfied.

As for the inserts my situation is bizarre: I never read them but I hate to open a new DVD and see that the insert is missing.
I don't care about cases until they perform what they have to perform: protecting the disc.
As for double-dipping: I spend a lot of time before buying a DVD, I have my list of movies I want and every month the studios release too much titles for my pocket, so I pick them carefully and upgrading is a remote option: a good collector needs to be patient.
Overall I can say I'm very happy with DVD's. This month makes 3 years since I started collecting DVD's, it was a good choice of time to start collecting, as I already said: if you want to be an happy collector patience is a virtue. 22 years ago when I started collecting films on VHS I wasn't patient at all, in the end I was disgusted for the waste of money it ended to be: though I'm glad that thanks to VHS I had the chance to watch movies I could never had the chance to watch otherwise. So in the end it wasn't a waste of money. I like movies, I'm a cinephile - since I watch thousands of film, I read tons of books and magazines, I always watch movies in OAR and I hate dubbing, at least I act like one of them - and I think DVD is the best thing happened to films after cinema itself.

My Collection

Wizdar

Ya know, had this thread been a spoof, a work of satire, I would have considered it a masterful piece of brilliance. The way jough worked over El-Kabong, egging him on with forgiveness of his errant ways whilst using his own sarcasm against him – pure genius.

But, no, jough actually believes himself to be the “cinephile” he claims to be. Well, he is no “cinephile,” he’s a fraud. A “cinephile,” faced with the decision of two DVDs but only being able to purchase one, would consider the filmmakers, which one was more worthy of being added to the collection. A “cinephile” would consider his collection and which title would be the best to add. A “cinephile” would never publicly admit to being swayed by the lack of an insert.

jough, you, Sir, are a fraud, and a pretentious and arrogant one at that. Please clean out your locker and leave the building.
In more ways than you realize.





But people still look at you weird when you shake ‘em.

EPKJ

"There is an entire SUBFORUM devoted to the subject of inserts in DVDs and other packaging:"

So what? I have read many of these threads. People are not incensed about inserts. One or two individuals ask a question and many people make joking responses. You are out of touch. Words have meaning. Incensed is a very powerful word and yet you chose to use it in this context.