I voted the first option. I listen to a commentary nearly every day while I'm falling asleep. It will usually take me 2-3 days to finish a whole one but I always listen to them.

I listen to them if I liked the movie or at times I'll listen to scene specific details to see how they justify some of their descisions. I prefer screenwriter, director and historian commentaries. I will give actor commentaries a chance, but I'm much quicker to stop listening if they don't catch my attention quickly. I want to learn about the film, how they made it, anecdotes about others who were working on the film, etc. As soon as I hear some telling me exactly what I'm seeing they get turned off.

No. It's a waste of my time. I can use that extra 2 hours and try to finish watching my DVD collection

I've only listened to one commentary out of the 80+ dvd's that I own and that was the Blackhawk Down Special Edition with the commentary from the guys in Taskforce Ranger.

I listen to the commentaries of my favorite films, if possible, and I'll listen to those that have a good word-of-mouth.

I've been getting into them lately. Two great ones I listened to this week are The Smashing Machine and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Both are lively, fun and informative.

I have learned alot about film making by listening to the commentaries. But after awhile, they start sounding the same. It is awesome when one comes along that really teaches you how they made the movie.

Sometimes, If i have time.

I'm finding that a lot of the supplements that i thought I would love having are a dissappointment. First of all it's really the movie that matters most. Bottom line is that no matter how many extra discs and fancy package features are thrown in, if the movie sucks, the rest ain't worth diddly. I admit that given the choice, I still go after the special ultimate platinum anniversary editions if the price is not a detererrent.
I do still check every commentary track out to see if it's worth the trouble. Probably end up listening to about 75% of them.

There's definitely an art to doing commentary. Some people get it and do a great job while others don't seem to have a clue. To much detail can be as bad as not enough. IMO John Carpenter strikes about the best tone, giving a nice mix of technical info and anecdotes. I especially like the commentary Carpenter did with Kurt Russell for The Thing. They must have had a great time shooting the film, they are just sitting around recollecting as it plays and sharing it with you. I already have the Escape from NY DVD without commentary but I'm tempted to buy the re-release for the commentary if it has those two chewing the fat again.

I personally prefer commentary by historians/film historians.
A commentary to me is more valuble if the film has aged and commentaries can be a way of learning about the era and techniques, etc. used then and an indication of whether or not the film has aged well.

The one commentary that stands out in my mind is the one by Donald Richie on the Rashomon Criterion Coll. Extremely informative and fascinating!

I look forward to listening the commentaries on Casablanca and the Warner Legends discs.

I live in Los Angeles and these commentaries on classic films can often be educational in learning more about the city.
(Most often it appears that commentators when speaking about films made in and around LA have a LA audience in mind as they refer to certain streets and parks that only someone living in LA can relate to.)

Otherwise, I listen to commentaries only when I have the time, but will eventually certainly listen to the commentaries on all my discs.

Commentaries also factor into whether or not I purchase a certain set.

I normally listen to the commentaries on the second viewing of the film, unless it's a commentary of one of my absolutely favorite films of all time or Ebert is involved. Those are listened to immediately.

I'll listen to a commentary whenever I am cleaning the house or doing something that I don't have to devote my full attention to. Usually it'll be the latest movie I purchased.

I'll try anything once...

I try to listen to all of them. Its more interesting to me if the person is not just describing the action onscreen.

Let's give this thread a bump.

Vote if you haven't yet!

(Studios and DVD companies are known to search through these forums, so let your voice be heard!)

I only do so on rare occasions.

I have never listened to a commentary yet. Maybe one of these days I will.

I always listen to the commentaries. I run across a few that are just not interesting, but overall I enjoy them.

I love humorous ones like Kevin Smith and Bruce Campbell do. As funny goes Charade and This is Spinal Tap are two favorites I have listened to on several occasions.

I don't like the ones like Marian Keene did on the Criterion Hitchcocks that are very technical and boring. Film Scholars in general are terrible commentaries from my experience. I've never made it more than thirty minutes into a commentary done by a Scholar.

They great ones are from Film Historians. They usually fill you in on all the things that happened during filming, give you great trivia and interesting stories about the people involved in making the film. Bruce Eder, David Skal, Rudy Behlmer, and Tom Weaver are among my favorites.

I also like those done by Film Critics. Roger Ebert was excellent on Citizen Kane and Casablanca. Leonard Maltin did a great job on the LD version of A Night at the Opera.

Waste of time, never watch them.

I think I've watched 2 the whole time I've had a DVD Player (since Dec. 1998).

I'm just not a hardcore film fan, and really am not in to learning about he filmmaking process. I rarely even watch the documentaries and what not, only for something like Star Wars or LOTR that I count among my favorite films.

I also don't have a lot of free time, and have several hobbies besides movies so I'd rather watch a movie than a commentary.

I'll usually check out a few of my favorite scenes, but for the whole commentary I'll reserve for when people on the board say it's really funny or entertaining. I can see why some people like them but for me the appeal is limited

I only check it for certain scenes (action sequences, effects shots, cameos and very crude humor scenes). Stand out scenes.

I love the commentaries where the movie is based on a true story and they got the people it was based on to do the commentary. A perfect example is the James and Marrilyn Lovell track on Apollo 13.

Another commentary that I really liked was Chris Columbus' on Mrs. Doubtfire. That track was so organized and filled with unique information and there was none of that ..."look what Robin Williams is doing now on the screen." A great commentary.

I listen to only the informative Commentaries. Yes, there are some trashy commentaries. For example, as much as I love Bowling For Columbine, its commentary has got to be worst. Do I really care what the intern or the secretary or some random joe shmoe has to say about the movie??? Does anyone in the freaking world, besides their parents, care??? Come on!

On the other hand, all CC commentaries are always worth listening. I enjoy Roger Ebert's commentaries; his Citizen Kane commentary is one of my favs.

I try to listen to all commentaries, though it doesn't work out. I love the ones Steven Soderbergh does. Same for Kevin Smith. Roger Ebert. There are many others.

What I don't like are commentaries where people just describe what's happening onscreen, or commentaries that are just like "Kevin Spacey was so good in this scene - see, here's the part where he raises an eyebrow and yells, and he just nails it. It was such a pleasure working with such a talented actor." Stuff that sounds like a press kit usually bores me. Fortunately, the commentaries for most of the films I enjoy are better than that.