Double Dipping- Discovering A Valid Reason To Do So
 

Hi all- I purchased my first ever widescreen TV a week ago and since then have been throwing this movie and that movie into my player to see how they look on a 57 inch screen. First off let me say I love the experience of having a home theatre screen in my living room.

Regarding DVD watching, the results have been mixed; some movies are simply incredible to look at; for example, most new releases look very good, and in some cases, awesome. SW II Attack Of the Clones is beautiful on DVD- the colors true and vibrant, little noticible flaws in the print, great sound....it gives one good reason to think DVD can be around for a long time to come.....it's a movie I would use to demonstrate to friends how good a bigscreen can look.

On the other hand, casual watching becomes less desirable. Try watching an older release as I did last night, Outland- and the movie becomes almost unwatchable. Print garbage, non-anamorphic, blurred.....it makes one understand why some people will buy a movie all over again, especially if it's a case where the movie was released in the early days of DVD and has needed an overhaul ever since. I have never related to what seemed like snobbery concerning discs not having this or that feature but when you're watching your movies on a screen closer to the theatre experience, it becomes clear why there is a faction less than satisfied with less than perfect movie transfers. The price isn't always an indicator by any means- I have in Continental Divide at present, and was watching Flight Of The Phoenix a few days ago. Both look super even though they aren't expensive buys. I have a feeling I'm going to be much more interested in the threads that discuss anamorphic prints and OAR from now on......

Heh, I remember when I first started buying DVDs (March 99), I was just happy to get them. :)

Now I am highly disappointed if a transfer is not anamorphic, but I'll still purchase cause my regular TV is still old school... but the projector I throw down on occassion is very much 16:9.

Probably be in the same boat once I finally upgrade my regular set.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tylerwillis
[B]Heh, I remember when I first started buying DVDs (March 99), I was just happy to get them. :)

I started a few months after that and like you was happy as could be with any print of a movie that I like.......on almost every occasion DVD beats VHS.

Anamorphic transfers aren't necessarily an indicator of high quality.

Ive had a widescreen TV since 1999 and rarely buy a widescreen movie that isn't anamorphic.

Thankfully, people as people start getting widescreen tvs, they begin to realize the importance. Now, it is (or should be) unacceptable for a movie to be released without anamorphic enhancement. Too bad it was not that way in 2000.

From Dusk til Dawn: SE was one of the titles that pissed me off!

As far as double dipping, I do not have a problem with it sometimes. The best example is LOTR films. They did a proper release of those films. I just sell the old one or give it to a family member.

If you think the difference is noticeable on an HD projection TV, the difference is far greater on an HDTV tube.

All things being equal, an anamorphic disc is more preferrable than a non-anamorphic. But for me, the film itself is the focus, so I'd rather have a non-anamorphic "Last Man on Earth" in my collection, than to not have the film at all. But I realize that I'm in the minority.

True. I bought a new 61in DLP tv this summer and it shows the limitations of DVD compared to HD.

I feel that I'm in that minority as well. I'll take any version of a movie I really enjoy on DVD rather than have no DVD of the movie at all. If I simply can't stand to watch it on my 57 inch widescreen then I'll watch it on my 27 inch tube which is of course far more forgiving.

:thumbsup: I'm there with ya.

I have plenty of tvs around to service all my films. if a dvd comes non-anamorphic...the film can still be enjoyed and appreciated.