Duality

Double-dipping, bad cover art, 2.0 surround mixes and barebones on regular DVD all point to manipulating consumers into purchasing more product.

First we'll have HD Karate Kid as a single disc "Collector's Edition." Then Karate Kid with a 5.1 mix as a "Deluxe Edition." After that, Karate Kid DTS w/commentaries - Special Two Disc Set. Finally we get the full Karate Kid 5.1/DTS/commentaries/featurettes - "You people are so dumb you'll buy this movie a hundred times Edition."

kar10

The multiple dipping is never going to end.

Hokeyboy

Ya know, nobody's forcing you to buy anything. I still have one copy of Dr. Strangelove from 1999, and I'm happy with it. Then again, you could certainly

Loc Nar

Looks like the studios got Matt. They're getting quicker.

Duality

The truly sad aspect of this phenomenon is that one has to wait, sometimes years, for the proper version to be released.

GaryEA

digitalfreaknyc

Hmm...so I wonder how they're going to screw us on the high-def version?


Flash forward 3 years.....

tanman

Um...yes. Yes they are.

Duality

So where is the interest, outrage, and activism?

Duality

How about an HD DVD with 2.0 surround for starters?

djtoell

2.0 surround on The Karate Kid?! What in the world are these evil studios thinking?! Giving us the film's original soundtrack??? Those bastards!!!!!11111

DJ

Hokeyboy

We should always upgrade our DVDs in order to have the best possible disc available at that time. We should support the studios so that they can continue to supply us with such fine product.

End communication.

Duality

I didn't want mono Star Trek TOS. Why would I want 2.0 Karate Kid. These *are* the days of Home Theater.

digitalfreaknyc

Nothing wrong with that as long as 2.0 is the original soundtrack. For the Karate Kid, that's what it originally was!

Duality

Mindless consumption - is the U.S. really a pig nation? As for the studios, they are multi-billion dollar entities. I'm not worried about supporting *them*!

djtoell

And what are "the days of Home Theater," exactly? Filling up all your speakers with sound without any regard to the integrity of the content you're watching? People who like to fill up their screens with picture without any regard for content are usually called derisive names on this forum, but people who want to fill up their speakers are called HT enthusiasts?

If that's what the days of Home Theater will be like, I'll be sleeping this one out and waiting for some other days to come along on the calendar.

DJ

Duality

Posts like this really make me wonder why people b*tch about DTS and other enhancements.

Duality

Comparing full quality 5.1 or DTS sound to an edited FS film is nonsense.

rdclark

[QUOTE=Duality]Double-dipping, bad cover art, 2.0 surround mixes and barebones on regular DVD all point to manipulating consumers into purchasing more product.
[QUOTE]

When did "manipulate" become a bad word? When did it become evil for a company to try to sell more product?

The cereal manufacturers are trying to manipulate us into buying more corn flakes. Detroit is trying to manipulate us into buying new cars. Pharmaceutical companies are trying to take over our sex lives. And don't get me started on breweries!

This phenomenon is not new. Anybody who has ever tried to sell anything has followed up by trying to sell more.

Informed customers who know what they want and understand the nature of the product are hard to manipulate. When I bought the Superbit "Fifth Element" I knew there would be a special edition someday. But I decided at that point that a good NTSC transfer of just the film was all I needed to have in my collection. If I change my mind in the future, well, that's my privilege as grown-up human being.

Studios trying to sell more DVDs is not evil. Governments going to war in order to control oil reserves is evil.

RichC

Duality

Produce, consume, produce, consume - it will end and it will not be pleasant for any of us! Manipulation is usually, though not always, negative. Companies should have ethics and should not dump product on us that will be garbage in a short time.

War is evil.

djtoell

What's nonsenical about it? "Full quality" is a meaningless term if it isn't supposed to be a part of the film in the first place. It is still modifying a major aspect of a film in a very important way. The "full quality" 5.1 mix of Jaws sounds little like the original mono counterpart in important ways. Comparing one major modification to another is far from nonsensical.

You like to have films modified to fill up your speakers. You don't care about the artistic integrity of the films you watch. You like 5.1 because you think more speakers making sound is "better." You care more about your equipment than what you watch on it. It's OK. There's no shame in it. Just don't pretend that your opinion is what HT is really all about.

DJ

Hokeyboy

The studios want us to fill up our home theaters with six channels of sound, but we may not be ready for that at first. It's best to buy a simple mono or 2.0 track at first that replicates the original soundtrack on the first release of the DVD. Then later on, we can purchase a new release with full six-channel digital sound to fill up our speakers with better quality. That way we get the best of both worlds, and we support the studios so that they can continue to supply us with such fine product.

End communication.

Duality

Full quality is not meaningless. It implies that a product isn't lacking in its full potential.

Editing (removing) parts of a film so that it will fit your screen isn't the same in any way, shape or form as creating a 5.1/DTS track for a mono or 2.0 soundtrack.

djtoell

So what is the full potential of Citizen Kane that Orson Welles was unable to realize in his lifetime? 3-D, color and 7.1 surround? Did we have to wait for Welles to die and for Duality to come on the scene so that Kane could finally be realized?

Full quality is a meaningless phrase when it doesn't properly represent a film. The full quality of a film is when it is presented in the proper manner as designed by the filmmakers. Modifying a film to make it conform to modern technological standards to please those that have no respect for artistic integrity isn't "full quality" or "full potential;" it's quite the opposite.

But why? Making a 5.1 track from a mono film edits parts of a film's soundtrack so it will fit all your speakers. How is it different from modifying the picture? Don't waste your fingers by just telling me "it isn't the same" again...

DJ

digitalfreaknyc

What are you talking about? DTS can be mono...it can be 2.0...it can be any format. It's the way the sound is compressed. I don't understand your post.