orangerunner

The sales stats seem to indicate that physica media (DVD & Blu combined as a whole) seem to be going down by 8-10% a year.

If you think physical media sales have been holding steady over the last few years, you're in denial.

Some may not go to the lengths of throwing away the cases but what I'm trying to illustrate is that the movie or CD, record as a complete "product" is becoming less and less important.

The current trend is to squeeze everything onto a smaller format. Video is always a step behind audio. People went from having a 10-disc changer in their car to having 1000 songs on their little iPod. Fewer people seem to care about the disc art, liner notes etc. They just want it easy to access and as portable as possible.

I'm not personally interested in that and by the sounds of it, neither are you. However, this will be the future for the masses. Physical media will be available but it will be harder to get and is already more expensive than the streaming alternatives.

That'sAllFolks

If I had enough money, that's what I would do: daisy-chain hundreds of hard drives togerther and copy all my DVDs to it. That way I could watch anything without getting off the couch. I have been using Comcast On-Demand and it has really spoiled me. But I would always keep the DVD as backup no matter what. I've learned from being in the IT business, you can't be too careful.

I do like the physical media, but could probably get used to not having a physical copy for EVERYTHING. It's still nice to have some stuff that I really like in physical form. The main problem I would have would be availability and corruption of data. These have been addressed, so I won't be-labor the point, but most people who have a hobby that they really enjoy would probably not want every aspect of it in digitized formats. Those who just want the video for consumption probably won't care that much.

Drake

Everybody keeps talking about the delivery system and the technology ,BUT what about the Art and the people that make the art ...the Artists?

Downsizing all art and carrying it around with you like a coin cheapens it!

I can't believe that the Art community at large has allowed this to happen...I mean who wants to watch Lawrence Of Arabia on an I Phone ???..I don't get it and it also compromises the whole esthetic of what the director was trying to convey.....no one ever thinks about this stuff?

kd5

The term "short-sighted pettiness" was what got my hackles up, I would not normally have reacted in the way that I did but since my post had been quoted I assumed it was directed towards me. Apparently I was wrong and I apologize for reacting the way that I did.

I can appreciate that streaming media works for you, I hope you can appreciate that I don't feel the same way. I don't feel as though I'm limiting or depriving myself of anything (the concept doesn't occur to me) by staying within my comfort zone. It's what my wife and I choose to (or not to) do.


Just for the sake of mentioning this (since you've mentioned it a couple of times), I don't blind buy anything. If I'm standing in front of the $5 bin at WalMart (or the $3 bin at BigLots) and don't see anything I really wanted to own, I walk away. It's better for me to save my money for something I really want than to gamble and lose. Once I've purchased something I really wanted however, it makes me feel comfortable knowing that I own it, I can watch it whenever I want to, as many times as I want to, forever.

I consider myself a collector, but not to the extent that I buy everything I see. I collect the DVDs that provide the most entertainment value for my wife and I. I own them, I can touch them and look at them, and look through my collection. It gives me great pleasure to be the proud owner of my collection (be that as it may), I can catalog them, sort through them, and choose which one we want to watch that evening. I want for nothing more (within the realms of this discussion). -kd5-

Travis McClain

I am, but only because I haven't progressed to acceptance yet. I spent a lot of time on anger, and it kinda slowed me down.

Remember when we all kind of noticed that studios had stopped printing booklets to include with DVDs? Then the increasingly generic cover art. Now, the "4 Film Favorites" packages where it doesn't even seem like half of the collections adhere to any obvious theme; the studios have demonstrated that the average consumer doesn't care--they just want content. I find it a disappointing trend, but it's certainly nothing I could deny.

Don't get me wrong: I love my iPod. But I buy CD's so I can browse the liner notes and lyrics, and so I can import at whatever bit rate I choose. And so that if it turns out I don't actually like the album, I have a tangible product to take to Half Price Books. With the digital content, you can delete it if you don't like it, but there's absolutely no way to recoup any of your paid price.

This is why I'm a fan of streaming for rental purposes, but would not go so far as to endorse an all-digital library. To me, Netflix's streaming is to video what satellite radio purported to be to music (only better, because I'm not at the mercy of someone else's playlist). It's a chance to maximize my exposure to material, so I know what I really want to own and what I'll have been content to have seen once.

Ash Ketchum

This could be why no one makes LAWRENCE OF ARABIA-type movies anymore. If most people are going to wind up seeing it on a hand-held device, then why make an epic? The creators who can make stuff that's watchable on devices like that, who know how to tailor what they make to the devices people are watching them on, are the ones who are going to dominate the production process. E.g. Remember when some TV guy (Joss Whedon) made that brief series with Neil Patrick Harris called "Dr. Horrible's Sing-along Blog"? It was made to be downloaded to people's phones. And it was very popular. Probably more people saw that than saw Ridley Scott's ROBIN HOOD.

All right, maybe I'm exaggerating a little. There are still lots of big-screen movies made and few cell phone series of high profile. But that may change.

That'sAllFolks

I've often wondered if there are royalty costs involved with special features. Otherwise why would MGM take them off re-releases of titles like Valley Girl, Sure Thing. Thelma and Louise and Legally Blonde. It seems it would be much easier to just press more discs than modify what they already have.

Trevor

I used to make this argument, until I actually started watching films on my iPhone.

It's a beautiful display, nice stereo sound with headphones, and the size of the screen is actually the the same or bigger than my bigscreen TV, if you think about it a certain way. Holding my phone a couple feet away from my eyes, it is larger than my 42" at my typical viewing distance.

Now, I'm not quite ready to argue that the experience is as good as a good TV set-up, but it's not nearly as bad as what many say.

Travis McClain

Well, David Lean directed Lawrence of Arabia with nary a thought to home video release, much less how the film would look on an iPhone. He shot a film to be exhibited in theaters, so the "Constitution-ist" thing to do would only see films in theaters.

I'm unsure what you mean by the aesthetics of a film. Yes, a big screen projection can reveal a sense of scope and show smaller details that you might gloss over on a TV screen, but the production design, sound track, etc. are all the same regardless of presentation.

For the sake of politeness, I'll spare you my standard anti-auteur rant and leave it at this: Film is a collaborative, commercial art. Anyone who wishes to have absolute control over how his or her work is ever released should only work under conditions that permit him or her to have absolute legal control over that work. But a word of caution: it may have been financially prudent, but fan sentiment about George Lucas has been very polarized because he actually did this.

On an anecdotal note, I took my iPod with me to visit family over the summer and flaked out one evening and watched Star Trek on that little device. I'd seen it the night it opened in a theater, had watched it a few times on Blu-ray and then on my iPod. Was it ideal? Of course not. But it beat the hell out of being bored. Besides, if I'd spent the money to buy the necessary cable, I could have connected my iPod to my father-in-law's TV and not been forced to rely exclusively on the 3" screen.

I can appreciate now why you felt attacked; I merely quoted you because your thoughts had been a microcosm of the points I was addressing, and provided a convenient jumping off point. Nothing was meant to be directed at you personally.

Makes sense to me, but I have to ask how you ever know what you want to buy? Other than renting discs or going to theatrical showings, I can't think of how one would know whether or not a given title was desired. Streaming, to me, is like having a much broader collection of premium cable movie channels. I'll always prefer my DVD's and Blu-ray Discs, but for the sake of getting around to actually seeing stuff? I can't think of a more viable model.

I learned to write as a child because my mom would have my make lists of the He-Man action figures I wanted, and I had to look on the back of the package to get the proper spelling for each character's name. Then came the comic books, the baseball cards, the trading cards...Trust me, I appreciate the collector mentality and the devotion to organization and sorting. I'm probably literally, clinically, obsessed with that aspect of it.

For instance, this morning I watched The Wolf Man for the Horror Challenge. I added it to my Horror Challenge list thread. I added it to Flickchart, and if it had been on any of the eligible lists, I'd have added it on ICheckMovies.com too. I marked it off my Unwatched Pile list. I've updated its entry in my DVD Profiler library. It takes me almost 30 minutes to "thoroughly" document the movies I watch. And I love that I can come to this forum and type up a paragraph like that and know that more members than not will likely identify with me, rather than think me insane. (Or, at least, they'll take comfort in knowing someone shares their insanity.)

islandclaws

Agreed. Movies look great on the iPhone 4. Is that the way you should watch a film for the first time? Hell no, but it's a great way to watch movies you enjoy and like having available at any time. I currently have Battle Royale, Black Dynamite, Hot Tub Time Machine, Kick-Ass, Godzilla 1985, Punisher: War Zone, Rambo and Trick 'r Treat on mine.

Drake

OK, maybe for you guys and you may be a lot younger than myself!

Once I hit 40 years old I can't see a damn thing that small, I went to the bank the other day and forgot my reading glasses and had to have the bank teller read from my deposit slip......I mean DAMN I am getting old.

kd5

I am somewhat familiar with what you speak of... -kd5-

Drake

Well, being a photographer I would not want anyone downsizing or manipulating my artwork......of course I shoot a lot for websites and catalogs and give the clients what they want.
Also in my commercial art I use a lot of assistants and I do it the way i want, I don't call them after and get their permission to change something in the photo's....I view a movie director in the same sense.

rw2516

Sales are adjusting to "normal" interest levels. By normal I mean those with a lifelong interest in owning movies/tv shows. DVD was a bonanza for the studios. A passing interest to most consumers. DVD has created many collectors so sales will probably bottom out slightly higher than at the level of catalog vhs/laserdisc/ widescreen vhs days of the mid nineties. Those who collected before dvd will continue to collect along with the new collectors picked up in the past ten years. Rental has always been the primary choice of consumers for home viewing of media and will remain so. Streaming will most likely become very popular, on demand from cable/satellite provider will probably be the most popular.
Collectors fall into two categories: Those who collect because it's what they do, if what they collect didn't exist they would find something else to collect, and those who latch onto that one thing they think is just really cool and develop an interest in which happens to be a physical item, as opposed to those who develop an interest in something like a physical activity.

orangerunner

I certainly share your sentiments. A lot of care and creativity went into many of the early DVD releases. You still see some nice packaging but mostly for titles aimed at collectors.

Maybe it was my age at the time but when I was a teenager there was a real buzz about new release videos for rent. The local newspaper used to list the top 10 video releases, Entertainment Tonight used to dedicate a section of their show to video releases etc. Video stores used to have great cardboard P.O.P. displays and posters to promote the videos.

I guess it's a sign of the times but all of that seems to have disappeared.

The new DVD cases are a sad sign as well. There is a huge recycling logo cut into the cover of the case and sections cut out where the disc snaps in.
I guess it saves plastic but it's so flimsy and cheap-looking. It's also a great way to have something puncture through the trap sheet as well.

orangerunner

I think a big cut to sales of DVDs isn't necessarily by the consumers but probably the decline in rental stores. I'm sure a chain like Blockbuster probably purchased 20% of all the copies sold of any new release title.

That business, as we know, has really hit a steep decline.

Drake

Most of the people I know would never consider buying movies ,the response I always hear is "why would you watch a movie twice".
I bet at least 90% of the population is more than happy with renting.

mike07

Streaming is not even an option for those of us rural dwellers, where broadband isn't even an option. I feel I waste more gas renting something from Redbox or the local B&M video store, as the nearest one is 8 miles (one way) away.

So, for the past 10 years or so I've been building my own "video store" in a spare bedroom in our house. I rarely ever spend over $5 for a movie, so I find it cheaper to buy a couple DVDs rather then a Netflix subscription. At least with my -personal collection- I can watch whatever I want, whenever I want, I don't have to worry about maintaining a queue online, and hope it's available when I feel like watching it.

I've tried all options: Netflix (too slow), Redbox (too far), satellite internet service for streaming videos (unreliable!)...

Trevor

But if you can't see an iPhone at 12-20 inches, then you can't see a 42" screen at 8 feet. It's the same size really. I'm convinced that everyone who makes comments like you have here has never actually tried it.

I'm over 40 with pretty bad eyesight myself.

Drake

It's not the same , I have a friend who shows me his i Phone and I can't make anything out .....When I watch my 50" Plasma I have no problem seeing no matter what distance.
My right eye at distance viewing is perfect ,My left eye I need help so I did pick up some eyeglasses for night when watching TV.
But in the day time I can watch TV with no glasses.

Travis McClain

I dunno. It's a lot more similar than comparing the image on a 52" TV screen with a sketch of the movie. Anyway, Trevor's argument rests on the premise of proportion. Parallax and all that, you know. I suspect that the scientists will insist that there is little difference on a technical level of what the human eye processes, but that the difference is more of a psychological one. But now we're venturing into territory well beyond my expertise, and any "evidence" will likely be anecdotal and suspect.

I still think the most valuable aspect of the iPod type devices is that they are the size of a cassette and can be connected to a TV via cable. I have ten different Digital Copies on my iPod (including both theatrical and director's cuts of Watchmen) and while I will always prefer to watch their Blu-ray counterparts, it's nice to have for those extended visits to the in-laws. The whole concept is built around portability and expanding viewing and access options, and I think these devices succeed at their objective.

dvdjunkie32

They don't make 8 track players anymore though, right?

Dick Laurent

I consider myself an audiophile, and I collect movies for the fun of it, but only seem to get a lot of viewing in during the Oct Horror Movie Challenge, with sporadic watches throughout the year.

There will always be a market--no matter how small it is--for those that enjoy tinkering with A/V gear and media to play that gear with. Just like there will always be gear-heads that work on trucks/cars no matter how advanced they become. The vinyl music industry recognizes this, and vinyl sales are through the roof in recent years (not competitive, but comparative to their own right). I'm amazed at the growing vinyl collection at my local Best Buy.

When it comes down to it, if there's a market, they will buy. The "market" and "they" may change throughout time, but I’m confident it will always be there. I don't shop at Ken Crane's Laserdiscs anymore, but I love the heck out of Deep Discount DVD.

bogrod

That is going to be the biggest sticking point with me. If I buy the right to download a movie or content via a studio's server, just what does it actually entitle me to?

A lot of what I download off of Netflix is at 720p. I am assuming with the advancement of technology and improvement in download speed, it will only get better.

bogrod

I honestly did not expect for my dvd's to hold their value, either, particularly when I knew damn well that a replacement format would certainly contribute to depreciation significantly. Same thing happened with the value of my VHS and laserdisc.

Home video, both software and hardware (with a handful of exceptions) is an investment in entertainment.

Even to take an extreme example, I honestly do not think (and if so, someone please correct me) that a studio has ever actually marketed a "limited edition" dvd product, and had that product actually increase in value more than twice than the "street" price & stay that way. Most dvd "investments"/collectors items ended up that way by accident.