I guess this could have gone either to this or to the "DVD Reviews", but since I'm not really requesting any review, I decided to post it here. I also tried the search to see if this subject has come up before, but no luck there. If it has, however, I'm sorry - be gentle with me, it's my first post here...

Anyway, as most DVD-collectors have probably noticed, there's a really disturbing trend of not including the original trailer (or any promotional material, for that matter) with the DVD-release - not even the ultra-special-extreme-ultimate editions. Sony is, by far, the worst offender. Indeed, I believe I have found a trailer in only one (1) of their releases which was, of all films, "Magma: Volcanic Disaster"(!). Oh yeah, and "Rise: Blood Hunter" also had one, if I remember correctly. In my opinion the trailer is the most important extra there is (far more important than promotional featurettes, commentaries or even deleted scenes) and serves numerous purposes. It lets the audience know how the film was marketed and what was it's target audience. It allows visitors a quick look at the film to find out whether they've already seen it or not (and this is nowadays quite important, since films are released using different titles and different cover pictures in different parts of the world). And, last but certainly not least, a trailer to me is kinda like a mini movie. The best trailers are fantastically edited, have brilliant music and are simply very fun to watch.

So I would like to know one thing and request two things. First, I'd certainly be interested in knowing WHY trailers are being dropped from DVDs these days. The DVDs are often quite obviously mastered after the film has premiered so the trailer would be ready. Also, there shouldn't be any copyright issues with the music or anything like that, since the trailers are often included with other DVDs. So do the companies really think that a trailer is simply an advertisement for the DVD and once the buyer has bought it, it has served it's purpose and doesn't need to be included on the DVD of the particular film itself? Consider the recent Bond collection release. All the other films have trailers and other promo material with the exception of Die Another Day (and that one's original release HAD the trailer!). Also, the Rocky collection... Again, Rockys 1-5 all have trailers. Rocky Balboa has numerous other features - but no trailer. Fox re-releases Speed 1 & 2 and both have trailers (Speed 1 also has TV-spots). My heart weeps of joy (of the inclusion of the trailers, not the re-release of Speed 2). Fox re-releases Predator as a special edition and doesn't even bother including the one trailer that was in the original, non-anamorphic release! Has anyone ever heard a reason for this from any company?

Now then... Given the fact that movie reviews are available absolutely everywhere and with a few clicks you can find dozens and dozens of film reviews from professional critics as well as "regular viewers", I'd certainly appreciate that a site like this would focus even more on the technical side of the disc, rather than the contents (which is likely to be familiar to most people reading the review). I'd really like to read more about the extra features (what the commentaries are like, how long the featurettes are and, especially, if the trailer is included - and perhaps even a special mention if the trailer is NOT included) of the DVD. Some reviewers do this already, of course, but still.

Also, since you are one of the leading DVD sites on the Web (and certainly the best), if you have any "inside contacts" to the companies (the people who supply you the review discs, for example), please let them know that there are A LOT of fans out there who'd like to have the trailer included on EVERY release! Even if it's only a brief 30-second promo spot. We'd finally get rid of those extra-long threads on some boards where people are looking for a specific trailer and others are trying to find it on some other DVD.

I would've hoped that, with the new HD-formats, we'd finally get all the extra features and promotional materials that are in the vaults, but, alas, that hasn't happened. I know that some people don't consider trailers important. Then again, some people don't care for any extra features. I think the more there is, the better. And the trailer is such an important part of the movie and it's marketing, it really should be included.

Finally, my sincerest thanks to all those reviewers who give detailed comments on the special features of the DVD - keep up the good work!

I wish there was some sort of list with the trailers that are available on other discs.

It is my understanding that the costs are different because including the trailer on other releases still allows it to qualify as a promotional item. Including it on the release itself does not (as you have already bought/rented the release).

And even if the costs were the same, studios see trailers as advertising and there is no need to advertise product which has already been sold.

Personally, as far as extras go, I consider the original trailer only slightly more important than English substitles. I would never want to give up a commentary of still gallery or interview of "making of" for it. I can only think of a few movies which had trailers which really impressed me and most of those were teasers.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread....hlight=trailer

Dreamworks suck for not putting trailers on the 2-disc Wars of the Worlds LE.

Hi! I'm a reviewer for DVDTalk, and I make it a habit of listing all trailers available on any disc I review. It seems to me the majority of reviewers here do this and detail / comment upon special features fairly well.

lord_henry is absolutely right: Many DVDs do not have the trailer of the film itself in the DVD's trailer gallery. And yes, Sony does that quite a bit, it seems. I don't have an answer as to why. Although, you don't see the trailer for the film you see at the theater, so possibly there's a business angle to it. I for one would love to see the trailer for any DVD I own as an extra (if there is one).

My bigger gripe is this: Why do so many widescreen movies have full screen menus? That's another little thing about DVD releases that leaves me perplexed.

I always note if the trailer is present and just like you am quite disapointed that often the studios choose not to include them.

In any event, your comment is noted and I will make sure to mark in future reviews explicitly whether or not the original theatrical trailer is present.

Ciao,
Pro-B

I don't think I've ever seen that before. Very strange.
Unfortunately the opposite occurs often, like with the non-anamorphic Star Wars DVDs - anamorphic widescreen menus when the main feature isn't.

Even some 4:3 TV DVDs have menus that are like that.

And Focus sucks for NEVER putting their trailers on their DVDs (esp.: Brokeback, Brick, Vanity Fair, Lust, Caution, 21 Grams, Eternal Sunshine..., Motorcycle Diaries, and so on).

Here's the reason why: studios are forcing consumers to choose between the good stuff and trailers.

I took lots of DVD surveys for a survey company and whenever I would get them they would always ask what one wanted to see on a DVD. Unfortunately, it would be a pick one or the other option, and one option would be Commentaries and Documentaries and the other would be Deleted Scenes and Trailers. Of course I chose the former, and I imagine hundreds upon hundreds if not thousands of other survey takers were forced to choose the same thing.

There are a few threads like this:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...-trailers.html

But those have a habit of quickly dying out and turning into rants about missing trailers.

I've found that the best bet is to try and find it out from a site like Rewind (http://www.dvdcompare.net/) which lists bonus trailers, if the disc has them.

As for the menus, yeah, I've seen several that are in full screen while the main feature is anamorphic widescreen and seen a lot more those where the menu is widescreen but the feature is non-anamorphic widescreen or full screen (especially early Fox titles were like this). It is indeed somewhat irritating when the TV switches the screen format all the time... Although what really ticks me is when the main feature is full screen, but the trailer is in widescreen!

I find it most annoying with double dips do not carry over the trailer from the first release. Casino and Groundhog day are 2 that come instantly to mind.

As someone who lives in an apartment and likes to watch movies during the night, I certainly appreciate English subtitles a lot. While watching a horror movie, you're often forced to turn up the sound so you can hear the whispers of the characters only to be "surprised" by some fake scare accompanied by the ever-popular loud "sting" which wakes up the neighbors in a not-too-friendly fashion...

I personally enjoy all DVD-extras and just about always listen to the commentaries and watch the featurettes etc. However, I rarely listen to a commentary or watch a featurette twice, while I can watch a good trailer dozens of times. I even went so far as to rent "Crank" R1 for the "visual commentary", watched it once and then bought the R2 version since it had the trailer, which the R1 lacked (although R2 didn't include the commentary). But to each his own.

As for keeping the costs down... In a way it makes sense, but there are a few things to keep in mind. First, the cost of including the trailer can't be too high since many smaller studios (certainly much smaller than Sony) do it. Secondly, the featurettes are often promotional in nature and are often the ones that are shown on TV before the film premieres. In fact, they often include brief bits from the trailer, even if the trailer's not included (Predator SE is but one example). Basically the studio doesn't feel the need to advertise the film once it's been bought but does include a 10min "making of"-feature that has about 5min of film clips and 5min of people telling the audience how good the film is and how pleased they are with it...

The survey-explanation does make sense. One would hope they would rather use a scale of how important a given feature is to a consumer rather than making them choose between two, but still, it's the best explanation I've heard.

On a personal note, even though I've used them as an example various times, I certainly have nothing against Sony as a distributor. They have excellent transfers and 98% of the time include English subtitles. Also, on another personal note, on featurettes... My old TV was acting up and I was thinking of a proper time to replace it. So I decided that the next time I hear some actor saying the new movie (s)he's in "is like a rollercoaster ride", I'm going to smash a hammer through the TV and go buy a new one. It took two days of waiting but now, thanks to Julie Benz (Rambo), a new Sony KDL-X3500 has been ordered...

Thanks, I'll add those to "upgrades that left off features" thread.

There are a handful of movies, perhaps 2% of what's being released out there, for which the trailer contributes something meaningful, and, quite frankly, for most recent movies, the trailer is more or less a two minute condensed version of the entire film.

Virtually anything provides more entertainment and education value than the trailer (production featurettes, interviews, deleted scenes, even production stills).

Is it better than nothing? Yes. But the presence or absence of a trailer would not be a reason to buy or not to buy a film.

Trailers for other movies from the same studio (or theatrical releases) are equally worthless, but they do have a promotional value for the studio, which is why they are included.

What I do is: everyday I check the Apple trailer site and download any new trailer to a film that looks half way good. If a pick up a dvd title that happens to have one of the trailers(ex:Vacancy had trailers for Vantage Point, RE:Extinction anf 30 Days of Night) I make a note of it and delete those files.
About once a year I burn all the trailers I didn't get either on the actual dvd or another title to disc. I have the trailer for every movie I have on dvd from the past several years. What bugs me is Paramount and Sony not putting the trailers on older catalog titles. Everybody else is pretty good about it, not 100%, but close.

One thing that ticks me off is when a trailer I don't have appears on another dvd but is edited to add "on dvd" or "coming to dvd" on the end". I don't count those as theatrical trailers even if they are otherwise identical.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course. While chatting with some hardcore-collectors (despite all the various criteria one might use to define that, I think everyone with over 2000 DVDs on their shelf can be classified as a hardcore-collector), I've found that they all care for very different things. While just about everyone agrees that a film should always be presented in anamorphic widescreen, the first disagreements come with sound. Should it have a remastered 5.1-soundtrack, the original mono/surround-soundtrack or both. Also, should the disc include the director's cut, the theatrical cut or both. Opinions vary.

As far as the features go, as I've mentioned, I'm glad with everything I can get. If I like the movie and/or the filmmakers, I always like to listen to to the commentary and watch the featurettes, but for me, the trailer is definitely the most important extra. I know many guys who think like this and would gladly exchange a brief featurette for the trailer. Some others want absolutely everything. They consider a bare-bones release a disgrace to the format - despite how good the transfer might be. And then there are those who never listen to commentaries and never watch any featurettes or trailers and only want the movie. Again, opinions vary.

The main point is that many extras (commentaries, certainly, and also many making of-featurettes) are often made exclusively for the DVD. However, the studios always make a trailer (and, from what I've heard, the trailer budgets are rather large these days). So since it has already been made and paid for and many people would like to see it on the DVD, why not include it? It would just be another benefit to the consumers.

Again, you might not care for it. Many others might not care for it. But there are lots of those who would like to see it included, so unless there indeed are some financial issues involved, I don't see how including it can be anything but a good thing.