Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
#427
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Mine was shipped on the 14th and I haven't gotten it yet. Of course, now I'm leaving town for a week, so I won't see it until after the New Year.
#428
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Dear Customer,
Greetings from Amazon.co.uk,
We are writing to let you know that the following item has been sent
using Royal Mail.
Your order (received December 22, 2010)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Item Price Delivery Subtotal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amazon.co.uk items (Sold by Amazon EU S.a.r.L.):
1 Battle Royale - 3 Disc Box... £14.46 1 £14.46
Dispatched via Royal Mail (estimated arrival date: January 18, 2011).
Greetings from Amazon.co.uk,
We are writing to let you know that the following item has been sent
using Royal Mail.
Your order (received December 22, 2010)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Item Price Delivery Subtotal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amazon.co.uk items (Sold by Amazon EU S.a.r.L.):
1 Battle Royale - 3 Disc Box... £14.46 1 £14.46
Dispatched via Royal Mail (estimated arrival date: January 18, 2011).
#429
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Some (minor!) thoughts about the packaging/design:
I wish they used images of the lead actor and actress on the cardboard cases for the theatrical and extended versions. Both are better matched to the slogans printed large inside ("Could you kill your best friend" and "Today I killed my best friend") than the two characters they chose to depict, both of whom have no actual "friends" in the game, and have virtually no qualms about killing to survive. Odd artistic choice, though the artwork is nicely executed.
The unused artwork and packaging concepts presented in the 16-page booklet range from amateurish (deliberately?) to striking, but seem more suited to being a supplement on one of the discs, as they have little to do with the film itself. The essays and interview in the other booklet are excellent, however.
Beyond that, this is an amazing collection for the money. The comic book's pretty slick, too.
Last edited by Brian T; 12-24-10 at 01:27 AM.
#431
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
I wish they used images of the lead actor and actress on the cardboard cases for the theatrical and extended versions. Both are better matched to the slogans printed large inside ("Could you kill your best friend" and "Today I killed my best friend") than the two characters they chose to depict, both of whom have no actual "friends" in the game, and have virtually no qualms about killing to survive. Odd artistic choice, though the artwork is nicely executed.
Beyond that, this is an amazing collection for the money. The comic book's pretty slick, too.
Beyond that, this is an amazing collection for the money. The comic book's pretty slick, too.
#432
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
They should of also stuck with the original disc art. The new ones are sort of lame. If you liked that comic you should also read the manga series. It gives more character development to the lesser class members than both the novel and movie and the killings are a lot more graphic and gory.
I still can't believe what I read with Go-Go Yibari's character.
#433
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Haven't gotten my Blu-ray yet, so to kill time...
Well, it'll be hard to explain, since it's mostly a tonal issue, and you claim not to see it even after review, but here's a shot.
For one, the volume and frequency of responses at the beginning was a bit much. Simply taking longer breaks between posts, and consolidating the many smaller, individual posts into less frequent larger posts would've helped.
Also, you mention matching snark with snark, but snark often only works if you don't care. Your earnestness about your opinion came through too readily for the snarky posts to work. It didn't help that your posts shifted in tone between snark and other writing styles, like awkward attempts at humor, since seeing 3 posts in a row by the same person, each with wildly different tones, doesn't suggest mental stability.
There's also your use of colored text. Nobody uses that here in a normal post. It's almost as bad as writing in all capsm which you also did in one post. Bolding and italizing for emphasis is OK, but color and all caps is a bit much.
Then there's the arguing about the argument. You've commented/complained about the argument over numbering almost as much as you've commented about the numbering itself. It's meta, it's distracting, and it reads like someone who can't handle contrary opinions. If someone calls you crazy (likely in jest at first), it's best to shrug it off instead of trying to analyze why that happened.
That's a pretty fine semantic line between "complaining on and on" and "continuing to defend an initial complaint," and most people aren't going to make that distinction. It doesn't help that your follow-ups often contained restatements of your complaint, so that they look like complaints themselves.
Back to the actual argument, about the numbering.
[quote]Well, not for lack of giving an explanation. What explanation would actually satisfy you, I may never know. As I have said, other 'specs', for the most part, tend to be just that: specifications- qualities, aspects and factual circumstances of the content contained in the release. On the other hand, the reason to say "limited release of 5,000" is to suggest scarcity and thus attempt to drive sales; it's a marketing bullet point.[quote]
You don't think the number of discs in a set is a marketing bullet point?
Or the inclusion of the director's cut?
Or the fact that it's region free?
If Arrow had changed any of those "specs", you don't think consumer interest in the set would've changed?
Or, let's take something about the set that did change: the release date. The release date is part of what makes a product marketable, which is why they're not typically announced too far in advance (for example, if Arrow had announced a date two years from now, do you think they would've gotten the same pre-order response?). The date is also important to consumers, especially this time of year, where it could be considered for a gift, and holiday delivery interruptions and our own travel plans can get in the way.
So, the date was announced, then due to production issues, changed. This has affected everyone who pre-ordered (unlike the numbering, which at least some of the people here weren't even aware of). Some people complained, and most of use are whining now about not getting it yet. Yet, I don't recall anyone being pissed at Arrow for "false advertising," or deliberately misleading the customer. Most of us realize that almost every aspect of a pre-release could be in flux up until the point of release, and that Arrow made its initial announcement in good faith.
Fair point and that's entirely possible, but the volume of paranoiac replies has caused me to second-guess myself and look back at my posts. Maybe I'm too close to it, but man... it's just not there...
Seriously, maybe I am insane, but please give me something to go on here. When you're trying to convince someone of something, evidence is always a help.
Seriously, maybe I am insane, but please give me something to go on here. When you're trying to convince someone of something, evidence is always a help.
For one, the volume and frequency of responses at the beginning was a bit much. Simply taking longer breaks between posts, and consolidating the many smaller, individual posts into less frequent larger posts would've helped.
Also, you mention matching snark with snark, but snark often only works if you don't care. Your earnestness about your opinion came through too readily for the snarky posts to work. It didn't help that your posts shifted in tone between snark and other writing styles, like awkward attempts at humor, since seeing 3 posts in a row by the same person, each with wildly different tones, doesn't suggest mental stability.
There's also your use of colored text. Nobody uses that here in a normal post. It's almost as bad as writing in all capsm which you also did in one post. Bolding and italizing for emphasis is OK, but color and all caps is a bit much.
Then there's the arguing about the argument. You've commented/complained about the argument over numbering almost as much as you've commented about the numbering itself. It's meta, it's distracting, and it reads like someone who can't handle contrary opinions. If someone calls you crazy (likely in jest at first), it's best to shrug it off instead of trying to analyze why that happened.
I only mentioned it because people kept making comments to the effect that I was complaining on and on. I just wanted to point out the fact that I complained once and then defended my complaint when people asked me to clarify my position. Does it not seem reasonable to you to want to correct assertions that I'm complaining and complaining?
Back to the actual argument, about the numbering.
[quote]Well, not for lack of giving an explanation. What explanation would actually satisfy you, I may never know. As I have said, other 'specs', for the most part, tend to be just that: specifications- qualities, aspects and factual circumstances of the content contained in the release. On the other hand, the reason to say "limited release of 5,000" is to suggest scarcity and thus attempt to drive sales; it's a marketing bullet point.[quote]
You don't think the number of discs in a set is a marketing bullet point?
Or the inclusion of the director's cut?
Or the fact that it's region free?
If Arrow had changed any of those "specs", you don't think consumer interest in the set would've changed?
Or, let's take something about the set that did change: the release date. The release date is part of what makes a product marketable, which is why they're not typically announced too far in advance (for example, if Arrow had announced a date two years from now, do you think they would've gotten the same pre-order response?). The date is also important to consumers, especially this time of year, where it could be considered for a gift, and holiday delivery interruptions and our own travel plans can get in the way.
So, the date was announced, then due to production issues, changed. This has affected everyone who pre-ordered (unlike the numbering, which at least some of the people here weren't even aware of). Some people complained, and most of use are whining now about not getting it yet. Yet, I don't recall anyone being pissed at Arrow for "false advertising," or deliberately misleading the customer. Most of us realize that almost every aspect of a pre-release could be in flux up until the point of release, and that Arrow made its initial announcement in good faith.
#434
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#435
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
#436
DVD Talk Reviewer
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Depends on the weather (which is bad over there right now) and the item. In my experience(s), just over a week.
#437
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
#439
DVD Talk Reviewer
#440
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
For people who haven't gotten the Limited Edition, the Standard Edition BD coming out in February will be
Region B Locked according to Arrow....
Region B Locked according to Arrow....
#441
#443
DVD Talk Reviewer
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
It's likely due to the rights purchase by Anchor Bay, which hadn't taken place when the initial set was in the works.
#445
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
It's likely due to the rights purchase by Anchor Bay, which hadn't taken place when the initial set was in the works.
There's a reason why the Tartan NTSC Region 0 DVD wasn't around long while the PAL editions of both the theatrical and special editions still remained in print.
#446
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
Well, if that's the case doesn't it make this edition really exclusive? If your still sitting on the fence about this release, now is the time to get it while it's still available. 10,000 copies doesn't sound like a big number now.
#447
DVD Talk Legend
#449
DVD Talk Legend
#450
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Aurora, CO
Re: Battle Royale (Arrow Releasing)--October 2010?
I sent an e-mail to amazon hoping just to get my shipping refunded because of the delay like others have been able to do, but that wasn't a choice they offered me. They said that because of the delay, I could either get a replacement sent out or get a full refund. This is definitely not what I was expecting or hoping for. Both of those options seem pretty shady since I'll end up getting what I want, just not in the timeframe I was promised.





It is a DVD-sized case, right? My eyes are playing tricks on me (it looks shorter).