Collecting DVDs: Classic or Dud?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Amazing digital technology, or the biggest scam since bottled water?

Are the "extra-special" features worth the "extra-special" price? Does anyone here collect DVDs like they collect music? Do any of you watch a favorite DVD as much as you listen to a favorite record? I only own 2 DVDs, so I can't claim to be a collector.

― geeta, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

dud, obviously. Collecting DVDs is popular with twunts who never go to the cinema.

― DV, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

laser discks were great, jsut the movie , beutifully restored and alot of them were released and then they died , why ?

― anthony, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Collecting DVDs is popular with twunts who never go to the cinema.

PRECISELY. Hey, wait...

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Do most of y'all have players that always play the discs OK? The one I ended up getting plays PAL & NTSC and all region codes, which was the clincher for me, but I've come to suspect the quality. Sometimes discs with no apparent scratches etc. freeze up during playback. Often it is some smudge on the disc or something, but sometimes not. Anyway, just wondering if I own a pice of crap or if the technology is a bit delicate??

― Ron Hudson, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah. Have that as well. I am worried cause the other time I experienced this the laser was crap. Had to take it in to get it fixed.

― helenfordsdale, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

DVD IS ONLY REALLY USEFULL WITH HIGH RESOLUTION TV OR YOUR COMPUTER SCREEN THOUGH.

― Mike Hanle y, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Extra special features generally = extra special shit. Picture quality is much better than PAL VHS even on my tiny telly and Buffy season boxsets are cheaper than on VHS, so DVD wins.

― RickyT, Saturday, 2 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I have a $900 Pioneer Elite laserdisc player and maybe 50 discs, and a bargain-basement DVD player, and the DVD shames the laserdisc. While the basic video quality on the laserdisc is almost as good as DVD, the time limitations of the disc are a major liability. Midway through the disc, the film is interruped while the laser mechanism flips around to play the other side. Films over 2 hours must occupy 2 discs, with the need for the view to get up and put in another disc at the end of the first one. This paradigm may work for the LP, but it stinks for watching a film. The format was also seen as a tweaky "videophile" format, and found poor distrubution from its inception right until the end. Most importantly, the price of laserdiscs was sky-high. 40, 50, even 60 dollars for a single disc! The average DVD release is about 20 bucks, makng collecting them a far more reasonable proposition. The question of why DVD wiped out laserdisc is really a no-brainer.

― Sean, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

that should have been with the need for the viewer...

― Sean, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

DVD extras = total waste. DVD menus = Utter dud. I just want to watch the film.

re: Quality. I was quite astounded by how good VHS can be after only seeing DVDs for a while. Almost as good as DVD, on a decent player with a good brand-new pre-recorded tape. Otherwise no.

― Graham, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

When you consider that the avg DVD today is as cheap as the price of the average VHS seven years ago, the realization that DVDs are the best thing since [insert GRATE object/idea here] sets in further. So eh, I'm a DVD-collecting twunt... but I also go to theaters. (Anutha pt: two movie tix = price of many DVDs, sometimes more than. No crowd noise -- i.e. people who fasted two weeks in preparation or people who think they're in their living room -- and you get to keep it hürrah!)

― Andy K, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

DVD extras = total waste
No! How else would I know that Nick Cage and A. Edwards plays in Fast Times @ R High?!?

― helenfordsdale, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Most extras may be crap, but there are several advantages:

On a DVD you can skip over all of the title/studio crap before the film, and you have discretion over which, if any, trailers you watch.

Some DVD's have interesting options. 'Following' had an option to watch the film with scenes rearranged in chronological order, and an alternate angle showing the working screenplay instead of the camera. I appreciate cast bio's because it makes it easier to check out an actor's other films.

Best offerings I've seen to date: Best in Show and especially Waiting for Guffman deleted scenes sections. Hilarious, just as entertaining as the film itself. Really enjoyed watching those ones with Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy commentary.

― Ron Hudson, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Collecting DVDs is about as interesting as collecting videos, which is to say, not at all.

― electric sound of jim, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

But what do you do when you *really really* want to see a movie but are too comfortable to go to the video store to rent one?

― Ned Raggett, Sunday, 3 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

two years pass...

Something to think about before you buy that next DVD

still from Gladiator DVD:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/5.38-ff-us.JPG

still from Gladiator HDTV broadcast
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/Gladiator1_hdtv.jpg

(hope those display in the page)

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:23 (twenty years ago)

(also, the HDTV image is 'open-matte' meaning there's more screen information than on the theatrical release - probably would not be released like that on an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc)

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:25 (twenty years ago)

20% OF GLADIATOR MISSING OH NOES

― Autumn Almanac (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:28 (twenty years ago)

But Gladiator is a shitty movie, no matter how clear the picture is.

xpost

― Huk-L, Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:31 (twenty years ago)

xpost
not really, I believe the film was framed for the top aspect ratio. A lot of the Kubrick confusion is due to this. For example, he shot The Shining film open matte and then framed it for theaters by adding matting. However, when it was broadcast on TV and released on DVD, it was shown open.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:32 (twenty years ago)

xpost
Obviously, I posted this to point out the difference in resolution, and not to discuss the merits of the film.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:33 (twenty years ago)

Here's a brighter pair of stills, DVD:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/50.49-ff-us.JPG

HDTV:
ihttp://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/Gladiator3_hdtv.jpg

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:37 (twenty years ago)

if you framed the pictures the same size i am not sure i could tell the difference. (for gladiator)

― ryan (ryan), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:38 (twenty years ago)

I will do just that

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:41 (twenty years ago)

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/5.38-ff-us.JPG
http://www.rotovibe.com/images/glad_hd_crop.jpg

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:44 (twenty years ago)

So far the two choices consist of manly men being manly in different light levels. WOT IS SPENCER TRYING TO SAY?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:45 (twenty years ago)

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator/50.49-ff-us.JPG
http://www.rotovibe.com/images/glad_hd_crop2.jpg

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:49 (twenty years ago)

But hang on, did Ridley Scott &c. intend the film to be seen in its reduced-height DVD format, or the HDTV format with added vision? Getting extra detail is only relevant if the film was shot with that in mind.

― Autumn Almanac (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:50 (twenty years ago)

no no, I'm talking about the sharpness of the image. disregard the matting issue.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:51 (twenty years ago)

In the second comparison, the difference is clearer. Compare the texture of the wall for example.

(these stills are from dvdbeaver.com btw)

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:51 (twenty years ago)

Also, brightness will vary from release to release.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:53 (twenty years ago)

Anyway, I know most people won't care, but I certainly do.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:54 (twenty years ago)

Bbbbut if it wasnt for DVD, I couldnt be a dickhead who just spent $400 at JB hifi on Babylon 5 and simpsons box sets!

I shall just rename myself ComincBookGuy now and be done with it, yes?

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:57 (twenty years ago)

To be honest tho - DVD can be cheaper. Whole season of simpsons on 4 DVDs for $28 AUD is pretty damn cheap.

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:57 (twenty years ago)

Worst post ever. (Not really.) (xpost)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:58 (twenty years ago)

Also, the Futurama commentaries by David X Cohen, Billy West and John DIMaggio are FREAKIN HILARIOUS.

Awwww Ned! *cries* (not really)

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:58 (twenty years ago)

o no, I'm talking about the sharpness of the image. disregard the matting issue.

Ah sorry.

Trayce: Yes

― Autumn Almanac (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:01 (twenty years ago)

Stuff you Adam, you're not coming over to watch Futurama anymore ;P

(PS I may not be serious)

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:03 (twenty years ago)

it could be my monitor (19" trinitron crt), but the variances between each of the 2 samples appear to be lighting/brightness driven and not necessarily quality of the picture.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:05 (twenty years ago)

it could be my monitor (19" trinitron crt), but i agree w/ the gax

― John (jdahlem), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:06 (twenty years ago)

The HD image is absolutely sharper. This would obviously be much more apparent on a large TV screen.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:08 (twenty years ago)

dud.
Collecting movies has always had zero appeal for me anyway, I think it's that movies are one of the few items where renting makes perfect sense, law of diminishing returns and all that(or whatever the law is that economists illustrate with the example of why people don't usually steal newspapers from the coinop boxes).

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:16 (twenty years ago)

not really, I believe the film was framed for the top aspect ratio. A lot of the Kubrick confusion is due to this. For example, he shot The Shining film open matte and then framed it for theaters by adding matting. However, when it was broadcast on TV and released on DVD, it was shown open.

I think that was caused by his desire to avoid pan-and-scanning his films. (The other story I've heard is that he saw 2001 letterboxed on TV and the station put little twinkly lights all over the black bars.) He made it so that (in the days of 4:3 tvs and VCRs) all of his films would only be shown full-matte on TV or video (this is why the Stanley Kubrick collection DVDs are 4:3), but his estate has revised that since 16:9 and DVD/HD started going mainstream. The latest Dr. Strangelove is 1.66:1 or 1.78:1, so I assume any new Kubrick DVDs will also be.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:18 (twenty years ago)

i love how collecting movies = dud, but collecting music = classic...

as if diminishing returns are exclusive to filmmaking.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:19 (twenty years ago)

ps spencer, i am not known for my eyesight... :-(

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:20 (twenty years ago)

Haha, I think you would notice it if you were watching side by side on a large HD screen.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:22 (twenty years ago)

Hey, did you know that when you go to the "theatre" to see a "film," there is part of the image which is cropped off or shown on the curtains surrounding the screen!? OH NOES! Going to cinema - DUD. In fact, seeing any movie ever in any format - DUD.

FWIW, I appreciate DVD Beaver's work.

― world's best grandpa (deangulberry), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

Exactly, you never really get to see the film as the filmmaker intended!!! Someday we'll be able to plug directly into Kubrick's dead brain via micro-circuitry to figure out what exactly he was thinking. Then we'll all finally be content and happy.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

I hear his brain is like in fucking 2:23 ratio!!! VISIONARY

― world's best grandpa (deangulberry), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:35 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 17 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

i don't really understand why anyone "collects" anything. if there's a film i want to see a lot, and i can afford the dvd, i'll buy it.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:22 (twenty years ago)

They are all distinctly different series... ^_^ the us/uk versions had many, many essential parts of the plotlines edited out due to excessively violent scenes deemed unfit for the benevolent us/uk societies.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:22 (twenty years ago)

Gatchaman = JP
G-Force = UK
Battle Of The Planets = US

Is this correct? I am new to this.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:29 (twenty years ago)

Yes. There is a great site that tells you the differences between all of them... CASEY KASEM!!!

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:32 (twenty years ago)

Oh god.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:35 (twenty years ago)

Though I'm amused to live in a world where Casey Kasem and Dominic Monaghan played the same character in different interpretations of The Lord of the Rings.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:36 (twenty years ago)

Gatchaman had slightly diff storylines or something as well, did it not? I only recall the BOTP ones with Casem doing the voice of erm... Jason, or whoever he did.

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:36 (twenty years ago)

i suppose that i dont really collect them in the sense of buying for rarity or anything like that... i just buy what i like and what i think that i would like.

― t0dd swiss, Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:45 (twenty years ago)

wow there really is a criterion version of armageddon!

― Lingbertt, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:05 (twenty years ago)

spencer there's no question that uncompressed HD is much higher quality than standard mpeg-2 compressed DVD! no question at all!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:12 (twenty years ago)

DVD player - 540 "lines of resolution" - 480i or 480p scan formats
HDTV television - 960 "lines of resolution" - 720p or 1080i scan formats

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:14 (twenty years ago)

Thank you! I think it's quite apparent upthread!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:17 (twenty years ago)

but i wouldn't neccessarily hold that against the dvd format, unless you had an hd tv.

(i'm sure that was addressed upthread too)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:18 (twenty years ago)

i buy them and leave them in piles and some of em on my shelf. they collect dust.

the term 'collecting' makes me think of creepy middle aged men waiting outside of record shows at 3am talking to trees.

― come on sock it to me (kephm), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:25 (twenty years ago)

so in order to enjoy the majesty of an hdtv image, do you have to buy special hd-dvds and an hd dvd player, or do you just need to have an hd dvd player?

― Lingbertt, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:31 (twenty years ago)

you need an hi-def BRAIN

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:32 (twenty years ago)

that's too bad.

― Lingbertt, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:37 (twenty years ago)

well, right now, you cant even buy hd-dvds because the technology hasnt been released yet.

but dvds obv look better on hdtv's because analog televisions cant handle 480i

― t0dd swiss, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:39 (twenty years ago)

HDTV broadcasts (HD signal with HDTV) look better than DVD. It's noticeable and great, but DVDs are not worthless and it may be years and years before your favorite movie becomes available on the new format. In the meantime, you can record HDTV directly to your Hard drive (they're HUGE files though).

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:43 (twenty years ago)

Has anybody here seen Cinemaniacs?

― Huk-L, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:47 (twenty years ago)

I have zero DVDs. I have three videos, none of which I bought myself; two of them I've watched once and the third I haven't watched at all. I guess I don't understand the appeal of watching movies more than once or twice.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:53 (twenty years ago)

oh ok. Your first comment ("Something to think about before you buy that next DVD") had me wondering if there was already a new format out (in which case I would have been unhappy).

Do you have to have an HDTV to record an HDTV broadcast to your hard drive, or can you still receive the HD signal on any ol' tv?

― Lingbertt, Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:55 (twenty years ago)

I guess I don't understand the appeal of watching movies more than once or twice.

I guess you don't either!

― world's best grandpa (deangulberry), Thursday, 20 January 2005 04:58 (twenty years ago)

I like TV sets. I have Space Ghost Vol 1, Chappelle Season One, and Arrested Development Season 1. I really want all the Homicide sets, but I do have all of them on VHS (taped off TV when Bravo used to run them 4 nights a week).
I also have a Marx Bros set (the Warner one, which is has the two best and five worst MB movies) and the first Looney Toons set. Oh, and Spongebob Season One.
Movies, I've never bought any for myself, but have received some as gifts. I usually fall asleep watching a movie for a second time.

― Huk-L, Thursday, 20 January 2005 05:01 (twenty years ago)

i am amazed by all the corny dvd-hate at the top of the thread. watching dvds is clearly and irrefutably MUCH better than going to the cinema. i wouldn't say i 'collect' dvds (or books, or records). i tend to 'buy' them and watch them. i also sometimes 'rent' them but doing this tends to mean i don't see the extra special features innit.

― Miles Finch, Thursday, 20 January 2005 09:50 (twenty years ago)

Is the DVD format going away soon? I don't think so but then I am out of the loop.

Okay, so HDTV gives better quality. But how soon will that be a common thing, having HDTV?

DVD, HDTV, bluetooth, cell phone, WIFI, HIFI. ROFL, I can't keep up with all this!

I have about 30 DVDs and I find myself a freak for not having more/less.

― stevie nixed (stevie nixed), Thursday, 20 January 2005 10:02 (twenty years ago)

"i love how collecting movies = dud, but collecting music = classic...
as if diminishing returns are exclusive to filmmaking."
-- gygax!

I actually wrote the equivalent myself but deleted it, I'll go with my instinct next time. At any rate, it's a contradiction I'm not looking to resolve(or possibly isn't a contradiction but I can't pinpoint as to why right now) so...

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Thursday, 20 January 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

I have:

Fugazi DVD
Can DVD set
Load Records DVD
N. Dyn0mit3 DVD (gift)
Kids in the Hall Season 2 Box
Battlestar Galatica Box

― LSD ARISTOCAT (ex machina), Thursday, 20 January 2005 17:21 (twenty years ago)

I have:

Candlemass "Documents of Doom" 2DVD
Candlemass "Essential Doom" DVD that came with CD
Krux "Live" DVD

Nits "1974" DVD that came with CD

Biglietto Per L'Inferno documentary DVD from CD box set

Steeleye Span live 1989 DVD

Die Haut live DVD that came with "Burnin' the Ice" CD

This is Spinal Tap

It's more than I would've thought, actually. I wish I had the Nektar reunion concert one, the Atomic Rooster TV appearance one, the Fall ones (all, what, six of them?), the Van Der Graaf Generator one, the Nits concert one, and the SCTV seasons.

― Pangolino again, Thursday, 20 January 2005 17:49 (twenty years ago)

three years pass...

They inevitably build up over time (I don't buy that many so it does take a while), but I steadily sell 'em...what with lack of space, and the feeling that I only need to watch a film once or twice at most. Besides, if I ever wanna watch it twice I can always catch it on the big screen in a few years (or on TV, unlikely as it seems). I can wait.

Anyway, revived bcz I wanna find out about shops in London where you can sell these. I did sell a batch at the Notting Hill exchange but I want some alternatives to consider apart from ebay.

― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:16 (seventeen years ago)

computer exchange?

― toby, Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:18 (seventeen years ago)

Nice one. Try that soon...keep 'em coming.

― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:22 (seventeen years ago)

i love these threads where a lot of people hasten to steadfastly oppose something completely mundane and unexceptional

― J.D., Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:23 (seventeen years ago)

"people who put stuff on their coffee tables: classic or dud?"

― J.D., Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:24 (seventeen years ago)

Give them to charity maybe? Charity shops can get good prices on DVDs. Depends how much you need the cash, I guess.

― Neil S, Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:24 (seventeen years ago)

It's not really the cash...ws looking to exchange but Notting Hill had a rub selection last time I looked (the action seemed to be all on the VHS corner, a couple of items did tempt me...)

― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 23 February 2008 20:44 (seventeen years ago)

it's gonna sound really twatty if i admit how much i enjoy watching shonky internet screeners isnt it :(

― r|t|c, Saturday, 23 February 2008 21:49 (seventeen years ago)

Films I love are just like music I love: I find myself going back to enjoy/experience them over and over. I own many DVDs.

― Capitaine Jay Vee, Saturday, 23 February 2008 23:29 (seventeen years ago)

I have basically stopped buying movies until Blu-Ray becomes cheaper.

― caek, Sunday, 24 February 2008 02:27 (seventeen years ago)

Is there any point in Blu-Ray ~~if you don't have an HD TV~~ at all?

― Colonel Poo, Sunday, 24 February 2008 02:30 (seventeen years ago)

okay this thread.

Collecting DVDs is popular with twunts who never go to the cinema.
-- DV, Saturday, March 2, 2002 1:00 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link
DVD IS ONLY REALLY USEFULL WITH HIGH RESOLUTION TV OR YOUR COMPUTER SCREEN THOUGH.
-- Mike Hanle y, Saturday, March 2, 2002 1:00 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link
Collecting DVDs is about as interesting as collecting videos, which is to say, not at all.
-- electric sound of jim, Sunday, March 3, 2002 1:00 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link

like people in 2002 were all like "i collect videos; isn't that INTERESTING?"

haha but also:

DVD extras = total waste. DVD menus = Utter dud. I just want to watch the film.
re: Quality. I was quite astounded by how good VHS can be after only seeing DVDs for a while. Almost as good as DVD, on a decent player with a good brand-new pre-recorded tape. Otherwise no.

-- Graham, Sunday, March 3, 2002 1:00 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link

http://www.absolutedvds.com/images/products/dvd_buffy7pack_med.jpg

― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 24 February 2008 10:39 (seventeen years ago)

i have to say, blu-ray looks pretty dope. and lol @ buffy.

― omar little, Sunday, 24 February 2008 15:29 (seventeen years ago)

and lol@ people being so sniffy about dvds.

― s1ocki, Sunday, 24 February 2008 17:10 (seventeen years ago)

Collecting DVDs is popular with twunts who never go to the cinema.
-- DV, Saturday, March 2, 2002 1:00 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link

this guy's local cinema shows old episodes of 'homicide' and, you know, the entire history of cinema, on a regular basis? sweet deal.

― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 24 February 2008 17:14 (seventeen years ago)

i think i have too many (100?) for me

― blueski, Sunday, 24 February 2008 20:26 (seventeen years ago)

The only DVD I own is Eddie Murphy's "Raw" that my housemate got me for Christmas basically so he could watch it. I usually rent, download or borrow films off mates. Don't think I've bought a CD for about a year, either. All a waste of money reserved for going out on the piss three nights a week. Still buy books, though.

― Bodrick III, Sunday, 24 February 2008 21:12 (seventeen years ago)

i dunno how many i own. "a shitload" about covers it.

― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 24 February 2008 21:16 (seventeen years ago)

I have two case logic binders full and working on a third.
spencer's freeze frames upthread remind me of why I'm not particularly impressed or stoked for BR

― El Tomboto, Sunday, 24 February 2008 21:22 (seventeen years ago)

i mean, I know they are retarded, but this kinda blew my mind:

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10723360

Indeed, Hollywood's desire to preserve its existing business rather than embrace a new one echoes its misgivings a few years ago about the DVD itself. In 1997, when the new format was about to be born, three studios, Paramount, Disney and Twentieth Century Fox, came out against it, remembers Warren Lieberfarb, who is widely credited with having fathered the product as it is today. They were worried that selling DVDs for $18 apiece would cannibalise their sales of video cassettes to rental stores for $65 each. None of the three studios is proud of that episode now.

This reminds me of this quote:

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/15-12/mf_morris

Morris has never accepted the digital world's ruling ethos that it's better to follow the smartest long-term strategy, even if it means near-term losses. As far as he's concerned, do that and someone, somewhere, is taking advantage of you. Morris wants to be paid now, not in some nebulous future.

― caek, Sunday, 24 February 2008 21:22 (seventeen years ago)

spencer's freeze frames upthread remind me of why I'm not particularly impressed or stoked for BR

-- El Tomboto, Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:22 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

but what are the sources? not blu-ray. and hdtv is way more compressed than blu-ray.

not to be a blu-ray proselyte or anything (i've barely seen them myself)... but just saying.

― s1ocki, Sunday, 24 February 2008 21:26 (seventeen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.