Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:41 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament" 
Author Message
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
slksc wrote:
Today, I never buy regular DVD's, only Blu-Ray. If I'm going to collect a movie, it has to be the highest quality audio and video; I will not waste my time and money on anything less.


Even if the movie in question has no benefit from being seen in a higher resolution? Personally the sound is not an issue, the difference (if there even is one) isn't noticeable, or at least I never notice it. As I said, I save the investment of BRD for something that LOOKS amazing (and meets the other criteria, like being good etc).

I won't quote roastbeef_ajus because I don't wish to draw attention to what was said but I'd seriously be careful what you say in regards to this matter. On web forums I mean :)

A couple of observations briefly, if I may. I've noticed a few people mentioning that their movie collection consists more of older movies than newer ones. In addition, people seem to have very strict criteria about, and the difference between, what constitutes a 'good movie' and 'good enough to buy'.

Now I'm not against having standards as such but I realised a long time ago that sticking to them rigidly was just not a very fun way to experience anything. I found that I wasn't experiencing anything new because I was "twisting facts to suit theories rather than forming theories to suit facts" to quote one of my favourite movies.

I know it's a radical way of thinking, especially since lowering your standards might inevitably lead to parting with more money etc but I'm not suggesting doing away with self control and discipline, just opening up your mind to new things.

My own conclusion is that it might not JUST be the drop in quality of movies that is having an effect, but that we the 'movie going public' have been scorned several times too often and have raised our guard against possibly giving something a chance on the offhand that it becomes our new favourite movie.

Just a 'brief' observation :)


Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:54 am
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
There are other ways to try something new other than plunking down cash for a DVD/BD, sight unseen. Better to be an informed consumer.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:23 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
What other ways are there? Especially since there is not 'legitimate' way to see a movie without paying for it, or at least subscribing to a rental service etc. Trailers and reviews are useful but I've begun to trust secondary information a lot less as of late.

In the past I have made judgements regarding movies based on things like the opinion of friends, and reviewers (JB mostly) and I fared well as a result. Lately however I've gone against 'general' opinion and found myself suprised. 'Sucker Punch' is probably the best example of how listening to people is sometimes not a good idea!


Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:03 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Dragonbeard wrote:
What other ways are there? Especially since there is not 'legitimate' way to see a movie without paying for it, or at least subscribing to a rental service etc.
I will remind you that we are specifically talking about buying movies--in other words, purchasing a disc at either new or used cost--and we're talking physical media.

1. As you've pointed out, rental is an option. You can subscribe, or (I realize this is must seem resoundingly atavistic in this futuristic wonderland we live in) you can go to a video store. There's also Redbox. These are all far cheaper than plunking down cash for a potential dud.

2. Netflix Instant has its flaws, but I would still say it's a decent option, within the limits of its selection. There's also On Demand, but every movie I recall trying has been letterboxed for 4:3. Absolutely ridiculous.

3. Most movies are floating around in the download-o-sphere. This may not be "legitimate", but it is a useful tool for sorting wheat from chaff.

Buying a movie without having seen it first is the worst of the available options, with Letterbox On Demand a short distance away.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:13 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
The only circumstances under which I buy a movie I've not seen is if a trusted friend recommends it and actually explains WHY. I can think of only ONE movie I've bought without any prior knowledge, other than the blurb on the case, which was 'Persepolis' on BRD. It was £3 in a pawn brokers and I liked the sound of it. Turns out it's a fantastic movie!

I'm tempted to join an online rental service for the simple reason that about half the movies I see are only re-watchable once in a while, and not often enough to take up what little space I have.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:26 pm
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1494
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Quote:
I think - I mean, look at 2010. We got Dogtooth, Exit Through the Gift Shop, Restrepo, Red Riding 1974, Carlos, I Am Love, Incendies, 127 Hours, True Grit, The King's Speech, Uncle Boonmee, Everyone Else, The Autobiography of Nicolae Ceausescu, Lourdes, Winter's Bone, Toy Story 3, Armadillo, Mother, Another Year, The Ghost Writer, Sweetgrass, and The Social Network, to name a few. And that's only what I saw personally; I'm still working through seeing all the films that have been recommended to me. That's a fair amount of great or near-great films in one year. And even this year, I've been lucky enough to see The Tree of Life, A Separation, The Artist, Drive, Pina, We Need to Talk About Kevin, Moneyball, and Once Upon a Time In Anatolia, all great films;


how many of those did James review?


Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:52 pm
Profile
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
I have several hundred DVDs, some of which I've owned for 10+ years, and maybe 300 Blu-rays. There are special features, especially commentaries and documentaries, which have never been ported over to the Blu-ray editions of some of my favorite movies ("Empire of Dreams", for example), so I keep the DVDs even after the Blu-ray edition comes out.

Although online streaming will become more reliable/friendly/efficient/higher quality, and although DVDs and Blu-rays will someday be obsolete (in the same way VHS and laserdisc are obsolete now), I can't see myself ever giving up my physical media. There's too much time and money invested in my collection, and I can't see the quality of streaming overtaking the quality of many of the DVDs and Blu-rays in my collection.

Some of these discs have sentimental value to me also... there could be a movie I don't enjoy much (like "Boondock Saints", for example), but I keep the DVD because an ex-girlfriend gave it to me. Or something similar to that. As I posted to highdefdigest a couple of weeks ago, I don't see myself ever joining the 3D bandwagon. I'm perfectly happy with my 2D Blu-ray copies of "Avatar".

I do think that Hollywood will keep producing physical media. They have too much money invested in the supply channels, retailers, Redbox and the like. The market may be dwindling, but I don't see the manufacture and distribution of physical media going away any time soon.


Last edited by nickinks on Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:04 pm
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:52 pm
Posts: 274
Location: North Carolina
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Even if the movie in question has no benefit from being seen in a higher resolution? Personally the sound is not an issue, the difference (if there even is one) isn't noticeable, or at least I never notice it. As I said, I save the investment of BRD for something that LOOKS amazing (and meets the other criteria, like being good etc).


Personally, I think every movie looks better in high resolution, but often it doesn't matter. For example, I'm sure the BD of Transformers looks better than the DVD, but I wouldn't buy it regardless.

The difference may not mean as much to you, and that's OK. First, if your screen is smaller than 50 inches, you'll find it harder to see the difference anyway. And some people just don't care. My wife couldn't tell the difference between a Blu-ray disc and a manhole cover, but I love her anyway.

I do agree with you that some movies benefit more from high resolution than others, but which ones may be surprising. The biggest difference I've seen is the DVD vs. BD of 2001. The DVD is full of annoying digital artifacts, especially in the high-contrast scenes in space. All of those are gone in the BD version, which is a truly beautiful disc. Even old B/W films benefit from high definition. My BD copy of The Third Man is really nice, and I bet it hasn't looked better since it was filmed. But, YMMV.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:06 pm
Profile
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
The higher quality of BD does bring it closer to the theatrical ideal, but it's still not terribly close for my money. For my TV, not significantly closer than DVD in most cases.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:08 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
I normally enjoy these articles but I felt this one to be very silly. The bashing of Hollywood is getting old.

who the hell is funding movies made by James Cameron, David Fincher, JJ Abrams,. Spielberg, the Coen Brothers, PIXAR, Christopher Nolan etc. Do people think these are independent filmmakers or something?





the idea that films of the past were all great and it is only know that Hollywood releases crappy films is also ludicrous.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:57 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
ShriekoftheVulture wrote:
I normally enjoy these articles but I felt this one to be very silly. The bashing of Hollywood is getting old.

who the hell is funding movies made by James Cameron, David Fincher, JJ Abrams,. Spielberg, the Coen Brothers, PIXAR, Christopher Nolan etc. Do people think these are independent filmmakers or something?

Who's funding Paul Schrader lately?

I'm normally loathe to repeat myself, but Go Go Gadget copy and paste.

Ken wrote:
The difference is that in "previous eras" (I'm assuming the discussion here is primarily referring to the '60s/'70s), there was room for all kinds of movies. Financiers had not yet fully transformed into market analysts and media event makers. There was still an element of "If you film it, they will come" to the way that projects were put into motion, and even if the producers fought with the creative team, the team could often prevail.

Nowadays, getting a serious, intelligent, artistic movie financed is like pulling teeth. A fair number of titles you mentioned have a lot of crossover appeal, whether it be through recognizable stars, being part of a popular series, being safe "prestige" movies, etc. Sure, if your name is Boyle or Fincher or Tarantino, some financiers are going to jump aboard readily, because they know that your name is money in the bank. But if you're a Lynch or a Schrader or, hell, even an Aronofsky on occasion, your crossover appeal is much more limited. For every project you do, you're going to have to spend years roaming the western world beforehand, hat in hand, trying to scrounge up enough money.

That's not healthy for the state of movies. It means that the mediocre sure-thing movies get much higher priority than ever before, and it means that even good movies that do get made are usually required to be superficially similar to the mediocre ones.

Furthermore, the health of the critical establishment has historically gone hand-in-hand with the quality of movies. They form a feedback loop. These days, the critical establishment is a shambles. We've already seen Variety fire McCarthy, and that's just one example of the common trend in movie journalism. When the most prestigious publications in the business are casually downsizing the brightest stars of the critical galaxy, the shit has hit the fan.



Quote:
the idea that films of the past were all great and it is only know that Hollywood releases crappy films is also ludicrous.
Then I suppose it's a good thing nobody's saying that.


Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:55 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
slksc wrote:
Dragonbeard wrote:
Even if the movie in question has no benefit from being seen in a higher resolution? Personally the sound is not an issue, the difference (if there even is one) isn't noticeable, or at least I never notice it. As I said, I save the investment of BRD for something that LOOKS amazing (and meets the other criteria, like being good etc).


Personally, I think every movie looks better in high resolution, but often it doesn't matter. For example, I'm sure the BD of Transformers looks better than the DVD, but I wouldn't buy it regardless.

The difference may not mean as much to you, and that's OK. First, if your screen is smaller than 50 inches, you'll find it harder to see the difference anyway. And some people just don't care. My wife couldn't tell the difference between a Blu-ray disc and a manhole cover, but I love her anyway.

I do agree with you that some movies benefit more from high resolution than others, but which ones may be surprising. The biggest difference I've seen is the DVD vs. BD of 2001. The DVD is full of annoying digital artifacts, especially in the high-contrast scenes in space. All of those are gone in the BD version, which is a truly beautiful disc. Even old B/W films benefit from high definition. My BD copy of The Third Man is really nice, and I bet it hasn't looked better since it was filmed. But, YMMV.


I can tell the difference regardless of the screen size. 50 inches is fine however I'm happy with my 22 inch screen, especially considering the space I have to work with.

I agree, everything looks better in higher resolution but I enjoy some movies for reasons other than visuals. 'Lock Stock' is in my top ten and I've yet to buy it on BRD (I've got VHS and DVD extended version) simply because it isn't something I'm bothered about owning in that format, at least not until the price comes down.

I don't see an end to physical media, at least not yet. I agree with the sentimental value angle, with books especially. Even the very laptop on which I'm writing this entry, I will always keep as the place I first found out I was going to be a father!


Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:42 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
If any of you DVD buyers have a nice tv hooked to a network...what precisely keeps you from finding the movies you know you can? There are plenty of server banks located in countries who don't regulate (the sort of thing that I am talking about)...and I am against using p2p, bittorrents (simply pretty much b/c it is slower than other options).

With a little light reading, If you don't know already, every single one of you know where to find a movie that you want...a perfect copy at the same resolution and sound options as the dvd/blu ray as a matter of fact.

And as I understand it, Pirates 4 was one of the most pirated movies in the history of pirated movies....that fact didn't stop Depp from pocketing over $50mm for his efforts. Also, is watching what people put on the net against the law?...They are the ones that "pirated"...not me. I am just simply looking at what those dudes posted.

Probably another topic for another day that will never be solved because I will never stop putting my hands in the cookie jar....especially if they are hot new cookies straight from the oven.

But the basic question is....do all of you have a moral dilema?


Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:47 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
I don't really care what the law says, and I also don't particularly care about enriching people who are already so rich that my money is essentially meaningless to them. But there are cases in which the filmmakers haven't reached that level of wealth, and the meager sales that their movies do make actually mean something to their livelihood. I'm talking about the guys that people conveniently leave out when they talk about good filmmakers getting mainstream funding in today's world.

There is also the central principle of popular entertainment: the only vote you have is the one you cast with your wallet. The only way you're ever going to see genuinely good movies get any kind of funding or exposure is to pay to see the genuinely good movies that do get made. You have to do your part as a consumer to run the titles up the charts, to demonstrate to financiers (both big and small) that good movies are a worthwhile investment.

I would imagine that people who watch movies exclusively by illegal downloads are being willfully ignorant of the role they play as consumers in this business. They view it as a matter of "I click button, I get movie, end of transaction", as though movies are borne out of a vacuum. But it isn't quite that simple. Occasionally, it can be a matter of hurting or helping good filmmakers financially, but it's always a matter of having your say.


Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:02 am
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
And as I understand it, Pirates 4 was one of the most pirated movies in the history of pirated movies....


Wait, does that mean Pirates 4 is the most pirated pirate movie ever? I'd love a list of the most pirated pirate movies, particularly how pirated the Pirates series had been compared to other pirate movies.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Pirates.


Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:44 am
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
If any of you DVD buyers have a nice tv hooked to a network...what precisely keeps you from finding the movies you know you can? There are plenty of server banks located in countries who don't regulate (the sort of thing that I am talking about)...and I am against using p2p, bittorrents (simply pretty much b/c it is slower than other options).

With a little light reading, If you don't know already, every single one of you know where to find a movie that you want...a perfect copy at the same resolution and sound options as the dvd/blu ray as a matter of fact.

And as I understand it, Pirates 4 was one of the most pirated movies in the history of pirated movies....that fact didn't stop Depp from pocketing over $50mm for his efforts. Also, is watching what people put on the net against the law?...They are the ones that "pirated"...not me. I am just simply looking at what those dudes posted.

Probably another topic for another day that will never be solved because I will never stop putting my hands in the cookie jar....especially if they are hot new cookies straight from the oven.

But the basic question is....do all of you have a moral dilema?


I just don't like discussing the matter where anyone could read it =p


Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:24 am
Gaffer

Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:33 pm
Posts: 11
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Why do we need so much junk in our homes anyway? Is it worth that much having lots of collectables instead of near invisible content? Isn't the content what matters the most?

Personally, I don't care about physical media anymore. I'm 25 and I think it's just a waste of space (and way more cumbersome to search through it) having tons of plastic cases with paper booklets and all of the stuff I love. I would gladly replace (and I have, for the most of it) all my music, films, etc for digital copies burried on a single Gazillian-Byte Hard Drive next to my hometheater. The whole argument that "in my days it was a joy to sniff at the scent of a new comic book" or "it was great to read a new CD booklet while I listened to the music" is pointless, it's all a thing of the past, and they're all exclusive to those who are old enough to have experienced it.

I'm not saying technology makes things better or worse, It simply runs from point A to B, and if I think that way, imagine someone who was born in 2001, or someone who's been born at this moment? They won't care for our nostalgia at all. They won't even understand why we all talk like we regret living through the modern age.

I agree with some people here who pointed out that there are still great movies around that are worth being rewatched and remembered. And I agree too that the economy has much to do with the decline in physical media sales. But I think that besides all that, the simple fact that the world is evolving together with today's tech is enough to make people stop caring about having so many stuff piled in their homes, since nowadays it's a lot more convenient just to rent it, borrow it, stream it or download it. Legally or not.


Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:17 pm
Profile
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Shut up Meg.

Kidding :P you're right, and I'd love to use up my space more productively (Apocalypse sized 40k table <3) however if someone said I could replace every DVD/BRD/CD/Vinyl/Cassette/VHS/etc with digital copies thereof, for nothing, then I would.


Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:35 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Shut up Meg.

Kidding :P you're right, and I'd love to use up my space more productively (Apocalypse sized 40k table <3) however if someone said I could replace every DVD/BRD/CD/Vinyl/Cassette/VHS/etc with digital copies thereof, for nothing, then I would.

Yeah, but what if your hard drive crashes? Then you'd lose EVERYTHING, movies, TV shows, music, etc. My hard drive crashed earlier this year, and oh man did that suck! :evil: Granted all I really lost was a list of films I was planning on seeing at some point, but it was a long list, so trying to make a new list is kind of a pain. So i'm perfectly fine with sacrificing a little shelf space to store physical media, sometimes I clear out part of my movie collection by either donating them to my local library or throwing them away(though I only throw away the films I really don't care for)


Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:08 pm
Post Re: October 21, 2011: "The DVD Collector's Lament"
Vexer wrote:
So i'm perfectly fine with sacrificing a little shelf space to store physical media, sometimes I clear out part of my movie collection by either donating them to my local library or throwing them away(though I only throw away the films I really don't care for)


Have you thought about selling them! I'm sure someone will buy it if you're going to trash it......shouldn't there be a Disc Replay by you?


Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:21 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr