I Heart Huckabees 2 disc version $39.99 srp (1 Viewer)

[ChristianB]

Like anyone PAYS MSRP anyway!! Practically all new release DVDs are sold as loss leaders. You are actually paying cost or below cost, which for us customers - is a great deal.

Christian

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

I picked up the SE today and let me raise a few concerns.

1. FOX is currently one of the worst studios releasing DVDs currently.
2. I Heart Huckabees should've just been a two-disc SE with an SRP of $29.99 and that's it. The film is not mainstream/popular enough to have two seperate versions of the flick available. I don't see the DVD moving millions of units, despite that Tower and Circuit City had both hundreds of copies of the SE and very few of the movie-only edition.
3. The SE includes the dual-sided disc that is available in the movie-only edition and a dual-layer disc for all the special features. What continuity is that? If I'm going to be paying $10 more, couldn't the SE be widescreen only? Maybe have it dual-layered with a DTS track on it as well?
4. Because of this practice, I am not buying the Kinsey SE when it comes out, unless it goes OOP or a price drop occurs shortly after release.
5. FOX is cheap.

 

[WillG]

This is an issue that I have been vocal about in the past as well. And I was surprised to see so many here actually supporting the practice. Many see it as the studio providing a cheaper solution for those who don't care about extras. But the stripped down version isn't really "cheaper" is it? The version with more extras is being sold at a premium that can be as much as double the price of the 1-disc version. If it was only a few dollars difference (which it may be in some cases) or the 1-disc was sold at around a $15 price point while the 2-Disc is at around a $20 price point, I think would not be as off putting. I mean when I can pick up a set like the LOTR: EEs which has 4 discs and is packed with full length documentaries and commentaries for around $25 and I see a 2-Disc edition of something for $29.99 in the store, mind you it's kind of a WTF thing for me.

But if I do pay a premium, all I have to say as that those extras had better be top notch, with none of the three featurettes running at 29:59 each thing.

 

[Vincent-P]

A) According to all the reviews of the disc I've read (DVDTalk's comes to mind) the extras are very plentiful and good.

B) This DVD will be a good seller. We sold more copies of it than any other disc today at my Best Buy. It beat Heat: Special Edition and South Park: Season 5, the other two well selling DVDs. We sold many copies of both versions. The higher price on the 2 disc set does not seem to be dettering people.

 

[Damin J Toell]

?

DJ

 

[Benson R]

I think his point was that the premium set should appeal to collectors. Collectors will only want widescreen, and including a fullscreen just wastes space on the disc that could be used on dts or better picture quality.

I too am quite puzzled by this release. Sure there are deals to be found the first week that makes the price reasonable, but after that the price will be 30-35 at popular retailers.

I bought the master and commander set which had a similar pricing structure, but that set was 3 discs, had really classy delux packaging and had a lot more to offer in general.

In fact, looking at the feature list, it seems that they could have left the fullscreen transfer off the flipper and included all the features on the second side.

And I heartily agree that fox releases are going from the best out there, to among the worst. The only thing going for them is their picture quality is still better then Disney, but even there they have lost a lot of ground.

 

[Skoobooz]

The Master and Commander Collector's Edition was only two discs...but was still worth it. As for this...well, Fox has been disappointing with this recent practice and their need to re-release a new title six months later with a special edition (Man On Fire, I Robot, etc.). Shame.

 

[Damin J Toell]

While I'm sure the collectors of the world appreciate you speaking for them, I wouldn't be surprised if having the fullscreen transfer in the set increases distribution and sales.

DJ

 

[Robert_eb]

Thanks for informative critique thread crapper.

I haven't seen this film and will probably give it a rent first.

Does Hollywood video have the one or two disc set for rental?

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I don't think that HV carries the multi-disc versions for rental.


I think his issue was that the flipper is likely to be single-layered on both sides, while a single-sided dual-layer disc could have better PQ and/ or additional audio options.

 

[Damin J Toell]

And Fox could have, if they wanted to, make a DVD-14 with a dual-layer side for the widescreen transfer and a single-layer side for the fullscreen transfer. They don't need to ditch the fullscreen transfer to accomplish that goal.

DJ

 

[Aaron Silverman]

BTW, to put it as diplomatically as I can, this recent trend of overpriced 2- and 3-disc sets SUCKS MAJOR ASS.

I don't own the single or multiple disc versions of Mystic River, The Terminal, etc. (notice that this is not just Fox) -- the sets are too pricey, but if I want a film enough to buy it, then I want the best edition available.

The cost of Criterions means I own about 1/4 of their titles that I'd like, but they at least have an excuse for their pricing model.

 

[Benson R]

Yeah but I highly doubt they did that. dvd14 and dvd18's are more expensive to produce.

The reason studios often produce the same disc one for the barebones and special edition releases is to cut down on manufacturing costs.

And I think I do speak for most people who would buy the special edition of this movie.

I'm sure there is some giant Huckabee's fan who wants the special edition and wants to watch it in fullscreen and doesnt care if that butchers the picture.

However most people that buy these premium sets are big movie buffs. And the vast vast majority of those wont watch non oar releases. Look at this way, LOTR was a giant hit with both casual and hardcore movie fans. The theatrical editions were both in oar and fullscreen. However the premium extended releases were only available in OAR. Thats because the more expensive sets are more costly to produce and there wouldnt be a huge interest in a fullscreen release of them.

My only point in this is if Fox is going to charge a premium for the special edition, they shouldnt cheap out. They should produce a disc one with an entire dual layer devoted to the oar presentation of the film and if there is space left over, include more sound options and other features.

 

[Damin J Toell]

That's because, unlike with Huckabees, New Line could do whatever they wanted with LOTR and still get maximum distribution and sales. The comparison to Huckabees is laughable. This is an arthouse film that has limited appeal, and Fox is trying to make all possible concessions to widen the appeal, distribution, and availability of the set. And, as we've seen from posts from Fox's Peter Staddon in the past, this is a very real and important concern for these types of films; the fullscreen transfer will get the set on more shelves around the country. Your presumption of what the "vast majority" of interested purchasers want aside, the increase in distribution and sales is not insignificant.

It seems to me that Fox determined that including a fullscreen transfer (a feature with wide appeal, no matter how berated here) has a greater upside than additional disc space for the transfer or DTS (features that, despite the rather warped view presented by internet forums, have comparatively limited appeal). I don't see this as "cheaping out" by any means. They're not trying to pass off a vastly inferior product; collectors still get an anamorphic OAR transfer with the film's original soundtrack and a wealth of extras. Fox has simply widened the appeal of the set. The additional money from the widened appeal (and other such releases done in this way previously) will probably be what recoups the expense of the creation of the collector's set; them "cheaping out" may well be what makes it economically possible to create a collector's set in the first place. If they didn't "cheap out" on these releases, we might not have gotten the 2-disc release at all. Do you think that's a preferrable situation to what we have now?

It's nice to have the luxury of demanding collector-pandering perfection from Fox, but it's all too easy to do when you don't have to also worry about their bottom line.

DJ

 

[TheLongshot]

Then why charge $39.99? Really, if you are going to charge a premium, treat the release like a premium release. From everything I've heard, it doesn't sound like it is worth the price.

Personally, it doesn't sound like Fox wants to sell too many special editions.

Jason

 

[Benson R]

I'll have to reserve judgement until I can watch my copy, but at 39.99 I expect the very best in picture quality. Even if the movie is only 90 minutes, its hard to get the absolute best picture quality cramming the entire feature onto a single layer. It is possible, but rare.

And I completely disagree that fox is doing the smart thing sales wise. At the price point they set, trust me, casual viewers will not buy.

I'm sorry if your a fan of fullscreen and I offended you though. I and others here are just venting some frustation at a studio that used to consistently put out the best product out there.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Please. I never said anything of the sort, and you obviously didn't understand a word I wrote if that's what you took from what I said. You cheapen the discussion by trying to derail it and give me such silly labels.

DJ

 

[Todd Bennington]

I think this trend is a disturbing one as well. There is a $10-15 difference in price between the 2 versions. For that much money the extras had better be pretty compelling, particularly since they'll likely only be watched once. If Fox was really concerned about making money from this release, this strategy doesn't seem to make much sense. If Huckabees is not the sort of film to appeal to casual or impulse dvd buyers (which is certainly is not), then why bother with the single disc version at all? Since most "serious" fans will want the "better" version, why bother with the single disc? Why not just do one 2 disc release? And while I don't really care about it that much, I do wonder about the fullscreen transfer. I would be frankly shocked if anyone who really engages with this film would ever want to watch it pan-n-scanned. But the thing that worries me the most is that is a new way for studios to get back into a "rental" pricing mode (only in this case the "rental" price is the for the cheap 1 disc version), charging a premium for content that used to be standard fare. I would also hate to be a retailer these days - with so many versions of the same movie floating around, who can stock a wide variety of titles? Have one release at one price really simplifies this

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Not really. Consider this: the single disc release can be had pre-viewed in a couple of months for under $10, and will most likely be marked down over time anyway, while the special edition will remain permanently stickered at $30 and will very rarely (if ever) go on sale. Release week is the only time those multi-disc editions are ever marked down.

Think of it that way, and you're essentially paying triple to get the extras.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Right. So, like I said, you didn't actually pay $39.99, and you used the higher MSRP number as a red herring. Got it.

DJ