Syndicated cuts, music substitutions..it's all good

Discussion in 'TV on DVD and Blu-ray' started by Bryan^H, Jul 24, 2006.

  1. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,064
    Likes Received:
    2
    Syndicated cuts are the reason I stopped watching any reruns on tv a long time ago. I watch TCM, CNN, etc., but am certainly not going to waste time watched cut up episodes of tv shows.
     
  2. Steven_F

    Steven_F Extra

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0


    I was going to reply, but George summed it up quite nicely.
     
  3. MarkHastings

    MarkHastings Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12,013
    Likes Received:
    1
    but a lot of people watch TV as a source of entertainment, and that's it - They enjoy it just as much in syndicated form as in non-edited form. To compare the enjoyment of syndicated epsiodes to being happy with a contractor only finishing part of the job, is hardly logic at all.

    That's just as fucked up as telling someone they can't enjoy music from a set of headphones and that music can ONLY be listened to under optimal conditions.

    Enjoyment isn't as strick as you guys make it. I'm not saying you have to agree with it, I'm just saying you need to understand it, but I don't think you guys do.
     
  4. Malcolm R

    Malcolm R Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    12,653
    Likes Received:
    550
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    So, since you're not as "strict" as the rest of us, you don't have a problem purchasing and watching full screen DVD's either? Most people on this forum won't watch a pan-and-scan film on DVD; why can't that same desire for product integrity carry over to television?
     
  5. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,064
    Likes Received:
    2
    Actually the better comparison would be something like listening to stereo with headphones that only had a working right phone. Or that eliminated half the frequency in the song. Or that faded in and out every few minutes, so that you were missing portions of the music.

    Your analogy is akin to arguments about the size of one's screen, etc., which is a completely different topic.
     
  6. MarkHastings

    MarkHastings Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12,013
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, syndication is a compromise in length, as MP3's are a compromise in quality. If you want to argue that people who like syndicated episodes must not care about everything else incomplete, then you must also agree that people who like compromises in quality (like MP3's), should also like compromises everywhere else (i.e syndicated shows).

    See? I don't agree with the above. That was the point. The comparisons are a ridiculous argument.
     
  7. MarkHastings

    MarkHastings Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12,013
    Likes Received:
    1
    You guys do realize there's a method to my madness here [​IMG]

    Hopefully I got you guys thinking about MP3's. Now here's my argument...The first thing MP3's do (when they get compressed) is to chop off the high and low frequencies. This is the start of getting a smaller file size.

    Now MP3 compression does NOT alter the length of the song so you can't actually compare it to syndicated episodes. I assume you've all come to that conclusion already (despite my previous arguments).

    Ok, now that we're all in agreement, if we can't compare liking MP3's to liking syndicated episodes, then I suggest we compare them to Pan & Scan movies.

    P&S movies chop off the sides of the film to make the image small enough to fit in the 4x3 image area. This is just what MP3's do, they chop off the tops and bottoms of the song frequencies (amongst other compression techniques) to make them small enough.

    So can we all agree that people who like MP3's, should also like Pan and Scan films?

    See how perfect example comparisons are absolutely and utterly ridiculous. [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    and before anyone brings up the "P&S changes the composition of the film to the point where the film is now different" argument, I can guarantee you that there are TONS of people who agree that MP3 compression alters the song in a way that it is no longer the same.

    It's all perspective. Most of us don't think that MP3's alter the song to the point that it is so different that we can no longer listen to it...just as there are those who don't think syndication alters the episode enough to render it 'unwatchable'.
     
  8. AnthonyC

    AnthonyC Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,342
    Likes Received:
    0
    MP3s still provide the full song at a lesser quality. They're the equivalent of a slightly grainy picture on a DVD set.
     
  9. Arild

    Arild Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    734
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sigh....

    Okay. Some of the posters here are, surprisingly, spending a significant amount of time trying to tell us that releasing shortened-for-syndication versions of TV shows is a-ok. An attitude I am shocked to see on a forum like this, but never mind that.

    The argument seems to boil down to the opinion that the syndicated cuts are somehow "legitimate" versions of the TV shows, that they can be considered "complete", etc. Okay, that idea in itself is wrong wrong WRONG, but for the sake of discussion, let's say for a moment that this is true.

    Now then - tell me, when a DVD season set of any given TV series is produced... does anyone seriously believe that the DVD producers chose the syndicated version because they honestly believe their audience would prefer the edited-down syndicated episodes over the full-length original versions if given a choice?

    If your answer to that is the same as mine; that is - "No, of course not, that line of thinking makes no sense" - that the producers don't actively go for syndicated cuts but rather that they probably do so because they are too lazy/ignorant/stupid/cheap/whatever to get the original cuts - then let me ask you this:

    Why in the hell is it somehow "okay" to release an inferior product?!? Even if syndicated cuts of TV episodes somehow were "legitimate versions" (and they f*cking aren't!) they're still clearly inferior to the original cuts. If you're saying we should settle for syndicated versions, you're essentially saying we should settle for inferior releases. And that's just wrong.
     
  10. Arild

    Arild Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    734
    Likes Received:
    0
    The song equivalent of an edited-for-syndication TV episode, would be something like a radio edit of a song that wouldn't originally fit into a standard four minute airtime slot. The full song can obviously still be found on the album if you decide to buy it. This should be the case with TV on DVD as well.
     
  11. Bryan^H

    Bryan^H Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,634
    Likes Received:
    667
    Lets just say Wonder Years is released on dvd and it contains music substitutions. There will never be another version of the Wonder Years released on dvd....ever. IF you are a fan of the show, and don't buy it, then that is your option. You will be shooting yourself in the foot, but again it is your call to buy it, or not.
    Now before you say music substitutions aren't that bad. Please understand that this is not how the show origianally aired, and if you have such a millitant stand against syndicated cuts, then you should feel the same way about music subs. If you don't,then your contradicting yourself in that you are such a sucker for how a series aired originally. and have made it more than clear that you will accept nothing but the original. There is no neutral ground on the subject. Either you are ok with an altered release or your not.
    This is the point I have been trying to make since the beginning of this thread, but no seems to understand what I'm talking about. I'm not holding out for another release when I know damn well there won't be another. Just bite the bullet and live with that fact......or not.

    About the whole P&S vs. Widescreen. I am a widescreen fanatic, but I have also watched hundreds upon hundred of movies on HBO in the 80's that were full screen. Now it seems I never really watched those movies at all, because they weren't complete. It's widescreen or nothing. Sound stupid? It is, because that is probably the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
     
  12. AnthonyC

    AnthonyC Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,342
    Likes Received:
    0

    Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean we dont' understand. But if you're looking to find people who agree with you on this subject, you're hard-pressed to find them here.
     
  13. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,064
    Likes Received:
    2
    No. If you are truly a fan, then you wouldn't buy this substitute version with cut scenes or with music replacements, any more than you would if it had different actors digitally imposed upon the originals. One can never know that a show will never be released properly, but one can be certain that a show has not been released correctly, and to say that because you doubt it will ever be right, then that justifies buying an adulterated piece of crap with a passing resemblence to the show, is mind-boggling to me.
     

Share This Page