Bravo THE DIGITAL BITS for summing up how it feels to be a DVD REVIEWER

I just read quite a rather remarkable article
by Adam Jahnke that really hit home.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...nke082703.html

Please read the above before moving on.....

Adam talks about what it feels like to write
DVD REVIEWS despite all the criticism that
surrounds people who write for DVD websites.

I was rather pleased he used our forum as
a reference point, because I have seen the type
of posts that he is referring to.

I wrote DVD reviews for this forum for a little
over two years, despite the criticism I received
from those that stood on a pedestal (as if they
earned that right) and proclaimed that I had no
right to review DVD product and that this forum
had no place as a review site.

I stopped doing reviews simply because I became
burned out. As Adam's article also points out,
it just became plain difficult to find new and
exciting adjectives to describe the quality of
these DVDs. As Adam also points out, a major
studio release is going to look far better than
its VHS or (in most cases) LASERDISC counterpart.
Unless you have a company like Artisan
releasing a title, you can expect the transfer
to look quite decent.

Adam also dwells into the argument as to whether
we DVD reviewers should be talking about the merits
of the film itself. I always believed that it was
equally important to sell the movie as it was the
transfer -- especially for those that may never
have previously heard of the film. You may not
agree with their opinion of the film itself, and
it mostly at those times when critics fall under
attack.

As reviewers, we are doing publicity for the
studio that is sending us the product. In the
same token, we are also keeping the studios in
check by expressing our opinions of how well a
particular studio's product comes across. It is
forums like ours and THE DIGITAL BITS that talk
frankly and honestly about how well the studios
are handling their DVD product.

I don't think there is any print publication that
gives a more frank and honest look at the industry
from the consumer's point-of-view than the Internet
forums and websites all of you regularly frequent.

As Adam points out, none of us will ever get the
respect that PRINT and TV reviewers receive. But
you know what? In my unbias opinion, I don't think
you'll find more honesty in a DVD review than the
ones you read from the "unrespected" reviewers of
sites like these who give you heartfelt and
detailed opinions of what they see and hear, and
do it without trying to impress anyone with their
enlarged vocabulary.

Quite frankly, I have read reviews from some of
the self-proclaimed "professional reviewers," and
I find reviews written by the common guy to show
far more enthusiasm.

This is why Parker and I finally decided to pick
seven "amateurs" (or near amateurs) to review for
this site. I think it's more important that you
get the viewpoint from someone that writes reviews
from the heart rather than from the Thesaurus.

I am very happy that Mr. Jahnke took the time to
write an article that really hits home when it comes
to looking at the "unrespected" DVD reviewers of
the Internet.

I agree 100%.

You can have the best looking DVD in the world, but if it's of a bad movie, who cares?

A good DVD review should review the content of the presentation as well as the quality. Blind buys I and others make are most likely the result of reading a post on this forum (or a review on the Bits or a similar resource) that take the time to use a review as an opportunity to present a film to a new audience.

When I read a review, I want to get a sense of the entire package, which includes content. If you don't want to read a review of the film, skip that part or don't read it - don't blast the kind, underpaid soul who's providing it. If you want a strictly technical review, subscribe to Widescreen Review. (That's not a knock on that publication; rather, it just points out that WSR strives to be a technical publication and succeeds. They accomplish what they set out to do, and they do that quite well.)

I particularly like reading DVD reviews by people who have never seen that film before; if it's a film I've never seen before, I'm interested to know how someone else who's unbiased feels about it. If I know the film, I'm curious what someone who had never seen it thought.

Anyone can write: "The 16x9 enhanced transfer is done well" or "The surround sound is wonderful."

I relate, bruthas, I relate...

Great article, great post. Should be a part of the DVD FAQ!

Cheers,

I've written well over 80 reviews freelance and am now writing officially for EYECRAVEDVD.COM . I always weigh the film more than the actual disc. Video quality is important to me but very rarely can I ever give one a low score. The film is the most important thing at the end of the day, you're not going to watch a terrible film just because it has an excellent transfer.

Good Article. I agree. If I want an honest opinion on a DVD release I will come online.

Funny thing is though that I read online reviews for the technical aspects of the DVD. Most "print mags" will not really go into this area.

I must take exception to his dig at other sites, (AICN) and it almost feels to me hypocritical. After all, he points out that the lack of respect Internet sites recieve for being honest then he digs in on AICN.

Keep up the good work guys Lord knows I couldn't do it.

Regards

AXE

I'm really not sure why any reviewer takes so much heat over something they write reguarding a movie. Reviewers aren't God and they aren't writing down facts. A reviewer is like everyone else on a website and they are just giving an opinion. Just because they are the reviewer doesn't make them any better or worse than someone buying the disc on their own.

If someone hates a movie I doubt they'll buy the DVD just because it has a great 5.1 track. Personally, I don't care how many extras a disc has or if it has a DTS track. If I don't like the movie then I could care less how the picture is or how the sound quality is. I'm somewhat certain that most fans will buy a film no matter if there's something wrong with the picture or sound.

I think many studios know that the "fans" will buy a movie they like even if it has less than stellar V/A. At the same time I'm sure studios are hoping someone new will read a review and get interested in the movie enough to buy it.

Well, At least most of the time we run what we post through spellcheck And at least our bearded red haired fatass knows what a "shower" and "haircut" are

Jeff "NOT F**KING HARRY KNOWLES" Kleist

(Yes, I have been mistaken for Harry by Kevin Smith, Ray Park's publicist, some girl at Otakon and 3 guys in the Dallas airport)

Jeff, are you a clone of Harry Knowles, with the ability to know what a shower and a haircut are?

Jeff, if you do shower and get haircuts, how could anyone possible mistake you for HK?

LOL.

AXE

I've been mistaken for a sane man, but no celebrity, internet or otherwise.

Seriously, though, as regards critical styles, I don't know that we need to bash the Gore Vidals in order to praise the Jackie Collins'. An enthusiastic, heartfelt review of anything has great value, and so too does a scholarly, precisely worded essay (think of it as a clash between the movie reviews of Harry Knowles and Roger Ebert, who were actually on-screen together once or twice back when Roger was searching for his new television show partner). One is a wonderful tool in making a buying/viewing decision, the other something that might hold up over time for critical and educational purposes. Such a line is by no means sharply drawn, of course, and I wouldn't want to dispense with either style.

In a personal story I'd rather not relate, I learned the hard way years ago that there is nothing sacred on-line where personality and the individual are concerned -- movie and television celebrities generally have to pick up a tabloid or turn to certain well-defined venues of junk to find horrid and false things about themselves; an internet personality just has to show up for work -- and very often legitimate media never covers them, offering no balance to the careless inhumanity with which they're occasionally confronted by the World's Weirdest Web. It shouldn't be part of the job (or the experience of putting your face out there, along with a few respectful opinions), but it is.

But as a writer myself (I don't write on-line, other than as a member here), I always take the work to be the justification and the reward; for every bad review a writer might get (myself included if I weren't "struggling" at the moment ), there are thousands of silent readers who may smile and finish the last line of whatever you've written and say to themselves "a good piece," or "nicely written," or "hmmm, that was helpful," or simply, and perhaps most importantly of all, "I enjoyed that." If you're reaching anyone on that level, it has to make up for those who find it useless or treat it as an opening to again demonstrate their own hostility toward anything honest, whether good or bad. No one who gets into public life on any level is going to avoid all "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune." The reason you do what you do, and your sense of value in doing it, should never find its measure in your worst critics, and certainly never from strangers who wouldn't know you from Adam on the street (both that Adam and, yes, that Adam ).

I always valued Ron's reviews here (I've been referencing the site casually for a couple of years) as honest, thoughtful reactions to the films he had a chance to view. Those who cannot find value in that sort of honest enthusiasm aren't presenting a voice that should carry weight with anyone's sense of the value of their work, IMO. Agree or disagree with the conclusions of any argument, but respect and value the process of formulating and presenting that argument, however accurate or however flawed. An argument shouldn't be an attack; it should be a process of reasoned deduction, emotional expression, intellectual consideration ... any of these and more, but words as weapons to diminish and dismiss bespeak only the value of their speaker, not that of whom they address.

All of this said, we're all human and occasionally say and write things that don't read as we intend them. Patience remains a necessary component of any discussion for this and other reasons, any passionate but respectful argument, any attempt to offer something useful to others, and perhaps find something useful in return.

Ron -- "don't let the b*****ds get you down," as the old adage says. You and Parker have put together a wonderful resource here, and its popularity belies any vicious words of criticism. To be perfectly honest (and respectfully critical), I've always found HTF's reviews more helpful than those of The Digital Bits (I'd name my favorite on-line review source, but that's beside the point). For me, TDB's strengths lie elsewhere (in a sampling of their reviews compared with my own eventual reactions to the discs, I haven't found them all that helpful). But to others their reviews may be the most helpful on the Web, and that reaction is no less valid, and as praise no less valid than my (how many times to use this key word? respectful) criticism. They do good work there, and their influence within the DVD industry reflects that.

A criticism, as I hope I've just illustrated, need not be an attack, and when backed with example and discussion (which my comment is not, as that would be afield of what I'm trying to say right now) it's really the only way any of us improve. But so much criticism on the internet does indeed seem to be of the attack variety, and that's a shame. But it's been that way for years, and is one of many sharks of which all must be aware in these particular waters. As a result, internet writing may occasionally seem like a fish's market, but the swimmers keep it afloat.

Discussion that gets at truth is always worthwhile, whether that's a review, a chat, or what have you. Discussion that takes shots and attempts to inflate one ego or another is what I fondly, and yes, dismissively, call chatter.

Discussion here and in other quality on-line DVD resources remains very interesting. Once again, and keep on truckin'.

I'm sure Adam will weigh in here at some point, but thanks for all the kind words on his behalf.

As far as AICN, hey - we read the site too, and it has its purpose. The problem is, the whole Internet ends up getting painted with the AICN/Drudge Report brush. And when you try to go talk with someone in the industry (or the business world as a whole) who doesn't haunt the Net frequently, the moment you mention you're from INSERT YOUR NAME HERE.com, people groan and roll there eyes and say, "Oh, you mean like Ain't it Cool News.com?" People just don't take you seriously. And so you have to work ten times harder to earn their respect.

Anyway, back to the subject of reviews. Speaking for myself and Todd (and I think Adam as well), we've always tried to use our reviews to expose people to films they might have missed, genres they might not have explored, etc. Anyone can review Daredevil, but how many sites are going to review Zatoichi? There's a huge world of film out there, and most people have only sampled a tiny slice of it. We love DVD, but we love films more. That's really what this is all about. If you just want a laundry list of all the extras, and a technical evaluation of the quality, there are lots of places that can give it to you. At The Bits, we have three missions:

1. To constantly bring new people into the DVD and film lovers fold, and to educate them to be savvy DVD consumers.

2. To widen people's film horizons by exposing them to films they may never have seen or heard of before.

3. To exert a positive influence on the industry, so that both the studios AND film fans can reap the best benefits from DVD and whatever comes next.

We have always recognized that The Digital Bits is part of an active and vibrant online community. We're not going to try to be everything to everyone. Our goal is NOT to be the best DVD site at absoluetly everything, so why would anyone want to read any other DVD site. That's just silly. We do what we do. If you want something we don't offer, then you can find it from the HTF or DVD File or DVD Talk or any number of other great online resources. We know our strengths and we do what we do very well... which complements what other sites do very well. And vise versa. That's what the online DVD community is all about. The key word being community. In the end, you guys are the ones who benefit.

And best of all, it's free. Can't beat that. ;-)

Cheers!

generally, i skip over the section of reviews that deal only with the film itself, usually because i already know the movie and whether i like it or not and i dont really need another opinion BUT i do NOT want it gone from the review. its good to have it there whether i need it or not, sometimes i actually do, sometimes it does interest me in a movie, or sway me into giving it a chance. whether i read it or not, its nice to know that its there.

personally, i read DVD reviews for the DVD presentation. i want to know the audio/video quality (i like hearing the phrase "this is the best this film has ever looked"), i like a brief description/review of the supplemental material (not just a laundry list, i can get that from reading the back of the case), and any obvious cuts or glitches in the product. if i get that, im happy.

Most of the time I usually skip past a reviewers take on the movie or show...ect, and I go right to the video/audio ratings. DVD's like the new Animal House I need to know how the transfer looks compared to the older version that I have. If most of the reviews say the new transfer smokes the older one....I buy it,again. Ron and others have saved me money on many discs, The Quiet Man comes to mind.

My pet peeve on reviewers are the ones that go into how they don't like for example Paul McCartney and they review his "Back in the USA" DVD.....Why give him/her the disc to review?? Another peeve is reviewers that don't have proper equipment. "I can not rate the dts track because I don't have the capabilities" granted it is less now than 3 years ago but on another DVD forum someone reviewed a few DVD-A's and they didn't even have a DVD-A player....
I tip my hat to vast majority of reviewers that have to sit thru 5 "Kelly and Justin's" to get to a "Citizen Kane". Not a easy job.

Like my father use to say "opinions are like assh#$%s, everyone has one."

I feel your pain.

As a reviewer for THEDIGITALREVIEW.COM, I can say that it honestly is not as easy as it looks. I don't mind providing the technical geek type portions of the review, such as the audio/video quality and a summary of the extras. However, the review portion of the film itself is the always the most difficult, and probably the least important.

Most people want reviews simply to know if the DVD serves up an excellent transfer, or whether it has any glaring flaws/errors. The last thing they need is someone like me to bash a film they love. But, so is the nature of the beast, and DVD reviews which only highlight the technical merits of the DVD, and have no mention of the film's quality are, in my opinion, not telling the full story. I'm sure Gigli will most likely have a great transfer, excellent audio levels, and maybe even some amusing extras...but I fear the day that that DVD ends up on my doorstep and I have to review it. : )

Bill Hunt wrote:
Diversity of info and opinion are one of the 'Bits many strengths, Bill. If I may make a suggestion along those lines: the internet is sorely in need of comprehensive silent film coverage on DVD. A few sites cover the news well, and one (Digitally Obsessed) does a fine job with the titles they choose to review, but there still seem to be so very many silent titles that no one gets around to (I only know of one dedicated silent site that covers DVDs, and their reviews are few and far between). These projects are often very risky home video endeavors for the likes of David Shepard and others (making a profit can be very tricky, I've heard), and if the 'Bits were to begin some sort of regular, dedicated silents coverage (perhaps as a compliment to Barrie Maxwell's excellent Classics coverage), that would be a great boon to those who, as with Zatoichi, would otherwise never find these films, and also a help to Shepard and his colleagues who struggle to bring these films to disc in very good quality (unlike the PD and legally questionable companies that "dump" classics to disc), usually through Image, Kino, or occasionally Criterion. Shepard's recent release of Tempest, which I found very pleasing, is only one recent example of a wonderful film few on-line seem to have noticed.

With studios now getting into the silents game (The superb Sunrise release from Fox, The Chaplin Collection, some of which are silents, from WB, the upcoming Lon Chaney Collection, also from WB, and so forth, right back to Columbia who brought the first major studio silent DVD release to fruition with the wonderful The Matinee Idol), the time is ripe for a serious push by major reviewers to cover these titles and hopefully bring those who'd love these films, but have simply never happened across them, into a whole new world of entertainment. The more business everyone can push toward these films, the better -- not just for their quality, but also for the way in which such interest has a ripple effect that increases public awareness of restoration and preservation efforts for these early cinematic treasures, a cause I'm sure everyone values, whether a silents fan or not.

I'm far from the first to say the 'Bits is a wonderful on-line resource. As is HTF. Between DVDFile, the 'Bits, HTF, Digitally Obsessed, The Cinema Laser ... the industry is well served on-line.

I have found HTF through the TDB several years ago mainly due to the Star Wars dvd news. This was my exposure to what is called DVD and since that time I have bought many a dvd that I have never heard of before, or simply to build up a collection. Movies like OUATIA or GBU from Leone are a blind buy and don't read any reviews for them. Then there are obscure movies like Zatoichi or Lang's Die Nibulungen that intrigue me enough to read or skim through a review and buy it or not.

I have more obscure and classic titles then recently released movies simply because of a love for movies.

over and out

Oscar

Thanks to sites like THE BITS, DVDFile, and a few others which have now disappeared from the web I was inspired to start my own site.

So, when I first started up EyeCraveDVD.com my focus was going to be the technical aspect and only write up a very brief summary of how the film made me feel. I’ve always loved movies, which made it an easy decision to start up a site. Plus, I’ve always enjoyed the experience of watching a great movie, visually and audibly.

I'll admit I was only looking to review mainstream films (DVDs), but as the discs started to arrive for movies I'd never seen nor heard of I was amazed at how much other stuff is out there. Now, I believe that without the little write up on the movie some readers would miss out on some great flicks that aren’t advertised like crazy. Otherwise how would anyone know that Mulva: Zombie Ass-kicker is a fun flick to watch. Being a reviewer may not be the most glorious job, but it’s the love of film and experiencing something new that makes it all worthwhile for most of us.

I'd also like to thank all reviewers/critics out there for helping me get started. You've all been a great inspiration. Even though we're now the best (just kidding). Thanks!

Oh ya! Hey Travis

Oh yeah, I have to add as well.

If it wasn't for the digital Bits I wouldn't have been part of this hobby. I owe you guys more than you know. Thanks for all your effort. I appreciate it.

...and to the HTF I am also very thankful. I Discovered HTF via the Digital bits all those years ago.

Thanks again guys

AXE

I'm basically in the midst of this myself at the moment, where one reader has suggested a change in my writing style (plug plug - www.animeondvd.com) so that I can gain more credibility, since I apparently lack it now after something like five years and over probably 1500 reviews. Adam's article got posted as the most recent link and it's definitely been an interesting read. But like said above, it's the knowledge that there are people (the silent majority usually) who read a review and take something useful away from it but never post or never actually talk to the person who wrote it to let them know. One of the best things about DVD sites and the forums is that there is some payoff.

I posted a new review last night for a new series called Super Gals. A lot of people hadn't heard of it beyond the title, but after the review they realized exactly what it is and that it was something they'd love. Getting comments like "that review made me salivating for the disc even more-so" or seeing a review generate much interesting discussion stemming from various thoughts I had on a show is definitely a great payoff and one of the reasons I love and continue to do what I do.

Thank god I learned long ago though that you can't please everyone and if you try, you please no one.

Add Holadem to that list. Seriously.

--
H

dOc doesn't "choose" to review anything, we review *everything* we get (eventually). Mark Zimmer (who recently posted his 600th review) has written many thoughtful reviews of silent films, but we simply don't get screeners of every single disc, and like most sites, can't really afford a) the time it would take to badger studios about a particular title and B) to pay for review copies.

Thanks for the kind words.

Thanks, Joel, and I'd add that sometimes we specifically request discs and can't get them. Milestone's upcoming Phantom of the Opera disc, for instance, may not get reviewed by us since it turns out that they've promised more press screeners than they're getting from Image. So there's not much we can do there.

Adam's piece is well worth reading, though. It's difficult to sit down and write something that's worth reading (especially 600+ times) about a movie and a disc, and often we DVD reviewers/critics get a feeling of being unappreciated when folks post that we have no right to spout off about the merits of a film. There's probably not much more that we can add about Citizen Kane, it's true, since those fields have been worked over so long and so hard already, but there's a big world of film out there that hasn't really been appreciated properly, and the DVD revolution is finally making much of that forgotten film heritage available in cheap and high-quality form. Unless your DVD buying/renting is limited solely to films you've seen before (something that makes zero sense to me, but whatever floats your boat), why wouldn't you look to a review to get a sense as to whether it's something you might like? Often the people selling discs misdescribe the film badly on the keepcase cover, so you can hardly rely on that.

But every now and then, it feels pretty good, such as Bill Burns' kind comments above, or when a filmmaker writes and refers to your review as "perceptive" even when it's not entirely favorable (my review of The First Nudie Musical), or when Roger Ebert himself acknowledges you as a "critic" and cites you as an authority http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/greatm...seofusher.html and it makes the effort feel worthwhile. So I guess there's nothing to do but take the heat and tell those who don't want to read about the movie in DVD reviews to skip right to the technical data, since we're not holding guns to the readers' heads. Usually.

There are 2 basic audience groups who read DVD reviews:

1. those who haven't seen the film and want to know if it's worth watching/getting.

2. those who have seen the film and want to know if the DVD transfer/extras do the film justice because they want to buy it.

Both groups have valid concerns and both concerns are worth addressing in a review. What's important is that neither get completely ignored, though if a reviewer doesn't feel equipped to properly judge a particular "movie" (like if it's a musical and he/she hates the musical genere) then the reviewer should focus primarily on the technical aspects of the DVD. If a reviewer feels that a film is objetively good or bad and feels well equipped to make the assertion, then that's great information to share as well.

What usually happens is folks who haven't seen a movie are keenly interested in the "movie" review as well as technical information, but folks who have already seen and enjoyed the movie become very defensive (understanably so) if a reviewer is critical of a film that they found personally involving.

No one-size-fits-all review to make everyone happy...but IMO technical merrits should be first-priority as the folks most interested in the review are typically those who "love" the movie and want to make sure the DVD is done right. A movie-review is a great addition to help give value to those who have not seen the film but find themselves curious to read the review for that perspective.

-dave

I remember the thread that Adam was referring to. Anyway I love reading reviews of the movies as well as the technical details. I have picked up several DVD's due to Ron's reviews that I would not have otherwise. Again on movies that I know I want the technical details are more important than the review.

I understand Adam's comment about the equipment but I think I disagree with it to some extent. I would say that if you are not viewing on ISF'd and you haven't setup your system with a meter etc.. then you really can't comment on some aspects of the DVD's you are reviewing.

Laters,
Jeff

Bill Burns wrote:

Bill, thanks for the kind words, I certainly appreciate hearing them. As someone who has personally written close to 1100 DVD reviews, I can honestly say that producing and maintaining a one man DVD review web site isn’t easy and it is always nice to hear positive feedback.

I second Derek's comments. Thanks to all of you for your kind words. Glad to see people from so many other great DVD sites checking in here too. Keep up the great work, everyone!

Very good article Adam, and like Ron I can more than understand where you're coming from. I've written a fair few reviews myself (although nowhere near 1000!) and I'm already struggling like hell to think up new and exciting phrases to describe the joys of grain, edge enhancement and so forth! To be honest I think we're more than entitled to share our opinions on the movie too...I don't wanna be looking at a site or magazine for a movie review and then another seperate site for the review of the DVD. It's just pointless, and from my experience most 'proper' reviewers are influenced more by the freebies that get flashed in their faces than anything else. I'd trust the reviews of DVDFile, TheDigitalBits and HTF's over a magazine any day. Two thumbs up!

They're just their quick reviews, but Zatoichi: The Tale of Zatoichi and Zatoichi: The Tale of Zatoichi Continues.

At any rate, I enjoy both sites. I just like sticking up for The DVD Journal because I used to work with some of the guys.

In my eyes, DVD Reviews on the net are a luxury item. It's there to use because someone who has a passion for the medium is taking time out of their life to type up a review. Not only the time to type it up, but view it, organize their thoughts and post them on a server which they pay for out of their own pocket. Sure, you can disagree with their opinion. Why you'd want to give them heat over is completely unfathomable to me.

The way I see it, there's no "professional" DVD reviewers. It's not a trade you go to school to learn. No big guys or little guys. It's about a person with a passion for movies and the media and the ability to put that in words. And if someone wants to take the time to give me a heads up on a DVD's special features or lack there of, then kudos to them! If I disagree with their take on the movie, than no biggie. It's their opinion, that's all.

My thanks to all those out there who fill the net with info on their free sites!