|
Originally Posted by Paul_Scott
the lower def version IS the one that is closer to the theatrical experience
|
|
Originally Posted by PaulDA
.... Nolan appears to belong to the school of thought that home cinema is not exactly the same as commercial cinema AND therefore he is free to shape the release (over which he has say, the BD) in a way HE thinks best presents his film, most likely influenced by what he believes the majority of BD owners have as displays, despite what anyone else may think. As consumers, we have no right to demand a presentation that accords with our wishes (we don't own it). We only have the right to accept or reject what IS offered (and express our disappointment/happiness).
The issue at stake remains the same--ownership vs expectations. I may not always be happy with what the filmmaker chooses to present in home video releases (I can enumerate any number of such examples) but I will still defend the right of filmmakers to make that choice whenever such is possible. This applies to any artistic endeavour. |
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Now Mr Nolan will look pretty silly if most consumers decided they wanted the same or something closely approximating what they experienced in the cinema and decided NOT to buy the title en masse.
|
|
Originally Posted by RobertR
I don't think it will happen in this case. I simply don't think the vast majority of people will object to the AR changes.
|
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Now Mr Nolan will look pretty silly if most consumers decided they wanted the same or something closely approximating what they experienced in the cinema and decided NOT to buy the title en masse.
I think where movies are concerned "art" should take a back seat to business and it's just smart business to give the consumer what they want...IE, at least one version of what they saw in the theater!!! |
|
Originally Posted by RobertR
I don't think it will happen in this case. I simply don't think the vast majority of people will object to the AR changes.
|
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Perhaps. But you missed the point. Buyers shouldn't be forced to necessarily make that evaluation. It should be as simple as "what you see is what you get" IMO. If the director/producer/studio decides to alter the above for whatever reason, they can add the changes on a separate disc of bonus features.
|
Carl Fink
Insect Politics
|
Originally Posted by Carlo Medina
Remember that a studio who releases a product is a business, and the goal of business is to maximize profit, and they are beholden to the shareholders. What you so cavalierly describe as just "adding a separate discs" of course adds cost to the production. And if they passed the cost on to consumers, we'd get another group complaining "why did they include an extra disc and charge me more $$$". And of course higher prices translates to lower sales (just read other parts of this forum where people deride higher priced BDs). And more SKUs (if you're going to advertise separate releases) just causes more confusion for resellers and consumers. Maybe that confusion is okay for DVD as it is now mass-market, but for a niche market like BD, confusion is not a good thing.
So you see, you can't please everyone all the time. What they did was, in consultation with the director, made the decision that made the most sense to them given the fiscal responsibilities they have to their shareholders. |
When you have to shoot...shoot. Don't talk!
|
Originally Posted by Carlo Medina
Remember that a studio who releases a product is a business, and the goal of business is to maximize profit, and they are beholden to the shareholders. What you so cavalierly describe as just "adding a separate discs" of course adds cost to the production. And if they passed the cost on to consumers, we'd get another group complaining "why did they include an extra disc and charge me more $$$". And of course higher prices translates to lower sales (just read other parts of this forum where people deride higher priced BDs). And more SKUs (if you're going to advertise separate releases) just causes more confusion for resellers and consumers. Maybe that confusion is okay for DVD as it is now mass-market, but for a niche market like BD, confusion is not a good thing.
So you see, you can't please everyone all the time. What they did was, in consultation with the director, made the decision that made the most sense to them given the fiscal responsibilities they have to their shareholders. |
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
But you can.....by simply releasing the title the way most people viewed it.
|
Carl Fink
Insect Politics
|
Originally Posted by cafink
Because he presumably would like them to exchange money for a copy of it.
|
|
Originally Posted by TravisR
But the number of sales that those people represent is too small for anyone to care about.
|
When you have to shoot...shoot. Don't talk!
Carl Fink
Insect Politics
|
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Nice assumption. How do you know?
|
|
Originally Posted by TravisR
Of course it's an assumption but do you see that many people even here or AVS saying that they won't buy it?
|
When you have to shoot...shoot. Don't talk!
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Perhaps. But you missed the point. Buyers shouldn't be forced to necessarily make that evaluation. It should be as simple as "what you see is what you get" IMO. If the director/producer/studio decides to alter the above for whatever reason, they can add the changes on a separate disc of bonus features.
|
|
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
True enough; however, there is no way to tell how many of the silent majority may skip buying it. The numbers will never reflect how many potential sales will be lost because of Nolan's ego. Warner could have satisfied his ego and still gained the extra revenue, small or otherwise, if they had made sure this BD set was complete. BD sales are small enough as it is. Why alienate even a portion of that niche market? It's dumb.
|
|
Originally Posted by cafink
Nobody said that Nolan or Warner has to care about those people; what Carlo said was that you can't please them. That is certainly not true in this case, as a dual-ratio release would have been perfectly satisfactory for all consumers and have required minimal cost/effort on Warner's part.
|
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Somehow you make the high-lighted point seem trivial. Now Mr Nolan will look pretty silly if most consumers decided they wanted the same or something closely approximating what they experienced in the cinema and decided NOT to buy the title en masse.
I think where movies are concerned "art" should take a back seat to business and it's just smart business to give the consumer what they want...IE, at least one version of what they saw in the theater!!! Sure would avoid threads like this and many unhappy customers, IMO. |
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I've been through too many of these type of complaints about various software releases to put much stock in thinking these complaints are going to negatively affect Warner's sales enough to matter to them. Especially, not this time of the year, when many of these discs will be gifts by people not in the know about the specifics here.
|
|
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
They're also unlikely to win many converts. They're in the odd position of having to trash a director (with complaints about his "ego" and lack of "professionalism") whose film they apparently love so much that they're devoting hours to complaining online about its treatment on Blu-ray. Most members of the Blu-ray-consuming public don't share that level of passion (or irony).
|
Carl Fink
Insect Politics
|
Originally Posted by cafink
Agreed that this has little relevance to the movie-watching public in general, but this is hardly anything new for film enthusiasts or the HTF. Kubrick or Storaro, anyone?
|
|
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
|
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!
|
Originally Posted by frankie108
Somehow you make the high-lighted point seem trivial. Now Mr Nolan will look pretty silly if most consumers decided they wanted the same or something closely approximating what they experienced in the cinema and decided NOT to buy the title en masse.
I think where movies are concerned "art" should take a back seat to business and it's just smart business to give the consumer what they want...IE, at least one version of what they saw in the theater!!! Sure would avoid threads like this and many unhappy customers, IMO. |
