Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › DVD › Sony Pictures continues to drop existing widescreen transfers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony Pictures continues to drop existing widescreen transfers - Page 8

post #211 of 293
5/22/05 at 8:00am
Quote:
Side B is a FULL SCREEN VERSION and is re-formatted to fit your TV.

I really hate this sentence... I now have a 16/9 tv screen, and this sentence do not "fit" at all!

They have to reformulate for:

Side B is a FULL SCREEN VERSION and is re-formatted to fit the non-widescreen TVs.
Reply
post #212 of 293
5/23/05 at 8:51am
Well, it has now been five business days and I haven't been contacted by Sony. As the owner of a Sony phone, clock-radio, TV... I'm becoming a not-so-happy customer. This really is outrageous. I've spoken with people from Universal, Warner Bros., Paramount and Disney over the years when I had "issues" with my DVDs. Each studio was professional and responded/resolved my "issue" in a timely manner.

Seriously, if I don't receive communication from them soon, I'm definitely not buying a Sony HDTV. It's called customer service and common courtesy when you have open lines of communication with your customers. This must be how bankruptcy starts. Hmmm.
Reply
post #213 of 293
5/23/05 at 9:07am
Confirmed: ROXANNE now FULL FRAME ONLY with new cover. I spotted it at Best Buy over the weekend.
Reply
post #214 of 293
5/23/05 at 7:41pm
Great...as if we needed another Steve Martin comedy to be in full frame! Welcome, Roxanne. Join the ranks of The Man With Two Brains and Parenthood. At least The Jerk is finally getting its due.

Shame you on you, Sony.
Reply
post #215 of 293
5/23/05 at 8:31pm
Quote:
This must be how bankruptcy starts.

Spend money to remanufacture discs (and covers) that benefits not one customer. Brilliant!
If anyone thinks this is not to sell HD widescreen transfers, please note Slimy released dual layer CD/SA-CD discs with the redbook layer intentional futz with, too make the SA-CD sound even better by comparison.
Sick (and NOT the good kind).
Reply
post #216 of 293
5/26/05 at 11:27am
I find it difficult to believe that no one from or connected in some way to Sony reads this forum. So, why the silence? Some speculation from an admin would be appreciated.
Reply
post #217 of 293
5/26/05 at 5:36pm
I don't think any actual humans work at Sony.
Reply
post #218 of 293
5/26/05 at 6:24pm
Quote:
SONY PICTURES PRESS RELEASE: We don't know what the fuck we're doing!
Quote:
I don't think any actual humans work at Sony.
If your goal is to get heard by Sony and to have a rep answer your questions, you might want to start by acting in a civil manor.

On the other hand, if your goal is to just insult a company based on something you do not like or even understand then by all means ignore the suggestion.
Reply
post #219 of 293
5/26/05 at 8:05pm
SONY PICTURES PRESS RELEASE: We don't know what the fuck we're doing!


I don't think any actual humans work at Sony.

I have empathy for those that are frustrated by Sony's actions regarding some of their dvd releases. However, comments such as those quoted above reflects poorly moreso on those that made them than it does with Sony. Lets try to keep our perspective while expressing our displeasure in a mature manner with Sony or any other studio.







Crawdaddy
Reply
post #220 of 293
5/26/05 at 8:25pm
Quote:
If your goal is to get heard by Sony and to have a rep answer your questions, you might want to start by acting in a civil manor.

On the other hand, if your goal is to just insult a company based on something you do not like or even understand then by all means ignore the suggestion.

With all due respect, this issue is not new. It's been going on for awhile. There has been plenty of time to be civil and plenty of time for Sony to respond to our concenrs. There are other threads on this subject and there has been no attention to them given by any Sony rep. So why not express extreme displeasure toward Sony. Columbia/Sony has been notorious about not responding to customer feedback so why disagree with Matthew about his comment?
Reply
post #221 of 293
5/27/05 at 2:18am
No, the issue isn't new and Sony hasn't responded, but with comments such as the ones that have been quoted in the above messages aren't going to help. People don't disagree about the issue but some of the anger could be expressed better. The HTF is probably the most civil and professional forum on the Internet to discuss and I hope it stays that way.

Sony really has made some poor decisions recently in converting many of their catalog releases into full-screen only. I really wanted about half a dozen titles on that list, but I'm not going to buy them now. If Sony continues with the practice, they will lose much of my business.
Reply
post #222 of 293
5/27/05 at 2:39am
People don't disagree about the issue but some of the anger could be expressed better.

Yes, very much so.
The HTF is probably the most civil and professional forum on the Internet to discuss and I hope it stays that way.

Thank you for the compliment and such environment is difficult to sustain at times, but is well worth the effort. This flies in the opposite direction of what some might think they can do on the faceless internet, but the HTF Staff will continue to encourage civil and professional posting behavior on this forum. Furthermore, just because Sony doesn't respond on this forum, doesn't mean that they don't read the comments posted here because from my personal experience with them, I know that they read this forum on a regular basis. However, comments that can taken as insulting will most likely not result in a positive outcome. Our goal should be convincing Sony to change some of their bad practices when it comes to their dvd releases without suggesting to the world that they're not intelligent nor human at all.







Crawdaddy
Reply
post #223 of 293
5/27/05 at 5:06am
Okay then,

—Why has Sony not responded to any consumer complaint in the last few years with anything other than a form letter?
—Why has Sony continued to continue the business practices that have made their home video division turn from one of the most respected to one of the most despised in the business?

Quite frankly, I have given up all hope of hearing from them or seeing a turnaround.
Reply
post #224 of 293
5/27/05 at 7:27am
I tried calling and getting info for months when I heard at DVD file that "replacements" for the mis-framed Annie DVD were avilable for consumers who were interested. I sent emails and placed calls and never got an answer from sony on the issue...it was pretty frustrating.

Of course, now I have the Japanese disc that is WS OAR (not mis-framed) with 5.1 DD and DTS so I'm feeling a lot better
Reply
post #225 of 293
5/27/05 at 8:16am
Quote:
Of course, now I have the Japanese disc that is WS OAR (not mis-framed) with 5.1 DD and DTS so I'm feeling a lot better
Is this a Sony release, David? And, if so, is Sony saying that things like WS OAR and DTS are important to the Japanese market but irrelevant to American consumers?
Reply
post #226 of 293
5/27/05 at 8:57am
It's indeed a Sony CTS release...in Japan (ordered it off the Japanese Amazon website...I have a multi-region player and it's an NTSC encoded disc).

Yes...they are saying that OAR and DTS are important to the Japanese market and not the US...either that or a different branch of Sony governs Japanese releases and happens to be run by folks with different values for disc production (very possible).

-dave
Reply
post #227 of 293
5/27/05 at 9:01am
Quote:
Furthermore, just because Sony doesn't respond on this forum, doesn't mean that they don't read the comments posted here because from my personal experience with them, I know that they read this forum on a regular basis. However, comments that can taken as insulting will most likely not result in a positive outcome. Our goal should be convincing Sony to change some of their bad practices when it comes to their dvd releases without suggesting to the world that they're not intelligent nor human at all.


I sure hope that nobody from Sony reads this thread. It could have been productive, but it's devolved into name-calling.

I'm going to try and get in touch with my contacts there again. Stay tuned. . .
Reply
post #228 of 293
5/27/05 at 9:14am
Quote:
I ordered The Cheap Detective as it was still advertised as full screen and widescreen. I have received the disc today and it only mentions full screen on the back.


I just ordered The Deep from Amazon Canada and thought I was safe because it was listed on the website as the widescreen/foolscreen version. I'll be keeping my fingers crossed.

They would have to take it back and give me a refund if it isn't as advertised, right?
Reply
post #229 of 293
5/27/05 at 12:26pm
Quote:
They would have to take it back and give me a refund if it isn't as advertised, right?

Technically, yes. But, by the same reasoning, DVDs listing "full screen" are subject to false advertising claims when a wide screen television is involved. Or when cable services like HBO advertise "uncut, unedited presentations", when up to half of the picture has been cropped off....
Reply
post #230 of 293
5/27/05 at 12:41pm
Quote:
sure hope that nobody from Sony reads this thread. It could have been productive, but it's devolved into name-calling.
Or, it might allow Sony to see what strong emotions their ill-advised strategies can evoke among some of their best customers. Not necessarily a bad thing.

Unless you have no other option, I would avoid trying to obtain the "old" dual version releases via online retailers, despite what the product descriptions say. As some have reported, they're getting the new fullscreen copies instead. You can't expect the retailers to keep accurate product specs (they're notorious for being inaccurate anyway) when the studio changes the discs but keeps the same UPC (brilliant decision). To be safe, if I wanted one of the disappearing DVDs I'd make sure I had it in my hands.
Reply
post #231 of 293
5/27/05 at 1:08pm
Thread Starter 
They have now issued a new notice dated May 20th, with the same wording as the one quoted previously with a few more titles added. Additional titles being "converted" to foolscreen only include:
Anaconda
John Carpenter's Vampires (the SECOND John Carpenter movie to get the shaft! This includes a commentary also)
The Man From Laramie
Maximum Risk
Money Train
Picnic

Most of these titles are 2.35 on top of that. Strangely enough, a couple more titles are actually losing the foolscreen versions, most of which are 1.85:
Fools Rush In
Homegrown
It Could Happen To You
Jabberwocky
Saving Silverman
Sex, Lies & Videotape
True Believer

While this obviously isn't as big a loss, it's still very puzzling, as they are still using the same widescreen transfers from the older discs so the extra space isn't being replaced with anything else, and if they feel there really are that many people who don't like widescreen this won't win them any fans on that side either.
The pricing doesn't seem to be consistent either- while the first titles they did this with were dropped to $9.99 list price (selling for $5.50 at Wal-Mart), some of these later ones are still listed at $14.99 and going between $7.50 and $10 at Wal-Mart and similar stores. They can't be saving that much money by doing this, and they must have gotten a number of returns by now as well.
Reply
post #232 of 293
5/27/05 at 1:10pm
Thread Starter 
Unless you have no other option, I would avoid trying to obtain the "old" dual version releases via online retailers, despite what the product descriptions say.


Well, if you do get the "converted" version, you can just send that back to Sony Pictures in Culver City, as apparently they haven't gotten enough returns yet to see what they're doing.
Reply
post #233 of 293
5/27/05 at 1:19pm
One thought,

most of Columbia's early dual-aspect ratio DVDs were dual-sided (flipper) discs...

I'm assuming it's cheaper for them to re-issue these discs using a single-layer/single side disc...so maybe this is a cost-motivated decision.

Only problem is of course that they're choosing the wrong version to keep/discard!

-dave
Reply
post #234 of 293
5/27/05 at 1:40pm
Quote:
I'm assuming it's cheaper for them to re-issue these discs using a single-layer/single side disc...so maybe this is a cost-motivated decision.


I think it is also got to be Wal*Mart motivated as well. You have a bunch of stagnant catalog titles that probably aren't flying off the shelves at the regular B&Ms and Wal*Mart is pretty well known among DVD owners for their $5.50 bin. Columbia wants to drop costs by going to DVD-5 from a DVD-10 so that Wal*Mart will buy large quatities of the titles for the bin (or other reduced price racks) So then it becomes which side to keep? And since they many are probably mostly destined for the Wal*Mart bin, they keep the P&S to make them happy (If you work for a company that supplies Wal*Mart you will know that whatever Wal*Mart wants, Wal*Mart gets). However, the DVDs where they are actually keeping the Widescreen transfer over the Full Screen brings some mystery into all of this.
Reply
post #235 of 293
5/27/05 at 1:45pm
Quote:
I sent emails and placed calls and never got an answer from sony on the issue...it was pretty frustrating.


I say keep writing polite letters. And if that doesn't work, ratch it up a little: start sending them roses and chocolate boxes.

Seriously people, if hardcore aficionados' response to Sony's outrageous DVD practices won't amount to anything other than writing polite and respectful letters, what on earth is going to persuade Sony to rectify their behavior?

In a way, the reaction from some of the main personalities here is more disheartening than Sony's scissors.
Reply
post #236 of 293
5/27/05 at 2:10pm
Thread Starter 
I don't think it costs THAT much more to manufacture a DVD-10 than a DVD-5, in fact many single-layer titles actually DO have something stamped on the labeled side. Being the media geek that I am, I discovered early on that most DVD-5 titles manufactured by Warner (WAMO) actually have the same program material stamped on both sides, and is playable if you were to clean off the printing with rubbing alcohol. I have also found about 45 minutes of color bars on the label side of discs made by Crest National and a couple other companies. Discs manufactured by Sony have a "dummy" side usually stamped in the middle as "DVXX", with no data on it but there is a physical side still there.
I think dual-layer discs are more complicated than a single layer disc with any number of sides, they were certainly used on a lot less titles in the beginning than they are now. However the Sony titles that have WS and FS on the same side have remained unchanged even after price drops. If the disc format issue is a factor in anything, I suspect the people currently in charge want to phase out 2-sided discs, as someone from the company essentially said that many customers are too stupid to figure out which side is which, in response to the question why "Castle Keep" was put out with only a pan and scan transfer.
Reply
post #237 of 293
5/27/05 at 2:15pm
Quote:
In a way, the reaction from some of the main personalities here is more disheartening than Sony's scissors.


There may be some in here that a more free with their voicing their opinions than others, with all due respect, at the other end there are those with the some high horse mentality of "keeping it civil" which is good in most cases, but I can't blame people in here for the more abrasive comments they make toward Sony and this Ridiculous practice. If this was the first we were seeing of this and the first words out of people were "Sony Sucks!" and the like, I would say that would be inappropriate. But, as I said, this is not new, it's been happening for awhile with no signs of abatement. So, I kind of feel like the time for being civil on this issue has passed. I really don't think saying "pretty please with sugar on top" or "I'll be your best friend" is going to change their decisions anyway.

As Robert has stated, this forum is supposed to hold a certain standard of decorum, so I will respect that. I would not classify some of the negativity as disheartening as I understand the frustration this is causing to others.
Reply
post #238 of 293
5/27/05 at 2:41pm
ANACONDA and VAMPIRES thankfully are Superbit titles if you want a Widescreen version. It is unfortunately that they are steamrolling through the catalogue and dropping the Widescreen tranfers. Great selling point if they want to sell SONY Anamorphic televisions!

The flipside is they are releasing pretty much all of thier recent catalogue titles ANAMORPHIC only (Except the 2:35 filmed MATLIDA:SE!!!!) with a HIGH $24. list price which means $20. at most retailers. So you pretty much cold get 2 FOX STUDIO CLASSICS for the prince of ONE SONY titles. Better yet, you can get the UNIVERSAL Gary Cooper set with 5 movies for the same price! SONY is absolutely clueless and dispise them more and more as time goes on.

My advice, if you ever thought about getting a SONY title get it NOW while you can still get a Widescreen transfer. It just may be on the chopping block soon.
Reply
post #239 of 293
5/27/05 at 3:16pm
Thread Starter 
I forgot to mention those 2 being available as Superbits- I would sort of understand them downgrading the other discs to get people to buy the higher-priced Superbit discs, but obviously not ALL of these titles have Superbit issues (Superbit 3 Ninjas Knuckle Up?)
They've made their packaging more vague as well- the new covers of The Fan and Stepmom say "1.33 Full Frame" with no mention of it being formatted to fit any screen. These are both pan and scan transfers of 2.35 movies, but there's nothing on the cover indicating that now. The "Full Frame" notice is also on the back cover of their Partridge Family box set, but of course that was made for TV and isn't MAR'd, so they're making it harder to tell exactly what you're getting.
Reply
post #240 of 293
5/27/05 at 3:25pm
Quote:
I think it is also got to be Wal*Mart motivated as well. You have a bunch of stagnant catalog titles that probably aren't flying off the shelves at the regular B&Ms and Wal*Mart is pretty well known among DVD owners for their $5.50 bin. Columbia wants to drop costs by going to DVD-5 from a DVD-10 so that Wal*Mart will buy large quatities of the titles for the bin (or other reduced price racks) So then it becomes which side to keep? And since they many are probably mostly destined for the Wal*Mart bin, they keep the P&S to make them happy (If you work for a company that supplies Wal*Mart you will know that whatever Wal*Mart wants, Wal*Mart gets). However, the DVDs where they are actually keeping the Widescreen transfer over the Full Screen brings some mystery into all of this.
Will, I don't know the truth, but this theory seems more plausible to me than the "eliminating widescreen versions to create a demand" theory. Neither can really explain the dropping of fullscreen versions from a few titles though.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DVD
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › DVD › Sony Pictures continues to drop existing widescreen transfers