Re: Best of Route 66
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hank Dearborn
Just curious but to the people complaining about the picture quality, I have a question. If they had spent the money to clean up the prints, would you have still bought the set if it was $50 or $60 per half season? You have people on here balking at paying for it now, with DDD selling it for under $20. It wouldn't bother me as I make a good living and my hobbies are my only big expense. But I just wonder how many people wouldn't mind paying the extra cost. Judging by some of the posts I read, not too many.
|
But apparently, the issue really isn't about "cleaning" up bad prints. It's about using good source material. And we know there's better material out there because so many saw it years ago on Nick@Nite. So unless Roxbury was told to only use these beat up prints that apparently came from Sony, this is more about not doing much research into what was available. And that would be a shame.
I'll admit that I would balk at paying $50 or more for half season sets. Especially if by $50 you are talking the actual price we'd pay - which is generally around 30% off SRP. Frankly, I don't believe Roxbury or Infinity would have ever even considered trying to sell the sets at that price. It'd be a losing proposition for them. So the hypothetical you bring up doesn't really work for me. It's just not something we'd have seen in any situation. No company worth their salt is going to be crazy enough to think folks would pay upwards of $50 to $60 for a half-season show. Just not gonna happen.
Have you actually seen the prints yourself, Hank? Because I can assure you none of us is exaggerating how poor some of the episodes look. Michael, Bert, myself and others are not being nitpicky here. There really are some bad looking spots in this set. And a few spots are perilously close to PD quality.
Gary "I still say buy the set for $20, it's well worth it in my book - but I'd be lying if I said the quality of every episode was outstanding or even average, because that's not the case" O.