New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Featureless Rental copies?

post #1 of 26
2/28/10 at 2:39pm
Thread Starter 
Don't know if this is the proper forum for this... but here goes...

Over the weekend I went to Blockbuster to rent "The Time Traveler's Wife."   I got the DVD because the two Blu-ray copies were out.  After the wife and I watched the movie, I proceeded to look for the special features to see if there was anything interesting.  There were no special features.  Not one. 

I found this kind of odd.  I looked at the cover and below the usual stickers, but printed on the actual cover insert were the words "Rental Copy" in big bold letters.  I looked at the disc itself, and again there were the same words "Rental Copy."  It looked like it was printed like this at the factory and not by Blockbuster.

When I went to return it, I looked at the copies for "The Time Traveler's Wife" that they had on sale.  Sure enough, there was a making of doc that was not on my rental copy, listed right on the back.  The clerk said that yes, over the last few months some DVDs have been released for rental like this but he did not know why.  He also didn't think it was studio specific, but after further investigation, by me, it seemed to be all recent Warner Bros (and New Line) movies, ie... The Informant, Terminator: Salvation among others.  Oh, and the Blu-ray had the Special Features.

So, what is the purpose of this?  I cannot believe it is cheaper to make "featureless" copies of these movies. I mean, once you are stamping 'em out, what difference does it make?  What, is the plus for Blockbuster when I can get the exact same content at home by ordering the movie "On Demand" at home for the same price (and in HD)  I mean, part of the reason I rented the flick was because I like to browse thru the extras.

I don't get it.  It's not like video stores need another reason for folks to stay away from them.  I used to rent from Hollywood Video, but the stores near me have closed down, so I don't know if other video stores are also stocking "Rental Copies."
Reply
post #2 of 26
2/28/10 at 3:23pm
Ric:

As you and I have discussed in the past, I purchase a number of used discs at rental shops...mostly Hollywood Video and Blockbuster. 

I have recently picked up a BD copy of GI Joe: Rise of Cobra (Paramount) and it has only one disc in it...meaning only the feature and commentary are available.  The second disc--with all the features--is MIA.  But the cover art has been changed so that you'd never know it was missing unless you knew better.

I also recently purchased the DVD of (500) Days of Summer (20th Century Fox) at HV.  Is labeled (both disc and cover art) as a 'Rental Exclusive.'  It is devoid of any special features--outside of a couple of trailers.  The regular DVD has deleted scenes and other features.

Also, HV's rental copies of the BD of The Day the Earth Stood Still (also Fox) is only a single-disc effort missing it's features and the '51 film. 

I'm sure there are a number of other examples.  Those are ones I just happened to notice recently.
Reply
post #3 of 26
2/28/10 at 3:43pm
Oh...but OTOH, I also picked up a BD copy of Marley & Me which had the same exact cover art as the regular BD (Three Disc "Bad Dog Edition")...but when I purchased the PV'd copy it only had Disc #1--no special features disc or digital copy. 

I wonder what happened to the extra discs?  They probably never got them for rentals. 
Reply
post #4 of 26
2/28/10 at 3:45pm
Thread Starter 
Interesting, though I still don't get it!  Oh, and I did mean to mention that their Previously Viewed copies for sale, were also, of course, the featureless rental versions.  It seems to me, that if you just wait for Best Buy or Amazon to have a sale on semi-recently released films, you could probably spend near the same amount and get more for your money.  Granted, a lot of folks could care less about special features, but I still find it to be a curious practice.

Thanks for the info, Mike!
Reply
post #5 of 26
2/28/10 at 3:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric Easton View Post

 It seems to me, that if you just wait for Best Buy or Amazon to have a sale on semi-recently released films, you could probably spend near the same amount and get more for your money. 
Yup.  For example, you can get the BD of TDTESS for $16.99 by itself or for $12.50 if you buy two BDs (2/$25).

Or...just go to amazon right now where it's $14.99 (for ALL 3 DISCS--including the '51 edition and special features).
Reply
post #6 of 26
5/3/10 at 7:24pm
       Ran into this policy this evening and I am, like Ric, clueless.   Why would in this case Blockbuster pay EXTRA to have less features?   You realize they have to press these separately which means MONEY.  The one benefit that I saw out of the blu-ray conversion is that I could stop by my local BB and get a new release WITH SE content again.  This had not been true since DVD went two disc crazy.  Could it be studio mandated?  If so...why haven't they done this dvd in the past?
Reply
post #7 of 26
5/5/10 at 10:33am
Just rented The Blind Side on Blu from Netflix, one of the first to fall victim to the 28-day delay, and it, too, was feature-less. The only thing that bothered me more was the fact that the trailers were forced, thus locking out my remote until the main menu appeared.

Blu-ray replication pricing must have finally come down for the studios to have separate retail and rentail runs.
Reply
post #8 of 26
5/5/10 at 2:41pm
IMO, like the 28 day rental delay window, it's another misguided attempt by the studios to drive disc sales. Want the extra features? You've gotta BUY the title. They're probably hoping that it will also take a bite out of the used rental disc market. Again, no extras if you don't purchase the retail version of the title.
Reply
post #9 of 26
5/20/10 at 2:15pm

I had a friend who rented Sherlock Holmes BD from Netflix and it was feature free too.  I think they are trying to discourage previously viewed sales.  When Redbox started signing deals with studios one of the stipulations with some studios was destroying a certain pertentage of titles rather than re-sell them.

Reply
post #10 of 26
5/20/10 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich View Post

I think they are trying to discourage previously viewed sales. 


I don't see that as a workable strategy. 

 

It won't dissuade me from buying previously-viewed discs.  And I'm a fairly informed shopper.  For me, I'll take just-the-film to get the discount.  I rarely have time for the bonus features. 

 

And, I gotta believe most shoppers (and I consider most are fairly uninformed) probably won't be thinking, "Oh, I'm not buying Title XYZ on Blu-ray used from my local rental shop because the director's commentary is missing."

Reply
post #11 of 26
5/20/10 at 2:32pm

I didn't say it was workable    I think they are trying a little bit of everything to boost their profits.  They don't want rentals to cut into sales, they don't want Redbox rentals to cut into Blockbuster rentals (since they get a cut of BB revenue), its all about the bottom line.

Reply
post #12 of 26
5/20/10 at 8:10pm

I didn't say you said it was workable.  rofl5.gif

 

I said it was unworkable. 

 

They might be on to something about getting rid of rental shops...because most of the ones I know are going under. 

Reply
post #13 of 26
5/21/10 at 10:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich View Post

When Redbox started signing deals with studios one of the stipulations with some studios was destroying a certain pertentage of titles rather than re-sell them.


Just wait until the environmentalists get wind of this..... Remember their reaction to DIVX and FlexPlay?

Reply
post #14 of 26
5/21/10 at 10:25am

I have a feeling the studios will soon be owning Blockbuster Canada.....
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich View Post

I didn't say it was workable    I think they are trying a little bit of everything to boost their profits.  They don't want rentals to cut into sales, they don't want Redbox rentals to cut into Blockbuster rentals (since they get a cut of BB revenue), its all about the bottom line.


 

Reply
post #15 of 26
5/25/10 at 10:28am

Do you guys really not get why they do this? Obviously they're figuring that some people who really want the special features will buy instead of renting, and some of those will be people who otherwise would have rented that title.

 

Rental stores (which also sell new discs) might also think some people will still rent, then buy when they realize there is extra stuff they didn't see, just like some people buy the same movie over and over when the next Super Ultimate Deluxe 13th Anniversary version comes out.

 

Whether this results in extra sales for them, I don't know, but it seems pretty clear what the reason is for it.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if they have surveys showing that most rental customers don't care about special features, so most people won't be upset by this.

 

As a renter, I'm not a fan of this, either, but it is their content that they are free to include or not include as they see fit.

Reply
post #16 of 26
5/25/10 at 6:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Lockwood View Post

Do you guys really not get why they do this? 

 


Did you not read the thread? I addressed your point already. 

Reply
post #17 of 26
5/27/10 at 10:48am


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Frezon View Post

And, I gotta believe most shoppers (and I consider most are fairly uninformed) probably won't be thinking, "Oh, I'm not buying Title XYZ on Blu-ray used from my local rental shop because the director's commentary is missing."


Those of us who listen to commentaries are probably in the minority, so many people won't care if features like that are included or not.

Reply
post #18 of 26
5/27/10 at 10:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Lockwood View Post


Those of us who listen to commentaries are probably in the minority, so many people won't care if features like that are included or not.


Exactly.  Which is why I think the concept is dubious at best. 

Reply
post #19 of 26
6/9/10 at 12:28pm

 I believe this has more to do with the fact that BB has a deal that allows them to come out with some discs while NetFlix and RedBox have to wait 28 days before they can rent them. If you want the extras, you can wait and order from alternative vendors.

Reply
post #20 of 26
6/21/10 at 11:28am

I have the BB online service and I am finding that more and more of my rentals are the stripped down versions. I enjoy the bonus content if I really like the movie but it is not enough to make me go out and buy the disc. I hope this is something that will slowly fade out and that they will go back to the complete disc.

Reply
post #21 of 26
6/21/10 at 12:29pm

I have a Hollywood Video going out of business near me (there are a precious few rental shops left near me) and picked up a copy of a "rental version" of Sherlock Holmes on Blu-ray. 

 

I originally wasn't that interested in the film (based on the trailers) but enough people are telling me I should give it a try.  And, I figured I don't need any extras for that one.  I find myself watching fewer and fewer extras.  Don't have the time.  It's got to be a film I really want to learn more about.  Maybe there are just fewer and fewer of those being made nowadays! 

Reply
post #22 of 26
6/22/10 at 3:18pm

Yeah, I also don't get to the extras nearly as much as I used to.  These days I often just end up falling asleep to them (after watching the movie) and then don't get back to them again in most cases.

 

But back on topic, I agree w/ Adam G that the main issue here for the studios is probably the used/previewed-sale market for rentals and how it impacts their retail sell-through market.  It's probably also partly what drives a studio like Universal to try their duo-format BD/DVD flipper while others have been going w/ separate discs in their combo packs -- they don't want people to resell (or give away) the DVDs and cut deeper into their all-around video market.  Interestingly, Universal seems to be one studio that has not gone w/ this rental-exclusive model for their BDs so far (though I have no idea about their DVDs).

 

BTW, although the lack of extras alone may not make much diff to most who'd either rent or buy the previewed/rental copies, that combined w/ the hard-forced trailers may very well deter many of you who'd normally buy them.  Certainly, I'd think there's not much point in buying them if/when you can often find the full featured retail versions (w/ no/less forcing of trailers) for not much more if you just exercise a little patience -- it's not like you can normally buy the previewed/rental ones during release week afterall.

 

As I've noted elsewhere, the forced trailers issue (at least w/ BDs) is getting worse, especially on the rental-exclusives.  Some of them (namely some recent Warner BDs) are locking out the chapter skip button, not just the menu button, during the forced trailers -- only thing you can do is use the fastforward scan to move them along quicker, but you'd have to repeat that for every single trailer.  That's rather annoying for the first viewing though tolerable enough (for a rental to me anyway), but would probably become insufferable if needed for every additional viewing (after you own it), especially if you're prone to accidentally hitting the stop button mid-stream (for the BD-J titles, and you know many of them will use BD-J even if there are no useable/viewing features).  Interestingly (again), I've noticed some Universal BDs seem to only force trailers some of the times (or not at all), not everytime, and that may also have something to do w/ their use of BD-Live to download trailers -- and I've disabled BD-Live on my Panny BD60.

 

OTOH, maybe forced trailers on BD rental exclusives would be less annoying *IF* it means much faster load times w/out all the extras.   I haven't taken note of that so far, but maybe I will going forward...

 

RE: the added authoring/manufacturing cost issue w/ rental exclusives, I wonder if they haven't figured out a way to keep that very minimal (beyond the issue of the physical disc pressings).  Maybe all they're doing is authoring and manufacturing the discs w/ a simple, cost-effective way to "cripple" large batches for rental-exclusives rather than actually creating completely separate discs.  Wouldn't be a first for a mass-produced consumer product.

 

_Man_


Edited by ManW_TheUncool - 6/22/10 at 3:30pm
Reply
post #23 of 26
10/12/11 at 11:48pm
Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but there's some good discussion here and I thought I'd stick my $0.02 in an existing discussion rather than start a new one.

I just rented Bridesmaids from Blockbuster and it's a feature-less rental version. This is my first experience with an artificially crippled disc and I'm... displeased. Far from having the desired effect of making me want to buy the retail version, it actually swung me in the other direction of being so furious that I never want to pay these greedy scum another red cent. Yes, first world problems, I know. Still peeved about it.

All these years and these studio execs still don't get it. They're punishing legitimate customers and encouraging people to seek out movies through more illicit means. I'm not condoning it, but as a customer I can certainly identify with the sentiment. Geez, are you not making enough money as it is?!?!

/rant off
Reply
post #24 of 26
10/13/11 at 5:47am
I agree completely.
Reply
post #25 of 26
10/13/11 at 10:56am

I think Universal is one of the worst offenders (Warner a very close second) with these bare-bones rental copies. The menu design and navigation is identical to the retail version, except when selecting a special feature, more times than not, a dialogue box pops up saying that this feature is only available on the retail version. Gee, thanks!

 

Warner's big offense, though, is the forced trailers that can only be scanned through, one at a time, with the next chapter and Top Menu buttons locked out.

Reply
post #26 of 26
10/28/11 at 6:01pm

To be honest, you're only scratching the surface.  I also did this.   but after some investigation, it's obvious that some titles aren't just featureless - in some cases, they are changed.  Changed how?  Different bitrates on the transfer.   I have seen a few that because they "came close" they were obviously made to fit on a single layer BD (BD-25) from a BD-50 disc, which means the bitrate for the title became less along with the loss of extras.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home