DVD's? I Don't Rent. I Own. -- NY Times article (1 Viewer)

[DaveGTP]

Agreed! I never buy a movie blindly. The only thing I have bought blindly is anime, and that very very very infrequently. That's only because it's hard to rent.


And as far as late fees - some of us are really busy. I admittedly do do this buy-only thing with books - enough library fines, and I just started buying books. I work full time and go to school full time. I don't have time to sleep some days, so I can't always stop and return a movie!

 

[Todd Robertson]

Hi everyone! yes, it was cool doing the interview. I wish more of what we talked about made it in...but hey..I'm not bitchin'. I'm in between job projects at the moment and will add more later...but I want to get this in. as far as having a ton of dvds/films...it's a personal decision. if a dvd/film gets watched only once every few years...so what? it's a library....and thats what libraries are for. there seems to be a mad rush to have to watch everything, all the time and as soon as possible. my personal library is for many things. enjoyment at my fingertips with all my favs, historical research and reference...and so on. these dvds I have are not going anywhere. as far as buying something only to not like it....thats not me. I know what I like and will like, just by doing research. I have never bought a 'blind-buy", because I feel my eyes are wide open. I dont pick a dvd off the retail shelf and say.."hey...I might like this"...it just does not work for my style of collecting. every title I have is there for a reason....my reason. each one serves a purpose and adds to the overall picture.

will I upgrade to HD-DVD? well...I'm not nuts...of course I will. for selected titles. I'm very happy with my current copy of The Blood Drinkers, and I doubt we will see that on the next format anytime soon...if at all. this can be said about many titles. Raiders Of The Lost Ark? you bet yer ass.

I'd love to give a shout-out later, if there are any questions or comments. it's back-to-work so I can buy some more dvds. anyway...my 15 seconds is about over.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

My only question is why did they waste their time with these folks with little piddling collections of 500? They should have come here where 2000+ is socially acceptable and even encouraged!

 

[Jeff_HR]

I have not rented a video of any kind since the late 1980's. I don't need to with the size of my video library.

 

[Jeff Reis]

I honestly mean no offense by this, and I don't think the original poster did either, but why does this have to be said in every single thread about large DVD collections? No one seems to bat an eye at the 400-500k McMansions and 60k behemoth vehicles that everyone seems to be able to somehow afford these days, but spending 2 or 3 grand a year on DVDs is somehow a waste of time and money? I just don't get it. It's really a drop in the bucket compared to a lot of other expenses we incur these days, and it's a hell of a lot more enjoyable.

 

[TonyD]

ChadP2k


what exactly is your reason for posting that?

this is a forum were people dont think that owning dvd collections and home theater equipment is a waste of time.

do you own dvs's or anytype of home theater?

if you do isnt that having too much time on your hands?

 

[DaveF]

It's silly, but some people are chronically late. For this guy, I suppose late fees are inevitable without a monumental act of willpower.

I see cinema, renting and buying as complementary. I try to see certain movies at the theater. Some movies that I really like and would rewatch, or just find a great price for, I buy. I also buy certain exceptional movies, like Dead Man Walking, as my small way of saying "please make more of these when on break from filming Scatalogical Sequel IV." And since renting is 25% the price of buying, I rent movies that I'm unlikely to fall in love with.

I also buy some movies with really good extras, since there'd not be time to watch those on a rental.

But I would rather have a nice new car than 2000 DVDs. That fits my needs and interests better. So I try to keep my collection small and only buy about 10 a year.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Entertaining article. It's nice to see DVD Aficionado getting some credit. I've been a fan of that site for years now.

 

[Wayne Earl]

Dvd is the first format I've collected movies in and have relatively quickly accumulated around 500.I,ve got a few duds but because of prior research before buying am mostly happy with my purchases .I am getting more selective though and less interested in movies that won't improve my collection .Lately I,ve noticed a slowdown in accumulation as I have so many movies that I wish to view again.This is the payoff I figure for all the research I put into my shopping.Now when I go for my tuesday new release look around I can hold back a little more for that special release or great deal.It's not like theirs not shelfs of great movies waiting for me at home if I choose not to buy.Having a library of movies is the same for me as books or music I feel blessed and lucky to have such wonderful art at my fingertips. Like another poster said its who I am.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Nice article, which basically confirms pretty much everything I've thought. I rarely rent, but I do so on some occasions and I am one that does do a lot of blind buys, but I should qualify that by saying that I usually have some knowledge of the film before I buy it either from a review or word of mouth or something, and I don't blind buy something that I know is contrary to my tastes.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

This article makes me feel disappointed in my 700+ title collection. Although, at $9/hour (plus commision) it's hard to do a whole lot better.

 

[JohnTRU]

I rent and buy. Buying is great fun, but here in Australia, if you want a brand new title, you're paying upwards of $30, so the best buying times are getting the cheaper titles on 15% off days at K-Mart, where you end up paying around $15 for decent flicks.

But renting is too inviting. I'm not going to blind buy a film I have only a passing interest in seeing. Renting doesn't leave me with a film I never want to watch again.

Plus, the place I rent from is literally twenty metres from my house, so I don't need to get it a car and drive somewhere, whcih is always what bugged me before - I never minded driving to get movies out, but always hated having to get in the car and drop them off.

 

[Clint]

I used to buy a lot of DVDs back in the days of coupons, 3-for-1, reel.com etc., but lately I've been renting more and more.

Unless it is a movie I intend to watch 2-3+ times or it is just a "must have", renting is a way to go for me. I also have a resource to borrow Criterion's, the classsics and some mainstream DVDs free for a week.

So that in addition to wanting to save money makes it even more of an incentive to NOT buy.

 

[Joe Kamsan]

I live in a Region 4 country but of my 160+ DVDs about 90% are Region 1 discs. I rarely rent because I hate having only one night to watch a movie as I am quite busy most of the time. Buying allows me to watch a movie at my own convenience and there is also the repeat viewing factor. Another consideration is the value of the US dollar which is quite weak against the Australian dollar. So I have shopped a lot online in the past six months.

I can understand people wanting huge collections but at 160 DVDs I have almost all the movies I have ever wanted to own. I first started buying in 2001, which is pretty late for a medium that is seven years old.

I am also mindful of the rate technology is advancing and how in a few years new media will supercede DVD. Some of us cannot affored to have all the movies we want, we just make do with the ones we will watch over and over.

 

[Frank@N]

I do the same and find that I'm on target 95% of the time. I've seen countless amazing movies on DVD for the first time (Iron Monkey, Shadow of the Vampire, ...Time in the West, Man Who would be King, Deliverance). I'm still amazed that you can actually buy movies like this for $5-10 used.

 

[Jon Martin]

But a car depreciates in value the second you drive it off the lot. DVDs retain their value, many often increase. In a few years, those DVDs will be worth a lot more than the car.

And, they are a surprisingly liquid investment. I've listed DVDs for sale on Amazon or Half and have sold them in less than an hour. Very common ones too. Try selling a car that quickly.

As for renting vs buying, with Netflix, I do both. I preview what would be blind buys through Netflix and then see if they would be worth buying. Probably saved enough to buy a new car by renting films I ended up not liking rather than buying.

 

[Frank@N]

For most people with larger DVD collections, this is a concern. At one time, I had about 200 LD.

There are times when I wonder about the cost vs. return on that particular investment, since LD was replaced with a superior product.

But in 1994, what other options were there?

I've decided that DVD is a 'good enough' platform upon which to build a larger collection than I had on LD.

I believe that continuing advances in HT hardware will allow DVD to perform better and be watchable on larger screen sizes in the future.

In short, I think the format will be viable and watchable even after HD-DVD arrives.

I don't plan on repurchasing anything. It would just make the rest of my collection look bad by comparison.

 

[Chet_F]

I have well over 500 DVDs and the same for CDs. I loathe TV, or actually what it has become, and NEVER listen to Clear Channel so there we have it. No sweat, I think I have a movie to watch .

Oh......the comment on double dipping. I don't get it. If a movie does not display correctly on my 16x9 TV then I will buy the upgrade(if it's ver released). I have only made 2 exceptions, Fear & Loathing CC and Memento LE, both found very cheap. I guess what I'm trying to ask is what is the allure of double dipping, i.e. What are you getting out of it? I know what the studios are getting out of it.....$$$$$

CF

P.S. I forgot to mention that the majority of my collection has been purchased at local used stores ranging from $3 to $9 and rarely anything over $9. Most of the time I can get them for $5 to $6. With prices like that the word 'rent' dosn't even exist in my vocabulary.

 

[DeeF]

That article could have been about me (and many of you, I'm sure).

I own 1300 DVDs, and a Fujitsu 50" plasma home theater.

I never collected tapes, or LDs, but the combination of good quality pictures from DVDs, high-definition television, and restored older movies has made my choice of buying inevitable. Movies in the theater are too expensive, and I actually get less out of the experience.

I do not rent, either.

But one thing that article did not mention, that I think is an important point. DVDs were positioned by the studios, etc., to be bought rather than rented. The price is right, the size is right, and the time was right. We all fell into a carefully marketed trap.

But no regrets.

My social life has improved immensely by getting the home theater and DVD collection. I have something for everyone to see, and many people schedule their weekends around my availability.

 

[Ted Todorov]

While I agree that some flavor(s) of HD-DVD will be out real soon now, I don't think that HD-DVD has any more chance of supplanting DVD than SACD/DVD-A have of replacing CDs for much the same reasons: rival formats, majority of public lacking equipment that would allow them to see or hear the difference, excessive copy protection, HDTV doesn't even exist in Europe, etc.

The only way HD-DVD can replace DVD is if HD-DVD discs were backward compatible to today's players and all future DVDs were in the HD-DVD format only.

It's not going to happen. A switch from DVD to HD-DVD on the same level as the current move from VHS to DVD is a LONG way off.

Ted