I'm getting totally DISGUSTED with collecting TV series on DVD (1 Viewer)

[Joe Lugoff]

I should have my head examined for contributing to Internet Forums in the first place.

But since I foolishly started this, on I go --


It's difficult to accept one's own snideness, but your message that most people have worse things to worry about was certainly snide. There's no other word for it.

snide, adj. Derogatory in a malicious, superior way.

You weren't teribly malicious, but you were certainly superior, or "on a high horse" as it was so aptly put.

I'm sorry you don't see that. I'm also sorry you don't mind watching Doris Day in hyperdrive.

I'm not going to transfer money from my bank account to a company that puts out product which is unacceptable. Now, it clearly isn't unacceptable to those who don't know any better or don't care -- but it's totally unacceptable to those who should care the most, to those who should have been the first to buy the product, and who end up being the ones who would be the last to buy it.

And I have a major announcement here: I don't want to shock you, but I, too, have MANY better things to get upset about than edited TV shows on DVD. And I write about those things on OTHER forums! THIS is the place, as Wendy put it, to vent about DVDs. I came here looking for people who feel the same way I do -- and I certainly found them. But someone always has to get snide................:frowning:

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Loads of crap are in the eye of the beholder. To me, what you say is a fantastic load of crap.

You're what psychologists call an ENABLER.

If my all-time favorite TV show is announced for DVD and I'm counting the seconds until it's released -- and then I discover it's made up of CUT or TIME COMPRESSED episodes -- I don't give my vote of approval by buying it. I'd rather have NOTHING -- which, after all, makes me no worse off than I was before -- than let the sellers of such merchandise think it's OK to put any crap on the market they want -- and, remember, this crap is usually falsely labeled as The COMPLETE Season! Fully Restored! which really adds insult to injury.

 

[JohnMor]

And we're back to the name calling. How charming.

 

[William Miller]

The origin of this thread is that one person is getting pretty fed up with so many botched up TV on DVD releases. And that is what the discussion should be about. Period. Nothing else should have come into it. If you like buying DVD's that are not correct, that is fine. But some people do not like buying them when they are incorrect. It's all pretty simple.

By the way, if the forthcoming Season One of the George Reeves Superman is botched up in any way, I will have to kill myself. Remember, you heard about it here first when you see the news report because I will leave a suicide note stating exactly why I drove my car into the Mississippi River.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

No they wouldn't, they just wouldn't release the shows, and TV on DVD would be dead. No business person in their right mind is going to spend outrageous amounts of money for restoration and music rights unless there is a high probability that those costs will be both covered and the set will make a profit. If there is no profit, there is no point releasing at all, the studios aren't charities.

Studios also realise that people aren't going to shell out hundreds of dollars for a release just because it is intact - which is the only way some of these shows could make it to market intact. In order to bring the show out at a price point that works there are compromises to be made. You can choose not to own it if you wish, but there are plenty more who are just happy to have the show, and can't remember every little music cue or snippet of a scene, or don't care.

 

[David Von Pein]

To add still more fuel to the fire of this thread:

Here's a nifty little announcement from Paramount Home Video, re. the upcoming August release of Andy Griffith Season 3 -- the one line that stands out being:

"Some episodes may be edited from their original Network versions."

:frowning: :frowning:

That little blurb doesn't make me smile at all. :frowning:

That "May Be Edited" disclaimer is not on Paramount's webpages for Andy-1 or Andy-2.

http://homevideo.paramount.com/Catal...elease_id=4391

 

[george kaplan]

One can only hope that this is generic legal bullshit that lawyer's are having them put on everything. If it is a sign of actual cuts to Season 3, then I guess my collecting of Andy Griffith will stop at 2 seasons (which is 2 seasons more than shows like Doris Day screwed up from the start).

As to the argument about buying cut product, it's a catch-22. If no one buys it, they might well conclude there's no market, though that could be remedied with a campaign explaining why (it's worked with some p&s only releases in the past). On the other hand, if they sell like hotcakes, you can be certain that the conclusion will be that they'll sell edited, and there's no need to fix them. I'd rather send them the first message. And having butchered dvds on my shelf with the guarantee that they'll never be fixed is much worse than having a show completely missing, with at least the hope that it may someday get released right.

WKRP may never make it because of music rights, but you can be guaranteed that if it got released with music replacement, that the correct version would never get released, since the studios would conclude either that the cuts don't matter, or there's no interest in the show. At least now, there's still hope that it'll someday see the light of day uncensored.

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes, I hope that's the case as well.

FWIW -- The "total run time" for the TAGS-3 set is listed @ Paramount at "808 minutes" -- which would make the 32 eps. average out at 25.25 min. per show (which would certainly seem to make them full-length and "uncut").

The S.2 TAGS set shows an "average" run time of just slightly less than that 25.25 statistic.

So, perhaps George K. is correct, and it's simply an obligatory "legal" type of disclaimer (which actually might, in the 'TAGS' case, refer to ONLY the opening and/or closing credits -- which, of course, WERE "edited" from their original network versions for the Season 1 set of Andy Griffith -- but not for S.2 as far as I'm able to tell).

 

[David Von Pein]

There's no "may be edited" notations on the upcoming "I Love Lucy S.5" set, however.......

http://homevideo.paramount.com/Catal...elease_id=4392

 

[Gary OS]

Good gosh this is getting absolutely ridiculous! I'm going to be more than slightly upset if they offer us edited TAGS episodes!!!

My first thought, upon reading the disclaimer, was the same as George. This was simply a way for Paramount to cover themselves, and it would begin appearing on all releases. The fact that the LUCY set doesn't have the disclaimer is a little disconcerting, but I still have high hopes this set will be complete due to the total running time.

Gary "this is such a frustrating issue that keeps popping up more and more" O.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Maybe that'll be on all TV DVDs from now on.

Maybe they should run a warning like they have on cigarettes: "Warning: As you watch these DVDs, you may discover things that could raise your blood pressure to dangerous levels."

That Andy Griffith "warning" certainly isn't very conclusive -- what's with this "may be?" Are they or aren't they? Don't they know? Are they just covering themselves in case some Andy Griffith expert discovers missing scenes, as happened with I LOVE LUCY 4?

What an aggravating hobby.

 

[David Von Pein]

I know what you mean, Joe.

It seems as if such ambiguous "disclaimers" are being inserted for the sole purpose of making HTFers (and similar HT aficionados) doubt the contents of the products (even though the eps. may NOT be edited).

The eps. "may" be chopped up; but -- then again -- maybe not.

Almost sounds like pure spite, just to keep customers guessing. :frowning:

If they knew some shows were chopped-up, the disclaimer should read: "Portions of some episodes have been edited from their original network versions."

What would Sheriff Andy say about such tactics?!

I'm sending Fast-Gun Fife after them right now! Barney won't tolerate such foolishness!

 

[Tony J Case]

Wow - are you this condescending ALL the time, or are you going out of the way to be an jerk?

If the edits bug you so much, great. Fantastic! The answer is simple - don't buy it. But why the hell does it matter to you what I buy? You don’t have to pay for it, you don’t have to watch it. So until you DO start putting up the cash for my sets, you get no bitching rights over me and my purchases. So stop calling me names about it and relax. Take an chill pill.

I on the other hand am willing to cut the studios some slack because - hey, sometime shit happens beyond their control. Buying the rights to "Fire" for Revelation of the Daleks would have eatn up the entire budget for extras on that disc. So I'd rather have extras and episode restoration and get 99.998% of the episode instead of nothing at all.

 

[RickER]

Wow! What great reading after a day of hard work. I love you all, and feel the need for a group hug. Anyway,I hate edited anything, but i go on a case by case basis. Some stuff i wish they would edit. I didnt want that Gary Coleman episode of Buck Rogers!

 

[Tony J Case]

Naw, I could have lived with that - I just wish they edited the second season . . . . oh, off the entire set, perhaps?

 

[Jeff Willis]

Just what this thread needed As a Buck Rogers set owner, I agree. I won't view the 2nd season. I got that one for S1 alone. BTW, I thought the "Gary Coleman" ones were but I admit they weren't the best ones of S1.

 

[Jon Martin]

I think it really is a case by case basis.

Take the upcoming DVD release of the show UNDECLARED.

Here is a show, that the producers have been very open about the fact that they HAD to change I think it is two songs. The artist (I think it was Outkast) would not allow them to use it in a DVD release.

So, should they have cancelled the DVD release because of two songs they could not obtain rights to? That, for me, would be silly.

I'll be buying the DVD. It really isn't that big of a deal.

I've bought plenty of TV on DVD that had the music changed. I had never seen KEEN EDDIE so I wasn't aware of the music that was there before being changed. It didn't bother me and if I didn't buy it, I would have missed out on a great show.

And I don't know if many of you are aware of it, but it is VERY common for music to be replaced, even in films. Look at most of Paramount's VHS releases in the 80's. Many had the "Music has been changed for home video release". Countless VHS titles had this disclaimer on it. Even in the 90's, Paramount had to cut the "Stairway to Heaven" joke from WAYNE'S WORLD for video.

And as far as syndication cuts go, it is pretty sloppy, as far as the studio goes. But, in some cases, I would still pick up the set, if it was cheap enough and I didn't care that strongly. Take TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT. This was a fun show, but in all the years it was on, I never liked it enough to tape an episode. So, when I bought it for $20, it didn't bother me THAT much when I found out they were the syndicaton cuts.

For shows made in the past three years or so, when TV on DVD is pretty much expected, there is no excuse to have to replace music or release syndicated cuts.

But, if you go back longer than that, there are factors that no matter how much you yell and scream about it here, you can't do anything about it.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Jon, you hit the bulls-eye on that post. True! Unfortunately, for me, I'm wanting a lot of the older series which makes it more difficult. I also got the Too Close For Comfort S1 in spite of the syndicated eps. On the other hand, I wouldn't buy either of my "fanatic" series (6M$M and Bionic Woman) sets (if they're ever released) if they had the cut eps in them.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Don't respond ... don't respond ... AARRGHHHH!!! I can't help myself!


Because if people buy badly done DVDs, it just encourages the companies not to do it right because the consumers are saying it doesn't matter if episodes are cut, sped up, etc... we'll take whatever garbage you throw at us, falsely labeled "complete" and "restored."

My god, I and others have been saying that over and over here, not just on this thread, but all over the Home Theater Forum. Concentrate!

And calling someone an "enabler" isn't calling someone a name. It's a term used in psychology, and I meant it humorously. I just forgot to insert the smilie, like this:

Now chill out, dude.

 

[Jeffrey Nelson]

What really offends me is the fact that such jewels of television as Viva La Bam and Survivor are on DVD before half a bazillion other more deserving shows, which is only slightly less annoying than their very existence in the first place.

Yes, I know, I'm on a high horse, and boy is the weather great up here.