Little Miss Sunshine to street 12/19 (1 Viewer)

[Jon Martin]

The budget was $8 million. Low by Hollywood standards, but hardly an indie.

And was I alone in not liking the film? Not trying to start anything, but I found it extremely disappointing. Plus, it steals half of its jokes from NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VACATION.

 

[Jason_V]

If it doesn't require the second layer because of the short running time, then the fullscreen version could be put on the same side as the widescreen, thus eliminating the need for a double sided disc.

 

[Richard Kim]

Fox did the same dual AR release for Napoleon Dynamite, and then released a duel layered SE edtion. Now I'm hesistant on picking up Little Miss Sunshine, for fear of them doing the same thing.

 

[TravisR]

Little Miss Sunshine doesn't have the kind of cult power that Napoleon Dynamite had though. By no means does that mean that Fox won't do an SE but I think unless the movie cleans up at the Oscars or sells ALOT of copies, I think it'll be quite awhile before there's a re-release.

I bet there will be some real good deals at stores on the disc at Oscar time though.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

I refuse to support any 5-inch disc release. They're too small and easily damaged

 

[ScottJH]

It's a little early to say something like that, considering LMS hasn't even been released on DVD yet. I doubt it will reach the status of ND but who knows.

 

[Jon Martin]

LMS may not have the cult of teen viewers that ND had, but I do think it is one the Wal Mart crowd could get into. I can see people buying it for Christmas presents for aunts and uncles, even grandparents. It did very well at the box office, among mainstream viewers. Like MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING, a lot of serious critics dismissed it, but the public seemed to love it.

I'm just surprised it wasn't released a couple weeks ago, as it could have been one of the biggest sellers this Holiday season.

 

[Dave Mack]

Hi guys!

Question... we saw the commercials for this DVD and at least on the commercial, the pic. looked pretty colorful and kind of "popping" (have no idea of a better word...) but we both recalled when we saw it in the theatres this year the pic. looked VERY dull, washed out with muted colors and an almost sickly yellow haze around the interiors in the beginning. I thought to myself at the time that it must be a stylistic choice to suit the more somber mood, especially in the beginning scenes. On the commercial it looked like a colorful "american Pie" type comedy! Does the commercial accurately represent the look of the DVD? Maybe we just saw a really, really crappy print...?

 

[MatS]

I recall it wasn't very vibrant in the theater

 

[MatS]

from dvdtalk.com

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25653

 

[Dave Mack]

yep, weird. It definitely did not look like that when I saw it. Was one of the most drab looking films I'd seen in years. I totally assumed that the look was intentional... maybe they wanted a more family friendly look for home vid?

 

[Lord Dalek]

I personally don't care about the video quality for this film. It was a low budget production shot in Super 35 in probably not the most ideal conditions. Grain was very visible in theaters and should be quite visible here.

 

[ScottJH]

Then I guess you won't mind the ringing/EE throughout the whole movie. Just watched it. PQ is definitely lacking, not film like.

 

[Dave Mack]

wow, still dealing with EE....
I have no problem with grain, just weird that it seems so colorful now when it was the exact opposite where I saw it.

 

[BBbrowd]

This is my favorite film of this year. Brilliant. I just put my DVD in and boy, I was disappointed. My immediate reaction was, "Oh no, something's wrong." The ringing makes it look almost blurry. Like something is out of register. I rushed over here to see what you all were saying about it and it looks like I'm not the only one that noticed the problems. It did not look like this in the theater. It was much better. It's sad that this amazing film is getting this poor copy for DVD. I hope we get a better version released eventually.

If you've never seen it, it's certainly worth seeing though. This is a special film. Priceless.

 

[BrandonJF]

After watching it, I looked up the DVD Talk review and couldn't believe they gave the PQ 4/5. Wow. I was wondering if I'm just so used to watching HD-DVD/Blu-Ray that I'm becoming less tolerant towards DVDs...

This was one of the worst looking DVDs I've seen in quite awhile. The EE was horrid. I can only assume all of the characters in the film were angels since they were surrounded by the thickest halos I've ever seen.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I didn't notice any heavy edge enhancement on my copy, but I thought the transfer was mediocre anyway:

http://www.dvdmg.com/littlemisssunshine.shtml

 

[Brent M]

I honestly don't see how a film like this could ever be a huge seller for the Holiday season. It's the exact opposite of something like The 40 Year Old Virgin which had mass appeal and was a huge success on DVD. Little Miss Sunshine isn't the kind of mainstream flick that everyone is going to run out and buy to give someone as a Christmas gift. No offense to those who liked it, but frankly I was very let down by the film itself(not to mention the awful PQ on the DVD). Thank goodness it was a rental and not a blind-buy.

 

[Jim Rankin]

I agree with Brent on this film not transferring to Holiday financial sucess it's simply not a mainstream film. I could see it pick up a little more steam if it has any sucess at all during the upcoming awards sweep.

I do disagree about the quality of the film - I enjoyed it immensely, but when I first saw the film I had low expectations and it exceeded them.

As for the PQ - I guess I don't have the eye that you guys do - I tend to get sucked into the film and lose my critical eye. I was more discouraged by the lack of extra features and a rather dry commentary.

 

[Eric Carl]

Getting sucked into the film happens to me too. I remember reading that people thought Signs looked terrible and all I thought was: really I didn't notice.

However, we should be comparing the PQ of this film to other low budget films and not to some high budget movie.

As to the look of the movie itself, I thought it was not ugly, and yet not too beautiful; which goes with the movie itself. The story is more important than the look, and, therefore, we shouldn't be concentrating on that with this particular title.

-Eric