Syndicated cuts, music substitutions..it's all good (1 Viewer)

[Arild]

I was gonna comment on this, but I think my viewpoint have been pretty well covered by others (music substitutions = sadly unavoidable; cut episodes = inexcusable) so instead I'm just going to second George and Steve's sarcastic posts.

 

[AnthonyC]

But you didn't pay for it. Syndicated edits on TV, no problem, that's the station's business; they bought it and are showing it and can do what they want with it. When you purchase them on DVD, why pay $35 for 97% of the product because the company was lazy enough to not utilize the original versions? Other than that 1st and Ten complete series set, I've never heard of any set that charged a lesser rate thanks to the inclusion of syndicated episodes.

But there's one thing that bothers me whenever these discussions come up, someone has to bring up their "It's your fault for not taping the original broadcasts" crap. No, it isn't. You're jumping to conclusions if you assume that everyone here had/has the means to record every single show they would care to rewatch at some point. It's ridiculous. Congratulations, I'm happy for you that you have them complete, but stop trying to act like we're all idiots here.

 

[Tony S]

^Unless you are watching broadcast tv via an antenna, you are paying to watch syndicated cuts on tv.

 

[HenryDuBrow]

No syndication cuts for me if possible, music replacements I can take better.

 

[MatthewA]

What bothers me is syndication cuts surfacing on DVD when the uncut version has been seen elsewhere in recent years, for instance:

ALF: Uncut episodes shown on Odyssey in 1999-2000, 3 uncut episodes released on Canadian DVD.
The Facts of Life: "Overachieving" season 1 episode is cut on DVD but uncut on Columbia House tapes
Sanford and Son: "A Matter of Silence" season 6 episode is cut on DVD but uncut on Columbia House tapes
Soap: Several cut DVD episodes uncut on Columbia House tapes

In not one of these cases is an instance of elements not existing. Yet they still put out the cut versions. Why?


It's my fault for not being born until 1983.
It's my fault for my family not having a VCR until December 1984.
It's my fault for not spending hundreds of dollars a month on blank videos while I was in preschool and my dad was still doing his residency.
It's my fault for not realizing the extent of the problem until The Simpsons were first syndicated.

/sarcasm off

 

[Marty M]

The music chosen for a particular scene was chosen for a specific reason. I want the music to be the same as it was in the original broadcast, no matter how powerful a new score could make it. A new score makes it a different show.

I know that I have to choose to either abide by those principles or breakdown and purchase the altered show, because I know that is the only way I will be able to purchase it. I wish I had the will power to stick to George's principles. If more of us did, then studios might think twice about issuing a TV series with altered music.

 

[Michael Alden]

No, not your fault, just your misfortune. Just as it is my good fortune that I got my first VCR in January 1980. That I began taping TV shows that I enjoyed and cared about. That I made contacts with people who started taping in 1978 and recorded most everything that aired in prime time. That I had foresight that others didn't. And what about those folks who weren't born just a few years ago? Well, I guess it's their misfortune as well.

 

[MarkHastings]

Those are poor comparisons.

That's like me buying a soda and being ok with it because it was half full...then you saying "Why are you fine with paying for a full soda and getting half a soda? Would you buy a car and be fine if you only got half a car?"

Huh? What the hell does that mean? Why would you compare a soda and a car????


In other words, why should someone, who is fine with syndicated DVD's, also be fine with someone who only does 95% of their kitchen work? Why are those 2 the same things???

 

[george kaplan]

You've got it backwards. The question is, "why the hell would someone who ISN'T fine with getting only 95% of their kitchen work done, be OK with buying dvds that only show 95% of the show?

Is getting ripped off on a car as bad as getting ripped off on a house? No. Does that mean you should be OK with getting ripped off on your car? And would you actually fork out money for a car that you knew was incomplete?

 

[MarkHastings]

But that's another bad.

Of course I'd be pissed if my house or car wasn't complete - in fact, if not resolved, I'd get my lawyer involved. But what if I ordered a cheeseburger from McDonald's (from the drive through) and when I got home, realized they only gave me a hamburger...would I get a lawyer involved?

See, that's why the previous examples are poor. You can't compare an incomplete car with an incomplete episode on a DVD. It's not the same thing.

You may equate them as the same, but most people don't.


While I don't like syndicated episodes, the thing here is, syndicated episodes are already on TV, so they are already established products.

If you want to use the car example, it's almost like getting a 4 cylinder car when you know they also make 6 cylinders. It's 'less' of a car, yet people buy them all the time.

And as far as the "But what if you paid for a 6 and got a 4?" argument, I don't think that's fair either because the price of a syndicated DVD set is the price you pay. You aren't paying for non-syndicated episodes.

If the DVD set was labeled as non-syndicated episodes, then you have a point about the price, but not many sets are falsely advertised. THey may try to trick you (i.e. "The Complete..."), but isn't that what advertising is all about They do it all the time. Look at how many products claim to be the best.

 

[MatthewA]

So therefore everyone else should have to go without uncut versions of their favorite TV shows?

 

[george kaplan]

It's not the same thing in 'intensity', but, yes, it's basically the same thing. It's wrong, and I'd no more knowingly pay for a partial dvd episode, than a partial car. That's the point. You're basically saying that ripping you off by selling you something incomplete is really bad for things above a certain threshold, and no big deal whatsoever for things below the threshold.

The bottom line is, that if you applied a consistent rule about getting ripped off (don't tell me you'd keep going back to the McDonald's that never put cheese on your cheeseburger), you'd have cognitive dissonance about buying edited dvds, and so you reduce that cognitive dissonance by trying to minimize the harm that's being done. I'm not willing to do that, and hence, I don't buy those edited dvds. You are certainly within your right to buy them, and you may convince yourself that it's no great loss, but you'll never convince me of that.

 

[MarkHastings]

But where does it say that the DVD's are non-syndication?

"Complete Series" means all episodes. A Complete Series of non-Syndication shows, or a Complete Series of Syndicated shows. There's nothing 'incomplete' about either one.

You say it's not complete because you expect non-syndication. While that's not an unreasonable expectation, it's not the rule since syndicated episodes are not incomplete. They are as they run in syndication

Syndication is what these 'cut' shows are in the form of. They are complete syndicated shows. Only when compared to original broadcast, are they not complete, but again, if the DVD box does not say "Original Broadcast" or "non-Syndicated" then you can't consider them incomplete.

 

[Steve Phillips]

That is a very bizarre way of thinking. Plain and simple, shows butchered for reruns are NOT complete.

They should advertise them as "the complete edited versions, now shorter to save you time!"

 

[Jason_V]

Again, it is implied that "Complete" means, well, the understood definition of "complete". That definition being everything originally included or "whole". These shows, by the very definition of being a syndicated cut is NOT complete. The syndicated version is NOT complete since it is NOT what was originally broadcast or intended to be seen.

 

[george kaplan]

The Complete Set of Page 4 from All Shakespeare Plays would indeed be a complete set of some incomplete things, but to call it The Complete Shakespeare would be a joke.

 

[David:S]

I don't know why people think the word "complete" should imply unedited episodes, intuitively I'd NEVER assume that is what they mean when they put on the set. Before I even picked up my very first "complete" season set or even began reading much about them, my idea of complete was that every episode from the season was there, and that the definition of "complete" has nothing to do with whether they are edited or uncut.

The way I see it, the word complete refers to the number of episodes, as in every episode from the particular season... and I think that is why the terminology is used anyway. I have a feeling that some of these people putting together these DVD sets have no clue there is a difference between syndicated and original length episodes, and sadly, I don't think most even care.

But if anybody wants to sue Sony (and honestly, as much as I hate edited episodes, I think some people are fighting harder than it'll ever be worth), I did see a commercial for Sony DVDs on TV Land a few months ago that mentioned that Sanford & Son was available on DVD, with the entire series in the original uncut format. Now that is obviously a lie.

I should also add to this... think about it this way, if you are a consumer that goes into a store and you know nothing about the TV on DVD model or that there is a difference between syndicated and uncut versions (believe me, there are more people out there that don't know about the difference than this website and many others would lead you to believe), would you rather buy a set that says "Season 1" or "The Complete First Season"? "The Complete First Season" conveys that all of the episodes are there, while "Season 1" may cause some of these consumers to believe that the set is just a few episodes from the first season, like just the best episodes of season 1, kind of like the horrible TV on VHS model that was used in the 90s (which, I'm proud to say, I never took part in) where you'd get just a couple of episodes that somebody that has probably never even heard of the show thinks are the best ones. I guess they could say "Every episode from Season 1" but that would be too wordy for the packaging.

 

[Jason_V]

So you wouldn't be at all upset if, say, you bought a movie and it was the television cut? Or the airline cut?

How about if you bought a CD and it turned out to have the radio versions of songs instead of the original intended song?

Complete means "nothing needs to be added to it." If I'm watching an episode of "TNG" on disc, it is complete because there is nothing contained in the original broadcast that is not included on the disc. However, if I throw in any number of syndication cut discs, I am not getting what was originally broadcast. I am missing out on the edited portions of the program.

But David, that's the thing...not all the episodes are there. By and large, they are. But not all the parts of the episodes are. Would it be okay if opening titles were left off? Closing credits?

 

[David:S]

I don't think you are getting what I am saying at all, this one or two edited episodes that many companies are doing makes no sense and it shouldn't be like that. But the word complete just doesn't (and I don't see why anybody would believe it does, I'm starting to think people believe it because it is a point that seems to be hammered down on this website over and over again) mean every single thing is totally unedited. What you have is a complete set of episodes... the fact that the episodes aren't all original broadcast versions is a different story.

If I bought a movie and it was a television edited version, I wouldn't be happy with that at all, and if I bought a CD that contained radio edits, I wouldn't be happy either. And you know what? I'm not going to be happy if I buy a tv show set that contains syndicated episodes either (I feel like you are portraying as somebody that feels it is perfectly okay to include edited episodes when I'm not--I'm just trying to explain how the definition of complete should be interpreted).

I'm not trying to debate whether or not tv show sets should be edited or unedited, the obvious answer is that they SHOULD be unedited and I bet everybody here (even the person that started this thread) agrees with that completely. It is just that complete means all of the episodes. Think about this, do movies on DVD have a header that say "The Complete Movie" to let you know it is unedited? Do CDs have a header that say "The Complete Album" on them to let you know it is the original versions? The TV shows have never been packaged in the way they are before, and have always been seen as individual episodes, and the header complete is to let you know they are packaging all of the episodes from an entire season together.

And as a side note, there are at least two sets out there that I am aware of that ARE missing the opening credits. And they even use the word "complete." It is absolutely shameful that somebody would do that to a DVD set, but even in that case, every episode from the seasons of those two shows are included (in syndicated form too...) and I can see why they say "complete."

 

[Michael Alden]

No, perhaps those people who find this important as some of us do should take a pro-active approach and not sit on their asses waiting for the studios to give them perfect quality, uncut shows with no music replacements. As with everything else in life, the more effort one puts in, the better the results. Yeah, if someone is 12 years old, then they haven't been in a position to do anything but people in their 30s, 40s and 50s, well, what's their excuse? They either didn't care or didn't think to do it or couldn't be bothered.

Should they go without it, no I'm not in favor of studios releasing cut shows but I can't do anything about that. What I can do something about (and I did) is not to put myself at the mercy of the studios or anybody else.