"100 Greatest DVDs" -- August 2002 Home Theater Magazine (1 Viewer)

[Mark Zimmer]

Yikes, I own 82 of these, plus the original 5th element and the non-Vista 6th Sense.....and of the top 24. Somebody stop me!

 

[William Ward]

I have 42 out of the 100 listed, alhtough I have some James Bonds, I don't have all of them.

I do have the entire top 15.

 

[William Ward]

And where was The Rock Criterion!!....best darned video transfer I've ever seen on DVD.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Nice list, but why is the MPI Beatles DVD set on there?

Help! is a very good DVD, but it's really the only plus of the entire set. The other 3 DVD's are awful or just kind of not worth replay. Add to the fact that Help! is the only disc with some real extras (MMT has two newsreels only) and a restored print...

Also...why the heck isn't The Art of Buster Keaton on the list? With 11 discs with over 30 films spread across them...plus tons of supplements, it's missed! I think that Dracula (1931) could have been replaced with the complete Universal Classic Monsters Collection. The other 7 discs are just as good, although Dracula has the edge by including 2 versions of the film, with the english version having both the original sound and the Phillip Glass scored version.

 

[RichardMA]

Just one more reason audio/video magazines are dying
off, losing all their advertisers. Lame "Best of" lists
that are completely subjective. They should stick to
reviewing equipment, even though they end up months
behind the 'net doing that anyway.

 

[Kami]

I am surprised that Matrix is #8. The video suffers in some areas and while the audio is good, I feel that it could be done better. Still a must-own DVD, but #8??

 

[Dan Lindley]

Richard,

I'm not so sure that such mag (and other, though you didn't say other, I'm aware) lists are useless/lame. Most of my purchases are either old faves or blind. And some, perhaps many, of my blinds are from looking at lists from IMDB, Amazon, the mags, the net, and triangulating these with reviews from Ebert, the net, books, Amazon, etc.

Bottom line: lists sometimes help me uncover things I would not have considered.

Most lists are subject to (and worthy of) some criticism. But that is even part of the fun of finding out what you value yourself.

Just my 1 cents worth.

Dan

 

[Jack Briggs]

And Richard, the magazines are not dying off. More, in fact, are appearing on the stands, as born out by two of the newer magazines participating in HTF's Periodicals section.

At the end of the year, it is always fun to read and listen to critics pick their "ten best" lists.

Similarly, I enjoy reading the A/V magazines' picks when it comes to annual equipment roundups and "best DVD" lists. Home Theater's is an annual feature of the magazine.

Another thing I've noticed: With each of our posts we're proving my point about no one being satisfied completely by anybody else's list.

 

[Jim Peavy]

"70. Dracula [1931] (Universal)"

Oh jeez, are they kidding? Terrible print Universal used for this. I sure hope this ain't as good as the Lugosi Dracula can look. The Spanish version looked pretty good, but both pale in comparison to Universal's '31 FRANKENSTEIN disc.

Oh well, at least they didn't have BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN on there...

 

[Patrick McCart]

Oh jeez, are they kidding? Terrible print Universal used for this. I sure hope this ain't as good as the Lugosi Dracula can look. The Spanish version looked pretty good, but both pale in comparison to Universal's '31 FRANKENSTEIN disc.

While it wouldn't have hurt for Universal to do a full digital restoration on Dracula, it looks pretty decent for a 71-year-old film.

Universal didn't quite take care of their older movies until the last 2 decades.