UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Casablanca -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Indy Guy]

I agree with the fragility problem of steelbooks. I was (and am) a fan of beautifully prepared digibooks. They seemed to die because of cost and lower disc sales, but when Target went all out with a book version that housed the discs properly in end covers similar to regular discs (not slide-in sleeves) and the books contained great pictures and information, they were my favorite ways to buy both classics and blockbusters. Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz, West Side Story and Disney animated films come to mind. Warner released it's classics this way also...Meet Me in St Louis, How the West Was Won and Camelot were all given the deluxe Warner treatment, as well as the DC films.
When Target cheapened the approach, first with booklets attached to standard packages and later with just little photo cards, they lost their advantage and I lost my interest. It had become a premium priced variant that offered essentially nothing.
For those willing to Google translate foreign languages, digibooks are still alive and well in Europe.

 

[Robert Harris]

For the record, SteelBooks added about $4 to production costs last time I checked. Not an insignificant amount.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Then maybe you cared more about LD covers/boxes perhaps... and yeah, I would/do too.

No, I never really cared about the covers for any home video releases.

I view movie posters and music album covers as unique art forms, whereas home video covers tend to be utilitarian in nature.

They usually either just copy posters or they're simple and mediocre - like all the "big head" covers we get.

Of course, there are exceptions and compelling, unique home video covers.

But they're in the minority.

 

[DavidJ]

I'm glad to read the updated review. I love this film and will now be adding the 4K disc to my collection.

 

[sbjork]

No, I never really cared about the covers for any home video releases.

I view movie posters and music album covers as unique art forms, whereas home video covers tend to be utilitarian in nature.

They usually either just copy posters or they're simple and mediocre - like all the "big head" covers we get.

Of course, there are exceptions and compelling, unique home video covers.

But they're in the minority.

Hopefully not to step on any toes, but not only have I never understood the obsession with cover art on DVD/Blu-ray/UHD releases, but it's actively annoying me at this point. It seems like any time we post reviews on social media, it's guaran-damn-teed that there's going to be people going off about the artwork. I even tried to do a preemptive strike about that in one recent review, but that just proved that people don't even bother to read what they are commenting on. I don't know if it's just hyperbole, but many of them also say that they're going to pass on a release just because of the cover art. If that's true, then why the hell would they ever buy a disc in the first place? If the cover art is more important than the movie on the disc, that's some seriously warped priorities.

Besides, as I keep pointing out (to deaf ears), media shelves are the great equalizer. Unless you've only got a dozen discs in your collection, they're all going to be spine-out on your shelf. But I never hear anyone complaining about the font artwork on the spine, even though that's all that you see once they're shelved.

You can argue that the art is more important on large format media like laserdiscs and LPs, but even in those cases, the bulk of my collection was always spine out. I never found myself pulling out a title just to marvel at the artwork, any more than I do now with current digital physical media.

I bought the UHD for Casablanca based solely on the the content on the disc, especially the movie itself. Sometimes, it feels like I'm an outlier for doing so.

/rant off. Sorry.

 

[TravisR]

Hopefully not to step on any toes, but not only have I never understood the obsession with cover art on DVD/Blu-ray/UHD releases, but it's actively annoying me at this point. It seems like any time we post reviews on social media, it's guaran-damn-teed that there's going to be people going off about it. I even tried to do a preemptive strike about that in one recent review, but that just proved that people don't even bother to read what they are commenting on. I don't know if it's just hyperbole, but many of them also say that they're going to pass on a release just because of the cover art. If that's true, then why the hell would they ever buy a disc in the first place? If the cover art is more important than the movie on the disc, that's some seriously warped priorities.

Besides, as I keep pointing out (to deaf ears), media shelves are the great equalizer. Unless you've only got a dozen discs in your collection, they're all going to be spine-out on your shelf. But I never hear anyone complaining about the font artwork on the spine, even though that's all that you see once they're shelved.

You can argue that the art is more important on large format media like laserdiscs and LPs, but even in those cases, the bulk of my collection was always spine out. I never found myself pulling out a title just to marvel at the artwork, any more than I do now with current digital physical media.

I bought the UHD for Casablanca based solely on the the content on the disc, especially the movie itself. Sometimes, it feels like I'm an outlier for doing so.

/rant off. Sorry.

I get that someone wants a nice looking cover but I'm going to see if for a few seconds when I'm opening the case to get the disc out so cover art has never been a determining factor if I buy or don't buy a disc.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I bought the UHD for Casablanca based solely on the the content on the disc, especially the movie itself. Sometimes, it feels like I'm an outlier for doing so.

/rant off. Sorry.

You’re not an outlier because I firmly believe that there is a silent majority of people that feel the same way and just shrug their collective shoulders at cover art complaints.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Heh... no idea who does -- don't really recall anyone -- but I would never care enough about the cover artwork to completely pass on a release merely because of that. I certainly might wait some bit to see if different packaging might be available, particularly if the initial release is some exclusive, premium priced package I don't really want to pay extra (and there's good likelihood of an eventual standard release), but how long I wait isn't usually any different from how long I might wait for pricing to reach my comfort level for a particular standard release anyway...

It's essentially the equiv of a fairly minor bonus feature for which I wouldn't want to pay extra. Sure, I don't mind paying a little extra on very rare occasion over such, especially if a standard/alternate release doesn't seem likely, but definitely not in general.

_Man_

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Hopefully not to step on any toes, but not only have I never understood the obsession with cover art on DVD/Blu-ray/UHD releases, but it's actively annoying me at this point. It seems like any time we post reviews on social media, it's guaran-damn-teed that there's going to be people going off about the artwork. I even tried to do a preemptive strike about that in one recent review, but that just proved that people don't even bother to read what they are commenting on. I don't know if it's just hyperbole, but many of them also say that they're going to pass on a release just because of the cover art. If that's true, then why the hell would they ever buy a disc in the first place? If the cover art is more important than the movie on the disc, that's some seriously warped priorities.

Besides, as I keep pointing out (to deaf ears), media shelves are the great equalizer. Unless you've only got a dozen discs in your collection, they're all going to be spine-out on your shelf. But I never hear anyone complaining about the font artwork on the spine, even though that's all that you see once they're shelved.

You can argue that the art is more important on large format media like laserdiscs and LPs, but even in those cases, the bulk of my collection was always spine out. I never found myself pulling out a title just to marvel at the artwork, any more than I do now with current digital physical media.

I bought the UHD for Casablanca based solely on the the content on the disc, especially the movie itself. Sometimes, it feels like I'm an outlier for doing so.

/rant off. Sorry.

Nah, I'm with you. Good cover art is nice but the quality of the disc itself is the only thing that really matters to me.

 

[dpippel]

Nah, I'm with you. Good cover art is nice but the quality of the disc itself is the only thing that really matters to me.

But getting BOTH? Well, that’s kinda nice. And good for you folks who don’t give a rat’s ass about the cover art. I don’t think anyone here who DOES care is saying that it’s as important or more important than the quality of the audio/video presentation. That is, of course, paramount (no pun intended).

 

[Colin Jacobson]

But getting BOTH? Well, that’s kinda nice. And good for you folks who don’t give a rat’s ass about the cover art. I don’t think anyone here who DOES care is saying that it’s as important or more important than the quality of the audio/video presentation. That is, of course, paramount (no pun intended).

Probably, but some people get so bent out of shape about ugly covers that it feels like they care more about them than the disc content.

Content quality is more important in many art forms, of course. Movies themselves > good posters, music albums > cover art, well-made DVDs/BDs/4Ks > cover art.

But like I opined earlier, I see movie posters and music album covers as art forms in a way that I don't with video disc covers, mainly because the latter are often not original - they just repurpose existing art - or they're basic/dull, like the "big head covers" that often become the case.

Video covers never evolved into a selling point ala music album covers - beyond "here's a big picture of the actors to entice you".

 

[Robert Crawford]

But getting BOTH? Well, that’s kinda nice. And good for you folks who don’t give a rat’s ass about the cover art. I don’t think anyone here who DOES care is saying that it’s as important or more important than the quality of the audio/video presentation. That is, of course, paramount (no pun intended).

I'm not so sure as I vaguely remember somebody on the forum stating they're not buying a certain release because of the cover art.

 

[Tino]

I'm not so sure as I vaguely remember somebody on the forum stating they're not buying a certain release because of the cover art.

That member should then be BANNED!!

 

[sbjork]

I'm not so sure as I vaguely remember somebody on the forum stating they're not buying a certain release because of the cover art.

Can't vouch for here, but we definitely get those comments on our reviews. Again, maybe it's a lot of hyperbole, but at least some of them must actually mean it. And that's baffling.

I mean, I've been collecting books for a longer than movies have even existed on physical media, and not one time have I ever heard anyone say that they weren't going to buy a book because of the artwork on the dust jacket.

 

[Sam Favate]

As someone who does care about the cover art (but not enough to not buy a title if I don't like it), maybe I can shed some light on this.

Since the days of DVD, I have enjoyed movie discs that are comprehensive. Number 1: I want to see the movie in as pristine a transfer as possible, but I also want to see extras that enhance the film, like making of- documentaries, deleted scenes, interviews with the film makers and cast, commentary from the director, actors and/or critics (such as Roger Ebert, in this case), and very importantly, trailers. I hate it when trailers are absent.

I think the disc should be like a history lesson of this particular film. To that end, proper artwork is important. Ideally, it should include the film's original theatrical poster (or at least, in the case of Casablanca, the beautiful 50th anniversary artwork that was prepared for its re-release on VHS).

What's more, in the cases of historically significant films like Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wind, Lawrence of Arabia and more, the inclusion of additional materials adds to the history lesson: press books, lobby cards, replicas of the theatrical program sold at the time. It is for that reason I will not part with my DVDs of Lawrence, Kwai, Oz and so forth, even though I have had them on blu-ray and now, in most cases, 4k. (I kept the Lawrence/Kwai DVDs, but not the blu-rays, when I got the 4k steelbooks.) For films of that stature, I want a set worthy of the masterpiece inside. In most cases, I haven't seen collections like that since the heydays of DVD. I think the new Casablanca 4k set with the extra materials fits the bill.

Yes, for the vast majority of the 1000s of films in my collection, a slim case will do (although again, I prefer to see the original artwork), especially since I want them to take as little space as possible on the shelves. But for a film like Casablanca (my personal favorite film of all time), I'd build a new friggin' shelf.

 

[Dave H]

I'm not so sure as I vaguely remember somebody on the forum stating they're not buying a certain release because of the cover art.

Agreed.

I recall a few people on other sites over the years claim they will not buy a certain movie because of the cover art or not having a slip, but I always thought they were BS'ing or just throwing a temper tantrum while purchasing the movie on day one..

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Agreed.

I recall a few people on other sites over the years claim they will not buy a certain movie because of the cover art or not having a slip, but I always thought they were BS'ing or just throwing a temper tantrum while purchasing the movie on day one..

You should see the kerfuffle over the Romeo and Juliet [1968] cover art on that thread, even though it's based on foreign poster art.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

You should see the kerfuffle over the Romeo and Juliet [1968] cover art on that thread, even though it's based on foreign poster art.

But near as I can tell, nobody on that thread actually indicated they're not buying just because of the cover art though...

_Man_

 

[roxy1927]

God forgive me but I stayed away from Lawrence in 4k because for such a magnificent film and considering all the great art work it has had through the years it has a real dog of a cover. We're talking Best in Show. Even worse than Summertime which was very bad indeed. Somebody's high school project without a doubt. And I do compare it to album covers which I love. How long do I look at them? Not long but they still give me a lot of pleasure. An anticipation of the treasure inside. But then I did see Lawrence many times when the restoration was shown at the Ziegfeld and never since so I'm not exactly looking forward to seeing it on a home screen no matter how large. I have the 4k 2001 which I saw for the last time at the Broadway Rivoli so I don't know if I'll ever crack that open.

Now you may stone me like Silvana Mangano in Barabbas.

 

[dpippel]

I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly here. You didn't get the 4K Lawrence release because of the cover art, but you DID buy 4K 2001 and may never watch it??? Huh????