DVD's? I Don't Rent. I Own. -- NY Times article (1 Viewer)

[Chet_F]

Ted, I completely agree.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Curious, but one thing that hasn't come up yet is the condition most rental discs are in. A friend of mine showed me a rental disc years ago that even had a cracked protective layer. People don't take care of the things they rent, just what they own.

 

[Kain_C]

This is an interesting issue and I don't want to sound antagonistic or mean, but I would like to give in my say.

I only own around 200 DVDs. My job pays ok, but there is just not alot I want to really own. In fact, I get a discount because I work for the most popular DVD reseller in the country. I have in fact sold alot of my older films that I bought when I had "the syndrome" that I am sure many of you are familiar with. Basically, it was when the technology just came out and there wasn't alot of movies to choose from, so I bought crap I shouldn't have. I do consider myself a little more knowledgeable about film than most people and I do consider my taste more elite than most people. I do not mean conceit, but that field just happens to be an area of EXTREME interest, so I take pride in my passion and knowledge. Most films that come out I do not like because my discretion is so powerful.

I do rent. I cannot ever fathom buying a movie on DVD without seeing it or a film I may only see once. That, to me, is poor financial management. Now, I have made blind purchases, but only on classic that I know I would probably like. This has a success rate of about 95%. I can spend $4 or around on a rental as opposed to around $15 for a movie I may not like or watch again. I am pretty young, but I have really changed my ways of spending to more conservative. This may sound weird, but I cannot respect someone who goes and just buys all of these movies. It is none of my business what they spend their money on and how often, but I can't help it. I don't like people who have thousands of DVDs just to have an "impressive" library. Maybe I am jealous, LOL. But probably not. I am of course very grateful that DVD is a huge success and I am proud of my early commitment and optimism towards DVD and it's future, but I am in it for the FILM. It's about the QUALITY of film in my library, not the QUANTITY of film in my library. Now I know there are people who have thousands of movies they truly love and plan on watching again, and I have no problem with them.

As far as my collection, like I said, I have about 200 titles, plus miniseries (Band of Brothers) and complete TV series seasons (Sopranos). I have seen every title I own at least twice, most films three times. I am probably on my fourth or so viewing of Band of Brothers, and that is a ten plus hour series.

Point is, I buy only what I feel is a great film and what I plan on watching over and over. I do NOT own Pearl Harbor. I know it's a popular movie and alot of people own it, but I think it's one of the most intolerable, ugly, terribly-made, insulting, degrading, pieces of celluloid EVER. I despise that film and it's makers with a passion for the way they brutally raped the spirit of what happened back on 1941. And I can't help but to feel off put by someone who owns it or likes it. I think some people buy it just because it's a popular film, not because it's a good film.

Well, I will stop rambling. I didn't mean to turn this into a I-hate-Pearl-Harbor thing, but it just happened. But that film demonstrates how I feel about the whole purchasing issue issue pretty well so that's why I used it as an example.

 

[DeeF]

I still think rental DVDs are a better bet, economically. And you don't have to store them on premises (which has become a big headache for me, LOL).

But I do think we are buying DVDs to have a library, just like we bought books to have a library. I have read every book in my house, at least once. I may never read some of them again, but I like to have them.

I have all the Disneys, and plenty of children come over to watch them, every weekend. I have many of the Criterions, the only movies I buy blind, and I'm working my way through them with pleasure and astonishment.

And I have many movies that I watch over and over again, and I've saved a lot of money for myself and others by buying them -- they are always on hand.

One problem I found with video parties -- a group has a hard time deciding what movie to rent. But when people come to my house, I choose a movie, and everybody watches it.

I really have no regrets on my purchase decisions, though I suppose it did cost me a little more in the end. Of course, I haven't been to the movies for a year or more (not really true -- I did go to The Return of the King, the only movie I saw last year in the theater).

So, I've saved on movie tickets, popcorn, and such, and also on rentals. And I don't have a car, so I don't suppose my home theater costs me more than the average person spends on a car, maintenance, etc.

 

[Frank@N]

It would take alot of dedication and resources to amass and organize that much software.

Sounds like films might be important to such a person...

Before you write off someone's collection, you should be required to stand and listen while the owner speaks about each film and why it's important to them.

Rather than be repulsed by such a library, I'd be fascinated to see and hear about the many titles that I've never been exposed to. I might even ask to borrow a thing or two.

 

[Frank@N]

I'm happy with 95% of my BPs and always search/wait for the best deal.

When I buy a used title for $5-$10, I'm taking my best shot at cost vs. return on something that I'm relative sure to be happy with.

Forcing myself to see a film in the theater or rent it first would blow my margin and end up costing me more.

Others consume and move on, while I quietly build a collection that I'm be enjoying for years to come.

No, I didn't buy Pearl Harbor either...not even for $7.

 

[george kaplan]

Well, Frank, you're better than me. I don't make blind purchases, but rent a lot of movies where I'm pretty confident, based on the sorts of criteria you reference, that I'll either like the film or not. If I was the type to make blind purchases, I'd do so based on those predictions. But I'm wrong a lot. Occasionally I see a film I didn't think I'd like enough to purchase and end up doing so. Much more often I see a film that I have every reason to believe I'll like, and end up not wanting to buy it.

Just one example: The Front Page. My second favorite director of all time, one of my favorite acting teams, my favorite genre, positive reviews, but I just didn't like it.

If you only misfire 95% of the time on blind purchases, then I can see why you do it, but I'd be lucky not to be unhappy 95% of the time.

 

[Frank@N]

Well, I can give you three recent examples that gave me pause..but I proceeded anyway.

All three titles were purchased used for $7.50 each (single-owner likely and in good condition):

Hollywood Homicide: Had my doubts about this one, even with Two Thumps Up. Ended up enjoying it, well-rounded quirky action flick.

Kate & Leopold: Had my doubts about this one again, even with Two Thumps Up. Thought idea was too 'out there', got it mostly for the Wife. Watched it tonight with her and we both liked it.

Angel Eyes: A little concerned here again, despite Two Thumbs Up. Bought most on strength of Jim Caviezel, this guy's on a roll lately. Some think he's too low-key, but I liked him in 'Count of MC' (another good BP). Not watched this one yet.

I have been burned on rare occasion (American Sweethearts), but if you don't overspend then you can trade it back for $3-4 and call the difference a rental.

 

[george kaplan]

I ended up renting Kate & Leopold, and was surprised by how much I liked it, and ended up buying it. I'm not sure I would have blind purchased this, though.

 

[CraigF]

Funny, I have the exact opposite process of many: I only go to a theater to see a film if I think I *don't* want to own it on DVD. Maybe weird, but that's the way it is. Like others said, but turning it around slightly, I have a pretty good sense of what I *won't* like. Sure I'm sometimes wrong, and I've sure learnt not to trust trailers, nor commercial/professional reviewers until I get a sense of where they're coming from.

Owning DVD's is just like owning a house or car, as opposed to renting or leasing, it may be hard to financially justify depending on your circumstances. But owning means you at least have something tangible to show for it, and you have a certain flexibility. I watch movies the same way I listen to music: what I last watched/heard greatly affects what I'll watch/listen to next, there is some associative process that goes on in my head, and sometimes I just *have* to see something. It's a very personal thing.

I consider a DVD as entertainment, and on a $$/hour basis, if you want to be crude, it is really damn cheap compared to most forms, and I really do get great enjoyment from watching a movie in my own silly way.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Seems so.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

My situation is kind of special but it perhaps is relevant to this thread. I enjoy anime, and I made a deliberate choice to buy into LaserDisc when it became obsolete; as a result, in less than four years I have amassed what is probably one of the larger collections at least in North Texas of this material. Most of the discs I own, I own because I want to watch them repeatedly; I rent before I buy, previously on VHS but probably on DVD when I begin buying again [my activity goes in surges]; I have specific criteria for blind buying, e.g. if a title is inexpensive and being offered simultaneously with one I know I want, or if I come across it in a local shop; I ordinarily read up on a title before making a buying blind; I have about a 75% satisfaction rate with blind purchases; I have both lent and borrowed; I have a good grasp of what items I do not want, or simply have no interest in, so that there are probably about 100 of the fewer than 300 US-market anime LDs which I will never own no matter what the circumstances; I spend a great deal of consideration before spending money; and I will buy an import if there is no domestic edition of something I really want to have, and a different [including import] edition of something I already own if I expect to gain significant viewing pleasure from doing so. For me, pleasure is less in the having than the doing, in this case watching and listening, and the criteria I have chosen are intended to maximize pleasure and minimize pain, as the Epicureans would have it. I am definitely not a movie glutton or a completist, and I don't care if my collection is impressive. Just as my library of hundreds of books is there to be read, my library of scores of discs is there to be watched.

 

[george kaplan]

It's funny, but I keep my collection in my den where nobody sees it but me. So, it certainly doesn't impress anybody else. But everytime I look at it, I'm impressed. Not by the number of titles, but just by all the great movies I own that I never thought I would a few years ago. Just thinking about the next time I'll watch those movies, gives me a warm glow inside.

 

[Ron Etaylor]

I have less than 100 DVDs. My tastes are pretty specialized: All the Disney and Beatles titles I can get my hands on, then a few must-haves like Star Wars, LOTR, and a few concert videos. I find that I would rather watch something from my library than rent. The more I see my movies, the more I enjoy them. It's kinda like buying CDs.
Most people listen to their favorite music discs dozens or hundreds of times. For me, it works the same way with movies.

 

[Kain_C]

I do NOT understand! How can renting or going to the theater cost MORE than buying the film on DVD?? I have heard people say that and I never understand that! A ticket here costs $7.50. I know it is more in other places but how much more can it be? Maybe a couple more dollars? A DVD rental here is about $4.00. Now I don't want to hear excuses like taking someone else, buying popcorn, or using up gas, cuz you do use gas going to the store to buy the DVD.

So how is renting a DVD cost more than buying it? And if that is the case, where are you finding these $3 DVDs to be purchased?

Also, I love my library. It's impressive to ME. I didn't say it was wrong to have an 'impressive' library, I just don't like it when people buy everything under the sun JUST TO HAVE a huge library. That is what I meant.

 

[george kaplan]

Well it would certainly cost more to rent a dvd and then buy it than it does to just buy it outright.

So if every one you buy blindly turns out to be a keeper, then it's a no-brainer not to rent.

The financial advantage to renting comes about when you rent the film and then decide NOT to buy it.

As far as buying being cheaper than renting, that's pretty hard to fathom unless you're buying them very cheap (which probably means used and long after they've been released), or renting very expensively.

As to it being cheaper to buy than go to the theater, sure I can understand that, especially if more than one person goes since you buy tickets per person. But, buying cheaper than renting doesn't add up.

 

[MarkHastings]

I think you are trying to look at it too litterally. It's not that a $15 DVD is CHEAPER than a $4 rental or $7.50 movie ticket, it has more to do with the flexibility with the $15 DVD.

A $7.50 movie ticket allows you one chance to see a movie. There's no chance of rewinding a scene, putting on subtitles, or pausing it to go to the bathroom.

A $4 DVD rental has a small time frame in which you are to watch it. Some of us don't like knowing that we have to watch every aspect (i.e. commentary, extras, etc.) in the short alloted time span. Also there's the chance that you may rent the movie and not see the extras, then your choice is to either rent it again, pay a late fee, or buy it. This seems less cost effective than buying it to begin with.

So when we say a rental or movie ticket costs MORE, it's more in comparison to what you're getting (i.e. cost effective). There is more value to owning the DVD than renting it (IMO). This may not be true for everyone, but it is for some.

 

[MarkHastings]

And to address the "Blind Purchases"...

I can't speak for everyone, but I think a lot will agree that it doesn't bother me too much if a buy a blind DVD and don't like it because I can usually appreciate any movie (no matter how bad it is).

Usually I will only buy Blind DVD's when there are extras or commentary. The reason being is, I find that a LOT of movies that I don't like are redeemed when I watch (or listen) to the extras. The extras will usually explain something I may have missed when I watched the movie or it may have just showed me all of the hard work that went into the production. The extras are a good insight into the heart and soul of the movie.

Not to get too philosophical, but just watching a "bad" movie is like seeing it on the outside. It's the soul of the movie that you have to find to appreciate it even if you didn't like it. I buy lots of blind buys and I think I've appreciated every one (except for a few) which makes it easier for me to justify the $15-$20 purchase price.

Also, the movie doesn't even have to be bad, it could be a good movie that I know I won't like. Example, Citizen Kane...I never saw this movie pre-DVD, but I bought it because of all the talk I heard about it. It was true that I didn't particularly care for the film, but I appreciated the mark it made on the movie making industry, which made it all the more enjoyable to watch rather than just sitting there thinking "I don't like this".

So again, it's not so much whether I'm going to like it or not, it's a matter of can I appreciate it? That's what makes it easier for me to make a blind purchase.

 

[Frank@N]

This morning I watched Confidence (2003, purchased used for $7.50) and loved it.

Last night, me and the wife watched a $10 copy of Chicago. Very good movie.

In the case of Chicago, I've had the disc for months but never got around to watching it.

As I mentioned in my previous post: I have a good sense of what I like in movies and buy them cheaply (no extra expenses for show tickets or rentals).

Believe and understand.

 

[RaymondSteiner]

Neither in Latin America and other parts of the world, BUT this is a great point because people in europe now have access to equipment with HDTV capabilities but there is no content.

I'm pretty sure with Blu-Ray /HD-DVD , we will see a major import trend like the one with Zone 1 DVD's