Nine to Five 25th Anniversary Edition DVD that's coming an improvement? (1 Viewer)

[MattHR]

Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[Jamie Cole]

I enjoyed the commentary a great deal for one reason: Dolly. She's just about as likeable as any celebrity I can think of, and she keeps it real. In fact, there are times when she's the only one saying anything, as if Jane and Lily lose interest towards the end of the film. It's worth a listen, anyway, but you can't expect too much. How many of you remember all the details of something you did 25 years ago?

I agree with Travis that the DVD is much better than the original, and probably as good as this movie is ever going to look thanks to the way it was shot on film. Colin's review of the movie itself is also a little negative; maybe that colored his view of the DVD itself.

This is one of my favorite movies, and I'm glad to have a nice DVD of it. It has aged surprisingly well when you take into account the groundbreaking subject matter, and the way it became something of a rallying cry for the working woman. Add to that the fact that the script is funny and inventive and every performance in the film is dead-on (especially, surprisingly, the non-actor Parton's), and you have a classic.

 

[Travis Brashear]

Jamie, glad to see you agree the new disc is a substantial improvement. I was recalling another instance where the quality upgrade is clear early in the film, when Jane Fonda first steps off the escalator and almost gets crushed by the closing doors. On the new disc, her head is haloed by a pleasing yet thankfully marginal soft-focus haze but on the old disc the haze has bloomed out to such a degree as to make her head look like it's surrounded by a swarm of gnats. Trust me, on-the-fencers, Colin's review is way off the mark in many, many ways.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Gee, thanks! :frowning: You disagree with my assessment of the picture quality. Great - I compared the old and the new directly, but different sets show different things, so it's not unusual for people to disagree. Not sure all the "many, many ways" I was "off the mark", though. Because I don't like the movie? Because I think the commentary sucks?

 

[Travis Brashear]

To name a few, you were wrong about the quality of the movie itself, grossly wrong about the video quality between the two DVD releases and wrong about the audio quality between the two DVD releases. The "in my opinion" should be strongly implied, though I feel the evidence of your errors in terms of the video can be easily proven by anyone else in a position to do a comparison and contrast between the two releases if they check out the examples I provided. I respect that you're allowed to have a different point of view, but I don't see how you can meaningfully support this one.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

And yet I do! I totally stand by what I wrote - disparage me if you'd like, but I reported what I saw and heard, so the subject's finished as far as I'm concerned...

 

[Travis Brashear]

I never said I was unbiased--in my last post, I spelled out that "in my opinion" was strongly implied--but one must realize if he is going to write a review disparaging a popular film, its fans will run to its defense. As far as the matter being closed, I'm pleased since I don't know what more you could add to the discussion outside of your original in-depth review; but if you stand by your review, then I'm all the more pleased some of us have come along to present an alternate perception (one, I feel, that is more easily proven) so that yours might not have as much damaging value for sales of the new version of 9 TO 5. Sorry this had to become a conflict, rather than a simple disagreement.

 

[MattHR]

...not just yet. After reading all this fuss (similar to the raging debate over Sam's Brokeback Mountain review), I decided to check out Colin's Review.

I really enjoyed the movie, as a young teenager, when it first came out. I can remember my mother really enjoying it. She could relate to the characters' plight, as an employee of a business in a "man's world." I remember her commenting she had more than one boss who was exactly like the Hart character.

Of course, times have changed (for the better) during the last 25 years -- dating the movie quite a bit. I still really enjoy the movie, more for its obvious comedy and likeable characters. It's the type of movie I can still enjoy today -- not because it necessarily "holds up" -- but because of a "nostalgic" fondness for how I remember and enjoyed it back then.

As for Colin's review of the disc: I'd say it was pretty darn accurate -- and very close to my own assessment. I was very torn between which disc was more pleasing, since they had different advantages. For me, the extras would be the deciding factor, since neither transfer was without flaw.

So, as the studios have started to label their SE's with cute little "nicknames", may I suggest we do the same with our reviews? (Sort of a "warning" that not everyone is sure to be pleased by it.)

Colin's review could now be retitled: 9 to 5: The Arrogant, Egotistical, Biased, Condescending, Opinionated Liar's Review.

Don't worry, Colin. I got your back.

 

[Michael Napier]

Steve,

This is the version I ordered and today I received the FULLSCREEN version!! Argh!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

As am I. I must admit I feel a little bothered just because I tried to go the proverbial extra mile with my review. I wrote up the original release five years ago and hadn't seen the DVD since then. I went out and rented the old one so I could do a comparison. It would have been easy to just let the old review stand as is, but I wanted to be able to make more current comparisons. And this is the thanks I get!

Actually, not looking for thanks, pity, or whatever - just some recognition that I didn't simply make up my opinions and try to slam the DVD because I don't like the movie or whatever...

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Clearly - I do LOVE being called an "Arrogant, Egotistical, Biased, Condescending, Opinionated Liar". Well, if the shoe fits...

 

[MattHR]

I figured you'd wear that title as a "badge of honor."

 

[Andrew Bunk]

Thanks for going that extra mile Colin. I came close but never purchased the original disc so I'm just going with this new one.

 

[ScottR]

So, background noises are missing from the new mono track?

 

[MattHR]

I guess I wouldn't quite say they're "missing". It's just that the soundtrack seems so compressed, or muffled, compared to the old disc, that the subtle sound effects become somewhat "drowned out". The limited range of the Dolby Digital mono encoding doesn't help, either.

A good way to describe the difference would be to say the old DVD's audio sounds like a PCM mono laserdisc compared to the new DVD's audio. If you've ever compared a PCM mono LD to a Dolby Digital mono DVD, you'd know exactly what I mean.

 

[Travis Brashear]

Colin, please understand, I've never been attacking you, nor even the quality of your reviews in general; I've simply taken issue with this specific review and tried to produce evidence of why I feel so strongly opposite your position. It is clear that a great deal of energy and effort goes into each of your reviews, given their lengthy and thorough nature, but effort expended is not always tantamount to impervious truth and I maintain that, no matter the sacrifices or good intentions behind it, your review suffers from (again, IMO) faulty reasoning and poor justifications. It's okay--you don't even know me, so why care what my opinion is, if you intend to stand behind your own?--I just want on-the-fencers to know they may take as much enjoyment from the new 9 TO 5 upgrade as I do and have reason to rethink avoiding said upgrade due to your review. No hard feelings...