Paramount recalls and re-releases 'The Jack Ryan' collection (1 Viewer)

[Jim_K]

Shall I name names?

 

[Clinton McClure]

Doesn't bother me. The transfers will still look much better than my SD versions and I won't have to muck around with any extras.

 

[Paul Arnette]

Quote:
Shall I name names? Believe me, I was sorely tempted to...

 

[Chris S]

Does it seriously take that long to reproduce cover art? I just don't understand the holdup on this release.

 

[Mark Booth]

Last year (before the recall), wasn't the street price (Amazon price) on this set about $59 or so? I ask, because, it will be interesting to see if Paramount lowers the price for the "bare bones" set. I'm betting they will! My prediction for street price: $45.99 That would be $11.50 each. I'll take that in a heartbeat! Hell, I'll buy them at $59 too, but don't tell Paramount!

Mark

 

[Jari K]

After all this time, no extras at all? WTF? Well, I might still pick this up, since I want to see the films again (it has been a while). We´ll see.

 

[Cees Alons]

Barely four months including the holiday season?
Hardly enough to reprint the cover art, collect and repackage the sets, and redistribute them again. I don't think it's realistic to expect them also to create, re-author and press a whole new release in that short time span.

And here's for hoping the price will have been cut. Paramount's own costs have increased, of course.
But, who knows, given the current situation in the format competition...


Cees

 

[Jim_K]

So it's not "realistic" to expect Paramount to do this set right since they already pulled it? That's amusing.

 

[Robert Crawford]

What's amusing about it? If you disagree with Cees then say so. Matter of fact, I disagree with him that it's not realistic to expect them to do it right.




Crawdaddy

 

[Jim_K]

That those who wanted Paramount to do this right by a repressing which would include the bonus features are being chastised for being unrealistic. Especially considering the timeframe involved which would be over 5 months from the time they announced the recall to the new release date. Seems a pretty big lead time to me.

The supposed "advantage" of HD DVD over BD is the low cost manufacturing and ease of production but it's funny that I'm not seeing it used when it should be.

 

[Robert Crawford]

So it's not really amusing in the real meaning of the word. I don't see how Cees expressing his opinion is chastising anybody. I don't agree with his opinion, but that doesn't mean he's not allowed to express his opinion as a member of this forum.

Edit: After checking my HDM release notes, this boxset was originally scheduled for late September of last year and now it's being released almost six months to the day of the original release. IMO, that's enough time to release this boxset with bonus material if they wanted to do so, but apparently that wasn't the reason why it was delayed in the first place.



Crawdaddy

 

[Paul Arnette]

No, it seems the only reason it was delayed in the first place was that Paramount didn't want to face a lawsuit.

 

[Jim_K]

I really don't understand how you get the idea that my comments suggest that Cees as an Admin (or even if he was just a member like myself) doesn't have a right to post his opinion?

If what you're saying between the lines is members (or certain members) aren't allowed to (or just shouldn't) challenge the opinions posted by an Admin, then fine. Check. Got it. Seems a bit draconian but who am I to complain.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Let me get this straight, first you accuse Cees of chastising you for being unrealistic which he didn't because he was simply expressing his personal opinion that five months wasn't enough time, now you're suggesting that I'm saying you can't challenge Cees or any administrator's personal opinion? What is the disconnect because the only thing I have a problem with is you suggesting that Cees was chastising others for thinking differently about this HD DVD release which is the result from me asking you for clarification when you stated that Cees post was amusing?

 

[Mark Booth]

A bit of a stretch there, don't you think Paul. :rolleyes

Look, Paramount did the right thing by pulling sets with inaccurate labeling. And now they are re-releasing the set with the appropriate labeling.

If Paramount is really smart, they will lower the MSRP of the set enough to make even the bare bones discs a bargain. If the set comes in at $45 or so (street price), I seriously doubt that any true fan of the Jack Ryan movies is going to boycott. A bargain is a bargain.

Like I said, I'll still buy the set, even at the old price. So, Paramount is going to get at least one sale!

Mark

 

[Jim_K]

No disconnect here. However this back and forth seems to be spiraling in a direction to where it doesn't matter what I say at this point.

 

[Robert Crawford]

There is clearly a disconnect, but I'll drop it.





Crawdaddy

 

[Paul Arnette]

No, I don't think it is at all. If you have another reasonable explanation for what they did, by all means share it. The bottom line is that the recall was obviously not done to do anything other than cover their ass.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Not this time, apparently.

MSRP $99.99
DVD Empire $69.99

 

[Cees Alons]

etc....

In fact, tell you what, I disagree with the notion that it's unrealistic (the way Jim uses that word there) too. In the sense that they should have repressed them, that is!

I just believe they didn't do that if it's on the shelves again in less than 4 months (subtracting a holidays season) after being pulled.
Of course they should have added the extras, I just didn't think they did, given that time span. I actually believe they took the same discs and repackaged them again.

Note that I'm using a slightly different time frame than Robert, because I think they started the replacement operation when they pulled the release (which was, if I'm not mistaken, the end of October). But really: that's all there is to it. If they had 6 months indeed, my conclusion is less valid.


Cees