Things that baffle you? (1 Viewer)

[bmasters9]

Baffled to read how deeply involved some folks get when they think a logo or credit roll from say a studio isn't EXACTLY perfectly rendered on a DVD's end or beginning credits. I mean down to the square inch they are critiqued and analyzed, the color, how fast it fades from the screen, tiny edge of screen errors, and so on. They aren't focused on the actual TV show or movie on the disc, it's pages and pages of discussions complaining about logos, credits, font sizes, color, size, etc.

It boggles the mind how the tiniest of things that most viewers wouldn't think twice about are picked at with a fine tooth comb for days and days online..

I hate to admit it, but I'm guilty in that a good bit, especially insofar as CBS and Sony have been infamous for whitewashing the older Paramount Television and CPT logos respectively (of course, seeing as several older series from the CBS family [like Petrocelli] were released from VEI in Canada and have the Paramount Television logos of their times, that seems to have mollified me some on that score).

 

[JQuintana]

So why, in the grand scheme of things, does it even matter? It's by far the last thing on my mind when I'm watching a movie or TV show. Matter of fact, I rather they didn't exist so we don't have to sit through seeing them.

 

[TJPC]

I remember an outcry over the opening titles for some cartoons in the Popeye sets. Apparently one or two had the TV opening logos (oh horror!) rather than the movie ones. The company offered a no questions asked or proof provided replacement, which for some reason I took advantage of. (I guess all the discussion made me think my original ones were flawed.). I got the replacements but really could not see much difference at all. It reminds me of the now cliché — “first world problems”!

 

[BobO'Link]

So why, in the grand scheme of things, does it even matter? It's by far the last thing on my mind when I'm watching a movie or TV show. Matter of fact, I rather they didn't exist so we don't have to sit through seeing them.

It doesn't really. But I'll admit that it sometimes bothers me depending on the product. Just having those extra, tacked on, logos front and/or end can be jarring when watching something you grew up with and know frontwards and backwards. It's just not "right" and somehow makes the product seem a bit "off."

Example: I don't need or want the modern CBS logo/sound tacked on after the end credits of a Three Stooges short. Put it on the pre menu junk but not at the end of every short. It doesn't belong. I don't care if you *are* the current rights holder. You weren't involved in the creation of the product. If you want it there for syndication then fine. Just don't put it on my discs. My grandkids will grow up not knowing the difference as that's the only way they've ever seen them. It's a little thing but totally takes me out of the mood.

Another: Universal adding their *modern* logo before the original Universal logo on their classic movie titles. Why do they need the new one *added* since the original is there? Sometimes it's skippable, sometimes not. Very annoying either way.

 

[bmasters9]

Example: I don't need or want the modern CBS logo/sound tacked on after the end credits of a Three Stooges short. Put it on the pre menu junk but not at the end of every short. It doesn't belong. I don't care if you *are* the current rights holder. You weren't involved in the creation of the product. If you want it there for syndication then fine. Just don't put it on my discs. My grandkids will grow up not knowing the difference as that's the only way they've ever seen them. It's a little thing but totally takes me out of the mood.

Like CBS-Paramount Television or CBS Television Distribution on the end credits of what was originally a Paramount Television series made under Gulf+Western (on the DVDs of any series like that)? I take it that's one example of what you're talking about.

After all, CBS-Paramount and CBSTD are distributors, not the original production people, so neither one should have been acting like they were the original production people.

 

[BobO'Link]

Like CBS-Paramount Television or CBS Television Distribution on the end credits of what was originally a Paramount Television series made under Gulf+Western (on the DVDs of any series like that)? I take it that's one example of what you're talking about.

After all, CBS-Paramount and CBSTD are distributors, not the original production people, so neither one should have been acting like they were the original production people.

Exactly.

 

[JQuintana]

I guess I should feel blessed that I don't let that these kind of tweaks bother me.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Well, this is an enthusiasts forum.

Enthusiasts tend to get...enthusiastic about detail.

 

[bmasters9]

Well, this is an enthusiasts forum.

Enthusiasts tend to get...enthusiastic about detail.

I know I'm one!

 

[Clinton McClure]

My title says it all.

 

[Malcolm R]

Over the last couple of weeks, I've gotten a couple of "rewards" coupons from Big Lots, you can either have $5 off a $15 purchase, or $15 off a $75 purchase. The incentive here seems to be to spend less, rather than more, as the percentage discount off the $15 purchase is 33%, while the percent off $75 is only 20%.

That's if you keep your purchase to just over $15 of course, but even spending up to $25 gives you the same or higher percentage discount vs. the $75 purchase.

I don't get it. I guess maybe they're hoping you'll end up somewhere in the middle around $50 and think, "gee, if I spend $25 more, I can get $15 off rather than just $5."

 

[Mike Frezon]

You're surprised the nice folks at Big Lots have trouble with math.........?

 

[BobO'Link]

Over the last couple of weeks, I've gotten a couple of "rewards" coupons from Big Lots, you can either have $5 off a $15 purchase, or $15 off a $75 purchase. The incentive here seems to be to spend less, rather than more, as the percentage discount off the $15 purchase is 33%, while the percent off $75 is only 20%.

That's if you keep your purchase to just over $15 of course, but even spending up to $25 gives you the same or higher percentage discount vs. the $75 purchase.

I don't get it. I guess maybe they're hoping you'll end up somewhere in the middle around $50 and think, "gee, if I spend $25 more, I can get $15 off rather than just $5."

That's my thinking too.

I discovered this past weekend that those $5 or $15 coupons can stack. I had 2 of them, ~$21 of merchandise, scanned and took both for ~$11 (after tax) for the total.

 

[Malcolm R]

That's my thinking too.

I discovered this past weekend that those $5 or $15 coupons can stack. I had 2 of them, ~$21 of merchandise, scanned and took both for ~$11 (after tax) for the total.

Interesting. I thought they were linked to the rewards card, and allowed only one coupon per card per interval.

 

[BobO'Link]

Interesting. I thought they were linked to the rewards card, and allowed only one coupon per card per interval.

They are linked to a specific card. The thing is I earn one of those almost every week. It takes only 3 purchases per week to earn one and there's no minimum purchase to earn a credit towards the 3 required. They have "day old" bread here via a partnership with a bakery. I swing by (the store is less than a mile from my house), pick up a loaf of bread ($1-$2) take it home. Go another day and get either more bread or a bag of chips or something else small. Then the 3rd (or 1st depending on the day of the week) purchase is with a coupon (yep - using the coupon is a purchase credit).

They have a ~2 week window for which to use them and I almost always have 2 that are valid. I normally use 1 per visit and almost always on the expiration date (a Sunday and the store is between home and church so it's not out of the way to run by).

This time I had a purchase reward coupon and another for donating to their charity that were expiring on the same day and that's what I used. I'd expect 2 of the purchase reward ones to also stack simply based on the fine print which says you can use "no more than 4 coupons in a single online transaction." That's what triggered me asking about stacking them. I'd never read the fine print before so just assumed it was one per transaction. I was ready to just make a 2nd purchase of $15 if they didn't stack. The checker was just as surprised as me when they stacked. You just have to have the minimum purchase amount for each. That's $20 for 2 as the first will take it down to $15 which will allow the 2nd to trigger. If you have 3 I'd expect to be able to stack them on a $25+ purchase. If I ever have 3 at once I plan to give it a try.

FWIW, those also stack on 20% off Friend and Family days. I discovered that on the last FF day when I had one and was going to do 2 transactions. The checker said "They stack so just do 1." I had enough that after 20% was taken off I then got the $15 discount instead of the $5 I was going for initially. That's probably the 1 time when using it on $75 pays off.

 

[bmasters9]

Probably inconsequential here, but it will never cease to baffle me why only four NBC stations in America are still on Eyewitness News in one form or another:

WRCB Channel 3 (Chattanooga, TN)
WBRE Channel 28 (Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, PA)
WTHR Channel 13 (Indianapolis, IN)
KOB Channel 4 (Albuquerque, NM)

I mean, before, you could find the EWN on NBC setup in many major places, like on WBZ Channel 4 in Boston (now the CBS O&O of that area), and KYW Channel 3 in Philly (likewise, although at least that one is on Eyewitness News).

I don't know if it's demographics or money or what that have caused EWN on NBC stations to be a dying breed, limited to the four stations I mentioned to start.

 

[Clinton McClure]

While sitting in traffic for over 3 hours Thursday after work and another 2.5 yesterday after work, it reminded me that I’m baffled at why bad drivers double-down on stupid decisions when it rains.

 

[BobO'Link]

While sitting in traffic for over 3 hours Thursday after work and another 2.5 yesterday after work, it reminded me that I’m baffled at why bad drivers double-down on stupid decisions when it rains.

Yep... It rains so they drive like there's 3" of snow on top of ice. Yet when there *is* 3" of snow on top of ice they drive like the ground is dry.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Here in central Arkansas, we’ve got a bunch of drivers who don’t slow down for anything. With all the rain, cars are constantly zipping by me.

 

[TJPC]

It’s almost as if they don’t believe in snow and ice!