Uncut Releases becoming gimmicks now a days? (1 Viewer)

[Dave H]

Re-read my first post. I was referring to mild "DVD fans" or people who read these forums.

However, I don't have a problem with a studio doing re-releases, or improved products for that matter. "Improved" being I only re-purchase a DVD if the transfer is improved --- extras are never a factor.

Also, I don't believe any studio or company has an obligation to state its marketing strategy or how many re-releases there will be. Sometimes these decisions are not made from the outset anyway....though I suspect often they may be.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

But who wants to wait two years for a DVD based on a logical assumption? Let's say CTS DID announce the Superbit DVD of Black Hawk Down when they originally put out the first version, but they let us know we'd have to wait two years for it. How many people would postpone their purchase for that long? Probably not many, but enough to make it worth doing.

However, delaying gratification due to an assumption is a totally different bag of donuts, especially since it also assumes that CTS won't pull the plug on the Superbit line. Those releases have become more sporadic and could get the boot at any minute for all we know. I think it's more foolish to assume a certain unannounced product WILL exist rather than to go on the assumption it won't...

 

[Dave H]

So what if they double dip?!? It's a business. You do have something called 'free will' anyway. You don't have to double dip. Obviously, plenty of people are buying these re-releases so there is a demand for them. If people wouldn't buy them, studios wouldn't waste money of them. The customers want re-releases. I don't know how many times I hear people (including myself) complain and wanting new transfers or extras for MANY movies.

Most studios do not state in advance, so I don't think you can single out Columbia. I have double dipped plenty of times and rarely was it ever announced ahead of time. And, I don't mind...nearly all of my double dips needed new transfers. As far as anything from Columbia, I just wait. I like Superbits and figure one is coming sooner or later.

Every studio without exception double dips. I don't think it's so evil. I do like seeing my favorite movies with better transfers or A/V quality. I have nothing against it. I wish I could double dip on a list of other movies too.....including Batman ('89), Goodfellas, and Heat just to name a few.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I DO feel they deserve to be singled-out. Name another studio with such a consistent pattern of double - and triple - dipping. I like it when they show a willingness to revisit titles from the Days of Yore - like A League of Their Own, even if they did screw up the audio - but when we get three versions each of Spider-Man and Black Hawk Down, they deserve their reputation as the dippingest company out there. No one's as over the top about it as they are.

If this doesn't bother you, great. Hey, I personally LOVE double and triple dipping. I don't pay for the DVDs anyway, and those reviews are very easy for me to write. But for the consumer, CTS's attitude is mercenary at minimum. It's one thing to revisit titles from the studio's early days ala Paramount; it's another thing to put out three versions of a movie in two years!

 

[Dave H]

Columbia without a doubt does it the most; but, the others still do it. (How many versions of American Pie have we seen from Universal?) I have a long list of non-Colmubia movies that are re-releases, as you surely do.

Again; it's all about demand. Consumers WANT re-releases and they are obviously selling quite well as all studios do it. Period. And it is a studio's right to continually make re-relases. Consumers don't have to buy them, the Black Hawk Down Superbit, or the fifth edition of American Pie.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

It's not about their "right" to do so or the demand. I simply think it's sleazy to plan three releases in advance - which is almost certainly what happened with BHD, for example - but only announce one. In that case, there were good signs that the special edition would eventually materialize, so I won't even hold it against them. But THREE total?

Does it mean anything to you that anti-CTS cynicism has gotten so bad around here that more than a few folks think they INTENTIONALLY screw up the transfers of the originalm releases to create a market for the Superbit editions?

 

[Damin J Toell]

Actually, Columbia announced the SE about 2 months before the first edition hit the shelves. See, for example, The DVDFile update of 4/15/02.

DJ

 

[Yee-Ming]

I think what most are taking issue with is the deliberate "planned", yet unannounced, re-release, rather than revisits a few years later to redo a title that was released in the early years of DVD with less-than-stellar transfers, and little or no extras. No one takes issue with New Line's LOTR series, since they told everyone up front what their release plans were. Or MGM going back and re-doing GBU.

Universal was once one of the biggest culprits with re-releases, their so-called Collectors' Editions being the vehicle -- examples include The Mummy and Notting Hill. To be fair, whilst they've milked the American Pie series to death, with the exception of AP1 (which came out in the bad old days of the CE), they were quite up-front as to the various editions and permutations available for AP2 and AW, and all versions were released at the same time, so you could pick and choose what you wanted. As for the "unrated" tag, this instance, more bare titties were, surely, justifiable considering what the AP series was about in the first place?

On the other hand, one really egregious "misuse" of the "Unrated" tag would be Pitch Black...

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I stand corrected for that one - I thought it was strongly rumored, but I didn't recall it had a formal press release...

 

[Dave H]

No, it doesn't mean anything to me. I've joked around before that they are deliberately screwing up regular releases. But, in all actuality, I don't see any evidence they are doing that. The Superbit transfers are not THAT much better--- on my 61" ISF'd display anyway. (I see about a 5-10% improvement...which to me is still worthwhile. Bjoern has done some interesting comparisons.) Lawrence of Arabia and other title are the exception.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Okay - I give up!

 

[Dave H]

Hard to battle logic, isn't it?