A few words about…™ Father Goose — in Blu-ray

Fun film. Poor restorative effort. 3 Stars

Fans of Cary Grant can finally own his penultimate film appearance on Blu-ray, courtesy of Olive Films via Paramount.

A delightful romp, with Mr. Grant and Leslie Caron, the 1964 production, comes across as a bit more than adequate on Blu-ray, with color not always tracking, and far too much dirt and damage for a 4k restoration.

I would have presumed much better quality coming from Paramount, but their work here is either slipshod, incomplete, or far to budget challenged.

Fun film. Poor restorative effort.

Extras place the release in Olive’s Signature category, but I’m not certain that they’re up to the quality of earlier releases.

Image – 3

Audio – 5

4k Up-rez – 2.75

Pass / Fail – Pass

Upgrade – No

RAH

Published by

Robert Harris

author,member

58 Comments

  1. Jimbo64

    Well that’s a damn shame, I was really looking forward to this

    I appreciate RAH's reviews, but I find too many instances in which I enjoy the audio and video presentations more than he did. In short, I"m still looking forward to this release to see if that pattern continues or not.

  2. Robert Harris

    Fans of Cary Grant can finally own his penultimate film appearance on Blu-ray, courtesy of Olive Films via Paramount.

    A delightful romp, with Mr. Grant and Leslie Caron, the 1964 production, comes across as a bit more than adequate on Blu-ray, with color not always tracking, and far too much dirt and damage for a 4k restoration.

    I would have presumed much better quality coming from Paramount, but their work here is either slipshod, incomplete, or far to budget challenged.

    Fun film. Poor restorative effort.

    Extras place the release in Olive's Signature category, but I'm not certain that they're up to the quality of earlier releases.

    Image – 3

    Audio – 5

    4k Up-rez – 2.75

    Pass / Fail – Pass

    Upgrade from DVD – No

    RAH

    My question is: is this Signature release an upgrade vs the previous Olive BD release? If no, I need to cancel my preorder. Same for Operation Petticoat.

  3. atfree

    My question is: is this Signature release an upgrade vs the previous Olive BD release? If no, I need to cancel my preorder. Same for Operation Petticoat.

    Both Grant films appear to be the same transfers, with the new BD, at a higher bitrate. Final results seem to be very similar, although the new product may be slightly better.

  4. Wait a minute, Olive has reissued Father Goose? I reread RAH post and I get it, it’s a Signature release. This is surprising so recently after the first release. I took a look at the Olive site and I see they have Operation Petticoat too coming, I just got the standard Olive releases of these two films and Olive’s That Touch of Mink earlier this year. Shoot!

    Seems like the main draw to repurchase would be for the extras and very minimal image quality improvement. If this was Indicreet, Notorious ( i know, not an Olive title) I’d have no second thoughts and go for it. But these later Cary Grant titles are pretty good so i’ll consider them. I was lucky in that I waited a bit for High Noon and I bought it when it was reissued as a Signature release and it looks great to me, not having seen the original Olive release.

  5. haineshisway

    Was Father Goose not a Universal release??? I have the previous Blu. Don't need this one with a new moniker.

    Father Goose was released theatrically by Universal. But the Cary Grant estate owns the home video rights to Father Goose, Operation Petticoat, Indiscreet, That Touch Of Mink and The Grass Is Greener and apparently the Grant estate licensed or sold those films to Republic which in turn was absorbed by Paramount. To the best of my knowledge, none of those titles were released to home video by the studios that released them theatrically, Universal (Goose, Petticoat, Grass, Mink) and Warners (Indiscreet)

  6. Robert Harris

    Both Grant films appear to be the same transfers, with the new BD, at a higher bitrate. Final results seem to be very similar, although the new product may be slightly better.

    Thank you for saving me $50. Both pre-orders cancelled. A big disappointment. Not sure what Olive is thinking here.

  7. skylark68

    Hmmm. I already preordered and sold my old original Olive Blu-ray’s. Maybe I jumped the gun. I was real pleased with the Olive Signature High Noon

    I never ever get rid of the old discs until I have the new disc in my hot little hands and have given it a look see! Precisely for the situation here but also anything can happen! Sometimes a disc is announced, people dump their DVDs or previous blu rays and then the disc is canceled. For instance, Kino Lorber announced a blu ray of Fathom with Raquel Welch but later canceled the blu. Had I gotten rid of the DVD, I'd just have to repurchase it.

  8. Robert Harris

    Both Grant films appear to be the same transfers, with the new BD, at a higher bitrate. Final results seem to be very similar, although the new product may be slightly better.

    So Olive has basically lied about the following in bold:

    • New Restoration from 4K Scan of Original Camera Negative
    • Audio commentary by film historian David Del Valle
    • “Unfinished Business: Cary Grant’s Search for Fatherhood and His Oscar” – with Marc Eliot, author of Cary Grant: A Biography
    • “My Father” – internet pioneer Ted Nelson discusses director Ralph Nelson
    • Universal Newsreel footage featuring Leslie Caron
    • Essay by Village Voice critic Bilge Ebiri
  9. Robert Crawford

    So Olive has basically lied about the following in bold:

    • New Restoration from 4K Scan of Original Camera Negative
    • Audio commentary by film historian David Del Valle
    • “Unfinished Business: Cary Grant’s Search for Fatherhood and His Oscar” – with Marc Eliot, author of Cary Grant: A Biography
    • “My Father” – internet pioneer Ted Nelson discusses director Ralph Nelson
    • Universal Newsreel footage featuring Leslie Caron
    • Essay by Village Voice critic Bilge Ebiri

    That seems a bit harsh.

    What I’m calling into question is the quality of said restoration, which has become more of a marketing tool, than reality.

    One of the worst offenders is Criterion.

    Question at hand.

    What does the word “restoration” mean, and to whom?

  10. Robert Harris

    That seems a bit harsh.

    What I’m calling into question is the quality of said restoration, which has become more of a marketing tool, than reality.

    One of the worst offenders is Criterion.

    Question at hand.

    What does the word “restoration” mean, and to whom?

    I don't think I'm being harsh based on your comment that it appears to be the same transfer with a higher bitrate. What else would you call it, but a lie as it's certainly not a new restoration from 4K scan of Original Camera Negative? Let's call a spade, a spade, if they're misrepresenting what they said this new Blu-ray is derived from.

  11. Robert Crawford

    I don't think I'm being harsh based on your comment that it appears to be the same transfer with a higher bitrate. What else would you call it, but a lie as it's certainly not a new restoration from 4K scan of Original Camera Negative? Let's call a spade, a spade, if they're misrepresenting what they said this new Blu-ray is derived from.

    Or might Olive’s initial Blu have been from a 4k scan of the OCN?

  12. Robert Harris

    […]Question at hand.
    What does the word “restoration” mean, and to whom?

    Well, in the case of Olive, the word "restoration" means an increase in price.
    Currently, Amazon has both BD's of Father Goose priced at $17.97 and $26.71
    Put the two side by side on a shelf at Barnes and Noble and the consumer who seeks a finer picture might hinge themselves to that very term; even though they may not fully understanding its truer definition.
    So, yah, marketing-wise the misuse of terms begins with the distributor.

  13. – Screener Encoding Errors –

    It has come to our attention that our Blu-ray editions of Olive Signature Operation Petticoat and Olive Signature Father Goose, originally scheduled for release on November 7, were affected by encoding errors during replication. These digital glitches are present in Blu-ray screeners that you may have received already or will receive in the next few days. Because the final quality control does not meet our standards, we will be correcting these glitches before commercial release and resubmitting new discs for review. As a consequence of these fixes, please be advised we will also be postponing the street date for both titles. Stay tuned, and we will update you when a new street date has been determined. We thank you for your patience as we work to resolve these issues.

    Thank you,
    Olive Films

  14. Robert Harris

    – Screener Encoding Errors –

    It has come to our attention that our Blu-ray editions of Olive Signature Operation Petticoat and Olive Signature Father Goose, originally scheduled for release on November 7, were affected by encoding errors during replication. These digital glitches are present in Blu-ray screeners that you may have received already or will receive in the next few days. Because the final quality control does not meet our standards, we will be correcting these glitches before commercial release and resubmitting new discs for review. As a consequence of these fixes, please be advised we will also be postponing the street date for both titles. Stay tuned, and we will update you when a new street date has been determined. We thank you for your patience as we work to resolve these issues.

    Thank you,
    Olive Films

    Thank you RAH! Your noted criticism of these upcoming releases just didn't match Olive's initial press release in which they promoted restoration efforts with these two titles. Very happy to see Olive stepping up to address this issue.

  15. Robert Harris

    – Screener Encoding Errors –

    It has come to our attention that our Blu-ray editions of Olive Signature Operation Petticoat and Olive Signature Father Goose, originally scheduled for release on November 7, were affected by encoding errors during replication. These digital glitches are present in Blu-ray screeners that you may have received already or will receive in the next few days. Because the final quality control does not meet our standards, we will be correcting these glitches before commercial release and resubmitting new discs for review. As a consequence of these fixes, please be advised we will also be postponing the street date for both titles. Stay tuned, and we will update you when a new street date has been determined. We thank you for your patience as we work to resolve these issues.

    Thank you,
    Olive Films

    Mistakes, I can respect.
    My faith in Olive has now been fully "Restored".
    This was altogether honest on their part; and for that, I will make an advance pledge to purchase both Father Goose and Operation Petticoat upon their availability.
    Bravo to Olive, bravo.:thumbs-up-smiley:

  16. Robert Crawford

    Thank you RAH! Your noted criticism of these upcoming releases just didn't match Olive's initial press release in which they promoted restoration efforts with these two titles. Very happy to see Olive stepping up to address this issue.

    but that announcement says about encoding errors.
    That is something entirely different than dirt/damage etc or a wrong master.
    Or am I mistaken?

  17. Konstantinos

    but that announcement says about encoding errors.
    That is something entirely different than dirt/damage etc or a wrong master.
    Or am I mistaken?

    As RAH stated in the Operation Petticoat thread, this Olive statement is rather vague so it could be the wrong master. We'll see what happens.

  18. Robert Crawford

    As RAH stated in the Operation Petticoat thread, this Olive statement is rather vague so it could be the wrong master. We'll see what happens.

    Well, maybe it's just me but I find their announcement anything but vague.
    it's quite explicit and specific to me. They're talking about encoding errors and digital glitches.
    Now, it's another matter if they released a wrong master but didn't want to say anything about it and talked about digital glitches instead.

  19. "The delay in release is due to the presence of digital artifacts on the screeners. It was an error made in replication and unrelated to the masters used. If you're asking about the masters used, we can confirm that Father Goose is from a 4K scan of the original camera negative, a different master than our 2013 blu-ray. Operation Petticoat is sourced from the same master as our 2014 blu-ray, but with considerable digital restoration undertaken."

    http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=14282123&postcount=22

    Well, as I said, their announcement was explicit enough.

  20. I just received this email (also a duplicate for my order of Operation Petticoat): "Your pre-order is now available. Your order details are shown below for your reference." This is after receiving the "delayed until November 28" email a few days ago.

  21. haineshisway

    Does Mr. Harris think this is really a 4K scan off the CAMERA negative – because it sure doesn't sound like it from his review.

    It could be, as Olive accurately reports that a 4k scan was produced.

    My problems stem from the fact that, if the new release is derived from that scan, that it doesn’t appear much different from the earlier release, or at the very least, might be unfinished work.

    Unlike our friend Shakespeare, for who could occasionally be heard mumbling something akin to “the play’s the thing,” at least for me, the scan is not the thing, but rather what one does with it.

    As I mentioned previously, it’s sometimes better to scan a well produced, and nearly properly timed wet-gate IP, than to open the Pandora’s box of potential costs and problems, of accessing an OCN.

    I have no doubt that Olive desires their Signature editions to shine, and I absolutely take them at their word, that a 4k scan has been perfected.

    The problem, especially in reviewing, is that one’s expectations are automatically raised above what might be seen from a dupe, and a new set of potential grades are in place.

  22. I want to add both films to my collection but I'm not spending a dime until I hear back from Robert that image quality is at least a 4. If Olive can't deliver an image quality of 4 (or better), they should go back and start over.

    Mark

  23. Mark Booth

    I want to add both films to my collection but I'm not spending a dime until I hear back from Robert that image quality is at least a 4. If Olive can't deliver an image quality of 4 (or better), they should go back and start over.

    Mark

    You may view what I’m seeing, and consider it a 4, or better. As I noted earlier, I tend to grade restorations, real or imagined, on a different scale.

    If I looked at the release, and presumed it to be from an IP, with minimal investment, and no marketing sizzle, it would be very acceptable, especially for licensed HD material.

    Once we add in new 4k scan, it’s a different perspective.

    There’s nothing really wrong with either of these new Olive releases, they simply aren’t brilliant, and at least fully void of wear.

  24. Digital technology today can be a advance, but the loss of image details, in terms of percentage loss, it's high, specially in MPEG-4. The MPEG-2 could deal better with motion than MPEG-4. MPEG-4 compress more, saved space in relative terms, but we see it tend to loss much more detaisl when image got motion and also have a poor rendering of shadows tonalities, making it prone to artefacts.
    People got much used with internet and iphones, and thinks artefacts are a normal thing. Most Blu-rays an 4K have artefacts, and all digital broadcast HD I ever saw have a lot of artefacts and loss of fine details and textures during low motion.
    A digital compressed image can have not hiss, no ghosting and no signal noise like analogyc, but many ideal or even a good analogy of the same resolution, (let's take 480p) had less detail loss and textures loss than many digital comporessed images of today.

    Besides, all LCD (including LED backlight LCDs that's a fake LED- marketing trick) TVs are poor, if not right in front of it the contrast tends became anoying, even with 15 degree. Also the center of screen looks brighter than the edges, if you don't watch far away. If you watch very far away the HD details start to became irrelenat. If you are far away HD and 4K are not very different. Go to watch near the 4K TV and the light do not look even along the screen area.
    The image got many problems if not adjusted to a low contrast faded look, otherwise it will have white clipping and black crushing. The LCD itself , can add blur, due low refreshing rate, and so we got blur from MPEG-4 compression and the blur from TV itself.
    With CRT flat screen from 12 years ago you hadn't to worry with view angle, refreshing rate, time response (for games), black crushing or white clipping.,

    That's why I believe people are noting really watching true HD (1080p) or "true 4K" (2160p). Let's take 4K films, most are just a interpolation from 2K digital masters, as most modern films are still finished in 2K. People think the 4K it's better, even being 2K, cause the the little blur added have a smaller radius compared to 1080p, since there are more pixels, and also because 2K have some more information than 1080P.

    What about another trick from manufactures ?
    1k=1024.
    2K= 2048
    3K=3072
    But they made everyone believe that 4k= 3840
    They could try to defiant gravity, if they defiant mathematic.

    What about HDR TV, trying to compensate the white clipping and black crushing of LCD, but require films mastered in HDR and the other films still have clipping and crushing problems.

  25. Alberto_D

    Digital technology today can be a advance, but the loss of image details, in terms of percentage loss, it's high, specially in MPEG-4. The MPEG-2 could deal better with motion than MPEG-4. MPEG-4 compress more, saved space in relative terms, but we see it tend to loss much more detaisl when image got motion and also have a poor rendering of shadows tonalities, making it prone to artefacts.
    People got much used with internet and iphones, and thinks artefacts are a normal thing. Most Blu-rays an 4K have artefacts, and all digital broadcast HD I ever saw have a lot of artefacts and loss of fine details and textures during low motion.
    A digital compressed image can have not hiss, no ghosting and no signal noise like analogyc, but many ideal or even a good analogy of the same resolution, (let's take 480p) had less detail loss and textures loss than many digital comporessed images of today.

    Besides, all LCD (including LED backlight LCDs that's a fake LED- marketing trick) TVs are poor, if not right in front of it the contrast tends became anoying, even with 15 degree. Also the center of screen looks brighter than the edges, if you don't watch far away. If you watch very far away the HD details start to became irrelenat. If you are far away HD and 4K are not very different. Go to watch near the 4K TV and the light do not look even along the screen area.
    The image got many problems if not adjusted to a low contrast faded look, otherwise it will have white clipping and black crushing. The LCD itself , can add blur, due low refreshing rate, and so we got blur from MPEG-4 compression and the blur from TV itself.
    With CRT flat screen from 12 years ago you hadn't to worry with view angle, refreshing rate, time response (for games), black crushing or white clipping.,

    That's why I believe people are noting really watching true HD (1080p) or "true 4K" (2160p). Let's take 4K films, most are just a interpolation from 2K digital masters, as most modern films are still finished in 2K. People think the 4K it's better, even being 2K, cause the the little blur added have a smaller radius compared to 1080p, since there are more pixels, and also because 2K have some more information than 1080P.

    What about another trick from manufactures ?
    1k=1024.
    2K= 2048
    3K=3072
    But they made everyone believe that 4k= 3840
    They could try to defiant gravity, if they defiant mathematic.

    What about HDR TV, trying to compensate the white clipping and black crushing of LCD, but require films mastered in HDR and the other films still have clipping and crushing problems.

    I believed that we were discussing uncompressed .dpx files.

    A 4k scan is 4096, but that includes the soundtrack area.

  26. Mr Harris, I remamber some old critics you did about some restorations years ago, about excessive grain reduction. Most films on blu ray today have at least some grain to give a film look, but even so there is grain reduction in some degree, even for films restored from camera negative. Do you think this is necessary ?
    Is right to supose they remove grain and add a finer grain than the original, as replacement ?

    I'm curious to what happned to Lowry Digital Images (DTS Digital Images >> Lowry Digital). Their last well know work was for James Bond collection. They had the best grain reduction technology, that could avoid detail loss. They restored Sunseth Boulevard in HD or 2K, released on DVD and looking very good, but for the Blu Ray edition the restoration was done again, but not by Lowry Digital. If they had the best tools to deal with grain and detail, how a 4K scan for blu ray could be better than their work, judging just by a HD image ?

    I remamber they old website had a very impressive example of a table with junk food and a Coca Cola can, a sequence of grainy frames (enlargment), and after their filter (which take 500 1000 MAcs to process) the very fine little letters in the side of the can could be readable.

    Their claim was that they had tools able to compensate for one or more generation loss of details during film copy, printing. It's a bit hard to believe, unless they were talking about loss during quality copy to fine grain materials in good printers.
    Had you the oportunity to check the reracity of it at the time you were involved in some of the restorations ?

  27. Gone With the Wind, shot in late 30's, have more image details & shapness and better colors than the 1966 film HD disc suposed from original camera negative 4K scanning:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    And why the new fashion is to present films somehow desaturated?

  28. Michel_Hafner

    An encoding error does not add analogue dirt and damage to a Blu Ray, unless encoding error really means "we took an old master to encode instead of the new master from the 4K restoration". 😉

    I'm hoping the "encoding error" means "we encoded the wrong master". Would Olive readily admit up front that the screwed up by encoding the wrong master? Who knows.

    I'm probably hoping for too much.

    Mark

  29. Mark Booth

    I'm hoping the "encoding error" means "we encoded the wrong master". Would Olive readily admit up front that the screwed up by encoding the wrong master? Who knows.

    I'm probably hoping for too much.

    Mark

    I would say that Olive's announced delay is all that was needed.
    After all, "readily admitting up front" to a technical error is not exactly a crime;
    for as it is, not a single consumer has lost a dime.
    A mistake is a mistake.
    So meanwhile;
    and on until then;
    let's just sit back, relax and enjoy this wait.:)

  30. Alberto_D

    Mr Harris, I remamber some old critics you did about some restorations years ago, about excessive grain reduction. Most films on blu ray today have at least some grain to give a film look, but even so there is grain reduction in some degree, even for films restored from camera negative. Do you think this is necessary ?
    Is right to supose they remove grain and add a finer grain than the original, as replacement ?

    Generally, grain is NOT removed. The early standard was to remove, by necessity, for DVD release and compression.

    I'm curious to what happned to Lowry Digital Images (DTS Digital Images >> Lowry Digital). Their last well know work was for James Bond collection. They had the best grain reduction technology, that could avoid detail loss. They restored Sunseth Boulevard in HD or 2K, released on DVD and looking very good, but for the Blu Ray edition the restoration was done again, but not by Lowry Digital. If they had the best tools to deal with grain and detail, how a 4K scan for blu ray could be better than their work, judging just by a HD image ?

    Sunseth Blvd was horrific. Looked like a quality kinescope.

    I remamber they old website had a very impressive example of a table with junk food and a Coca Cola can, a sequence of grainy frames (enlargment), and after their filter (which take 500 1000 MAcs to process) the very fine little letters in the side of the can could be readable.

    Their claim was that they had tools able to compensate for one or more generation loss of details during film copy, printing. It's a bit hard to believe, unless they were talking about loss during quality copy to fine grain materials in good printers.
    Had you the oportunity to check the reracity of it at the time you were involved in some of the restorations ?

    Yes.

  31. Thank you Mr Harris. May I call you Robert ?
    Please tell me if I'm pushing too much or being a bit anoying.

    Since the Sunseth Boulevard blu ray looks pretty good, and it's credited as a new digital restoration, how is it better than the work Lowry Digital/DTS Digital, if Lowry's was (or still is) the only technology trully able to recover some details, instead of just sharpens existent/surviving details?

    Why Lowry's technology no longer used for film restoration of Hollywood films ?
    The "coca cola can demo" (in their old website) for me looked a step better than what they could do, judging by the Casablanca comparisons.

    I Had a Idea to use the "segmentation idea for color restorations", as a way to improve their (Lowry's) tools in case of color films. I will send in private.
    It's sad that John Lowry died. He was the brain behind the technology of this unic image processing.

    I still believe video compression technology can't deal well with grain. Looking closer to the "grain" (digital rendering of it) it looks like something that remamber gif images.

  32. In reply to the above post I don’t think much of most of the Bond flicks on Blu Ray, some such as On Her Majesty’s Secret Service have issues such as excessive contrast boosting applied and GoldenEye looks like it was filmed in smoothavision, so not a fan of Lowry’s early work, they did Aliens, thats good, I think many of the Bond films could do with brand new scans for UHD and Blu release, I hope one day that happens.

    I could be wrong but I believe they are now Reliance, a company based in India, I also think they were working for a number of years now on upscaling SD masters to make them look like Blu Ray quality, that’s the impression I got from an article I read a few years back, do not take that as the gospel, that information could be wrong.

    Blu Ray can handle film grain just fine, all it needs is a competent person working on it, as for displays, many of us have Plasma, Oled and projectors and HDR on these displays will mature in time.

    I am wondering, since this is Cary Grant, is Gunga Din ever likely to be released on Blu Ray, do the original negatives for that film exist, I saw it last month on TV and enjoyed it, wouldn’t mind owning it on disc.

  33. FoxyMulder

    I am wondering, since this is Cary Grant, is Gunga Din ever likely to be released on Blu Ray, do the original negatives for that film exist, I saw it last month on TV and enjoyed it, wouldn’t mind owning it on disc.

    I don't know about the negative, but the HD digital version that exists seems good:

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

  34. Konstantinos

    I don't know about the negative, but the HD digital version that exists seems good:

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Yeah, I own that HD Digital stream. I haven't watch it in its entirety, but I'm going to do so in the next 24 hours as I'm in the mood to watch this childhood favorite of mine.

  35. Robert Crawford

    Yeah, I own that HD Digital stream. I haven't watch it in its entirety, but I'm going to do so in the next 24 hours as I'm in the mood to watch this childhood favorite of mine.

    If I didn't think Gunga Din was a likely candidate for a Warner Archive Blu, I'd pay the $5 for a disc-to-digital conversion, but I'm kind of cautious with Warner titles because the Archive has been gangbusters lately.

  36. Mark-P

    If I didn't think Gunga Din was a likely candidate for a Warner Archive Blu, I'd pay the $5 for a disc-to-digital conversion, but I'm kind of cautious with Warner titles because the Archive has been gangbusters lately.

    Yeah, I understand that sentiment too. Gunga Din was one of those titles that I did the Vudu disc to digital conversions about two weeks ago. I just got done watching the HD stream on iTunes in its entirety. Looks pretty damn good and a young Joan Fontaine really looked like her sister Olivia in this film.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=joa…iR4IuQE&biw=1920&bih=949#imgrc=iBC_V-QpKbb72M:

  37. Konstantinos

    I don't know about the negative, but the HD digital version that exists seems good:

    [​IMG]

    Very nice, I think that not too many would complain if there was a Blu-ray release from that master.

  38. Josh Steinberg

    Nice. I'll probably wait to see the reviews on the corrected copy, but if they're better than the uncorrected version, I'm still in.

    I doubt that pricing stays that low for long so if the reviews are good then you'll have to buy it at a higher price point or wait for it to be discounted again.

  39. Robert Crawford

    I doubt that pricing stays that low for long so if the reviews are good then you'll have to buy it at a higher price point or wait for it to be discounted again.

    I saw both of them pretty recently so I can probably wait. But that's a good point – maybe I should order but wait to open for reviews and then return if necessary.

Leave a Reply