DVD Pet Peeves

one of my pet peeves is when you but the disc in and movie previews start playing. that is really fucking annoying.

My peet peeve is that we're all going to have to buy our movies again in three years when Blu-ray starts to mature.

I second both of those--the movie previews are annoying, especially when you can't skip past them. This is typically of rental DVD's, but I know I've bought at least one retail disc that has this feature as well.

The Blu-Ray thing has me worried. DVD was embraced very strongly (as opposed to, say, Laserdisc), so to make everyone's collection so quickly become obsolete is not in the best interest of the manufacturers. I'm sure there will be side-by-side Blu-Ray/standard DVD units available for nearly the same price as single tray Blu-Ray units.

Does Blu-Ray destroy DVD players or something? There are so many of them around that it's hard to say how DVDs will become "obsolete" -- they're still going to be a standard computer storage format, at the very least. They will tempt you to buy another set-up, sure, but it'll be up to you whether you fall for it. DVDs are certainly entrenched for now.

Blu-Ray is a blue-laser technology for creating high definition DVDs. It's a fairly large leap in quality over standard DVD's, and it's expected to be highly touted as the replacement to the existing DVD format.

I have serious doubts that it will "take over" DVD's, at least for the next ten years or so, unless they make the prices too good to pass up. I expect it will go the way of the laserdisc--a videophile format that won't be widely embraced by the public. It should be a good format for digital projection mastering, though--there's even talk that many of the die-hard "film snobs" of the experimental film set may be willing to present their films digitally for the first time when Blu-Ray is perfected.

>there's even talk that many of the die-hard "film snobs" of the >experimental film set may be willing to present their films >digitally for the first time when Blu-Ray is perfected.

damn! otherwise, when the time comes, i think i might be able to pretend it doesn't exist.

>there's even talk that many of the die-hard "film snobs" of the
>experimental film set may be willing to present their films
>digitally for the first time when Blu-Ray is perfected.

Like who, for example?

I don't see how Blu-ray will make anyone more willing to show their films digitally - the difference between a DVD and Blu-ray is only so much (assuming that these people aren't working with ultra-complicated surround sound or so forth...). Honestly, for me the digital question is an origination one. For experimental work, how much of a difference is it between film>DVD and film>Blu-ray? Or HD>DVD vs. HD>Blu-ray? Can't be so much as to be the breaking point for a decision as to whether or not to present digitally. For example, I can't see Stan Brakhage being able to accept any digital medium, regardless of the quality, for best possible presentation of his films. He says so as much on the Criterion - that the DVDs provided are a tradeoff he's not happy about, but resigned to as inevitable tranmission method of the time.

For good discussions about this topic, I'd recommend joining the Frameworks listserv.

Even Fred Camper, the stodgey old "film purist" die-hard believes that Blu-Ray will be an acceptable medium for digital projection. Considering how incredibly limited 16mm and 8mm are as a "resolution" medium, it's really not an excuse anymore with today's video technology. We already have cameras like the Thompson Vipercam that have surpassed the resolution of film, and it's just a matter of time before average consumer media does as well.

There will always be film. I enjoy shooting on film because I like the tangibility and destructability of the medium and its imperfect aesthetic. But to give any justification for needing to project/distribute a film ONLY as a film print these days is merely for snobbish pretention and neophobia rather than quality concerns.

It is true that Brakhage put up a fight initially on the Criterion DVD's, but before his death, he was making every effort to ensure that they came out. And Brakhage is one of the filmmakers who had a decent excuse for not wanting video copies made--a large part of the appreciation of his films is the physical presentation of them: the sound of the projector, the flicker of the projected image, etc.

But at the same time, there's no such thing as experiencing a film in a vaccuum. When it comes to the point that a filmmaker has to make a written list of demands for what projection method is used, what the screen size is, where the projector is located, etc., it becomes less about the purity of the image and more about ideology and theory. That's where experimental film reaches it's downfall IMO.

The Vipercam is far from perfect. Just read the American Cinematographer article on Collateral. And honestly, I don't think that Fred Camper's opinion on the matter is going to shake up anyone. Brakhage's (were he still alive)...maybe. But not Camper's.

I am not saying that the world should be all-film, but the notion that Blu-ray, specifically in comparison to DVD, is going to change anyone's mind on the matter is, frankly, kinda ridiculous. Can you cite anyone else?

Fred Camper has been one of experimental films' most important voices for over 30 years, so his word does hold a bit of clout.

As for "American Cinematographer"'s opinion on anything video related, it's kind of like reading an article on Noam Chomsky in the Wall Street Journal. Their biggest advertisers are Kodak, Fuji, Arri, etc. so they're bound to be pretty biased. I'm not saying that the Viper is a replacement for 35mm but it's a hell of an advancement.

Again, for the opinion of the avant-garde set on Blu-Ray, check out Frameworks. I'm not saying that it's going to change the mind of the die-hards because nothing will--a close-minded film snob will always be a close-minded film snob. They have no grasp of the intrinsic value of the image because they're so wrapped up in nostalgia and celluloid lust to see past it, and their films usually suffer as a result.

Isn't there a big question about whether blu-ray will even be the successful "next generation" format? HD DVD may be pushed pretty hard as well. As I understand it, blue ray holds much more data than HD DVD, but may be more expensive to produce. There are also some concerns about it's durability against scratches, right?

In any case, I always imagined that the future medium of digitally projected movies would just be a hard drive, shipped to theaters. That's too expensive for home consumers, but I'm guessing that it's much less expensive than a film print. In that case you aren't constrained by the storage limit of any particular optical format. If you need 500 GB of data, just ship the movie on a 500 GB hard drive.

I don't want to change the subject, but the thing that annoys me even more than unskippable commericals before DVDs are the unskippable commercials before theater films. I guess DVD commericals bother me less because I'm not one of those people who buy DVD. I just rent them so I only have to suffer once. But, on the other hand, I'm only paying two bucks for the DVD. Nothing steams me up more than paying 10 bucks in a theater to watch 10 minutes of commercials. Its such bullshit. TV is free for a reason: the advertisement. But if I've paid money then I should either:

A) not have to sit through commericals or
B) sit through commercials and see the movie for free

worse, one of the funnest things about going to the movies is watching the trailers. How much do you want to bet that theater owners (who may or may not ever get the movies advertised) are tempted to show fewer and fewer trailers to make room for more and more commercials?

Just don't buy the Focus Features DVD's. Those are the ones with all of the commericals. It is annoying as all hell, yeah.

Whoops, yeah, the theater commericals are worse. I've noticed more of those, and fewer trailers. But then again, I haven't been to a movie theater in ages.

I guess they're using the negative marketing approach. You hate them so much you remember the name. I don't honestly see how that's selling anything though.

I'm in full agreement, I hate those as well.

I've been watching DVDs just under a year and have been able to skip all the commercials. Can't you just press the Menu option when they start? Works for me.

Some DVD players will let you skip the commericals and stuff even if they aren't supposed to. Thank China.

i like the way that regal cinemas do the commercials beforehand, they call it "the twenty" and it plays for the 20 minutes before the feature, and they even repeatedly remind you to show up early so you can see each and every advertisement. and then at actual showtime the 10-15 minutes of movie trailers start.

as for dvd pet peeves, right now it's companies that cram too much stuff onto single discs. but thankfully the industry seems to still be trending away from that.

I think I've decided to sell all but my favorite DVDs (crazy/beautiful, She's All That for the "Kiss Me" video, Dawson's Creek season 1, etc.) on Ebay before Blu-Ray/HD hits the market and pushes prices down. With Netflix/Blockbuster (and soon Amazon?) duelling for share and offering better service, I see little reason to own anything I'm not absolutely in love with.