B5 DVD review

Kribu · Dec 4, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Joseph DeMartino:
Actually, your videotapes are deteriorating even if you never watch them.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great. Alright, I'll buy the DVD (or whatever the preferred media is then) in ten years when I finally might get an urge to watch one of those movies.

And when I bought/taped them (roughly half of my video collection has been bought, the rest I've taped off TV), I did so because I fully intended to watch them - just that once I had the tape in my hands, I lost all interest in it.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It doesn't sound as though you're enough of a movie freak and/or collector for you to be the target audience for this anyway.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is correct. I think the most I've ever watched any movie is 3-4 times, and I prefer to leave a few years' break between the viewings.

However, this doesn't mean that even a non-freak like me couldn't suddenly get all obsessed and passionate about a certain TV series... yes, B5 is the first and so far the only thing that has made me even consider wanting the whole series on tape/DVD so that I could view it again.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>When it comes to the episodes they very likely will add extras precisely to lure folks who have spent a small fortune on a partial VHS collection to buy the DVDs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Makes sense. I know I definitely want the first three seasons at least - I have 4 and 5 taped. I would guess that if the series is released, then I'll know for sure after season 3 comes out on DVD if I want the rest as well.

------------------
"Narns, Humans, Centauri... we all do what we do for the same reason: because it seems like a good idea at the time." - G'Kar, Mind War
Kribu's Lounge | kribu@ranger.b5lr.com

sputnik · Dec 4, 2001

hehehe!

all this excitement over one little DVD!

joe - i take your point about 'sub-par', but i find it very rare these days to purchase a DVD sans extras (and no, longevity and shelf space don't count!!

), hence my disappointment.

in terms of picture quality, no it isn't brilliant - and yes some of this can be blamed on the source material. i have however ('cos i can be kinda anal sometimes) compared my ItB VHS and DVD and have to say that there's very little improvement in picture quality on the DVD. who knows, maybe i have a killer VCR (unlikely) or a dodgy DVD player (bloody well hope not) - but i certainly haven't got the increase in picture quality i'd've liked...

ah well... as you say i'm hoping the uk releases don't have any extras, otherwise i'll be off purchasing more copies, my wife'll kill me and all the bad things will start happening...

cheers!

------------------

Joseph DeMartino · Dec 4, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>i have however ('cos i can be kinda anal sometimes) compared my ItB VHS and DVD and have to say that there's very little improvement in picture quality on the DVD. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One thing I didn't really take into account was players down-converting the anamorphic widescreen to 4:3 letterboxed on 4:3 sets. That will likely produce some aliasing, which I didn't see on ItB because I was watching it, as the good lord intended, on a widescreen set.

I did compare it to my laserdisc, and the DVD definitely looked better, so something must be at fault if you think the VHS tape looked just (or almost) as good.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net

**DONOTDELETE** · Dec 4, 2001

The other thing WBV will be using the sales is to estimate the sales of the episodes. When selling a DVD at a time adjusting the production quanity is easy. For a box set all DVDs have to be manufactured before the first one is sold. The cost difference between making ten thousand, a hundred thousand and a million copies is *very* big.

------------------
Andrew Swallow

Recoil · Dec 5, 2001

True,

But nothing is stopping WB from doing the B5 series as Paramount has done Star Trek the Original Series on DVD...2 Episodes at a time.

BTW I picked up the DVD tonight and watched In the Begining and thought it was great. If all the episodes make the DVD transition as this one did I cant ask for more from a TV series turned DVD. The sound and picture were very good.

Lastly, something about Joe saying this seemed kind of ominous. It had sort of an 'I know something you dont know' ring to it

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> BTW, look for a new thread shortly on where Warner Bros. is with respect to releasing the episodes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------
'I don't believe in the no-win scenario' - JTK

Jade Jaguar · Dec 5, 2001

So Joe, if I understand you correctly, all of us with 4:3 aspect ratio tvs won't be able to see ITB in wide screen? So I have to buy a DVD player AND a new tv to see it correctly? AARRRGGGGHHHHH?

I was hoping to wait a few years, until HDTV shakes out more, and comes down in price some more, since my old one is pretty big and works fine.

------------------
You're speaking treason! Olivia De Havilland as Maid Marian
Fluently! Errol Flynn as Robin Hood
You're talking treason! Olivia De Havilland as Arabella Bishop
I trust I'm not obscure. Errol Flynn as Dr. Peter Blood

Pallindromes of the month: Snug was I, ere I saw guns.
Doom an evil deed, liven a mood.

Jade Jaguar · Dec 5, 2001

Oh, yeah, how does it convert to 4:3? Does it compress, or crop, or what?

------------------
You're speaking treason! Olivia De Havilland as Maid Marian
Fluently! Errol Flynn as Robin Hood
You're talking treason! Olivia De Havilland as Arabella Bishop
I trust I'm not obscure. Errol Flynn as Dr. Peter Blood

Pallindromes of the month: Snug was I, ere I saw guns.
Doom an evil deed, liven a mood.

Joseph DeMartino · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>But nothing is stopping WB from doing the B5 series as Paramount has done Star Trek the Original Series on DVD...2 Episodes at a time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Except the fact that Paramount did very poorly with those 2-episode per disc Trek releases, which is one reason that Warner Bros. got cold feet and cancelled their first planned DVD release back in 1999. (When you can't sell Trek for the umpteenth time to rabid Trekkies who will normally buy anything with a Federation logo on it, you've got troubles.)

Paramount itself has learned the lesson: The next series will be released in season boxed sets, like The X-Files starting next spring.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Lastly, something about Joe saying this seemed kind of ominous. It had sort of an 'I know something you dont know' ring to it<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well there were already, what? three or four different DVD threads here. So I decided to put the latest stuff from JMS in a new thread rather than post it in four others. That was just a bit of a heads up to watch for the thread when I got around to posting it. (Which I did several hours ago.

)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>So Joe, if I understand you correctly, all of us with 4:3 aspect ratio tvs won't be able to see ITB in wide screen? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I didn't mean that at all. Without getting into boring technical detail, In the Beginning is encoded on the disc in a way that allows it to playback at a higher resolution on a widescreen TV than it would if it were a standard letterboxed release. You tell the player what kind of set you have. If it is widescreen the player sends the raw data from the DVD and the TV handles properly formatting if. If you have a standard 4:3 TV the player adjusts the image and sends an appropriate letterboxed image to your screen. Probably 3/4 of the widescreen DVDs you've ever watched are processed this way, and you've never known it.

Some players handle this "downconversion" process better than others. (Older models from some companies were especially bad, virtually all newer models from all companies are extremely good.) The bad one produce a slight "stair-step" pattern on fine lines and other minor picture flaws. But there is no loss of resolution. You're seeing exactly the same number of lines of picture information off an anamorphic widescreen disc that is "letterboxed on the fly" by your player as you would on one that was encoded as straight letterbox in the first place.

The difference is that if you get a widescreen HDTV set in few years the discs you buy today will look even better on that set than they do now.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net

**DONOTDELETE** · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The region coding system exists to protect non U.S. markets from U.S. product, not the other way around. The Hollywood studios acquiesed in the region-coding system at the request of theater owners and DVD distributors elsewhere.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I acquiesed in washing my right hand at the request of my left hand.

Sorry, but this one I disagree with completely. The "theatre owners and DVD distributors elsewhere" are simply Hollywood's official distribution channels.

When direct distribution channelse started to hurt their profits, Hollywood/MPAA decided to create an artificial market division to maintain maximum prices and assure the survival of these inefficient distributors.

------------------
"We are the universe, trying to figure itself out.
Unfortunately we as software lack any coherent documentation."
-- Delenn

Joseph DeMartino · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>and if they were that fussed for a good audience why multiple region releases?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, let's try this again. People keep talking about "Warner Bros." as though it were a single entity like Paramount and Fox. There is NO Warner Bros.

The R1 DVD is being released by Warner Home Video, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Warner Communications, which acts independently of other subsidiaries under the Warner umbrella. Warner Home Video only releases product in the North American market - U.S. and Canada. They neither know nor care what goes on in other regions, except to the extent that they don't want to interfere with the markets controlled by other WB units.

They are only concerned with how the disc sells in the U.S. and Canada and it is based on those sales that they will decide what to do next. They gain little or nothing by having people in other countries import their discs - except perhaps to piss off whoever releases Warner Bros. titles in the U.K. by cutting into their sales. (The region coding system exists to protect non U.S. markets from U.S. product, not the other way around. The Hollywood studios acquiesed in the region-coding system at the request of theater owners and DVD distributors elsewhere. So if the EU has a problem with the system, they really ought to be beating up on people in their own back yard.)

That's the reality of the situation. We may think it all ought to work some other way, but it doesn't.

The U.K. release is a different matter entirely. Since the series sold well there on VHS, it is quite possible that the individual discs will have some kind of extras (which could be why they're waiting until March.) If that's the case, I'll be stuck buying the films a second time for a lot more money.

BTW, I've taken a look at the discs and I don't see anything "sub-par" about them. It would be nice to have extras, but extras cost money. The picture looks good on both films. The Gathering and some of the battle interiors in In the Beginning are on the dark side - but that's how they were filmed. (My laserdisc of ItB looks very much the same.) On my 56" 16:9 TV I simply don't see all the "film grain" and "digital artifacts" that some critics have referred to. The films don't look as good as the best theatrical films, but then, most TV material doesn't. It isn't shot with the same time, money or care, and it isn't designed to be viewed on giant screens in public auditoriums.

But ItB in particular is noticably sharper and more detailed than the laserdisc, and both films sound a lot better than they have in any other format. Even if it isn't DD 5.1 the Dolby Surround mix is aggressive and directional, the Centauri warship fly-by at the start of ItB being a great example. My only "disappointment" is that there wasn't a season one boxed set next to the movie disc for me to pick up. I really look forward to sitting down and watching six or seven episodes back-to-back, which is really the best way to watch the show and pick up all the nuances. With luck, this disc will sell well enough that we'll get that, too, with extras this time.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net

Recoil · Dec 5, 2001

I have yet to get the DVD, I plan on picking it up tonight. All the insight is appreaciated, but doesn't make my want to buy the DVD more or less than I already did. Which brings me to the point my post. I have to TOTALLY disagree with the logic behind saying WB should have added the Extras in this DVD to help sales. My reasoning is as follows. People don't buy DVDs for 'extras'. They buy DVDs for the actual film because it is something they had enjoyed seeing before, or something they have never seen but looks interesting and buy it on a whim. I know of no one who picks up a DVD, turns it over, and looks at the extras before looking at the title of the DVD. They are exactly that, extras. Someone new to B5 won't buy or not buy this because of a lack of extras. The only people who DO care about the extras are those of us here, the die hard fans. And lets face it, die hard fans are buying it ANYWAY. So WB not adding extras isnt turning away first time buyers, it is simply a cost savings. It may irritate some die hard fans a bit, but those fans will still buy it anyway. I would like to think, however, if this does get released season by season, that there will be some more goodies in it, but it not having goodies now isnt going to stop me from running to BBuy and picking it up...

------------------
'I don't believe in the no-win scenario' - JTK

Kribu · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Recoil:
People don't buy DVDs for 'extras'. They buy DVDs for the actual film because it is something they had enjoyed seeing before, or something they have never seen but looks interesting and buy it on a whim. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How about people who own the film on video already?

Yes, die-hard fans will buy the DVD anyway - those not quite as rabid as us (or on a tight budget) might only consider it if the DVD has something extra to offer them, in addition to better picture quality - I'd guess that for a number of moderate fans who are not in any danger of wearing their tapes out because of repeated viewing, better quality alone might not be reason enough for buying the DVD as well.

------------------
"Narns, Humans, Centauri... we all do what we do for the same reason: because it seems like a good idea at the time." - G'Kar, Mind War
Kribu's Lounge | kribu@ranger.b5lr.com

sputnik · Dec 5, 2001

grrrr, arrgghhhh, damn...

once again joe nails it... wandered round to a friends last night to watch ItB on a proper widescreen TV...

...now you're talking picture quality! and i used to be so proud of my 36" TV... off to the shops i go...

cheers!

- and for those that haven't check out joe new thread regarding possible releases of the episodes on DVD... interesting, verrrry interesting...

------------------

Joseph DeMartino · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>When direct distribution channelse started to hurt their profits, Hollywood/MPAA decided to create an artificial market division to maintain maximum prices and assure the survival of these inefficient distributors.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only problem with this theory is that the facts get in the way. The distribution patterns that the region coding scheme conforms to existed long before any "direct distribution channels." They are the distribution patterns that U.S. theatrical films have followed since at least the fifties, when limited numbers of prints meant you couldn't simultaneously open a film in all areas of the world. And the DVD region coding system is at least as much about protecting theater owners as it is about the home video distributors who get the second bite of the apple. Films that are still in their first run in Europe are often available on DVD in the U.S. People running movie houses don't want their potential audience to have the option of watching the same film in digital quality in the comfort of their own homes. U.S. theater owners feel this way, too - that's why films aren't released over here when they're still in theaters.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division
joseph-demartino@att.net

**DONOTDELETE** · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Joe DeMartino:

The only problem with this theory is that the facts get in the way. The distribution patterns that the region coding scheme conforms to existed long before any "direct distribution channels." They are the distribution patterns that U.S. theatrical films have followed since at least the fifties...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your theory has the same problem as mine. The facts get in its way. Price data do so in a particularly visible manner.

---

Should we let history get in the way of free competition? Perhaps the distribution of all goods should follow their "established patterns" from some randomly chosen period? Perhaps books should have region codes which would make them first readable in China, allowing other regions to have access after 1000 years?

The "established distribution patterns" you mention were based on practical need and fair competition. The region code system seeks to uphold them via censorship and unfair competition.

If Hollywood's objective would have been protecting anything else than their profit, they could have done so easily. They would have created a system of expiring region codes which was technically feasible, only a few cents more expensive.

Instead they chose to ignore the rights of consumers, exceed their rights as copyright holders, violate principles of free trade and fair competition. The fact that they almost managed to pull it off... can only be attributed to their wealth and influence.

---

The principles are simple:

I am able to read a book no matter where I live. A film is just like a book. Why don't books get first released for libraries and then private customers? Why are cinemas different from libraries? If you can point out a qualitative difference, I will agree to consider your point.

A copyright holder has no right to discriminate against people (who have legally obtained the material) basing on their origin. While the format difference of PAL/NTSC is a coincidence, region codes are a deliberate creation, with the sole intent to divide a global market.

You call it protecting cinemas. I call it extracting maximum prices, forcing decisions on customers via deliberately created differences in standards. Differences that consist of one well-placed byte!

The same disks get produced and profitably sold in India for $7, in the US for $13 and in the UK for $28. If the intention is to protect cinemas, why maintain the price difference? Cinemas are already protected without the prices. These disks can clearly earn a profit for seven dollars. Why sell them for thirty?

Protecting cinemas is the weakest cover story ever invented. Hollywood may find nice "explanations" -- but their prices speak for themselves. Customers have the right to buy from the lowest bidder, a right which the region code system seeks to deny. Luckily customers also have the willingness to excercise their rights -- and MPAA has very few ways of legally limiting R1 exports.

A system which artificially maintains price differences and also harms the free movement of ideas will not stand long.

[This message has been edited by Lennier (edited December 05, 2001).]

GKarsEye · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I am able to read a book no matter where I live. A film is just like a books. Why don't books get first released for libraries and then private customers? Why are cinemas different from libraries? If you can point out a qualitative difference, I will agree to consider your point.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Libraries are non-profit. Movie theaters are. There is no need to "protect" libraries, they lose nothing.

Not only do movie theaters need to pull a profit, but in today's market, they need to do fantastic business to even stay alive. Despite the exorbitant ticket sales and box office smashes, theater costs are running so high that many are struggling to keep alive.

However, I do think the whole region coding think is stupid, because I can't buy older Jackie Chan movies.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."

jnk5y · Dec 5, 2001

region codes bother me a little but i'm in the US so things aren't too bad here. What bothers me is how they price their movies. Some crappy movies are $20 while other crappy movies are $10 while some good movies are $15 while others are $35. I don't understand it. Why is 'field of dreams' $35 while other similar movies are much much less.

------------------

**DONOTDELETE** · Dec 5, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Libraries are non-profit. Movie theaters are. There is no need to "protect" libraries, they lose nothing.

Not only do movie theaters need to pull a profit, but in today's market, they need to do fantastic business to even stay alive.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Most true... to a certain extent.

There are numerous libraries which require a yearly fee from their readers. They cover their operating costs, although most do not work for profit. Most cinemas do operate for profit, although I know a few which do not.

---

Most cinemas are private enterprises. Institutions which work for profit and thus have no right to unfair competitive advantages. If DVD sales endanger the performance of cinemas, movie studios are allowed to limit (or delay) their DVD sales. But not selectively, not by denying consumers free choice or artificially sabotaging the compatibility of disks with equipment.

It is unacceptable for film makers to create an unfair avantage for compensating the inefficiency of cinemas. If cinemas are inefficient, they will die or receive government support. Supporting someone is a fine idea, but this is Hollywood supporting its failing distribution arm at the expense of others.

It is no excuse for violating competition laws, copyright and consumers' rights. If cinemas are protected by creating an artificial market division, which in turn allows to freely manipulate prices -- then it is more than unacceptable, it is illegal.

Limiting DVD sales would have been acceptable, but Hollywood wanted to eat the cake and still have it. This is not allowable.

If they care for cinemas, let them protect cinemas. In reality they care about DVD prices, protecting cinemas with words when it feels comfortable. The true intention of region codes is easy to grasp -- DVD sales are more profitable and outperform cinemas, hence reaping better profits from DVD disks is the reason for region codes.

[This message has been edited by Lennier (edited December 05, 2001).]

bakana · Dec 5, 2001

We're missing one important point here:

The reason theater showings in Europe & Asia lag behind US is simple. The distribution system still depends on Prints. Prints which cost a Lot of money.
In some overseas markets (ie, English speaking), they can "recycle" a print and save money by delaying release until US theaters are finished with the prints.
In others, they must spend Extra to produce dubbed or subtitled prints. In these markets, they wait until "good reviews" in the US market spur demand.

Many of these considerations will go away when Digital Projection systems become cheap enough and of such high quality that they are competitive with film.
And when the majority of theaters worldwide have spent the money to Install the equipment.

Until then, Studios will follow distribution strategies that maximize profits. I.e. Fragmented distribution regions.

------------------
The 3 most common elements in the Universe:
Hydrogen, Greed, Stupidity!

**DONOTDELETE** · Dec 5, 2001

VHS Cassettes are not region coded. The studios simply rely on the PAL/NTSC split to run the distribution networks.

DVDs, which came later than cassettes, are region coded. This is not the behaviour of a natural system but does fit a malicious act.

As for the fairy story about the cinemas. Distribution of the VHS cassettes is delayed until at least 6 months after the films are shown at the cinema. They can simply apply the same rule to DVDs.

NOW A WARNING.

The whole of the money made in Hollywood depends on copyright law. If Hollywood cheats too much that protection will be removed. Copy-privilege hurts Britain financially, so banning it is in the UK's interests. In the United Kingdom alien companies have *NO* constitutional rights. In the USA limiting copyright to 1 week would comply with the constitution.

The Hollywood studios are basically relying on gentlemen's agreements. British Governments tend to be gentlemen; where as pornographic, double-dealing and money grabbing Hollywood is quite obviously not a gentleman. Gentlemen can trade with non-gentlemen but are expected to avoid cads and rotters.

It is in the most expensive supplier in the business interests to ensure that we can trust them more than the pirates.

------------------
Andrew Swallow

B5 DVD review

Administrator

Member

Moderator

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest

Regular

Regular

Regular

Moderator

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest

Moderator

Regular

Administrator

Member

Moderator

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest

Regular

Regular

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest

Beyond the rim

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest

Share this page

We value your privacy

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE