DVD Bashing @ The Oscars ??

Any topic that doesn't fit elsewhere.
Post Reply
User avatar
pleasurebay
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:27 am
Location: The Jersey Shore

DVD Bashing @ The Oscars ??

Post by pleasurebay »

I'm sure I was not the only one to pick up on the DVD bashing that was going on last night at the Oscars :?

It just goes to show you how out of touch with reality these people are :!: Do they truly have a clue as to where the big bucks come from to finance these big budget blockbusters and the over the top paychecks :?:

Yes your right it comes from you and I going to the theaters and buying their DVD's :o

Maybe if a few of them had to survive on an average living wage they would understand what it really costs to take a family of four to the movies with the $10 tickets, $4 cokes and $3 candy. I can drop 80 dollars without even trying !

To be honest with you I can do without the rock hard seats, lack of legroom, candy and gum on the floor and the rude noisey patrons :!: :!:

Bottom line is I will take my couch over THE BIG SCREEN EXPERIENCE any day, and after all is said and done I own the movie :lol:
User avatar
Luke
Site Admin
Posts: 10037
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2003 4:57 pm
Location: Dinosaur World
Contact:

Post by Luke »

I saw it less as DVD-bashing as a feeble attempt to reverse the ongoing box office slump. Nonetheless, it was feeble. And raising ticket prices only makes DVDs that much more attractive. I mean honestly, unless you're seeing and buying movies just for yourself and have no time for repeat viewing or bonus features, then it makes little sense financially to regularly pay to see movies in theaters in their initial run. Most of the movies being advertised today don't scream to me as being worth anything more than a cheap theater viewing, and most of the time they don't even seem to merit that. There are, no doubt, certain exceptions that will get me to the theater, and there's nothing quite like opening night audience energy for a much-anticipated film. But by and large, I'd prefer DVD viewing these days.
castleinthesky
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 12:21 pm
Location: Laputa

Post by castleinthesky »

Actually the only DVD bashing I saw was against DVD burning.
Best Movies of 2009:
1. Moon
2. Inglorious Basterds
3. The Hurt Locker
4. Coraline
5. Ponyo
User avatar
TM2-Megatron
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:51 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Post by TM2-Megatron »

Yeah, it seemed pretty transparent to me, as well.

However, I'm not one of the people not going to theatres, so I ignored it. While I don't care for their shameless self-promotion, I happen to agree with them that, no matter how big your TV is and how many speakers you've got; it's still worth going to the theatre.
User avatar
pleasurebay
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:27 am
Location: The Jersey Shore

Post by pleasurebay »

On the rare occasion I take the family to the movies, especially for something like POTC which does call out for the big screen :!:

I took them all to see Your's, Mine and Ours in the hopes of seeing something as good as the origional which I also saw in the theaters!! What a waste , when the DVD sells for 99 cents maybe I'll buy it :P

They say you can't stop progress and in this case I hope they don't :!:

All we need now is a legal right to use the DVD's we purchase any way we want to for personal use :idea:
User avatar
AwallaceUNC
Signature Collection
Posts: 9439
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:00 am
Contact:

Post by AwallaceUNC »

I must have missed all this. :? I did see Shyamalan's wack commercial, though.

-Aaron
• Author of Hocus Pocus in Focus: The Thinking Fan's Guide to Disney's Halloween Classic
and The Thinking Fan's Guide to Walt Disney World: Magic Kingdom (Epcot coming soon)
• Host of Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Pod, the longest-running Disney podcast
• Entertainment Writer & Moderator at DVDizzy.com
• Twitter - @aaronspod
User avatar
pleasurebay
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 6:27 am
Location: The Jersey Shore

Post by pleasurebay »

There were actually several zingers about DVD's VS's the big screen and one over the top comment about trying to watch and epic movie release on a portable DVD player :o
User avatar
AwallaceUNC
Signature Collection
Posts: 9439
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:00 am
Contact:

Post by AwallaceUNC »

Ah yes, I did hear something about a portable DVD player. I was watching with a big group while also studying, so we probably talked over most of the DVD comments, which is why I missed them.

-Aaron
• Author of Hocus Pocus in Focus: The Thinking Fan's Guide to Disney's Halloween Classic
and The Thinking Fan's Guide to Walt Disney World: Magic Kingdom (Epcot coming soon)
• Host of Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Pod, the longest-running Disney podcast
• Entertainment Writer & Moderator at DVDizzy.com
• Twitter - @aaronspod
User avatar
deathie mouse
Ultraviolet Edition
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:12 am
Location: Alea jacta est

Post by deathie mouse »

Well Ben Hur, Lady And The Tramp, 2001: A Space Odissey, STAR WARS, The Ten Commandments, Back To the Future III, Harry Potter, don't look like the shadow of the theater screen on DVD, that's for sure.
Image
User avatar
jambo*rafiki
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 6:26 pm
Location: It doesn't matter . . . It's in the past . . .

Post by jambo*rafiki »

AwallaceUNC wrote: I did see Shyamalan's wack commercial, though.
That was SO COOL. I had no idea what was going on. I knew I recognized him though. I want to see it again!
"The names Cruuuuuuush. Emphasis on the U. But you can call me Crush."

"Asante sana, squash banana, wewe nugu, mimi apana!"

SAVE 2D!!!!!!!!
User avatar
Paka
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1094
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:38 pm
Location: Minnesota

Post by Paka »

I have to agree with TM2-Megatron. Under the proper conditions, there really is nothing like the big screen experience, because that is (or at least used to be) where films are meant to be seen. Unfortunately, due to the advent of television and home video, films have become egregiously mass-produced, and many of the rushed theatrical releases are little more than a grand advertisement for the eventual DVD released 3 months afterward. :roll:

But if one is wise in their decision of which films to see, the money spent is well worth it! I don't see many films in the theatre these days simply due to the large amount of junk that's released. So that's the first step - pick good films to go to. :P The second step is to select a good theatre to attend, because you'll have more of a chance of seeing the film projected and presented correctly. This is certainly not always the case, but your chances are better at some slicked-up theatre chains than most others. Third, on a similar note, try to seek out digitally projected and IMAX/large format films when you can. Even if it's just nature documentaries, IMAX films are an incredible experience! There's nothing like a giant Harry Potter!! :lol:
Fourth, and most importantly, seat yourself correctly!! If you sit way in the back and the screen is little more than a TV set from your perspective, move forward!! Theatre screens are not like television viewing, people! ;) These are simple steps to make your viewing of a theatrical film better. Unfortunately you can't control stupid monkey projectionists, who may possibly present the film incorrectly, but hey - that's the hazard of living! :D

I agree in part that the Oscars ceremony was a little too ham-fisted on the "big screen" campaign last night (and it most likely was monetarily motivated), but their point was still true. Unfortunately, gone are the days where film was an experience, complete with whole programs of shorts, newreels, and serials before it. Where do you think the term feature film came from? Because it used to be the feature presentation of a visit to the movies!! (Similar with the term trailer - because film previews used to trail the feature after credits! :P) Nowadays it's mostly a chore, and an unpleasant experience for a good number of people. No wonder the art of cinema is dying. :(

For all its hazards, however, theatrical films are still worth it over a DVD on a 27" screen any day of the week!! ^_^
Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: "Too late."

~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Lazario

Post by Lazario »

I didn't see the ceremony. Who did it / was it on the red carpet or during acceptance speeches?
bmadigan
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 10:18 am

Portable DVD players

Post by bmadigan »

AwallaceUNC wrote:Ah yes, I did hear something about a portable DVD player. I was watching with a big group while also studying, so we probably talked over most of the DVD comments, which is why I missed them.

-Aaron
I was noticing the other day, as I sat watching a movie on my 10" screen laptop DVD player, that with the screen on my lap, the image was actually larger than on my 27" TV across the room and probably camparable to a 56" projection set. It is all a matter of perspective.
User avatar
kbehm29
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 7:49 am
Location: Too Far Away from Disney
Contact:

Re: DVD Bashing @ The Oscars ??

Post by kbehm29 »

pleasurebay wrote:Maybe if a few of them had to survive on an average living wage they would understand what it really costs to take a family of four to the movies with the $10 tickets, $4 cokes and $3 candy. I can drop 80 dollars without even trying !
Try having a family of SEVEN! You have no idea how much of my (limited) budget goes to movies. The theater experience is almost always worth it though, providing you do your research before you go. I love spending my money on movies (theater and dvd), lol we just have to go to the $6 matinees.

Anyway, I didn't get to see the academy awards this year....wish I would have had time. :roll: I hope that other people see that theater viewing is still worth it...even if they have their own home theater system at home.
Disneyland Trips: 1983, 1992, 1995, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, Aug 2018
Walt Disney World Trips: 1999, 2007, 2011, 2014, 2016, ~Dec 2018~, ~Apr 2019~
Favorite Disney Movies: Peter Pan, 101 Dalmatians, Tangled, The Princess and the Frog, Enchanted, FROZEN
User avatar
deathie mouse
Ultraviolet Edition
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:12 am
Location: Alea jacta est

Post by deathie mouse »

Well watching Harry Potter on your 10" laptop gives you an image of aprox 3" x 8" (unless you have a 16:9 laptop then it's 3.5" x 9" :-P)

On a 27" TV the image of HP is about 9" x 22" if it's a 4:3 TV, or 10" x 24" if it's a 16:9 TV


If your lap is around 20"-24" from your eyes, watching HP on your laptop is like watching a 15" x 36" image from a TV (17" x 40" if your laptop was 16:9 :-P), at the typical "9 feet" seating distance

Depending on your laptop ratio/lap-eye distance :-P,
to get that kind of image size on a TV you'd need a 44"-51" 16:9 display, or a 45"-55" 4:3 display, aproximately, from 9 feet away.

50 points for Bmadigandor!


Now when the UD crowd watched Harry Potter at the Imax in Minneapolis, we watched it like watching a 6 x 14 FEET image 9 feet in front of us so that would mean a 17 foot (200 inch) 16:9 display or a 18 foot (216 inch) 4:3 display. Some of us even sat several rows closer than that on the theater!

That's the Theatrical experience. You don't watch a movie. You live it.

_________________
Image
Incrediholics Anonymous
Limited Issue
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:42 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX
Contact:

Post by Incrediholics Anonymous »

Lazario wrote:I didn't see the ceremony. Who did it / was it on the red carpet or during acceptance speeches?
First it was the head of the academy, then later, that man was the puppeteer for Heath Ledger's introduction to a montage.
Post Reply