July 27, 2005
View Comments | Post CommentDVD manufacturers suck
 |
So there's something that's been bothering me for quite some time. It's a problem I encounter at least a couple times per week, and though it only takes fifteen seconds or so to correct, it has become extremely annoying, to the point that it has induced this rant.
The problem of which I am speaking is that of two-sided DVDs and the way they are labeled. I know it seems to be a simple problem, but I am here to tell you, friends, that it is not. It is exasperating.
See, they put out DVDs with the widescreen version of the film on one side, and the "full screen" version on the other. Then they label one side as "Widescreen" and the other side as "Full Screen." The trouble is, I never know whether the "Widescreen" label should be facing up so that I can see it, or whether the side labeled "Widescreen" should be facing down, toward the laser that actually reads it. Either way would make sense, though I think the latter method would make a bit more sense. The side on which the widescreen version of the film is printed should be labeled as such, and should therefore be facing down toward the laser.
In any case, this wouldn't be so bad. A simple one-time trial would solve the dilemma and tell me which way the DVD manufacturers expect me to insert the DVD into my player or drive. The real trouble comes in the fact that every DVD is different! Some DVDs expect the widescreen label to be up to play the widescreen version, and some expect the widescreen label to be down to play the widescreen version. Guess Who's Coming To Dinner wants the Widescreen label down, while Play It Again, Sam wants it up. What the fuck is wrong with them?
Can't they label it "Widescreen (this side up)" or "Widescreen (this side down)?" Instead I have to arbitrarily pick a side, put it in, wait for it to start playing. Then, because the companies are too lazy to make two different sets of DVD menus, I have to actually play the movie and fast forward until I can see the entire picture. Then, approximately 90% of the time (can't explain why it's so often), I have to take the DVD out, flip it over, and play it. All I'm asking for is a little consistency.
On the other hand, it's completely beyond me why anyone would want a "full screen," aka "partial movie" version. Movies look so much more grand in widescreen... so much more aesthetically pleasing. The pan and scan versions just cut part of the picture off, destroying the care the directors and cinematographers have put into framing the shot. The letterboxing is a small price to pay for getting 50% more movie. I really wish the DGA would succeed in negotiating their contracts such that the full movie must be shown. Is anyone really going to go to the store looking for some movie, and then not buy it because it isn't available in a version chopping off its sides? Do any of my readers actually prefer the misleadingly titled "full screen" versions? If so, fuck you for causing me to have go through this hassle, but please explain why.
Posted at July 27, 2005 1:02 AM | Comments (4)
Comments
Post a new comment
justin keith and i used to have this theory about why people would watch movies in full screen or foreign films that had been dubbed instead of sub-titled when they had the choice: they're philistines.
Posted by: sarah at July 27, 2005 10:17 AM
Hooray! An opportunity to mention, again, that I work at BlockBuster.
So, I work at BlockBuster, and I can assure you, there are a lot of people who don't like widescreen, and their reasons are almost always "well, I don't have a widescreen TV." I've learned not to try explaining it to them, it takes too long and rarely changes their mind. (I don't mean to be implying they are dense, or anything, here, I just think that's the way it is.) The other common, and better, reason is that for those who don't have large tvs, the widescreen version might be too small to see what's going on easily.
In any case, I think the fullscreen advocates are fewer in number, but more vocal. People come in all the time and ask if such-and-such a movie is available not in widescreen, but rarely the other way around. Except a couple of days ago. Someone came in and said "Do you have this in widescreen format? I can only find it in letterbox." *shrug*
Posted by: Jeffrey at July 27, 2005 10:17 AM
"In letterbox?"
Isn't letterbox the widescreen format? Letterboxing refers to a method of copying a film to another format and preserving its aspect ratio. So I guess even this customer was a moron?
But yeah, I only get widescreen. I guess I'd rent a full screen version if they didn't have the widescreen, but not of artistic films. And I'd certainly never purchase a full screen DVD.
The funny thing is that before a certain year, a lot of films were originally shot in 4:3, and sometimes I will run across one of those DVDs, and it'll piss me off because I'll think it's pan and scan. Then I realize it was the original aspect ratio, and I feel stupid about being mad.
Posted by: David Barzelay at July 27, 2005 1:25 PM
Yeah, and I told the customer as much. Without the moron part. I don't think she was a moron, just confused.
Posted by: Jangler at July 28, 2005 11:48 AM
