Blu-ray & HD-DVD already failed formats?

[rumplestiltskin]

50GB of storage? Does that mean I'll get not only the 2 hour movie but the comments of every individual involved in the production? Maybe even the "key grip" and "best boy"?

The Key Grip always gives the best commentaries, very insightful. However, Best Boy commentaries tend to be rather pendantic and go on and on and on....

:P

Sorta like this thread, eh?

[Steve Stepoway]

I'll promise you that you don't want the commentary from the honeywagon driver

Steve

[rumplestiltskin]

I'll promise you that you don't want the commentary from the honeywagon driver

Steve

Sorry, Steve. With 50GB of space on the disc, you can bet even that will be there, too.

Even more scary: All those damn teasers at the beginning that you can't skip; there will probably be 60 minutes of 'em.

[ntscuser]

Personally I enjoy reading the copyright notices in 37 different languages including esperanto and swahili, especially if the disc was only ever sold in Denmark

[RLT69]

Personally I enjoy reading the copyright notices in 37 different languages including esperanto and swahili, especially if the disc was only ever sold in Denmark

...and the commentary by Ralph the Wonder Llama....

8)

[rumplestiltskin]

Warnings from the FBI... Surete... Scotland Yard... KGB... Carabinieri... Dalai Lama... and that nice lady on the street corner. You know which one...this one:

[RabidDog]

In that article he states that consumers loved CD's in 1982 and then when DVD's came out many years later they were entranceed by the idea of a shiny silver disc ???

Its so sad when a relationship ends and the bitter lovers turn on each other with all their energy.
I always thought v2000 was a better system than either Vhs or Betamax, but hell I find spares for my steam driven auto carriage impossible to find http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VCR

And, yes, we must move to a new Hi-def format, one that incorporates a far more secure security system than the current DVD one.. for the sake of Hollywood

[ntscuser]

In that article he states that consumers loved CD's in 1982 and then when DVD's came out many years later they were entranceed by the idea of a shiny silver disc ???

Its so sad when a relationship ends and the bitter lovers turn on each other with all their energy.
I always thought v2000 was a better system than either Vhs or Betamax, but hell I find spares for my steam driven auto carriage impossible to find http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VCR

And, yes, we must move to a new Hi-def format, one that incorporates a far more secure security system than the current DVD one.. for the sake of Hollywood

You mean the same Hollywood that wrecked its own dealer network by abolishing the distinction between retail and wholesale and now has no one to demonstrate their overpriced new formats properly?

[RabidDog]

No I mean the Hollywood that loves its customers and rubs their back on bad days.

bitter lovers (ROF &friends)!

[terjeber]

I love articles that predict failures. Take a look at this one from 1996: http://www.robertsdvd.com/failure.html

That does not compare to the thoroughness presented in the HD/BD article. Not even close.

People read into an article what they want to read. Most people do not read anything to get new information, just to re-confirm already held beliefs. Nows, as to HD vs ...whaterver...

TV standards don't change very often. Once every 20 years or so, perhaps. The new format is HD, and it is likely to stay that way for quite a while. Anyone buying a new TV from this holiday season and onwards, and who invest more than $600 in said TV, would be insane to buy an SD TV if it is the primary TV for the house. HD is here, and it will be coming on even stronger no matter what people want.

Think about this: A few years down the road there will not be any SD TVs available for sale. Not a single one. Technology becomes cheaper and cheaper, and better and better. This means that the only way companies like Sony can make money is by adding features to their TVs. Slowly they stop selling the cheapest stuff, which, going forward, means SD. In 5-6 years it will be as easy to find an SD TV for your main room (in other words a relatively large one) as it is to find a 80386 PC for sale at Best Buy today. It simply will not be economical to sell them.

This means that our brodcasters willl have to keep up. They need to produce HD because all the people out there with HD sets are going to change channel if it is not in HD. They will be able to tell the difference. If you can't, easily, tell the difference between SD and HD on a moderately good TV, I will buy a full year of food for your guide-dog.

As HD becomes prevalent, consumers are then going to turn to their movies (like DVDs today). They will watch one and see moderate quality and another and see far better quality, and believe me, the quality will be far better once the studios master the compression technology - they haven't ye, not to the level they have mastered SD MPEG-2 compression. So, what is the consumer going to buy for his HD set, a DVD or HD? They'll have a similar price as today, have no doubt. The HD stuff will be down around $20, the DVDs will be at about $5.

Now, what happens when DVDs fall in price. All titles. New and old? Well, the profit for the studios go down. They'll make less. This means that they'll invest less in DVD mastering. The current level of investment in a DVD release will not be profitable. Five years from now DVDs are going to be relatively poorly encoded stuff, or poorly downconverted HD. There will be no special processing for SD-DVDs. Now, the reason DVDs look as good as they do today is that the studios invest significant time and resources in encoding them, down to individual algorithms for different parts of the image. They can't continue investing like that when there is no money to be made.

So, once there is an amount of HD out there, be prepared to see the quality of DVD take a dive. Back to about 1998, and you know what, the quality at the time wasn't all that good.

Now, that means that you and I will both be buying HD content on our "DVDs" in the future. It doesn't matter what format it is, the content will be HD. The format may be HD-DVD, it may be Blue Ray, it may even be holographic storage on a credit card. We will buy it though, since most people are more comfortable owning something tangible rather than downloading the movie from an on-demand site. And don't forget something very, very important. You cant wrap a movie that is streamed from an Adelphia server. This means you can't give it as a gift, and that is very important.

At the moment there are two competing formats. That is not a bad thing. One of them will probably win, but we may end up with a situation where players play both, and there is no winner for years. Wouldn't really harm consumers all that much. Which format wins is dependent on two things. The first is the consumer. What will we buy. The second is related, namely what format will our favorite movies be released on. That is one of the reasons Sony bought a movie studio, particularly one with a huge archive of classical movies. Do you think that all the old MGM movies will be released on HD-DVD? Not soon, that's for sure.

I hope that this time the better technology, which is Blue Ray, wins. If the better technology wins we are all a little better off.

As to the gripes about the quality of the technology, cheeezuz guys, do you not have any concept of history? Compared to todays DVDs the older DVDs looked like VHS, you know what, the players generally sucked too. Badly. The problem is of course that most opiners in this case are so young they think DVDs have been around "forever".

People may not want HD. There are always some. Througout time we have had situations like these:

"That 'fire stuff, modern shit, it'll never catch on, and you know what, they'll just burn them selves to death."

Husband: "Hey, wife, have you heard, the Jonses moved out of their cave, they have built a wodden structure, they call it a 'house'". Wife: "Just a fad. It won't last. Who would want to live in a wooden house anyway. Did we climb down from the trees just to climb right back up?"

"Metal!?! Who needs this 'metal' anyway? I us a stone tool. My father use a stone tool. His father used a stone tool. Forget about it son, it'll never catch on. Just watch."

"If man was meant to fly Krishna would have given him wings."

[ntscuser]

90% of the population can't tell the difference between VHS and a live broadcast so why would they care if a new format has more resolution? People bought DVD because it was cheap and convenient, not because it had higher resolution. People buy HD screens because they're flat and hang on the wall, not because they have more pixels when viewed under a magnifying glass. It's just a tiny minority of techies who care about the specs and seem to think everyone else does too. Experiments in europe have shown that wherever there is a choice between more channelsand higher resolution, people opt for more channels. There are people posting in these forums who are perfectly happy viewing 24 episodes of a TV series on a single disc in a tiny window on their PC monitor and they are by no means unusual. As a former A-V demonstrator it makes me weep but that is the way the world is and there is nothing I or anyone else can do about it.

[RLT69]

Think about this: A few years down the road there will not be any SD TVs available for sale. Not a single one. Technology becomes cheaper and cheaper, and better and better. This means that the only way companies like Sony can make money is by adding features to their TVs. Slowly they stop selling the cheapest stuff, which, going forward, means SD. In 5-6 years it will be as easy to find an SD TV for your main room (in other words a relatively large one) as it is to find a 80386 PC for sale at Best Buy today. It simply will not be economical to sell them.

Do you read what you write or do you just like to see yourself write? Because what you wrote is simply asinine.

First off you can still buy VCRs. Think about that, 26 years after the VCR was introduced you can still buy them. Technology has a habit of hanging on longer than you think.

Secondly HD TV is no where near the market penetration to make Analog TV absolete, let alone Standard Definition TV. The only reason Analog TV is going away is because Congress passed a law forcing TV manufacturers to include Digital Tuners in their TVs. Did you see that. Congress had to pass a law to push adoption of digital tv, not consumer demand.

Thirdly, I have no idea what you are talking about with Sony. If you thinking Sony doesn't make money, you're kidding yourself.

The biggest reason HD adoption is slow is CONTENT! Until there is more HD content, people will not rush out and buy an HD tv. Also, given the problem with trying to standardize on some kind of DRM, this will further push back the adoption.

[rumplestiltskin]

The future -may- encompass HD but the change in 2009 will be digital. That doesn't necessarily mean HD.

There are also lots of folks who really couldn't care less about 52" screens either because they don't have the room for it or, frankly, watch a few sitcoms, CNN, and the local 10 o'clock news. HD is irrelevant to them.

Steely Dan's "IGY" wasn't a prediction of the future; it was an accounting of the failures of technology. I'm not a luddite simply because I don't buy into -someone's- version of progress. There are more important issues about the content of the content and the means of distribution rather than the size of the screen and the number of pixels.

[edDV]

Think about this: A few years down the road there will not be any SD TVs available for sale. Not a single one. Technology becomes cheaper and cheaper, and better and better. This means that the only way companies like Sony can make money is by adding features to their TVs. Slowly they stop selling the cheapest stuff, which, going forward, means SD. In 5-6 years it will be as easy to find an SD TV for your main room (in other words a relatively large one) as it is to find a 80386 PC for sale at Best Buy today. It simply will not be economical to sell them.

Do you read what you write or do you just like to see yourself write? Because what you wrote is simply asinine.

First off you can still buy VCRs. Think about that, 26 years after the VCR was introduced you can still buy them. Technology has a habit of hanging on longer than you think.

Secondly HD TV is no where near the market penetration to make Analog TV absolete, let alone Standard Definition TV. The only reason Analog TV is going away is because Congress passed a law forcing TV manufacturers to include Digital Tuners in their TVs. Did you see that. Congress had to pass a law to push adoption of digital tv, not consumer demand.

Thirdly, I have no idea what you are talking about with Sony. If you thinking Sony doesn't make money, you're kidding yourself.

The biggest reason HD adoption is slow is CONTENT! Until there is more HD content, people will not rush out and buy an HD tv. Also, given the problem with trying to standardize on some kind of DRM, this will further push back the adoption.

You both are confusing several issues. Let's try to sort them out.

1. Congress is changing the frequencies that broadcast stations can use. They did this for telecom spectrum demand issues, not any concern about TV consumer demand. Wireless comunication services were the target. This won't change cable or DBS reception so long as you use their tuner boxes. SD TV sets will continue to be produced but they will be required to have ATSC digital tuners whether you want to receive OTA broadcast or not. This is a waste of money if you ask me. The tuner and display should be separate. More than 85% in the USA get TV service over cable or dbs.

2. The new frequencies will use digital broadcast standards. This was done primarily to allow closer packing of stations in a smaller part of the spectrum. While they were at it, and to offer some consumer benefit + offer a boost to industry, HDTV was added as a side benefit. Digital broadcasting can be and will be for some time available in SD and HD. SD channels will be upconverted to HD and HD will be downconverted to SD in the digital tuners so that TV sets can tune all the broadcast channels.

Now to RLT69's points:

1st: Analog TV sets and VCRs will continue to function with external tuners but within a few years the analog tuner will become useless except in certain cable franchises. New TV sets and VCR's will be required to have digital ATSC tuners when the technology is cost reduced.

2nd: The analog TV transmitters will be turned off and cable will go mostly digital with QAM modulation except for a few legacy "granny" basic service analog channels (depending on local cable franchise laws)*. Digital tuners (internal or external) will be required to get most programming.

3rd: Sony is in serious trouble. They make money but a failure of BD will seriously deminish their future. I wouldn't advise SONY stock as a wise retirement investment.


* every legacy 6MHz analog channel on cable takes the space of 6-10 digital SD or 1 to 2 digital HD channels. Local gov'ts will decide if some limited analog survives or if cable boxes will be required for all.

[zoobie]

I read that the analog wireless signal will always be around as backup for emergency purposes for example when the cable goes out during a hurricane. I guess TV's will always have an analog tuner. Perhaps this plan is local.

[CrayonEater]

I owned thousands of dollars in movies on VHS. I was mighty pissed to have to re-buy them again on DVD. But there is no freakin way I'm going to start this process all over again, especially since DVD's effective lifespan was only a few years, and HD/BD will likely be shorter than that with HVD and other, more promising storage technologies.

Although I'm sure there are consumers who don't mind being milked like a freakin cow, I'm not one of them. The public just needs to be aware that this is exactly what is happening.

[edDV]

I read that the analog wireless signal will always be around as backup for emergency purposes for example when the cable goes out during a hurricane. I guess TV's will always have an analog tuner. Perhaps this plan is local.

The lower VHF spectrum (channels 2 to 6) will be reallocated to various services, mostly wireless communications and emergency services. Urban areas will start consuming the upper VHF (channels 7 to 13) for more services.

The oringial plan was to move all DTV to UHF but it has been decided to continue to use upper VHS for rural areas where long transmission distance is required.

The main need is to frequency separate high power TV stations from these new distributed low power wireless services and to make available about 50% of the spectrum previously assigned to television. The remaining TV channels will be packed closer together.

[adam]

Personally I think it mostly just amounts to ranting to write off such new technologies, but to each their own. But to argue that lack of content is the nail in the coffin for HD is just completely backwards. The whole point of releasing blu-ray and HD-DVD now, when HDTV penetration is low and prices are high and the market is iffy, is so there will be time for the content to accumulate! Over the next 5 years studios will be releasing new movies on DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-ray. By the time the technology is more accepted and more affordable there will be a sizeable amount of content available. You can't just churn out the last 5 years worth of movies to coincide with the release of first gen formats. You think Best Buy is going to clear out half its DVD section for HD-DVD/Blu-Ray movies? The content has to grow along with the popularity of the format. Look at any media format ever released and that's how its done because its the only feasible way to do it. These formats are not supposed to come blazing out of the gates. These formats are not even expected to penetrate the market for at least 3-5 years so I don't see how you can even attempt to judge them now.

[ebenton]

I think the point made by rumplestiltskin earlier is probably more appropriate than many of the other comments.
I and many others find no value in the extras currently being provided on many DVDs. What kind of content could any disk producer possibly put on a 50 GB disk that would appeal to enough people to make it worth the extra cost?
I think that there are not enough of those who are in love with the idea of 50GB or more of storage space on a disk to make sales of Blu-Ray disks skyrocket. If that's the big deal about Blu-Ray, then that should be what is promoted, not pre-recorded disk content.
Unfortunately for Blu-Ray, there is plenty of competition (especially cheaper) from other technologies in the mass-storage arena.

[Conquest10]

2. Format Wars Don’t Sell Players? Huh? Guess no one ever heard of a VHS player.

VHS didn't become the standard video tape technology because of the format war with Betamax (a superior technology, BTW), but in spite of it.

All I knew was VHS. Up until about 2000, I did not know there was a format war. All I had known about Beta was from the Married.. with Children episode.

10. Broadband and IPTV to Compete? What's this? Competition? Say it isn't so. Did the person writing this article even realize that competition spurs more competition which brings about more compeition which brings down prices, which sells more products to more markets and OMG make the whole point of this one useless?

Not true at all. Here, if I want broadband internet service, I have two choices. AT&T or Comcast. You can call them competing companies as they both have commercials touting their superiority to the other service. Prices have not come down. In fact, if I choose to stay with AT&T with their 768kbps DSL (which there is no chance in hell I would ever stay with them) my monthly bill would actually go UP to more than what Comcast charges for 6Mbps.

[ROF]

So you consider those movies to be "taking chances"? Money makers, yes, but "original"? Come on!! Anybody who's really in the business knows that the one thing that scares major studio execs more than anything is originality & creativity. They are terrified of it because they don't know how to predict it! Why else would they continue to remake movies that were mediocre to start with, or try to turn so-so '70s sitcoms into movies? They are trying to minimize their risk. What they want is a "franchise". Something other than trivialities like "plot" and "character development" that will get people into the theaters, like a star's name. Take a look at the Oscar noms for best picture from last year. taking chances, character-driven, edgy, NOT from major studios. The majors wouldn't touch them. If you don't know that then you don't know the business.

Steve

Oscar Nominations for Best Picture:

Crash - Winner - One great movie from beginning to end.
Capote - Probably should have one - Another great movie
Munich - Ouch a Doc-Drama that actually follows the events true to the way they unfolded
Good Night and Good Luck - An alright film but not my type of movie

All these are character driven films. The storylines would fail to function otherwise. I really do not know which movies you saw or which Oscar night you watched but these films are all quite edgy, all character driven, all take chances, and none of them are trivial unless you don't care for the material.

The reason why we see movies made from television stories is because they sell a ton of receipts. The bottom line is what matters in any business. Anyone in business knows that you need to keep the customer happy and make money. The customer is certainly happy if they are paying millions upon millions of dollars to see these big screen re-runs. It is not he movie industry who likes familiarity. It is the audience. The studios are taking a chance each time they release one of those types of film based on whether people will go see them. For the most part, they have been selling exactly what the public wants. While you may not agree with this. The box office receipts for last years Best Picture Nominees disagrees with you.

[RLT69]

The whole point of releasing blu-ray and HD-DVD now, when HDTV penetration is low and prices are high and the market is iffy, is so there will be time for the content to accumulate! Over the next 5 years studios will be releasing new movies on DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-ray.

Firts of all content is the driving force behind adopting a technology. If you can't buy movies in HD or watch HD programming, what's the point of plunking down $1000, as an exmaple, on an HD TV set if there is nothing to watch. The consumer would wait to buy an HD TV until there is content available. This is actually a good idea since HD TV technology is influx, thus buying an HD TV later, rather than sooner, has advantage of buying something that would be more mature and have the features you need and it would work.

If HD is the future than the market is not iffy. The market is only iffy if HD's future is uncertain. Studios can eaily push out the content on HD. The format has been established, Blue-Ray/HD-DVD. And if that's a problem to pushing product out the door then the Studios should have backed one format over another. This they did not do.

Once DVD was established over VHS - moving towards HD was a no brainer. People would adopt it if that's all that's available. But the studios are quite timid to push product out in HD only format. At the very least they could do what they did with DVD, make the first releases available in HD only, then later on release DVD and VHS (if they are still doing that).

The point is - there is a way to push adoption of HD. Make content available in HD and limit content access to HD format only. The studios would do well to follow Apples lead, when a new technology emerges they drop the old one and never look back.

By no means am I or for the most part anyone else saying HD is not coming. HD well get here but probably in another 10 years. The real question is wether or not Blue-Ray or HD-DVD is the technology that's going to carry HD. From what we have seen, it's not doing a good job.

[Cunhambebe]

Cunhambebe,
The WMVHD DVDs did show a way that you could get High Def content on a standard DVD-9 disk.
Granted you couldn't add dozens of surround tracks, lots of bonus features or extra long movies. (i.e. LOTR, Titanic, ect) But it would have been a hell of alot smoother to move to.

-I do agree with you. I guess before developing another kind of DVD that is the Blu Ray and HD DVD, the industry shoud consider first the technology already available such as Divx, Xvid and MP4 (AVC, H/x. 264)

What I don't get is why Blu-Ray is using MPEG2 on their disks. I guess they don't wnat to pay fees to MS. Doesn't Sony own some rights to MPEG2 too?

-I definitely don't know. One thing is certain: Microsoft has a webpage where some HD videoclips are available for download. I have donwloaded a couple of them; wanna know something? The quality is horrible - there are banding on the video everywhere. If this is the HD-MPEG2, I would say the only advantage of the new format is the storage capacity of 25 GB if I'm mot mistaken. Nothing more than this. But we never know what the industry plans for the near future - in order to take the money out of our pockets... Imagine that: buying Star Wars Trilogy all over again in HD DVD or Blu Ray - lol lol. I wouldn't do it

[Conquest10]

One thing is certain: Microsoft has a webpage where some HD videoclips are available for download. I have donwloaded a couple of them; wanna know something? The quality is horrible - there are banding on the video everywhere. If this is the HD-MPEG2, I would say the only advantage of the new format is the storage capacity of 25 GB if I'm mot mistaken. Nothing more than this. But we never know what the industry plans for the near future - in order to take the money out of our pockets... Imagine that: buying Star Wars Trilogy all over again in HD DVD or Blu Ray - lol lol. I wouldn't do it

Those are encoded WMV files. WMV is based on MPEG-4.

[Cunhambebe]

Anyway, it's HD, isn't it??

[jntaylor63]

None of these formats will get the wide support until we get universal players or one format dies. The market is made of average people, not enthusiast. Enthusiast will only but so much of this product. If you want your product to grow, you have to get the mass market. Even when the price drops to near DVD levels, people (ie the mass market) will be turned off by two formats. By having 2 formats where a movie may or may not be on both formats, most people will keep with DVD as it is "universal". Think about this. A person walks into a store looking to buy one of these new High-Def players. They are also going to look at what movies are available to help make their choice. This is what will go through their minds:

“Movie 1 that I like is in Blu-Ray and DVD. Movie 2 that I like is in HD-DVD and DVD. I will just keep with DVD.”

If we get to one format or universal players, people will see the new High-Def movies as a safe bet. They won’t care so much that there are two different disks, as long as their player can play both.

It will just take one company to make a good, well priced machine that can play both formats and the rest of the CE companies will see the light and do the same.

[ROF]

Anyway, it's HD, isn't it??

A 48k bit MP3 song is digital music but I don't think your eardrums will want to listen to it. Sure it's HD but not the best out there.

[ntscuser]

It will just take one company to make a good, well priced machine that can play both formats and the rest of the CE companies will see the light and do the same.

That is why they use encryption, to stop anyone in China producing an affordable machine and undercutting the big brand names.

[overloaded_ide]

First off you can still buy VCRs. Think about that, 26 years after the VCR was introduced you can still buy them. Technology has a habit of hanging on longer than you think.

I agree, I had to laugh when I read alot of this thread, and laugh hard when I read we won't be able to buy things like DVDs in a few years.

Lets see, everytime I go to a certain discount chain I find more and more $4.88 DVD movies available, been buying a ton of them and more are made everyday I geuss cause I see more different ones each week. Not all movie owners are as greedy as Disney, trying to get $15 for a 25-30 year old movie!
I'm talking about lots of good movies, not just crap junk, $4.88

I geuss the poster about how DVDs and players won't be available does not know you can still buy CASSETTE audio players and tapes still! How long have CDs been on the market? Oh ya it drove away ALL cassete tape players right? Cd's have all the same advantages over cassettes as DVD has over VHS tapes. Also we can still buy VCR's though there are less available new brands, but then that is more because people are not buying them than is it anything else. If people were still buying them there would be alot more to choose from. But most of us do want DVD.

Other disks do not have any advantage over DVD like DVD had over VHS.
DVD you can jump around at random, VHS you have to scan. DVD done with the movie put it away, VHS rewind 10 minutes. Want to watch a movie DVD is ready to go, VHS you find last person did not rewind it so wait 10 minutes.
DVD far less space than VHS. DVDs don't get ate like tapes. Magnets don't erase DVDs Etc.. Etc..
DVD took over the market for real reasons and it was not the extra space for crappy extras nor just a little better quality. Quality is better maybe in some cases but not on old Laurel and Hardy movies and other classics but we still buy those on DVD anyway.

As far as the quality, I capture my VHS's and burn to disks. Not a big deal, if I am going to watch the movie I just set up the computer to capture it at same time. I don't care enough about the little extra quality on a DVD to pay $15 to buy the same movie I already own and I care nothing about the extra's normally either.

DVD is not going to go away!!


Something was mentioned by some-one that players might play both formats till one wins and the other dies? Who cares then if either wins or dies and why should they??
Anyone here rember the great debates which is better format and which will live or which will die from a few years ago? Which format BURNER to buy?? HUH, well, I can still get plenty of DVD-R disks to burn on the old Toshiba 2X -R burner, and the newer burner burns both formats and I can buy both format disks in any speeds and I think DL too though I never bought a DL disk.
Format wars are for suckers. And disk formats it's been proven now does not need to worry about it, only a question of if they can or will make daul format players and burners.

Studios really don't give a rats behind about what media to use, they care about money!!!!
If 15 Billion people wanted to pay $20 each for the next greatest movie on VHS but not on DVD you can bet your behind it would be released on VHS!!! They would not throw away that kind of money simply because they like the DVD media better than sales! It does not happen because most people DO want the DVD's and not tapes.
If studios cared about the quality they would cut the crap from the disks and make the movies better quality now!

I have SEVERAL DVDs I am going to re-author, it was nice they gave me the deleated scenes as extra's so I can put them back in where they belong!!! They should NEVER have been cut in the first place! Parts of the movie does not make much sence because the scene showing WHY something happened was deleted. Ok, a guy gets ran over buy a car, the scene of WHY the driver was ticked off was cut so we don't know WHY the guy was ran over! If they don't care about the content of the movie why care about the quality of the media?? As long as it sells is good enough for them.

[ntscuser]

I have SEVERAL DVDs I am going to re-author, it was nice they gave me the deleated scenes as extra's so I can put them back in where they belong!!!

Alternatively, you could just wait a few weeks for the extended director's cut to be released!