How often do you view extras on DVD's?

[salmonax]

You're still missing the point. It's not a matter of withholding information but that a person should be able to get the full experience of the movie just by simply watching the movie, and not having to buy into special features limited edition web site mind games bullshit.

I don't really care about Blade Runner (I just wanted to use a common pop reference) but if the point of the entire movie is the question "Is Deckard a replicant?", why bother ruining the experience for everyone?

Speaking specifically about Blade Runner, Scott said that stuff because Blade Runner was pretty much hijacked from him by the studio, became a sore spot for him, and he wanted to piss people off. He didn't get to tell the story he wanted to, which is what I was saying with my very first post.

The only way you could "get the full experience of the movie just by simply watching the movie" is to remove capitalism from the equation. As long as studios can make make money by pushing unrelated bric-a-brac, we'll continue to see more shit like Enter the Matrix.

[Sqoon]

Speaking specifically about Blade Runner, Scott said that stuff because Blade Runner was pretty much hijacked from him by the studio, became a sore spot for him, and he wanted to piss people off. He didn't get to tell the story he wanted to, which is what I was saying with my very first post.

What's he complaining about? He got his director's cut.

The only way you could "get the full experience of the movie just by simply watching the movie" is to remove capitalism from the equation. As long as studios can make make money by pushing unrelated bric-a-brac, we'll continue to see more shit like Enter the Matrix.

I think exceptions can be made with something like the Matrix games since the Wachowski brothers did collaborate extensively on it and it serves an entertainment purpose (unlike commentaries, "10 clues lists on how to solve Film Q," and website puzzles) . As far as I'm concerned, I understand the Matrix films just fine and I'm not wondering what Niobe and Ghost did between Day X and Day Y because it's not the point of the movie, just like I'm not curious what happens in the Star Wars novels because they won't alter the perspective on the films in any way.

Also, directors can be just as guilty as studios.

Whenever Donnie Darko (and yes, this was discussed/argued thoroughly a long time ago and I bring it up only for this point) is discussed on any message board, there's always a message like this one. I have not seen Donnie Darko with commentary nor spent more than two minutes on the lousy director-collaborated website and I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how Donnie Darko "saved the world" or how "everybody's actually dead" (to quote various message posts). It's not because I'm lacking mental agility but its because this movie was either designed to be an impenatrable fog for the sake of being "deep" or just poorly, badly executed.

As a disclaimer: I know that 99% of commentaries aren't like this. Some are funny, some are trivially interesting, etc. I just personally would rather watch the movie on my own or spend the time watching something new.

[arjue]

Sqoon makes a valid point, with a good example.

My final essay for highschool advanced English was to pull Bladerunner to pieces and compare it to Shakespear's King Lear & Akira Kurasawa's Ran on the basis of nature versus control (god I love the Australian school system). Our teacher told us that if we go on the internet and look for that interview with Ridley Scot we will actually be disadvantaging ourselves, because he said that since we have the answers infront of us, we will not strive to look for subtle context.
Instead of critiquing the movie and coming to our own conclusion,
we will be working backwards and will try to fit our views into what we know is the truth. Which is meaningless.

It's not the destination that matters baby, it's the journey!

Bahahahaha

holy shit, I did that exact thing last year. GO HSC!

English was the single shittest subject I did. Instead of teaching us how to write, we learned about how pretentious directors throw ambiguous themes around.

They need to change schooling here so its oriented around learning, not passing your tests.



For the record, I got a score of 57 in english, mainly because I can't write fast enough. Woo!

[AstroBlue]

I don't agree with this. Creators are only attempting to say something. They can fail just as easily as they can succeed. There's no reason to take everything they say about their own work as the truth about it.

You missed the point. I'll try to explain using a controversial example:

Bob read the Bible and the sixth commandment said "You shall not murder." Bob decided he shouldn't murder because God said so, and he doesn't want to be punished by God.

Mary decided from the self exploration of her compassion for other humans that she shouldn't murder because that would be destroying another persons right to live. Mary then read the Bible and agreed with gods Sixth Commandment.


Bob knows fuck, Mary knows everything.

[rezo]

I seem to be missing the point often in this thread, but I don't quite get your example. The problem seems to be Bob's and not innately related to finding conclusions before you've looked for them on your own. For example, Bob could read the bible and disagree with it based on his own reasons even if he believes in god. He could also agree with it but ultimately find it worthless since he doesn't care for the argument the bible provides to support its case and would then be basing his belief on something else, like Mary, even if he agrees with the conclusion overall. I suppose what your teacher said was a sort of protection against students that wouldn't think to do that?

[Cheebs]

In the end, the moral of the story is that Bob and Mary both could have had higher bitrates on their DVDs if all that space wasn't wasted on extras.

[Scourge]

To those of you so hard on commentaries, think of some of them as film class, like Ebert's excellent commentary on Citizen Kane. You shouldn't dissavow what someone else has to say about a movie just because you think differently about it. I have no idea why anyone would honestly believe that listening to someone else's ideas on a subject would hinder their ability to think for themselves, and often other's opinions, while debatable, are a source of great perspective.

Take Fight Club for example, I hear so much about how this is such a fringe movie with a really strong message; the movie was nothing but bullshit to me with a gimmick. Good performances, good direction, interesting concept, but bullshit nonetheless. People who were so knocked out by the film's anti-consumerism "message" rushed out to buy the dvd. Anti-consumerism is not the message the film sent me at all.

You can look at other commentaries as 'making of/archival' type scrap book fan-service. The commentary on Superman: The Movie is great in this respect. You get onset type making of documentary information but it's as the film progresses, so you find out that that Kansas corn field is in Canada and those mountains by the highway where the missles get hijacked are at Banff and whatnot. Probably not the best examples, but the picture on Superman is pretty damn pristine, so why bitch about bitrates?

And like I said, that's where 2 disc/multi-disc/dvd 18 sets come in handy.

[Sqoon]

To those of you so hard on commentaries, think of some of them as film class, like Ebert's excellent commentary on Citizen Kane. You shouldn't dissavow what someone else has to say about a movie just because you think differently about it. I have no idea why anyone would honestly believe that listening to someone else's ideas on a subject would hinder their ability to think for themselves, and often other's opinions, while debatable, are a source of great perspective.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with that, and a meeting of minds is a place of invaluable information. Ebert may be a smart guy, he may have read countless books, he may have been on the set of Citizen Kane and been friends with Welles, and what he says is probably worth hearing. And it's those kinds of commentaries that I agree are worth hearing if you're so inclined. But In the end though, it's still only his opinion and the movie is still open to interpetation.

On the other hand, can you prove to me 100% Deckard is a replicant? No. 100% he's a human? No. Can anyone prove to me the theories of time Donnie Darko was trying to convey without resorting to websites or commentaries? No. Why can't I find out the "official answers" to these movies without resorting to outside sources? The only proof you have is the statement itself. It cheapens the whole movie.

I'm reminded of the Calvin & Hobbes strip where Calvin tries displaying his sidewalk doodles. Ultimately, he realizes that the "artist statement" is more important than the art itself.

[Gonzo]

I live for the extras. I have over 100 DVDs and have watched/listened to the commentary on almost every one.

[GohanX]

I'm with Chibi here. Cut the crap and have a really high-quality movie. Or have that crap on a second disc, DVDs are cheap enough to produce now.

I have noticed a nice trend, the last few DVD's that I've purchased HAVE been 2 disc sets, one with nothing but the movie, and the other for everything else.

The only extras that I normally look at are deleted scenes, although the watchers computer thing on the Highlander season DVDs are damn cool.