or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Twilight Time thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Twilight Time thread - Page 6

post #151 of 513
The one thing that is a bit frustrating is that I have to wait for an e-mail from SAE before I can actually order the TT BR - prior to that, it is nowhere to be found on the SAE website, although a tentative release date is given in this thread. For some odd reason, I went to the first posting in this thread and ran across #3 that details what TT is all about and it was fascinating to read - although it was long, both parts 1 & 2. I did really like The Egyptian BR that I had looked for quite awhile and could only obtain as an import dvd years ago - whose transfer was better than nothing. So far this has been the highest priced TT BR and with the commentary was well worth it. When it was announced on blu-ray.com, I didn't hesitate for a moment to order it, even at $39.95. It would appear that TT has dropped the dual release of BR and normal dvd that began with The Egyptian, but has never resurfaced again (I maybe mistaken). With BR players so ubiquitous, there is no great market for the dvd, even if it is about $10 less.
post #152 of 513
Thread Starter 
I started this thread. I didn't see anything off topic. If anyone needs disciplined it is the person sending mod reports for no reason.
post #153 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

"Even Fright Night"???

Virtually any film from the late '50s is going to be a tough sell on Blu-Ray. I couldn't possibly imagine Bell Book and Candle doing well at retail at all. And in this day and age, I'd argue far more people know what "Fright Night" is than "Bell Book & Candle".

Which means content from earlier than the 50s should be all but un-sellable, right? Tell that to the folks who bought "The Wizard of Oz" and "The General". The latter doesn't even have sound...or color...


Quote:
Once again, TT titles aren't being aimed at Walmart consumers used to routinely spending $5-$10 on catalog dump bin titles. They're not being sold for mainstream consumers in the first place! (This has been said over and over). They're being aimed at the hard-core HD loving fan of a particular film who wants to see it in the best possible quality and doesn't mind spending $30 to do so. They're only pressing 3000 copies of these titles, they don't need to engage the Walmart/Target crowd to make the model successful. And how this is so different than the $20 DVD-R model that all the studios have used for several years now is something you and any other contrarian here has totally ignored when the subject comes up. The pricing is commensurate....and believe it or not, people buy the $20 DVD-Rs or else they wouldn't be making them!

The simple fact that you also bring up this "single, easy to browse location" where the discs should be bought says it all. Like HDMe2 you seem to have the same tunnelvision that most people buy discs these days at a retail location. It's 2012. People buy discs -- and especially of catalog content -- online. They even search for these titles (as stunned as HDMe2 was to this alien concept), and buy them, on Amazon. I think the days of people going into a store hoping to find anything OTHER than "Avatar" and similar new-release titles are pretty much over myself.

Um...I specifically called for them to partner with Amazon. Fright Night would have likely had legs at Walmart along side the remake, but a proper presence on Amazon would be far better than the insignificant independent store TT has. There's also merit to selling in the store, but online is definitely where it's at.

People base what they buy on what's "trending" and Amazon is better equipped to work with that than just about any seller.

Having said that, if things were that bad at Walmart, they wouldn't sell media. Walmart only sells what they can move.

Honestly, the best thing TT could do for themselves is sell a hundred or so discounted copies to Netflix to rent out so people at least know the titles exist.

Quote:
What you expect and what the reality is for physical media are two different things. Or, don't mind me, simply go and read this article from Deadlinehollywood which notes many studios have been devalued at half their worth since 2007 primarily because the home video market has bottomed out:

http://www.deadline.com/2012/04/netf...rofits-report/

That's a fact. As it says, DVD sales are dropping faster than Blu-Ray sales (of all content, not just catalog) are growing. Continuing to feed retail chains with cheap product (at a loss) as they have all tried to do over the last few years hasn't turned things around either...so now you are seeing the result, which are catalog titles that most mainstream consumers aren't going to be interested in at ANY price, moving to a limited-edition or manufactured-on-demand model. Again, I don't understand why you continuously argue against this well-known fact that most people all understand.



And yet, as the decline of the home video industry shows, people haven't been buying catalog content no matter what the price is.

They're "undercutting the largest markets" because they're losing money going that route with catalog product that doesn't sell. You guys may never believe it until the books are opened to your perusal, but the writing is on the wall. You can keep going around in circles trying to ignore it or arguing it, but it's not going to change -- yes, it sucks you will have to pay more to get catalog content, but them's the breaks, and that's the reality of the marketplace in 2012.

The problem is, the economy has been in the dumper for the last 5 years or so. People aren't buying buying BD's because they cost too much compared to other choices.

People buy all kinds of stuff when the economy is hot. It will be again if our elected officials get it together and companies stop sending our jobs to people who steal our patents instead of using that money to buy stuff from us.

Heck, I'm gainfully employed, but at BD prices, I'm not buying as much as I used to. I just can't afford it. They cost too much for no reason other than the studios sell them for more. It's the same scan and restoration as the DVD, just HD instead of downrezzed to SD for DVD with different menus, yet it sells for $5-$8 more...and often more than even that. That adds up quickly.
post #154 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by junglalien View Post

I started this thread. I didn't see anything off topic. If anyone needs disciplined it is the person sending mod reports for no reason.

Since the OP doesn't have a problem with it...post away. As always focus on the post and not the poster when responding. Be civil.

Ron
post #155 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by rboster View Post


Since the OP doesn't have a problem with it...post away. As always focus on the post and not the poster when responding. Be civil.

Ron

Is that a rule? Honest question
post #156 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Is that a rule? Honest question

Depends on the situation. Case by case.
post #157 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post

Depends on the situation. Case by case.

I thought the OP just started the ball rolling.
post #158 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Heck, I'm gainfully employed, but at BD prices, I'm not buying as much as I used to. I just can't afford it. They cost too much for no reason other than the studios sell them for more. It's the same scan and restoration as the DVD, just HD instead of downrezzed to SD for DVD with different menus, yet it sells for $5-$8 more...and often more than even that. That adds up quickly.

I don't buy very many BD for the same reason, But I would rather put the money towards a catalog title that I like instead of the latest blockbuster that I can get anytime.
post #159 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeD View Post

I don't drink the kool-aid because I have too, I drink the kool-aid because I like the taste, especially Blue Kool-aid

Who else is going to buy these BRs at this price level? TT's break even point is selling 1500 of the 3000 available. The fact that there were only 3000 copies available for the entire world, made no difference to me. Sure like that Blue stuff.
post #160 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Heck, I'm gainfully employed, but at BD prices, I'm not buying as much as I used to. I just can't afford it. They cost too much for no reason other than the studios sell them for more. It's the same scan and restoration as the DVD, just HD instead of downrezzed to SD for DVD with different menus, yet it sells for $5-$8 more...and often more than even that. That adds up quickly.

With this economy, most people are trying to save a little bit here or there by doing things like combining store trips. In the large scale of things, BRs are cheap when compared to what a Betamax would have cost years ago - even when discounted at $40. Here is something that usually costs $millions to make and you can buy it for <$30. How cool is that? This is the golden era for people who love film because of the available inexpensive technologies available today. Aside from the cost, there is the continual problem of all of the dvds and BRs eating up space.
post #161 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by fookoo_2010 View Post

With this economy, most people are trying to save a little bit here or there by doing things like combining store trips. In the large scale of things, BRs are cheap when compared to what a Betamax would have cost years ago - even when discounted at $40. Here is something that usually costs $millions to make and you can buy it for <$30. How cool is that? This is the golden era for people who love film because of the available inexpensive technologies available today. Aside from the cost, there is the continual problem of all of the dvds and BRs eating up space.

I like that, great way of looking at it.
post #162 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by fookoo_2010 View Post

With this economy, most people are trying to save a little bit here or there by doing things like combining store trips. In the large scale of things, BRs are cheap when compared to what a Betamax would have cost years ago - even when discounted at $40. Here is something that usually costs $millions to make and you can buy it for <$30. How cool is that? This is the golden era for people who love film because of the available inexpensive technologies available today. Aside from the cost, there is the continual problem of all of the dvds and BRs eating up space.

Except the economics aren't the same anymore.

Computers cost $3K in 1982 - in 1982 dollars. Today, you can buy something 10000x more powerful for $600 in 2012 dollars. Heck, in the 70's, computers cost a couple thousand and you had to put it together your self and screw it to a plank of wood.

My family's first camcorder was a big VHS shoulder cam costing $900. Now I can get a DSLR that shoots HD for $800 or less and will also shoot 18MP photos. A standalone HD camcorder can be had for around $500. You can get a smart phone that fits in your pocket for next to nothing from most providers that will shoot video far better than that monster I owned decades ago.

Technology gets cheaper to produce as manufacturing techniques improve and economies of scale increase.

We've been using optical disc based media since the 80s. Each step from CDs, to DVDs to BD's is merely an improvement to the technology that starts with less overhead with each advancement.

It's shouldn't cost $100 to buy a movie like it did in the laser disc days. It shouldn't cost $30 to buy a catalog title, either. By the time movies make it to home video, nearly all of them have paid for themselves with theatrical tickets. Catalog titles also often have the added bonus of previous home video releases, TV rights and, in some cases, decades of merchandising. Further, many of these catalog titles were made on very tight budgets that would pale in comparison to those of today, even accounting for inflation.

We aren't paying $20, $25 or $30 for a multi-million dollar movie. We're paying $20, $25 or $30 for our small share of the chance to watch it.

We don't pay $3,000,000 for a chevy because that's how much it costs to produce a prototype. We pay $20,000 for it because that's how much our copy of that prototype costs with a reasonable profit for all those involved.

The right price for something produces the most revenue by setting the right price to sell the maximum number of units vs. what most people will pay. The secret is to not under or overcharge. Too much money and people won't buy and you lose revenue. Too little and you lose to much profit on each unit and lose as much revenue as you would by overcharging.

In the end, it falls on the studio to figure out how to make it at a cost that lets them sell it at a price most of the potential audience for the product will pay.

$30-$35 ain't it.
post #163 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Except the economics aren't the same anymore.

Computers cost $3K in 1982 - in 1982 dollars. Today, you can buy something 10000x more powerful for $600 in 2012 dollars. Heck, in the 70's, computers cost a couple thousand and you had to put it together your self and screw it to a plank of wood.

My family's first camcorder was a big VHS shoulder cam costing $900. Now I can get a DSLR that shoots HD for $800 or less and will also shoot 18MP photos. A standalone HD camcorder can be had for around $500. You can get a smart phone that fits in your pocket for next to nothing from most providers that will shoot video far better than that monster I owned decades ago.

Technology gets cheaper to produce as manufacturing techniques improve and economies of scale increase.

We've been using optical disc based media since the 80s. Each step from CDs, to DVDs to BD's is merely an improvement to the technology that starts with less overhead with each advancement.

It's shouldn't cost $100 to buy a movie like it did in the laser disc days. It shouldn't cost $30 to buy a catalog title, either. By the time movies make it to home video, nearly all of them have paid for themselves with theatrical tickets. Catalog titles also often have the added bonus of previous home video releases, TV rights and, in some cases, decades of merchandising. Further, many of these catalog titles were made on very tight budgets that would pale in comparison to those of today, even accounting for inflation.

We aren't paying $20, $25 or $30 for a multi-million dollar movie. We're paying $20, $25 or $30 for our small share of the chance to watch it.

We don't pay $3,000,000 for a chevy because that's how much it costs to produce a prototype. We pay $20,000 for it because that's how much our copy of that prototype costs with a reasonable profit for all those involved.

The right price for something produces the most revenue by setting the right price to sell the maximum number of units vs. what most people will pay. The secret is to not under or overcharge. Too much money and people won't buy and you lose revenue. Too little and you lose to much profit on each unit and lose as much revenue as you would by overcharging.

In the end, it falls on the studio to figure out how to make it at a cost that lets them sell it at a price most of the potential audience for the product will pay.

$30-$35 ain't it.

LOL, great post but absolutely begs the question: why aren't studios (sony in the most recent case) releasing seemingly popular catalog titles at a reasonable price?

Why does a company like TT have to step in and charge a premium???
post #164 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

The right price for something produces the most revenue by setting the right price to sell the maximum number of units vs. what most people will pay. The secret is to not under or overcharge. Too much money and people won't buy and you lose revenue. Too little and you lose to much profit on each unit and lose as much revenue as you would by overcharging.

In the end, it falls on the studio to figure out how to make it at a cost that lets them sell it at a price most of the potential audience for the product will pay.

$30-$35 ain't it.

It's a delicate balance for sure, and one that is hard to predict. Emotions run deep on all sides, those that think all titles should cost $5, and those that just want everything released no matter the cost, and those that want some kind of middle ground. I have my limits that move up or down depending on what title it is, so far the titles that I have chosen to buy from TT are worth the price, others are not.
post #165 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

.....In the end, it falls on the studio to figure out how to make it at a cost that lets them sell it at a price most of the potential audience for the product will pay. $30-$35 ain't it.

Nobody forces you to buy it. So don't buy it and leave the rest of us alone who are willing to pay $30+. It is our choice, you can make your own choice and vote with your pocket book and not buy it.
post #166 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi_Def_Boss View Post

LOL, great post but absolutely begs the question: why aren't studios (sony in the most recent case) releasing seemingly popular catalog titles at a reasonable price?

Why does a company like TT have to step in and charge a premium???

Go to the first page of this thread and go to the link in #3. There you will find your answer.
post #167 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Which means content from earlier than the 50s should be all but un-sellable, right? Tell that to the folks who bought "The Wizard of Oz" and "The General". The latter doesn't even have sound...or color...



Um...I specifically called for them to partner with Amazon. Fright Night would have likely had legs at Walmart along side the remake, but a proper presence on Amazon would be far better than the insignificant independent store TT has. There's also merit to selling in the store, but online is definitely where it's at.

People base what they buy on what's "trending" and Amazon is better equipped to work with that than just about any seller.

Having said that, if things were that bad at Walmart, they wouldn't sell media. Walmart only sells what they can move.

Honestly, the best thing TT could do for themselves is sell a hundred or so discounted copies to Netflix to rent out so people at least know the titles exist.



The problem is, the economy has been in the dumper for the last 5 years or so. People aren't buying buying BD's because they cost too much compared to other choices.

People buy all kinds of stuff when the economy is hot. It will be again if our elected officials get it together and companies stop sending our jobs to people who steal our patents instead of using that money to buy stuff from us.

Heck, I'm gainfully employed, but at BD prices, I'm not buying as much as I used to. I just can't afford it. They cost too much for no reason other than the studios sell them for more. It's the same scan and restoration as the DVD, just HD instead of downrezzed to SD for DVD with different menus, yet it sells for $5-$8 more...and often more than even that. That adds up quickly.

c) the bottom line, which I and others keep reiterating in response after response because not one of the three or four that keep posting the same thing over and over again seem to want to understand and probably never will - and it's really simple to get - if the studios thought there were ANY upside to doing this themselves they would - wait for it - do it. I am here to tell you that they have all taken rather large baths on way too many titles specifically because even at bargain basement prices NO ONE is buying in sufficient numbers. There is no refuting this. There is no way around it. If the studios were making money with these catalog titles they would release these themselves. They are not. The End.
post #168 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Except the economics aren't the same anymore.

Computers cost $3K in 1982 - in 1982 dollars. Today, you can buy something 10000x more powerful for $600 in 2012 dollars. Heck, in the 70's, computers cost a couple thousand and you had to put it together your self and screw it to a plank of wood.

My family's first camcorder was a big VHS shoulder cam costing $900. Now I can get a DSLR that shoots HD for $800 or less and will also shoot 18MP photos. A standalone HD camcorder can be had for around $500. You can get a smart phone that fits in your pocket for next to nothing from most providers that will shoot video far better than that monster I owned decades ago.

Technology gets cheaper to produce as manufacturing techniques improve and economies of scale increase.

We've been using optical disc based media since the 80s. Each step from CDs, to DVDs to BD's is merely an improvement to the technology that starts with less overhead with each advancement.

It's shouldn't cost $100 to buy a movie like it did in the laser disc days. It shouldn't cost $30 to buy a catalog title, either. By the time movies make it to home video, nearly all of them have paid for themselves with theatrical tickets. Catalog titles also often have the added bonus of previous home video releases, TV rights and, in some cases, decades of merchandising. Further, many of these catalog titles were made on very tight budgets that would pale in comparison to those of today, even accounting for inflation.

We aren't paying $20, $25 or $30 for a multi-million dollar movie. We're paying $20, $25 or $30 for our small share of the chance to watch it.

We don't pay $3,000,000 for a chevy because that's how much it costs to produce a prototype. We pay $20,000 for it because that's how much our copy of that prototype costs with a reasonable profit for all those involved.

The right price for something produces the most revenue by setting the right price to sell the maximum number of units vs. what most people will pay. The secret is to not under or overcharge. Too much money and people won't buy and you lose revenue. Too little and you lose to much profit on each unit and lose as much revenue as you would by overcharging.

In the end, it falls on the studio to figure out how to make it at a cost that lets them sell it at a price most of the potential audience for the product will pay.

$30-$35 ain't it.

And has been proven in just about every thread in the history of this board - if Sony did this and charged twenty dollars, people would complain and say "Why isn't it fifteen?" And others would say, "I'll just wait for it to hit the ten-dollar bin." And then those same people, when it did hit the ten-dollar bin, would say, "Well, I've waited this long, it's bound to hit the five-dollar bin." And that is why studios have begun licensing out titles. They don't need the aggravation and they like getting a certain chunk of money up front, never having to think about it again, nor dealing with returns - they are in, they are out - AND they still own the title and can work that title for their HD channels and streaming and however else they want to work it - and three years after the Twilight Time deal is up, they can, although they won't, release it themselves.
post #169 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway View Post

And has been proven in just about every thread in the history of this board - if Sony did this and charged twenty dollars, people would complain and say "Why isn't it fifteen?" And others would say, "I'll just wait for it to hit the ten-dollar bin." And then those same people, when it did hit the ten-dollar bin, would say, "Well, I've waited this long, it's bound to hit the five-dollar bin." And that is why studios have begun licensing out titles. They don't need the aggravation and they like getting a certain chunk of money up front, never having to think about it again, nor dealing with returns - they are in, they are out - AND they still own the title and can work that title for their HD channels and streaming and however else they want to work it - and three years after the Twilight Time deal is up, they can, although they won't, release it themselves.

But this practice is still very rare, it seems. Studios are much more likely to release catalog titles on their own, rather than through a third party. The ratio of studio released (catalog) titles vs. licensed third party catalog releases is at least 10 to 1? 100 to 1?
post #170 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi_Def_Boss View Post

But this practice is still very rare, it seems. Studios are much more likely to release catalog titles on their own, rather than through a third party. The ratio of studio released (catalog) titles vs. licensed third party catalog releases is at least 10 to 1? 100 to 1?

In the case of Sony and Fox, no. They haven't been releasing much of anything catalog-wise - a few here and there and that's it. Other studios have been releasing them - Paramount every now and then, Warners a bit, and Universal doing stuff regularly of late. But knowing what things are selling, I wouldn't be surprised if they either usurp Twilight Time's business model (in the same way that many other studios usurped Warners' MOD model), or begin licensing out at least their lesser catalog titles.
post #171 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway View Post

c) the bottom line, which I and others keep reiterating in response after response because not one of the three or four that keep posting the same thing over and over again seem to want to understand and probably never will - and it's really simple to get - if the studios thought there were ANY upside to doing this themselves they would - wait for it - do it. I am here to tell you that they have all taken rather large baths on way too many titles specifically because even at bargain basement prices NO ONE is buying in sufficient numbers. There is no refuting this. There is no way around it. If the studios were making money with these catalog titles they would release these themselves. They are not. The End.

That's the sad truth of it, and that's why I'm glad TT is releasing some of my favorite catalog titles, which I will gladly pay a premium. I firmly beleave that streaming is killing off any interest in catolog titles, it's a shame because there are so many great catolog titles that may never come to Blu-ray.
post #172 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeD View Post

That's the sad truth of it, and that's why I'm glad TT is releasing some of my favorite catalog titles, which I will gladly pay a premium. I firmly beleave that streaming is killing off any interest in catolog titles, it's a shame because there are so many great catolog titles that may never come to Blu-ray.

I fully agree with this.

From car leases all the way down to movies and music, people just don't want to own anything anymore.

I miss album art. I miss liner notes. I miss any sort of care in releasing stuff.

I fear I'll soon miss being able to use my computer without an internet connection when I can't install and run software from the drive anymore. Further, I'll miss the ability to not use the latest version if it sucks - which something the cloud will likely put an end to when they simply pull the old version.

We're headed down the digital path with such gusto, we're bound to be shocked when we all go "splat" at the bottom.

At that point, people might start missing those shiny discs, but it will be too late.

While it's great there are these options for rare titles, I think the studios are missing the boat by doing it this way. These guys built empires based on making people want to see this stuff and be desperate to experience everything in the world of movies and celebrity. Now, they all seem to have lost that hold on people.

That's really what they need to work out: how do you get people to love movies enough to buy them?

Bring back the magic and the customers will follow.

...oh, and step 1: stop cranking out movies that suck...
post #173 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeD View Post

That's the sad truth of it, and that's why I'm glad TT is releasing some of my favorite catalog titles, which I will gladly pay a premium. I firmly beleave that streaming is killing off any interest in catolog titles, it's a shame because there are so many great catolog titles that may never come to Blu-ray.

First there was rental that is being killed off by streaming. I have both with Netflix and use them as a pre-screening to determine whether or not I want to actually buy the physical disc. The amusing thing is that there is quite a difference in picture quality between the streaming and a BR disc, both video-wise and audio-wise. Yet these differences do not seem to make any difference to those who use their mobile devices to stream film. TT BRs cannot be rented, so they have to be bought.
post #174 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway View Post

And has been proven in just about every thread in the history of this board - if Sony did this and charged twenty dollars, people would complain and say "Why isn't it fifteen?" And others would say, "I'll just wait for it to hit the ten-dollar bin." And then those same people, when it did hit the ten-dollar bin, would say, "Well, I've waited this long, it's bound to hit the five-dollar bin." And that is why studios have begun licensing out titles. They don't need the aggravation and they like getting a certain chunk of money up front, never having to think about it again, nor dealing with returns - they are in, they are out - AND they still own the title and can work that title for their HD channels and streaming and however else they want to work it - and three years after the Twilight Time deal is up, they can, although they won't, release it themselves.

You forgot one important factor: people want it for free.
post #175 of 513
It's not that people don't want to own, I think it's that we are so overwhelmed with content and that access to digital versions of media (recordable to hard drive) are so easy to obtain, it's becoming harder to convince people to buy physical media. Two or three CD's can take up as much space as a 2 TB hard drive now.
post #176 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi_Def_Boss View Post

It's not that people don't want to own, I think it's that we are so overwhelmed with content and that access to digital versions of media (recordable to hard drive) are so easy to obtain, it's becoming harder to convince people to buy physical media. Two or three CD's can take up as much space as a 2 TB hard drive now.

Once the content is on any kind of hard drive, it is easily copied. Not that I couldn't eventually do it, but it is too much trouble to rip cds, dvds, BRs, SACDs, and DVD-As and create an archive. The attractiveness of portability is a hard one to beat for those who want to do it and carry it around in the palm of one's hand.
post #177 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by fookoo_2010 View Post

Once the content is on any kind of hard drive, it is easily copied. Not that I couldn't eventually do it, but it is too much trouble to rip cds, dvds, BRs, SACDs, and DVD-As and create an archive.

Copying content from a physical disc is "too much trouble" versus copying it from a file

the way that

taking a bite of a sandwich and putting on your socks is "too much trouble" versus putting on your socks.
post #178 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

Copying content from a physical disc is "too much trouble" versus copying it from a file

the way that

taking a bite of a sandwich and putting on your socks is "too much trouble" versus putting on your socks.

To quote Bender...

"Wait! You want me to do two things?!"

post #179 of 513
With three of the TT BRs, I got a refrigerator magnet that is a little bigger than a business card but has the cover art on it from the BR. The ones that came with the magnet were: The Egyptian, Picnic, and Bell, Book and Candle. The ones with no magnets are: Pal Joey and Swamp Water. I am wondering what the story is with the magnets, whether one is in the box or not. Or is it accidental that accompanies the TT BRs.
post #180 of 513
With an avalanche of content both old and new, short memory spans, a little bit of bitterness over the hd format war, along with overwhelming access to torrented/pirated material, I find it refreshing that there is still a collector's market at all. TT seems to be filling this niche nicely--I'm just saddened that a high profile picture like as good as it gets is now considered a "niche" title.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Twilight Time thread