logo Sign In

Bossk

User Group
Members
Join date
10-Mar-2003
Last activity
13-Jan-2008
Posts
9,501

Post History

Post
#83929
Topic
DVD Packaging
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: starkiller
Less expense on packaging = increased per unit profit


That pretty much nails it on the head.

Besides, GL has said how much he liked the Indiana Jones DVD set, so I expected it to be similar in physical appearance.

There was no way it would be a digipak and I'm kinda glad he didn't. Those things get a bit unwieldy. I like to just slip one case out of the box and open it so I don't have to lay the whole thing down and unfold from here to infinity trying to get a movie out to watch. Weird as it sounds, the huge mother of a digipak that is Aliens Quadrilogy is one of the reasons that I've balked about buying it. I think I might just buy the couple I want individually.

Now what I would have liked to see for SW would have been slim line individual snap cases. Different artwork, hell yes. Check out the thread in the Restoration section all about Definitive Collection Artwork. Almost any of those would be ideal.
Post
#83918
Topic
If you like this, then you'll like this...
Time
Confused by the title? It refers to when you visit a website and it offers recommendations. eg "if you liked the movie Mallrats, you might want to check out Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back". That sort of thing.

Well, I want to know how these recommendations are derived on sites like IMDb.com, or Amazon.com.

I was just reading the entry for ESPN's "The Sports List" with Summer Sanders and, at the bottom of the page (Sports List on IMDb), it said "If you like this title, we also recommend..." and the recommendation was "Happy Tree Friends: Volume 1: First Blood".

Here's the description for HTF...

Quote

They're cute, they're happy, they're cuddly, they love life, and they die in the most gruesome ways - every single episode...


How did these two shows get equated? Please help. I'm confused.

What other completely ridiculous recommendations have you received either by a living person or a website?
Post
#83877
Topic
What if someone else had played Obi-Wan instead of Alec Guinness?
Time
I think the films would have been very different. Guinness added elegance and class to a space cowboy story. I don't know of anyone else who could have done it as well. I'm sure someone might have been able to. But all we're going to wind up with is a case of what if.

Just remember, rearrange the letters in "Alec Guinness" and you end up with "Genuine Class".
Post
#83876
Topic
SW Photo Spread in Vanity Fair
Time
Yeah, not having James is a bit of blasphemy as he's the one, in my mind, truly responsible for making Vader the greatest cinematic villain of all time. Without the voice, Vader is just a big guy in a black costume. JEJ added the "umph" behind his appearance.

I had actually wondered what it would be like to have all the costume characters sitting there with the helmets/masks in their hands. But I think that would work best as a supplemental photo. Have this one and then a second one with their masks off. If you just have it with masks off, some people would gripe that they want it the other way. So just make both happy.

I wish both Alec Guinness and Peter Cushing were alive for this shoot.
Post
#83875
Topic
A New Hope.... pieces of work becomes copyright free
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
but what about Max Rebo - don't you think that the original should be reinstated?


To be honest with you, I haven't seen the DVDs to know about that scene. I'm speaking about the three scenes that resulted in so much anger in me that I decided not to buy or rent the DVDs as a result. I've got my DVD copies taken from the pre-SE LDs and they're wonderful.

Learning about Max Rebo is a relatively new thing for me. I didn't realize he had been changed at all. Doesn't make me quite as angry as the other stuff I listed, though.

I'd like to be able to make my list more simplistic like...

1. Restore ANH to 1977 version

2. Restore ESB to 1980 version

3. Restore ROTJ to 1983 version

But somehow I don't think that's what you're shooting for, is it?