The Future of Home Video

[tenia]

I'd second that.

[MichaelB]

Although it's also the case that the shift from DVD to BD and now to UHD has significantly increased disc production and per-unit manufacturing costs, which unavoidably have to be passed onto customers. Which is one of the reasons why Second Run took ages to embrace high definition, because their entire business model relies on people's willingness to blind-buy titles they may never have heard of before - which is why they wanted to avoid anyone paying more than about £15 (ideally less) for one of their releases, while still remaining in business.

See also the way that British boutique labels have generally released UHD and BD titles separately - a small but highly vocal contingent screams blue murder about this, but there's abundant evidence that people who aren't planning to upgrade to UHD strongly resent having to pay a premium of at least £5, and even people who are UHD-compatible would rather pay £25 than £30, and dual-format releases are typically (and unavoidably) nearer the latter level.

[Peacock]

It’s painful having to buy UHD and BD releases of the same titles. BD so I can watch them now, or in places where there isn’t a UHD player, and the UHD copy for when I do get a HDR projector etc. But I recognise this is first world problems and boutique labels have to do what they have to do to stay in the game supplying us with the movies we love.

Unless you’re Imprint. Imprint has no excuse.

[rrenault]

My question is why is it socially seen as an eccentricity to physically buy movies even among a lot of serious film enthusiasts? Even in today’s world, it’s socially acceptable for someone serious about music to have a vinyl collection or for a voracious reader to have a large book collection, but buy films for physically is seen as eccentric no matter what.

[criterionsnob]

I had a conversation with my barber about how I buy movies almost exclusively on Blu-ray and 4K discs, and she proceeded to laugh, like a lot. I tried to explain how the quality and selection is better, but that just made her laugh more. However, she isn't old enough to really remember video stores, and always recommends shows on Netflix to me that I have no interest in.

[rrenault]

I do have to wonder if this wholesale shift on the part of boutiques to having a business model primarily oriented around bells and whistles UHD releases is partly responsible for the price hikes. Initially, a boutique UHD release was a once in a blue moon “event” interspersed among what were primarily Blu-ray releases.

When the 4K UHD format was initially conceived, it was probably only ever imagined to be an “event films only” format but when home theater enthusiasts saw the A/V benefits, it resulted in a mad dash to release anything and everything on the format, and the price hikes were the only way to keep up with the increased demand given the higher costs of producing and replicating UHD releases.

If a boutique label would only have 2-3 UHD releases per year as “events”, they could charge a more affordable price, despite the higher production costs, by justifying them as “passion projects” on the part of the label since they were still making decent money on the plethora of much cheaper to produce standard Blu-ray releases. In short, the overall production overhead was lower even if UHDs weren’t necessarily cheaper to produce on a per-release basis.

However, when your business model is structured primarily around 4K, you kind of have to charge an arm and a leg since the bulk of your production and replication costs come from UHD rather than Blu-ray, and that has to be passed onto the consumer.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Criterion ends up having to bump up their standard UHD MSRP to $60.

Those Imprint prices or what Shout is charging for those John Woo films feel like a “straw breaking the camel’s back” moment. 4K Arrow LEs aren’t cheap, but they’re still at least priced in the realm of “Ok, f**k it” if it’s one of your all time favorite films.

I could be wrong though.

The other issue though is standard 1080p Blu-ray isn’t quite as “premium” as it once was so a $40 MSRP for a standalone 1080p release is a harder sell then it used to be, but labels aren’t realistically going to lower prices…

[Zot!]

My question is why is it socially seen as an eccentricity to physically buy movies even among a lot of serious film enthusiasts? Even in today’s world, it’s socially acceptable for someone serious about music to have a vinyl collection or for a voracious reader to have a large book collection, but buy films for physically is seen as eccentric no matter what.

I think it's mostly because movies are considered "entertainment" by the general public rather than art. So to them, when you say you buy movies, they think you're buying something they consider disposable ephemera. It's easier to convince a hairdresser of the importance of a collection of opera records. Because that has a signifier of something high-brow, which even if they can't appreciate, they can imagine it denotes sophistication. I don't think it helps that "collectors" these days have the connotation of being Labubu enthusiast/steelbook collector over-consumerists.

[rrenault]

My question is why is it socially seen as an eccentricity to physically buy movies even among a lot of serious film enthusiasts? Even in today’s world, it’s socially acceptable for someone serious about music to have a vinyl collection or for a voracious reader to have a large book collection, but buy films for physically is seen as eccentric no matter what.

I think it's mostly because movies are considered "entertainment" by the general public rather than art. So to them, when you say you buy movies, they think you're buying something they consider disposable ephemera. It's easier to convince a hairdresser of the importance of a collection of opera records. Because that has a signifier of something high-brow, which even if they can't appreciate, they can imagine it denotes sophistication. I don't think it helps that "collectors" these days have the connotation of being Labubu enthusiast/steelbook collector over-consumerists.

To be fair, some element of this probably also applies to modern-day vinyl collectors.

I suppose what annoys me is there’s this implied attitude in modern-day where physical media culture “you’re letting the team down” if you’re picky about your purchases and don’t make an effort buy everything and anything physically, “because physical media needs to be supported. Otherwise, there’ll be no reliable way to access these films” when, as you say, much of it is just consumerism.

I fail to see how it’s heresy to physically purchase a handful of personal favorites while covering the rest with digital avenues, such as purchases/rentals on iTunes to use one example.

The bottom line though is people aren’t anti-4K as a format on a technical level. They’re anti-getting priced out and anti-physical media becoming strictly a collectors’ market, and those are both valid things about which to have an axe to grind I think.

[FrauBlucher]

For me it depends on where they are on the movie spectrum. If they are mainstream action/horror/comedy viewers then I get a quizzical, "really?" when they find out I still collect blu-ray's. I don't get that if they have a more eclectic, intellectual view of film, even if they themselves don't collect. It's more of a that's cool reaction. One co-worker who questioned my interest of collecting didn't even know who David Lynch was, even though he ODs on Netlfix and other streaming service shows. And he runs to the nearest multiplex for the latest blockbuster. He is in his 50s so it's not a generational thing.

I think of vinyl differently and I think it's looked upon differently than physical media for movies. It has more of an antiquity feel to it, like it's from a bygone era; having a turntable, speakers and shelves or bins of albums is almost like having interesting furniture

[Matt]

I think of vinyl differently and I think it's looked upon differently than physical media for movies. It has more of an antiquity feel to it, like it's from a bygone era; having a turntable, speakers and shelves or bins of albums is almost like having interesting furniture

I think there are probably a couple different veins of vinyl collectors just as there are of physical video media collectors. Some are in it for the music, supporting indie artists and labels and shops, and that vintage, possibly nostalgic analog feel. Others are in it for the Taylor Swift Target exclusive opaque pink and pale-yellow pearlescent vinyl with gold shimmer, collectible custom gatefold sleeve, giant double-sided poster, poem written by Taylor, and never-before-seen photos and album lyrics. And so with video stuff, we have folks in it for the films, supporting indie labels, and the idea of having a deep collection at your fingertips, and then there are those who are in it for the $430 Imprint Halloween 1-5 4K UHD steelbooks housed in a hand-painted, led-lit Jack O’Lantern inside a PVC display case.

No shame to any of these types of collectors—do what makes you happy. Heaven knows I want that Wes Anderson box set just to have it on my shelf, but I've talked myself out of it (for now). And the latter types of collectors doing what they do is probably what continues to allow the former types of collectors to do what they do.

[domino harvey]

I think one reason it seems inconceivable to laypeople is that they only want to watch stuff made recently that likely is streaming somewhere that they subscribe to, so the idea that something they want to watch isn’t at minimum rentable is probably accurate for them.

As far as people not understanding this as a hobby, I’ve dated almost exclusively women who tolerated my interest at best, but when we moved in my fiancée went out of her way to make sure I had to the most space possible in our house to shelve my films because she knew how important they were to me (though she herself is one of the aforementioned streaming watchers)— may you all find that kind of love in your lives!

[hearthesilence]

A friend of mine sees no point in physical media, but he's someone who spent a ridiculous amount of time researching the TV with "the best" picture quality possible, paid a lot of money for it....and currently streams incredibly shitty-looking illegal downloads of movies and TV shows on that very same TV. I don't know if he's representative of the average person who wants a top-of-the-line home theater and no physical media whatsoever, but it says a lot. Same with music - I can't understand how anyone who cares about sound quality at a time when horrendous mastering has blighted recorded music in general would insist on sticking with Spotify or some other mainstream streaming service.

[domino harvey]

I mean these are the same people who think vinyl sounds better and then play them on suitcase units from Urban Outfitters

[pistolwink]

Most people, including many if not most self-professed audiophiles, probably couldn't tell the difference between audio formats in a blind test. (There have been some studies to this effect.) My default assumption is that most cases of vinyl fetishism have little or nothing to do with "fidelity" in sound reproduction... not just among people who buy those suitcase units, but a lot of people who spend thousands on a Micro Seiki SX 8000.

One thing that distinguishes vinyl and film to me—what makes them not simply equivalent as "nostalgic" media formats— is that recorded music was very seldom recorded on vinyl (or shellac). It might have been recorded on lacquer, aluminum, or even glass discs if you go back far enough, metal wires, magnetic tape for most of the second half of the 20th century, or DAT, or even directly to digital files.... A 33rpm record can't summarily be said to preserve an original recording any more than a CD, much less a truly hi-def file. For this reason, I don't think vinyl records are any more "authentic" than most digital formats, indeed they have much greater sonic limitations... with the necessary caveat that any record or CD or digital file (downloadable or streaming) can be mastered poorly or well. People may be attracted to vinyl—consciously or not—because of the noise introduced by the mechanical playback mechanism (even tiny amounts of dust can contribute to that), and/or because the sounds carved into it are slightly transformed with every playback, making each 33 or 45 or 78 disc a "record" not only of the music but of its own use (albeit often in an almost notional way, unless you're misusing your turntable).

Similiar phenomena apply to film prints too, of course. Each time a print runs through a projector it is subject to changes, and even just sitting in a can its colors can shift. A print is a record of its own use as well as a vehicle for projecting a movie.

But a key difference, for me, is that most movies (until the 2010s) were shot on film and projected on film. That's not to say that a negative or interpositive isn't a different thing from a release print. It's not 1:1. But at least in the era before digital post, there was truly a greater "analogue" between what's been recorded and what's been played than was ever the case with popular recorded music formats.

At least, that's my explanation for why I will go out of my way to see films projected on film, while I could typically care less about whether I have an album on "vinyl." That said, I have a lot of records, because plenty of stuff isn't available (or easily available) on CD, because it is/was cheaper on 33rpm (this was much more the case in the 1990s, when everyone was dumping their record collections), and because sometimes the available CDs sound like crap.

[MichaelB]

As far as people not understanding this as a hobby, I’ve dated almost exclusively women who tolerated my interest at best, but when we moved in my fiancée went out of her way to make sure I had to the most space possible in our house to shelve my films because she knew how important they were to me (though she herself is one of the aforementioned streaming watchers)— may you all find that kind of love in your lives!

Provided I restrict my stuff to my home office and my former garden office (now a garden archive, and mostly full of crates), my wife's happy. Although we've agreed that if I reduce my holdings by 50% before we relocate permanently to Scotland in a few years' time, the new house will have a dedicated home cinema room, the layout chosen with that specifically in mind.

[Drucker]

Pistolwink, I actually don't see it the way you do. Sure, vinyl fetishism is overstated and there are many great sounding CDs, but popular music post-1950 was a medium primarily consumed on vinyl records (and radio, I suppose). The rock and roll era itself was listened to on vinyl, with records and collections changing hands and being passed down to next generations. If someone is getting into the Carter Family in 1955, or Hank WIlliams in 1975, or Robert Johnson in 1985, it still is likely via a vinyl record release. Billions of records were sold. All that is to say, I do think popular music and vinyl is basically synonymous in the popular consciousness, even if vinyl isn't necessarily more "accurate" than reel-to-reel tape or lacquers, etc.

Since COVID, my blu ray collection has been ever-present in the backdrop of all of my work calls, which often invites amused colleagues and professional contacts. It's a nice conversation starter, and you can tell 99% of people think it's a bizarre but charming oddity to know someone that collects physical media. I think it's just the reality that most people are going to gravitate towards the most convenient way to consume media, and any record collector or home video enthusiast is always going to be an odd-duck. And it doesn't bother me to be an odd duck.

[MichaelB]

I consumed films almost exclusively via 35mm until the last few years of the 20th century, as that wasn't just the best but pretty much the only way of watching them as intended (especially if they were in any flavour of widescreen). And then DVD came along just before I moved out of London and had kids, both the latter events significantly curtailing the number of interesting films available locally and my ability to go and see them even if I wanted to.

(I recently reviewed John Bleasdale's book on Jonathan Glazer, rewatching Glazer's complete filmography in the process, and idly wondered why I hadn't seen Birth when it came out when I made a point of seeing all of Glazer's other films on original release. And then I looked up the UK release date, and it was when I had a toddler with another kid on the way, which explained everything!)

[JSC]

It's a nice conversation starter, and you can tell 99% of people think it's a bizarre but charming oddity to know someone that collects physical media.

It's not as if physical media is some ancient outmoded technology. It's still being mass produced by major companies (albeit at a lesser amount
to be sure)... and it's not exactly the same as inviting someone to your house to listen to music and you have to haul out the wind-up Victrola
to do so.

[knives]

I think one reason it seems inconceivable to laypeople is that they only want to watch stuff made recently that likely is streaming somewhere that they subscribe to, so the idea that something they want to watch isn’t at minimum rentable is probably accurate for them.

As far as people not understanding this as a hobby, I’ve dated almost exclusively women who tolerated my interest at best, but when we moved in my fiancée went out of her way to make sure I had to the most space possible in our house to shelve my films because she knew how important they were to me (though she herself is one of the aforementioned streaming watchers)— may you all find that kind of love in your lives!

My wife would kindly tease me for my collection until our son became obsessed with The Lorax which suddenly one day was streaming no where. Since then she’s even bought for herself one or two things.

[Zot!]

My wife would kindly tease me for my collection until our son became obsessed with The Lorax which suddenly one day was streaming no where. Since then she’s even bought for herself one or two things.

Yeah, the US streaming market is super unstable. I don't think the likes of Amazon should even be allowed to offer a "purchase" rather than "rent" option, because even the most popular things just up and disappear. My daughter in a vulnerable moment bought a season of The Office, and after about 6 months it went up in smoke.

Another factor to people not "getting it" is that DVD/BD's on a shelf just hasn't gained the same Architectural Digest sexiness factor that a record collection or book library (that nobody reads) has today. Somebody needs to put some steelbooks on Pedro Pascal's midcentury modern shelving unit or something if we're going to compete with the likes of celebrity sneaker collections.

[rrenault]

My wife would kindly tease me for my collection until our son became obsessed with The Lorax which suddenly one day was streaming no where. Since then she’s even bought for herself one or two things.

Yeah, the US streaming market is super unstable. I don't think the likes of Amazon should even be allowed to offer a "purchase" rather than "rent" option, because even the most popular things just up and disappear. My daughter in a vulnerable moment bought a season of The Office, and after about 6 months it went up in smoke.

Another factor to people not "getting it" is that DVD/BD's on a shelf just hasn't gained the same Architectural Digest sexiness factor that a record collection or book library (that nobody reads) has today. Somebody needs to put some steelbooks on Pedro Pascal's midcentury modern shelving unit or something if we're going to compete with the likes of celebrity sneaker collections.

Pretty much this, I’d say.

That being said, I get the sense a certain contingent of admittedly passionate cinephiles have a democratic/egalitarian attitude and feel one should watch films any which way one can just to educate themselves even if not in ideal A/V conditions, and they probably see the fussing over “New 4K restorations” and UHD Blu-ray releases as “bourgeois” and counterproductive to the radical impulse of an intellectually and pedagogically substantive cinephilia (I.e. the kind of cinephilia one associates with the Godards and Serge Daneys of the world).

And I’ll admit my love-hate relationship with the influence UHD home video has had on modern-day cinephilia (which I know I often make clear and obvious on this forum to an admittedly annoying extent) stems partly from sympathizing with the above-mentioned type of cinephilia.

[domino harvey]

Is Tracy Letts not enough for you people

[MichaelB]

That being said, I get the sense a certain contingent of admittedly passionate cinephiles have a democratic/egalitarian attitude and feel one should watch films any which way one can just to educate themselves even if not in ideal A/V conditions, and they probably see the fussing over “New 4K restorations” and UHD Blu-ray releases as “bourgeois” and counterproductive to the radical impulse of an intellectually and pedagogically substantive cinephilia (I.e. the kind of cinephilia one associates with the Godards and Serge Daneys of the world).

I love a good 4K restoration, but the number of films from my own particular critical beat (central/eastern European cinema) that have received one is minuscule, and the number that have subsequently been released on UHD physical media is, as far as I'm aware, currently zero. And if the only way I can get to see a particular film is via a YouTube rip with a Serbian TV station ident burned in... well, that's better than I'd most likely have had access to twenty years ago.

[rrenault]

That being said, I get the sense a certain contingent of admittedly passionate cinephiles have a democratic/egalitarian attitude and feel one should watch films any which way one can just to educate themselves even if not in ideal A/V conditions, and they probably see the fussing over “New 4K restorations” and UHD Blu-ray releases as “bourgeois” and counterproductive to the radical impulse of an intellectually and pedagogically substantive cinephilia (I.e. the kind of cinephilia one associates with the Godards and Serge Daneys of the world).

I love a good 4K restoration, but the number of films from my own particular critical beat (central/eastern European cinema) that have received one is minuscule, and the number that have subsequently been released on UHD physical media is, as far as I'm aware, currently zero. And if the only way I can get to see a particular film is via a YouTube rip with a Serbian TV station ident burned in... well, that's better than I'd most likely have had access to twenty years ago.

Werckmeister Harmonies, unless you’re referring specifically to Soviet-era cinema…

[Mr Sausage]

That being said, I get the sense a certain contingent of admittedly passionate cinephiles have a democratic/egalitarian attitude and feel one should watch films any which way one can just to educate themselves even if not in ideal A/V conditions, and they probably see the fussing over “New 4K restorations” and UHD Blu-ray releases as “bourgeois” and counterproductive to the radical impulse of an intellectually and pedagogically substantive cinephilia (I.e. the kind of cinephilia one associates with the Godards and Serge Daneys of the world).

I love a good 4K restoration, but the number of films from my own particular critical beat (central/eastern European cinema) that have received one is minuscule, and the number that have subsequently been released on UHD physical media is, as far as I'm aware, currently zero. And if the only way I can get to see a particular film is via a YouTube rip with a Serbian TV station ident burned in... well, that's better than I'd most likely have had access to twenty years ago.

One thing I've had to accept with delving back into Hong Kong films is how many important films are just unavailable in decent releases. While I would love to go to 4K projections of Yim Ho's Homecoming or Ann Hui's The Spooky Bunch the way I could for In the Mood For Love and Bullet in the Head, I'll take semi-visible VHS/VCD rips on youtube and elsewhere if it means I actually get to see them.