-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
Season 5 DVD Question
- Thread starter raven2032
- Start date
Shaal Mayan
Regular
You could always make one I don't think WB will sell or give one away .
...Maybe writing to them, saying that your boxset came without a booklet? It's got to be worth a try.
I'm thinking of asking them for a new box for season 2. I've only got as far as seasons 2 & 3 - but as far as I'm aware, the original box for 3 was the same as 2 (i.e. cardboard and plastic book type thing which is anything but durable). My season 3, however, came as six slimline DVD cases in a slightly bigger box (which is how I guess the region 1 sets have been released). I want them all like that!
Bah humbug and etcetera.
I'm thinking of asking them for a new box for season 2. I've only got as far as seasons 2 & 3 - but as far as I'm aware, the original box for 3 was the same as 2 (i.e. cardboard and plastic book type thing which is anything but durable). My season 3, however, came as six slimline DVD cases in a slightly bigger box (which is how I guess the region 1 sets have been released). I want them all like that!
Bah humbug and etcetera.
You know, I feel so much more confident about posting on here - and making mistake after mistake - when I know you're right there, ready to correct any foolish error I might make.
That might sound sarcastic. But it isn't.
By the way, I've always thought it was a shame O J Simpson didn't get a chance to carry on with the role of Kosh after "The Gathering".
That might sound sarcastic. But it isn't.
By the way, I've always thought it was a shame O J Simpson didn't get a chance to carry on with the role of Kosh after "The Gathering".
GenevaRanger
Member
Some information about the "great" job they have done for the R2 packaging:
Season 1: all 6 DVDs together in one case
Season 2: same, but small cosmetic changes on the back
Season 3: I got initially same as Season 2, but all the DVDs were loose and damaged, so I sent it back. It took months before I got the new Season 3, but this was now slightly bigger and each DVD in a slimcase. They had a lot of packaging problems at the time, so that's probably why they changed it to 6 slimcases instead of 1 case containing all the DVDs
Season 4: same as season 3, but again cosmetic changes on the back
So when I put all the Seasons in a row, they are all different! Maybe I'll post a picture sometime... I am anxious to find out what will happen with Season 5 R2.
Argh!!!
job they have done for the R2 packaging:Season 1: all 6 DVDs together in one case
Season 2: same, but small cosmetic changes on the back
Season 3: I got initially same as Season 2, but all the DVDs were loose and damaged, so I sent it back. It took months before I got the new Season 3, but this was now slightly bigger and each DVD in a slimcase. They had a lot of packaging problems at the time, so that's probably why they changed it to 6 slimcases instead of 1 case containing all the DVDs
Season 4: same as season 3, but again cosmetic changes on the back
So when I put all the Seasons in a row, they are all different! Maybe I'll post a picture sometime... I am anxious to find out what will happen with Season 5 R2.
Argh!!!
Yes, it's very frustrating. The original boxset design (seasons 1-3) is pretty awful - how many years of opening and closing do you think *that* will sustain? And while the box I got for season 3 is much better, it is hugely disappointing that Warner have not put a little more thought into this.
Still, what do we expect? They know we want to buy it - and in droves. So why waste too much money on good packaging? We will buy it regardless, because it's our favourite programme (or up there, anyway).
But it is really the *worst* way to house a season's worth of discs that I've ever seen. The thing looks second hand when you get it in the post! I reckon the best design I've seen so far is for the Starsky and Hutch boxsets. Nice to look at, fairly durable - and that marvellous thing of a whole season of something taking up exactly the same amount of shelfspace as one VHS tape. Marvellous. And they'll actually *look* like a set on your shelf, too!
In the end, I'd be more forgiving of the packaging if other mistakes hadn't been made. This thing with "And Now For A Word" being cropped is ridiculous. I can just about swallow effects shots being trimmed to fit the ratio when the live-action (the bulk of the show) was shot in widescreen, but surely that whole episode could have been released in 4:3?
Perhaps Warner were worried that someone would complain that the whole season wasn't in widescreen if they did that? I somehow think they'll get more complaints for doing it the way they have, though...
Oh well, they'll all get re-released in 5 years time as special editions (and they'll be "almost" right - don't expect miracles) and all of us fools will buy them again.
Still, what do we expect? They know we want to buy it - and in droves. So why waste too much money on good packaging? We will buy it regardless, because it's our favourite programme (or up there, anyway).
But it is really the *worst* way to house a season's worth of discs that I've ever seen. The thing looks second hand when you get it in the post! I reckon the best design I've seen so far is for the Starsky and Hutch boxsets. Nice to look at, fairly durable - and that marvellous thing of a whole season of something taking up exactly the same amount of shelfspace as one VHS tape. Marvellous. And they'll actually *look* like a set on your shelf, too!
In the end, I'd be more forgiving of the packaging if other mistakes hadn't been made. This thing with "And Now For A Word" being cropped is ridiculous. I can just about swallow effects shots being trimmed to fit the ratio when the live-action (the bulk of the show) was shot in widescreen, but surely that whole episode could have been released in 4:3?
Perhaps Warner were worried that someone would complain that the whole season wasn't in widescreen if they did that? I somehow think they'll get more complaints for doing it the way they have, though...
Oh well, they'll all get re-released in 5 years time as special editions (and they'll be "almost" right - don't expect miracles) and all of us fools will buy them again.
Okay. I'll get right on in here, and correct the usual foolish error before anyone else gets the chance.
A little browsing later...and we see that - apparently - every live-action shot in the show which has had CGI treatment will be cropped in the same way that your normal (usually space-set) effects shots are. "And Now For A Word" is the most obviously hit by this, because of the use of on-screen captions. The bits without them (and other effects) are still "proper" widescreen. Maybe a 4:3 release *might* have been better, considering how often PPGs get used...
Everyone else probably knows this. I'm just setting myself right.
Jump now? I probably should have jumped ages ago.
A little browsing later...and we see that - apparently - every live-action shot in the show which has had CGI treatment will be cropped in the same way that your normal (usually space-set) effects shots are. "And Now For A Word" is the most obviously hit by this, because of the use of on-screen captions. The bits without them (and other effects) are still "proper" widescreen. Maybe a 4:3 release *might* have been better, considering how often PPGs get used...
Everyone else probably knows this. I'm just setting myself right.
Jump now? I probably should have jumped ages ago.
KoshN
Super Moderator
A 4:3 release on DVD WOULD have been better, and they (WB) could have given the fact that all the CGI, existing only in 4:3, was justification for a 4:3 release. That would have been perfectly reasonable and understandable. It would have made sense. What they did, going with the 16:9 version and introducing all these new problems with the CGI scenes and Composite CGI scenes, was nuts.
EITHER stick with the same format you've already aired, OR re-do the CGI for 16:9 and do a true widescreen release (16:9 live action and CGI, across the board), but don't do a half-a**ed job of 16:9 live action and enlarged, top and bottom cropped, 4:3 CGI/Composite CGI.
Yes, this still pisses me off.Yeah, I completely agree. Since I discovered that more has been cropped, trimmed and otherwise distorted than I thought (more often than not nearly 50% of each episode, at a rough guess), I despair of the choice they've made to release this in widescreen.
I mean, how important is it to see an extra couple of inches of set (and nothing else, since it was always intended to be broadcast 4:3) on either side of the picture, at the expense of losing the tops of heads, captions, etc. in other scenes? We watched the thing originally in 4:3 - so it's not as if a 4:3 release would have resulted in us actually losing anything. But the way they've been released, we're losing a lot.
Widescreen is great, yes. But I want to see things as they were when they went out.
You can't release ST:TNG in widescreen, and everybody accepts that because you just cant't, without ruining the original framing. Why is there this mania to retroactively apply modern advances to older material?
You all know where you can stick your colourised Laurel & Hardy films. It was the 30's! They didn't have colour!
I mean, how important is it to see an extra couple of inches of set (and nothing else, since it was always intended to be broadcast 4:3) on either side of the picture, at the expense of losing the tops of heads, captions, etc. in other scenes? We watched the thing originally in 4:3 - so it's not as if a 4:3 release would have resulted in us actually losing anything. But the way they've been released, we're losing a lot.
Widescreen is great, yes. But I want to see things as they were when they went out.
You can't release ST:TNG in widescreen, and everybody accepts that because you just cant't, without ruining the original framing. Why is there this mania to retroactively apply modern advances to older material?
You all know where you can stick your colourised Laurel & Hardy films. It was the 30's! They didn't have colour!
KoshN
Super Moderator
Look at the bottom example in this series of 16:9 Sci-Fi Widescreen vs. 4:3 Laserdisc screencaps of Secrets of the Soul:
[sarcasm] Are you telling me that you're not absolutely thrilled at getting to see the person's entire elbow on the right? Surely, that was worth reducing the scope of all the CGI and Composite CGI shots. [/sarcasm]
And that's exactly what I've always said.
Because, on the surface, it sounds new and improved, and because of that they think it'll result in increased sales (and they're probably right in that respect). It also results in people being bummed out at the newly introduced problems, which didn't exist in the previously aired, 4:3 version.
Right. Part of the charm is seeing those films as you remember them, not colorized (Ted Turnerized).
Jade Jaguar
Regular
We've had this discussion so many times before... I am actually glad you've finally found someone who agrees with you whole-heartedly!
But, I will point out that in every example you show, the widescreen version is clearly the better-composed picture, and in only one is there anything that is even slightly important, left out. But, as many of us have pointed out repeatedly, JMS composed for wide screen from the beginning. I'm looking forward to the HD, widescreen, release...
But, I will point out that in every example you show, the widescreen version is clearly the better-composed picture, and in only one is there anything that is even slightly important, left out. But, as many of us have pointed out repeatedly, JMS composed for wide screen from the beginning. I'm looking forward to the HD, widescreen, release...
KoshN
Super Moderator
But, I will point out that in every example you show, the widescreen version is clearly the better-composed picture, and in only one is there anything that is even slightly important, left out. But, as many of us have pointed out repeatedly, JMS composed for wide screen from the beginning. I'm looking forward to the HD, widescreen, release...
Shot Comparison #1: I could go either way. No preference.
Shot Comparison #2: I vastly prefer the 4:3 version, because it has a more open feel, and like there's more depth to it.
Shot Comparison #3: I vastly prefer the 4:3 version, because it has a more open feel, and like there's more depth to it.
Shot Comparison #4: The 16:9 version would have been better if they moved the frame down a bit, showing more of her fist. I dislike where the 16:9 frame cuts her off on the bottom.
Shot Comparison #5: I hate to lose the electricity arcing over her head, however, the 16:9 shot is OK.
Shot Comparison #6: The cropping of the 16:9 is better here.
Shot Comparison #7: I prefer the tighter left to right cropping of the 4:3. It reduces the importance of the person with her back to us, and focuses more attention on the Pak'ma'ra and Dr. Franklin.
Firstly, I should perhaps apologise for re-opening this discussion when I probably realised this has been debated at length already... But I am a newbie and I've only just started to buy the DVD sets. And I was interested to know what other people thought.
Secondly, I take on board the fact that some of the 16:9 shots might be better framed - but I'm still of the opinion that none of the shots in the original broadcast made us sit up and say "that doesn't look right"...whereas I think there's quite a few now which do. At least, might it not have been possible to re-do the more offending articles if the original film still exists (I believe all of the credits - after the main title sequence - have been done again, so why not extend that thought a little)?
Thirdly, I'm less worried about losing arcs of lightning than I am about seeing less of Lytas...er...attachments.
Secondly, I take on board the fact that some of the 16:9 shots might be better framed - but I'm still of the opinion that none of the shots in the original broadcast made us sit up and say "that doesn't look right"...whereas I think there's quite a few now which do. At least, might it not have been possible to re-do the more offending articles if the original film still exists (I believe all of the credits - after the main title sequence - have been done again, so why not extend that thought a little)?
Thirdly, I'm less worried about losing arcs of lightning than I am about seeing less of Lytas...er...attachments.
KoshN
Super Moderator
Well, it's kind of a sore subject with me, as I have all the B5 4:3 Laserdisc releases
, and they look great. Unfortunately, Image Ent. never released all the episodes. Agreed.
Thirdly, I'm less worried about losing arcs of lightning than I am about seeing less of Lytas...er...attachments.
I just thought the extra lightning gave it a sort of cool, Frankenstein's lab look.
Regarding Lyta's "attributes".... well you'll never see me complain about seeing too much of those.
Jade Jaguar
Regular
I didn't mean to jump on you, Jump Now, I just meant to suggest, to KoshN, that I wasn't going to go into much detail, or restate the old arguments. Even if I don't totally agree with KoshN, I can understand how he feels, given my own extreme dislike for pan&scan, and cropped, feature films, which I will only buy in their original aspect ratio.
To sum up long-past discussions, details which you may well know, B5 was shot in Super 35, a process also used for feature films, which is designed to allow both a wide screen version, and a 4x3 version, without cropping, or p&s. B5 was shot and composed with the intention of eventually releasing WS as the definitive version. The problem is, the existing tech only allowed the CGI to be rendered in 4x3, affecting the composite shots as well. But, the CGI was also composed with the thought that in the future, it would be cropped to a WS aspect ratio.
In recomposing the shots for the WS DVDs, at times, I agree, they made some poor choices. But, over all, I believe that the DVD versions are much better than the 4x3 versions, and are, in fact, closer to the original visions for the episodes. Most seem to agree, but KoshN disagrees, strongly. I think the only way to produce truly definitive versions of each ep would for each director, and JMS, to get together, and oversee the recomposing, and WS transfers. This is an imperfect world, and that isn't going to happen, so I am satisfied with what we have.
If you want to see something monumentally stupid, that Warner Bros did along these lines, check out the DVD sets of the 1970s TV show Kung Fu, a favorite of mine. It was shot for 4x3 TV, and never imagined in any other aspect ratio. But, for the DVD, they cropped it to widescreen! Much important action, and picture has been lost, for no reason, save stupidity. A friend of mine bought season 1. After we watched a few painful eps, he returned it.
To sum up long-past discussions, details which you may well know, B5 was shot in Super 35, a process also used for feature films, which is designed to allow both a wide screen version, and a 4x3 version, without cropping, or p&s. B5 was shot and composed with the intention of eventually releasing WS as the definitive version. The problem is, the existing tech only allowed the CGI to be rendered in 4x3, affecting the composite shots as well. But, the CGI was also composed with the thought that in the future, it would be cropped to a WS aspect ratio.
In recomposing the shots for the WS DVDs, at times, I agree, they made some poor choices. But, over all, I believe that the DVD versions are much better than the 4x3 versions, and are, in fact, closer to the original visions for the episodes. Most seem to agree, but KoshN disagrees, strongly. I think the only way to produce truly definitive versions of each ep would for each director, and JMS, to get together, and oversee the recomposing, and WS transfers. This is an imperfect world, and that isn't going to happen, so I am satisfied with what we have.
If you want to see something monumentally stupid, that Warner Bros did along these lines, check out the DVD sets of the 1970s TV show Kung Fu, a favorite of mine. It was shot for 4x3 TV, and never imagined in any other aspect ratio. But, for the DVD, they cropped it to widescreen! Much important action, and picture has been lost, for no reason, save stupidity. A friend of mine bought season 1. After we watched a few painful eps, he returned it.
Nah, you didn't jump on me. I think this is a fascinating discussion, and I value every point of view.
I take your point that the releases we have are how JMS envisoned them, pretty much. And that the whole thing (including the full CGI shots) was created with widescreen in mind. I just wish (and surely this would have been possible) that they could have generated the CGI only shots with a border at the top and bottom! On broadcast, might they then not have been able to use the central portion of the picture (i.e. scan the middle section, losing the blackness at the top and trimming the sides) - and for the DVD releases, they could use the whole picture (i.e. with the sides of the shot, without "the blackness").
Okay. That's a totally non-technically minded "solution" without any knowledge of whether it would have been possible or not...but to my simple mind, it seems like it could have worked. Since they were planning for eventual widescreen, I guess if this had been possible, they should have done it.
The "Kung Fu" situation sounds awful. And I know how you feel. I resisted buying the complete series of a show called "Danger: UXB" on DVD - at a very cheap price - because the blurb on the back of the box told me that it was widescreen. Since the show was made 70s...80s...somewhere about then...I smelled a rat.
I think we can all agree that we don't like to see things released other than the way they were intended to be shown (or how they were first shown) - and don't like changes made just for the sake of it, to make them more "modern" (the laziest criticism of anything, on a side note, is to say "it's dated" - of course it is, it was made more than one second ago!). The problem with the B5 releases is that it's a very, very grey area...and there's no definitive answer as to "what's right".
To be honest, it does look lovely in widescreen. And I guess those of us who disagree with what's been done will get over (or swallow) the glaring bits, forget the other bits (where something has been changed but you don't really notice) - and marvel at how gorgeous the rest of it looks.
Someone would have been shot if they's released "The Gathering" in widescreen, though!
I take your point that the releases we have are how JMS envisoned them, pretty much. And that the whole thing (including the full CGI shots) was created with widescreen in mind. I just wish (and surely this would have been possible) that they could have generated the CGI only shots with a border at the top and bottom! On broadcast, might they then not have been able to use the central portion of the picture (i.e. scan the middle section, losing the blackness at the top and trimming the sides) - and for the DVD releases, they could use the whole picture (i.e. with the sides of the shot, without "the blackness").
Okay. That's a totally non-technically minded "solution" without any knowledge of whether it would have been possible or not...but to my simple mind, it seems like it could have worked. Since they were planning for eventual widescreen, I guess if this had been possible, they should have done it.
The "Kung Fu" situation sounds awful. And I know how you feel. I resisted buying the complete series of a show called "Danger: UXB" on DVD - at a very cheap price - because the blurb on the back of the box told me that it was widescreen. Since the show was made 70s...80s...somewhere about then...I smelled a rat.
I think we can all agree that we don't like to see things released other than the way they were intended to be shown (or how they were first shown) - and don't like changes made just for the sake of it, to make them more "modern" (the laziest criticism of anything, on a side note, is to say "it's dated" - of course it is, it was made more than one second ago!). The problem with the B5 releases is that it's a very, very grey area...and there's no definitive answer as to "what's right".
To be honest, it does look lovely in widescreen. And I guess those of us who disagree with what's been done will get over (or swallow) the glaring bits, forget the other bits (where something has been changed but you don't really notice) - and marvel at how gorgeous the rest of it looks.
Someone would have been shot if they's released "The Gathering" in widescreen, though!
