Gladiator (2000)

[RedIsNotBlue]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

The same could be said when WB double dipped "300".

There were a ton of complainers for 300. "TOO MUCH GRAIN!" lol! Seems to be the opposite here with Gladiator.

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by Downhere

Yes, no one forced them to buy it, but they did buy it thinking it was the definitive release of that particular title with no new release being planned for a while. If you loved the movie and thought that this would be the only version available on Blu-ray for at least two years, then why not buy it and at least have slightly better PQ and way better AQ than the DVD release. But, I'm sure if consumers knew that a better release was coming with top quality picture, then they would have waited.

You summed it up for me. I never owned it own dvd so wanted the blu-ray. I didn't buy on release due to bad reviews. Then at Christmas time Amazon had it on sale for $10 so I said what the heck and bought it thinking since it was JUST released there wouldn't be another better,transfer, release for atleast 2-3 years.

I haven't opened it yet and now I see the news of a "corrected version". If they don't announce an exchange program then when the new version hits I'll take my sealed copy and swap it for the new one.

Also, the reason I feel an exchange program should be implemented is because I see this as not a double dip but a "corrected version" meaning the first was fubar'd. For example 300 WAS a double dip as nothing was wrong with the transfer or audio on the first release, they just rereleased it in different packaging and added more extras.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

I concur: no replacement program should be instituted. The studios owe no one anything, and vice versa. People need to learn the hard way from their mistakes, regardless of the cost.

This makes no sense.

Whether you bought or didn't buy the original release, no one here should oppose a re-release that comes with an exchange/replacement program.

No one loses.

(Your position also fails to take into account the average person who had no idea of the technical deficiencies of the release.)

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

The same could be said when WB double dipped "300".

Exactly. And also Stranger Than Fiction and I Am Legend. I don't think I heard anyone saying that WB or Sony or Disney should be replacing their original discs for them. People simply accepted them as newer special editions. But this whole thing with Gladiator is different...

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

You set your standards far too high buddy.

Gladiator was released on September 1st along with Braveheart, Heroes Season 3, Monster, M*A*S*H, Monster, The Girl Next Door, High Crimes, Puppies & Kittens, State of Play, Sugar, Supernatural: Season Four, Fire & Ice, Bring It On: Fight To The Finish, CSI: Season 9, and Terry Fator Live From Vegas.

Gladiator and Monster are the "poor" releases out of 20 new releases that day. That's too small of a percentage to call a format doomed.

If it were the other way around and 98% of the titles were poorly done then you have an argument. So I say with all you compaining you have done about this format, its either time to lower your standards or sell off you what you bought and go back to standard-definition DVDs & a standard-definition television.

2 out of 20 is 10%, not 2%. Just sayin.

[hamchuck1]

you can also rent it first to judge for yourself

I did that with several movies i had on dvd and was thankful I didnt buy the blu first because i didnt think it was much of an improvement

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

I agree with you wholeheartedly, so no apology is necessary.

If someone participates on a forum such as this, the onus of responsibility falls on the forum member to seek all of the information required before deciding on a purchase. No one is in a position to plead ignorance on this subject because the disc was reviewed on this site, as well as numerous others, plus we had pages upon pages of discussion on this very release. If someone went through all of the paces yet s/he still proceeded with a purchase, and were dissatisfied with what they received, they have no one to blame but themselves. No one was compelled to purchase this when it was released initially; all buying decisions were done voluntarily.

I concur: no replacement program should be instituted. The studios owe no one anything, and vice versa. People need to learn the hard way from their mistakes, regardless of the cost.

It aint that black and white though. We members witnessed a few industry people URGE Paramount/Uni to immediately redo/recall. I waited and waitted for a studio response. After a FEW MONTHS of research and waiting, we heard that the requests had fallen upon deaf ears and that the old version was "it". We were pretty much told that the studios said "thats all you are getting".

At that point, what were we to believe? No redo was in the works. Yet it was, nearly the whole darn time. Nearly.

I aint a bellyacher who feels entitled to every little thing, but I strongly believe we were mislead.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by RedIsNotBlue

There were a ton of complainers for 300. "TOO MUCH GRAIN!"

But those were from people that don't know what they're talking about.

[masetodd]

Let's think positive: Perhaps instead of an "exchange" program, they might offer a rebate to previous owners of the blu-ray - similar to the one for previous DVD owners.

Of course, the only problem with this is that most of us already cut out the blu-ray Proof of Purchase for the DVD rebate.....hmmmm....

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

2 out of 20 is 10%, not 2%. Just sayin.

Doh! You're right. Stupid maths is hard.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

But those were from people that don't know what they're talking about.

[Fighter]

No exchange....live with your purchase!!

[J.Cornelius]

Caveat emptor

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by Fighter

No exchange....live with your purchase!!

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Caveat emptor

Again, this makes no sense.

No one loses with an exchange.

I'd love to hear your reasoning.

[J.Cornelius]

I would think the movie studio would lose a significant amount of money on an exchange, no?

Explain to me how "no one loses on an exchange".

[J.Cornelius]

The exchange process does not make sense. In my opinion it is equivalent to saying you know that movie played fine on your blu ray player, no scratches, did not skip, etc.... but I did not like the quality of the presentation so I should be entitled to an exchange. And to that I say Caveat emptor......capitalism at its best.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

I would think the movie studio would lose a significant amount of money on an exchange, no?

Explain to me how "no one loses on an exchange".

The studio satisfies their customers, who purchased an inferior and deficient release (a release which the studio acknowledges and admits was inferior and deficient). They also regain customer confidence.

You think they lose? Fine, no problem. Does that mean they shouldn't do it? Please explain why.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

The exchange process does not make sense. In my opinion it is equivalent to saying you know that movie played fine on your blu ray player, no scratches, did not skip, etc.... but I did not like the quality of the presentation so I should be entitled to an exchange. And to that I say Caveat emptor......capitalism at its best.

Isnt the studios remastering within 4-5 months an admission of defect?

If the studio believes it to be satisfactory, they should not remaster it.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Isnt the studios remastering within 4-5 months an admission of defect?

Yes, it unequivocally is.

[J.Cornelius]

Have you purchased a Paramount title since Gladiator, I think customer confidence is probably ok. Toyota, maybe more of a consumer confidence issue.