'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

[McCrutchy]

Back in the days of videotape, people rarely bought movies when they were new. So studios priced everything in the $80-100 range because video stores had to buy popular movies for rental, and they had to pay whatever the studio wanted (though bigger rental chains, at least, got discounts on those prices). Anyway, after a year or so, most videotapes were repriced around $20 so people who wanted to own them could buy them at a decent price (and of course demand for rentals had died down considerably by that point anyway).

Oh, I remember all that, all right. But it's still funny as hell to think that rich 1986 parents would spend 80 bucks for a video of a kids movie, which would probably be worn down in a few months. I always like to refresh my memory when I want to complain about paying $20+ for a new release Blu-ray nowadays.

[Black Hat]

Oh man I had totally forgotten about those days. Looking back I remember being fascinated by the elaborate displays they'd have for the films with some videos inside a display case, others neatly stood up on top of fixtures. It looked like a cosmetic counter of videotapes.

[MichaelB]

Oh, I remember all that, all right. But it's still funny as hell to think that rich 1986 parents would spend 80 bucks for a video of a kids movie, which would probably be worn down in a few months. I always like to refresh my memory when I want to complain about paying $20+ for a new release Blu-ray nowadays.

And even those prices didn't seem too bad when set against the cost of Super 8 prints - which before the advent of home video was the cheapest domestic viewing option. In the last forty years, prices have plunged (and quality has risen) to a level that would have seemed utterly unbelievable when my dad bought a Super 8 projector in the mid-1970s.

Which is why I find it hilarious when people born circa 1990 complain about a Blu-ray being more than £10/$15. Not least because anything less than that is probably drastically underpriced when set against production cost.

[TMDaines]

C'mon MichaelB, the majors will charge whatever makes them the greatest profit long term. The costs related to their blockbusters are miles less than that. It's a completely different kettle of fish for labels looking to distribute classic, foreign and arthouse fare, of course, but the pricing of mainstream cinema on home video makes too much of a killing to worry about recouping costs. I think the majority of film fans understand that peole do need to make a living from running a DVD label, but when people are paying to line the pockets of big business through unfair fees (Sony's Blu-ray license fee) or to compensate for bad business practices (Twilight Time) that's when people get annoyed.

[HistoryProf]

I don't know what's funnier: Hunt's reaction, the bizarre association of the two films, or the fact that people would have actually paid $80 for The Care Bears Movie II: A New Generation.

Back in the days of videotape, people rarely bought movies when they were new. So studios priced everything in the $80-100 range because video stores had to buy popular movies for rental, and they had to pay whatever the studio wanted (though bigger rental chains, at least, got discounts on those prices). Anyway, after a year or so, most videotapes were repriced around $20 so people who wanted to own them could buy them at a decent price (and of course demand for rentals had died down considerably by that point anyway).

it was a lot longer than a year that a lot of titles were $60-$100 a pop on VHS...it wasn't until the early 90s that they started marketing VHS via retailers to sell. Before then your only option was the big price or finding a pre-viewed decomissioned copy at a video store. Those were dark days.

[MichaelB]

it was a lot longer than a year that a lot of titles were $60-$100 a pop on VHS...it wasn't until the early 90s that they started marketing VHS via retailers to sell. Before then your only option was the big price or finding a pre-viewed decomissioned copy at a video store. Those were dark days.

If that's true, then Britain was way ahead of that particular curve - our great VHS price drop was in early 1986. I remember it vividly, because I'd got my first VCR the previous November.

This was also the final nail in Betamax's coffin, at least as far as the UK market was concerned, as it was a conscious decision to manufacture sell-through tapes on VHS only. I think it was roughly the same time that Sony effectively threw in the towel by manufacturing VHS players for the first time.

[RossyG]

Yes, 1986 was when The Video Collection appeared, selling episodes of The Goodies and The Wind in the Willows for £6.99. Not long after that came Channel Five video (nothing to do with the later TV station), which sold proper films like Sophie's Choice for a similar price. Times were changing...

[dx23]

I know I shouldn't expect anything intelligent from the Yahoo comments section, but this one from a Safe Haven article summarizes the idiot crowd flocking to theaters to see crap:

If you want to be entertained for a couple hours go to a two star movie. However, if you want to be bored for two hours go to a four or five star movie.

[Murdoch]

Review for Compliance

The bad acting in this movie, (accept for the main character), combined with her attractiveness, gave it the feel of an erotic documentary, complete with spanking, fellatio, and a slow strip tease.

[McCrutchy]

This is kind of unfair, as it's been Google-translated from the original German, but at the same time, I can't resist:

A series for kids and adults alike ...., 19th February 2013

S. Schrader

Amazon confirmed Purchase(What is it?)

This review is from: My Little Pony - Galopping Gala - Die komplette 1. Staffel zur TV-Serie [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray)

... Because who can be deterred by the colorful ponies, who missed probably one of the best animated shows of the last year. Granted, the series looks at first glance like a typical series for little girls. But what is typical for little girls? Colorful Ponies and a colorful world? Men and boys are allowed to watch only series in gray and gray? Most would probably respond well to that at least this series nothing for male adolescents and adults, and for adults in general, is. Yet this attitude is based on most of the education that we all learn by the entire society around us. Typical series for girls and guys do not exist. Or is it typical for girls, is to look at only brainless series that revolve around tea parties and the latest fashion trends? Hardly. Similarly, it is typical for boys, only series to watch, exploding where things constantly. My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic combines great characters, interesting stories and beautiful animation that can not look at anybody who was not by this ridiculous split in typically discourage male and female, can be to look at something that small society according to the target group Girl was produced.

The series deserves 5 out of 5 stars. It's worth.

[swo17]

Why can't I ever receive seller feedback like this?

2 out of 5: "I just want to know what happend to my tv show that is called werewolf:the complete series. I haven't received it at all."

I mean, I'm listing all my copies of W:TCS and intentionally sending them all to the wrong addresses, but nothing.

[Matt]

One of the biggest hazards of being a seller on ebay and Amazon is selling to idiots.

[zedz]

I never seem to come across fodder for this thread (who reads amazon reviews?), but this seemed irresistible (identifying marks removed to add to the fun):

This is a movie I felt was strongly enough distasteful I had to write an Amazon review against it. [. . .] It's said to have the most sensual kiss scene in movie history--it turned my stomach because of the steamy passions of the main characters. It also gripped my attention with suspense, but the extreme melodrama and lack of moral boundaries to the characters was unwholesome and made me almost nauseous. A movie can have all the artistic achievement in the world, which this one does, but if it's a turn-off, then so what? I judge a movie based on whether it has something to offer me besides just emotional excesses--and this one doesn't.

SpoilerShow

It's Notorious.

[Feego]

Haha, I guessed the film from the line about the "most sensual kiss." I find myself picturing the priest from Cinema Paradiso furioustly typing that review with an outraged expression on his face.

[zedz]

I only just noticed the delightful double-take of the last sentence:

"I judge a movie based on whether it has something to offer me besides just emotional excesses--and this one doesn't."

What, not even "all the artistic achievement in the world," like you just mentioned? That's some harsh criteria!

[Koukol]

Speaking of VHS...
A long time ago I bought JULIET OF THE SPIRITS on VHS which cost me $120.00 and since the film was longer than the tape the movie ended 3/4 of the way through.
And don't get me started on PQ.

[Mr Sausage]

Haha, I guessed the film from the line about the "most sensual kiss."

Same here. No doubt because Marian Keane beleaguered this scene to death, right before moving on to tell me about even more penises lurking in every shot.

[Gregory]

Haha, I guessed the film from the line about the "most sensual kiss."

I might as easily have guessed Big Top Pee-Wee.

I never seem to come across fodder for this thread (who reads amazon reviews?)

Addict right here. For me the question is how one resists.

[MichaelB]

I often read one-star Amazon reviews, usually to see if there are any technical issues I should be warned about.

[zedz]

That's what I've got you guys for.

[Steven H]

Found here. I know it's HuffPo and I know you're supposed to ignore comments on the internet, but I thought this was worth posting here.

[bainbridgezu]

Pre-emptive pan of Frances Ha, based upon the trailer:

Gerwig is well-liked, seems to be a decent enough actress. Noah Baumbach seems to be putting some decent touches onto a writing and directing career, and is an up and comer. But this movie? This movie comes out every two weeks. And I hate it. I’m sick of it. Every Dawson Leery with a hipster actress girlfriend and a New York City fetish makes this film and is surprised when the world doesn’t hand them golden statues and a penthouse.

Of course the film has the usual pile of praises coming out of film festivals, and comparisons to Woody Allen’s work. Here’s a dirty secret: I don’t like Woody Allen films either, which is a fantastic way to get into a fight with film lovers. I may be alone in this, and a snobbish boor who shouldn’t be allowed to comment on film as a result, but I find a filmmaker’s obsession with exploring his own neuroses neither original nor interesting to those who don’t share the same neuroses.

It’s perfectly plausible that this film is actually pretty good. But then there is probably a snuff film or two out there that deserve consideration for their gifted use of cinematography. I’m not going to watch them either.

[matrixschmatrix]

There's a fascinating logical disconnect in saying you don't like a filmmaker because he's in the Woody Allen mode, and then saying you don't like Allen because he's unoriginal

[Gregory]

I liked the irony of the way he criticizes (presumed) clichés of a film, variations of which come out "every two weeks," producing in the process dead-horse-beating complaints which are registered somewhere on the internet every two minutes.
It's true, though, that Baumbach's a real up-and-comer. It's hard to believe he's already accomplished so much in only about 20 short years of filmmaking.

[Steven H]

Does "fan rob alert" mean "alert: fans of Robert Pattinson [beware]" or "alert: this movie is robbing fans"?