- Awards
- 27
I'm just assuming there's going to be a DVD release of season 1. So, would you want to have it?
Does it belong in your soap collection?
Does it belong in your soap collection?
Would you buy the DVDs?
- Thread starter Willie Oleson
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
- Awards
- 14
The beginning of the season was a bit all over the place, but I think I would buy it. I have ended up enjoying it now that Alexis is there and it somehow seems to be about something. I'm interested in seeing season 2.
I would never buy TNT Dallas as nothing about it interested me. It was like someone was inside my head trying to piss me off. Like they actively were trying to make the show the total opposite of what I wanted. I don't feel this with this new Dynasty. And there is the interest to see these new versions of the characters, even if sometimes they can be really annoying. I think though the show had a lot of teething problems, and is only now finding itself. So I think it's great they gave it a second season order.
I would never buy TNT Dallas as nothing about it interested me. It was like someone was inside my head trying to piss me off. Like they actively were trying to make the show the total opposite of what I wanted. I don't feel this with this new Dynasty. And there is the interest to see these new versions of the characters, even if sometimes they can be really annoying. I think though the show had a lot of teething problems, and is only now finding itself. So I think it's great they gave it a second season order.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 27
I thought the first half was an incoherent, juvenile mess. Maybe they'll release it in volumes
- Awards
- 14
I agree, it was. But then most post '80s soaps I have watched have been awful, especially in the beginning. There was a lot wrong in the beginning. I HATED the house, then they fixed that. I hated Cristal, and to my surprise I have grown to like her. I detested Fallon's tweeniness. Now that seems to be changing too. I even hated Nicollette's introduction and then they have shown me flashbacks of Alexis before she was broke.I thought the first half was an incoherent, juvenile mess. Maybe they'll release it in volumes
It started terrible, then started to flip flop between bad and good/acceptable. Now it's seeming to be mildly enjoyable.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 27
I think what pulled me back in is when things started to matter.
If it matters to them, it matters to me.
If it matters to them, it matters to me.
- Awards
- 18
Oh yeah!
- Awards
- 5
I agree about TNT Dallas. It doesn't belong in my prized DVD/Blu-ray collection despite the appearance of Larry, Patrick and Linda. As for Dynasty 2.0? Firm answer is no. From the snippets I've seen on youtube it doesn't warrant the opening of my wallet. I understand some will argue I'm not seeing the whole picture but the vibe I'm getting from the creators is this reincarnation is not produced for my taste....and that's okay.
- Awards
- 5
I'm not buying DVDs anymore and am quite angry that those are still produced, as that literally killed the Bluray. They should have stopped doing DVDs in 2010.
But i would buy it on Bluray. And i would HATE a DVD release with all my heart!
And before the whiners start whining: a bluray-player costs the same than 2 DVD box sets, so if you can afford to buy DVDs, you can afford a bluray-player as well, as simple as that.
But i would buy it on Bluray. And i would HATE a DVD release with all my heart!
And before the whiners start whining: a bluray-player costs the same than 2 DVD box sets, so if you can afford to buy DVDs, you can afford a bluray-player as well, as simple as that.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 27
How so? The DVD was first, it was that sneaky Bluray thing that tried to replace the DVD.
I think Bluray is totally overrated and I hate those blue boxes. I'm not a smurf. And if Bluray wants to rule then maybe they should make those things a little less expensive.
- Awards
- 5
It's a matter of attitude. I always favored quality over quantity, not only with movies or TV shows, but in general. That's why i don't buy in IKEA as well, for one example.
But if someone starts about the color of the cases and if it's not the actual content that counts, then any further discuission has died that moment already...
But if someone starts about the color of the cases and if it's not the actual content that counts, then any further discuission has died that moment already...
Last edited:
- Awards
- 14
I never really noticed that much improvement in quality between DVD and Bluray to be honest. Not that I was ever looking. I mean DVD quality is usually just fine for me. I don't need to feel like I'm in the movie or show. Then again I prefer older films and TV in general, so I'm used to slight imperfections or what some would call flaws anyway.
Bluray just always just seemed like a silly expense to me. I'll say it again though, I don't really take much notice of techy stuff.
Bluray just always just seemed like a silly expense to me. I'll say it again though, I don't really take much notice of techy stuff.
- Awards
- 5
Maybe that's the difference. I'm a tech nerd and I do care about quality, it means so much to me that i'd rather have something NOT at all than in bad quality.
But of course you need all quality components to get the real difference. Starting from a good quality big flat TV.
But the difference is there, and it's huge. It's like ... old and nuDynasty!
But most arguments of people are pure nonsense.
If they said "I'm not really interested in good quality in gereral", i could accept it more.
But they say "Blurays are more expensive". Compared to nowadays to DVDs that might be right.
But if you set it in the correct context, let's say when DVDs were quite new as Blurays are now - waaaaay wrong.
I paid 100 dollars for a single season of the x-files on DVD.
Today you get the whole thing, 9 seasons on Bluray for 89,99.
Twin Peaks on Bluray is way cheaper than it was on DVDs at the time.
I paid around 50$ for a Dynasty season on DVD, hard to find any season of any show on bluray for that price. Bluray was never more expensive than DVDs- seen in the right context.
A decent movie on DVD cost around 30 Dollars at the time. People tend to forget that, but it's the truth. A decent bluray release is between 10 and 20 dollars today.
And they even come with nonsense like "i don't like the blue cases" when a black bluray-case costs less than a dollar on Amazon. You can't be that cheap-o!
An okay bluray player costs around 80$ which is not even the amount of 2 DVD box sets, plus they are DVD compatible as well.
So if people say "i'm not a person that gives much about quality" that's okay.
But nonsense arguments i can't stand. Because those socalled arguments spread and influence others and that's the problem and that's what made the Bluray a fail and that's the reason why the studios hesitate ro remaster all our beloved shows into HD.
But of course you need all quality components to get the real difference. Starting from a good quality big flat TV.
But the difference is there, and it's huge. It's like ... old and nuDynasty!
But most arguments of people are pure nonsense.
If they said "I'm not really interested in good quality in gereral", i could accept it more.
But they say "Blurays are more expensive". Compared to nowadays to DVDs that might be right.
But if you set it in the correct context, let's say when DVDs were quite new as Blurays are now - waaaaay wrong.
I paid 100 dollars for a single season of the x-files on DVD.
Today you get the whole thing, 9 seasons on Bluray for 89,99.
Twin Peaks on Bluray is way cheaper than it was on DVDs at the time.
I paid around 50$ for a Dynasty season on DVD, hard to find any season of any show on bluray for that price. Bluray was never more expensive than DVDs- seen in the right context.
A decent movie on DVD cost around 30 Dollars at the time. People tend to forget that, but it's the truth. A decent bluray release is between 10 and 20 dollars today.
And they even come with nonsense like "i don't like the blue cases" when a black bluray-case costs less than a dollar on Amazon. You can't be that cheap-o!
An okay bluray player costs around 80$ which is not even the amount of 2 DVD box sets, plus they are DVD compatible as well.
So if people say "i'm not a person that gives much about quality" that's okay.
But nonsense arguments i can't stand. Because those socalled arguments spread and influence others and that's the problem and that's what made the Bluray a fail and that's the reason why the studios hesitate ro remaster all our beloved shows into HD.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 27
I think it's a matter of expectations.
Of course I like great picture quality, like The Colbys DVD and the first DVD sets of Dynasty.
But I don't like it to be ultra-ultra-ultra sharp, I don't find that pleasant at all.
And especially with older shows I kinda like the vintage look, it makes the experience a little more nostalgic.
Besides, there's only so much they can do with very old material.
I hope to get the complete Peyton Place on DVD, but I don't want it to look as it was filmed yesterday.
The blue boxes was an additional comment, it's not like I wouldn't buy Knots Landing if Bluray was the only option.
- Awards
- 27
I've watched Knots on DVD-R (soapnet recordings) and the quality ranged from good to bad. To know the story was more important to me.
If anything, the only thing that annoyed me was the bad audio quality of some episodes. That's something that could spoil it for me.
- Awards
- 5
Me neither. But that is NOT what HD is about. If it's too sharp, then they sharpened the picture artificially. HD is NOT about sharpness it's about DETAIL and information onscreen.
Plus, many people have their TV setup the wrong way. Sharpness it at it's correct position at "0". Not "3" and certainly not "7".
Most people have way too high contrast and color set on their TV sets as well. But that's another problem
HD gives you the possibility to watch the content in it's intended form. Not overly sharp, but the way it was intended to look by the persons who produced that content.
DVD simply doesn't have that possibility due to it's limited resolution. If gives you a downgraded quality of the intended look.
Or do you think original Dynastys producers had the intention for it to look like it did when f.e. season 6 originally aired on TV? Certainly not.
Take a look at the HD files. Then you know what the intention clearly was.
Or all those detailed costumes and alien masks of Star Trek TNG. They did SO much more effort and on TV all got completly lost. Only on Bluray you can see the real thing how it was intended to look for the very first time.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 2
Lots of people seem to be blind...I want that shit on 4k ultra HD disk,man!!
- Awards
- 4
Meh, I prefer DVDs just because I'm set in my ways. I mean, when DVDs first came out, I enjoyed them. They seemed way better than VHS tapes, and they offered behind-the-scene stuff, extra info and occasionally a fun game or too. Plus you got to skip certain scenes if you weren't interested in them, or if you simply wanted to get ahead to another scene, and all much faster than a VHS would allow.
So really, it answered a lot of my desires when it came to movies. And when BluRay came out, it just seemed superfluous. I didn't see any reason to get something new when what I had was already satisfactory.
Of course, then movie-makers would put all the fun extra info/stuff on the BluRays, obviously as a ploy to get people to buy them. At that point, I felt like I was being... oh, what's the word? Manipulated? Either way, I didn't want to switch to BluRay, and stubbornly stuck by DVDs. And now, like I said before, I'm set in my ways. And I really have no regrets.
I mean, when DVDs first came out, I enjoyed them. They seemed way better than VHS tapes, and they offered behind-the-scene stuff, extra info and occasionally a fun game or too. Plus you got to skip certain scenes if you weren't interested in them, or if you simply wanted to get ahead to another scene, and all much faster than a VHS would allow. So really, it answered a lot of my desires when it came to movies. And when BluRay came out, it just seemed superfluous. I didn't see any reason to get something new when what I had was already satisfactory.
Of course, then movie-makers would put all the fun extra info/stuff on the BluRays, obviously as a ploy to get people to buy them. At that point, I felt like I was being... oh, what's the word? Manipulated? Either way, I didn't want to switch to BluRay, and stubbornly stuck by DVDs. And now, like I said before, I'm set in my ways. And I really have no regrets.
Could they even do. Blu-Ray of Dynasty? Or multiple other tv shows produced before the 2000s? The way filming has changed greatly. Can you get a Blu-Ray of Friends? If you can that's a huge timeframe difference.
I bought the Colby's on DVD and it is great quality. Not HD by any means, but I was surprised.
I bought the Colby's on DVD and it is great quality. Not HD by any means, but I was surprised.
- Awards
- 5
Every movie or TV-show shot on film is just fine for an HD release on Bluray. Most of original Dynasty (except for a few season 1 episodes) has been already transferred to brilliant HD and could be released on Bluray by tomorrow, if CBS wanted to.
"Friends" was shot on film too and is completly available in HD on Bluray for half a decade already for just laughable 2,50$ more than on DVD: https://www.amazon.com/Friends-Complete-Jennifer-Aniston/dp/B00FS33M7M
Only shows that were shot directly on Video could not get an HD upgrade, but those are not that many. It's mostly sitcoms like "Married with children" or "The Cosby show" which were sadly shot just on Video in front of an audience. Or all those daytime soaps like "General Hospital", "The Guiding Light", etc. You could put those on Bluray as well of course, but they wouldn't look any different than on TV at the time, as the complete source material is just poor video resolution.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 2
Matthew, what season one episodes aren`t transfered to hd? How do you know?