Why do they do it?

[FightForTheRight]

This has probably been done to death many times before, but I thought I'd bring up an old (?) subject again.

Why is it that certain DVDs of, frankly, great films are so - pardon my French - crap?

Here are some examples:

Who Framed Roger Rabbit? - One of, if not THE, best examples of how to combine live action with cartoon. The DVD? Absolutely pittyful, not even a bloomin trailer! Come tot hink of it, not even released over here! :eek:

Ghostbusters 2 - Not the greatest example of a good sequel, but fair none-the-less. The DVD? Just as bad, only just managing a trailer and some biographies - WOW!! :D

Gone With The Wind - A classic film, no question. The DVD? Pants, when considering a film this age must have at least a fair bit of either documentary or making-of extras.

Apocalypse Now - Redux - Realising that it has just been released in Region 1, and is not yet out over here, this may seem unfair. The DVD? A trailer, and em not much else! We can only hope the Region 2 version will be better, or that a Special Edition is being planned.

The Truman Show - An excellent film, one of Jim Carrey's best IMHO. The DVD? A couple of trailers and that's your lot! This film is especially crying out for a Special Edition considering that the idea behind it was rather clever, and that there MUST be making-of or documentary material lying about somewhere.

The good news is that what with Special Editions of Predator, Speed, The Usual Suspects, and Robocop already announced at least SOME companies listen to what their customers want.

Every film I have listed above DESERVES a Special Edition, and hopefully each will receive one at some point in the future.

We can only hope!

Sorry about the length - once I get on my high horse about something, it can be quite difficult to get me down! :D

[mikegray]

They do it because they know we fools will buy the bare-bones disc for the picture and the sound quality, and then we'll fork out again for a "special edition" two days later... Predator being a particularly galling example. Very glad that I didn't bother buying the Predator box, considering the cuts etc... even more glad now there's an SE coming out.

[Lappers]

I think it also has to do with copyright issues. Any footage outside of the film itself has to be Ok'd with the 'star', and some actors , for one reason or another don't agree to footage being used.

[Ridcully]

Although not as bad I would add Braveheart to the list. Ok it has a documentary and commentary both of which mention a signaificatn amount of cut material. So where is it ?

[Michael Brooke]

The vast majority of the titles you've cited are either very or relatively early DVD releases, released at a time when cramming in everything but the kitchen sink hadn't become fashionable in the way it has now.

You should also bear in mind that extras are expensive - rights have to be cleared, source materials have to be tracked down, people who worked on the film have to be available to supervise the DVD (Ridley Scott was a bit busy shooting Gladiator and Hannibal back-to-back when Warner released their first bare-bones <I>Blade Runner</I> - and what's the betting that had they waited, people would whinge about them not releasing it at all, an attitude I'm sure George Lucas is more than familiar with!). There are also logistical considerations: for instance, <I>Gone with the Wind</I> would need a second disc, pushing up manufacturing costs.

There are several reasons why certain extras aren't included - take deleted scenes, for instance. There may be contractual reasons why they can't be added (for instance, you'll never get to see Harvey Keitel's <I>Apocalypse Now</I> scenes unless Keitel gives his permission - which considering he was fired from the leading role, something that didn't exactly do wonders for his late 1970s and 1980s career, is somewhat unlikely), there may be technical reasons, or the director may simply not want to show them in public, for entirely understandable reasons (some go even further and disapprove of extras full stop - Woody Allen and Stanley Kubrick being good examples).

And of course the footage may simply not exist any more - many films have all their surplus stock disposed of once post-production has finished to save storage space. This is a particularly important issue if the film is a small independent production, as storing hundreds of cans of stock - my own <I>Paradise Grove</I>, a low-budget film with a shooting ratio as tight as they come, notched up 300 cans, and <I>Heaven's Gate</I> notoriously shot over a million feet of film) simply isn't practical, and sorting through all the footage to find something that might be worth preserving takes time and money, something that's probably in fairly short supply. Sometimes the director may not be aware of this - listen to Peter Mullan's commentary on <I>Orphans</I> for a good example ("To say I'm not very happy about this is an understatement").