In my monthly column that I write for the indutry trade magazine “Media Line” I was touching upon an interesting subject this month. Although we all often get distracted by the glamor of DVD releases, I was asking myself, what exactly makes a good DVD? Are supplements the end all be all, or ist he film itself more important? What about trailers and other supplements?

Looking through the DVD releases of the past three years it is obvious that there is a lot of latitude in the quality. I am not only talking about the general technical quality but also of the implicit value for the consumer. It may appear strange at first that the same people who willingly paid $150 for a Laserdisc box set a few short years ago, now get upset over the lack of a certain feature in a $25 DVD, but the fact of the matter is that DVD consumers are very discriminating when it comes to the value of the package they are presented with.

It may be easy to forget sometimes, but the most important aspect of any DVD is and remains the movie itself, and publishers need to make sure their producers understand that the film deserves the utmost attention while everything else has to become secondary. With that in mind, a great DVD obviously utilizes DVD’s technical capabilities to the fullest. 16x9 enhanced video transfers should never really be an option that is up for discussion, but a standard across the board. This is not only because of the increased video resolution but also because for the most part it requires new transfers. Given the quality of today’s telecine technology, any well-done new transfer will inevitable look better than one pulled from the archives, even if presented in a 4:3 letterboxed version.

Fortunately on the audio side things are not nearly as controversial, as practically all studios release titles in their original sound formats, which often allows for 5.1 Dolby Digital presentations. However, there appears to be a trend to release DTS and Dolby Digital tracks on the same disc. While this is a laudable attempt in general, publishers should be aware that these dual presentations may force them to sacrifice the video or audio quality. Needless to say that such a release could hardly be called a “great” DVD and all of the above should actually be self-implying.

Especially over the past year or so I have noticed that some publishers seem to take a rather uncritical approach to the bonus programming on their DVDs. It may in part be attributed to the fast turn-around times of many publishers, who are concerned to churn out releases simply to build a decent library. DVDs should never become the dumpsters for material just for their own sake - but let me explain this in a little more detail.

Apart from trailers, which fortunately have become almost obligatory for any DVD release, one of the most common extras are audio commentaries. The difference in quality of those tracks ranges from abysmal to absolutely fascinating. Producers need to ensure that commentators do have something to say about the release and are fired up about it. Nothing is more boring and discrediting than a poorly done commentary track that is poorly recorded with reverberation, ambiance or distortion, and an inconsistent volume level where some participants are audible while others are not. Most importantly the participants need to be active, even if it requires editing, retakes and an outside push when they run out of steam. If you want to see for yourself what a truly great commentary track feels like, check out John Carpenter and Kurt Russell on “The Thing”, Ken Russel on “Lair Of The White Worm” or Mel Brooks on “Young Frankenstein”. These and many others are examples where the commentaries add a new dimension to the movie with all the expertise, and entertainment value they convey.

Sadly, documentaries and featurettes are without a doubt the single-most abused form of DVD extras. Against popular believe, 5 minutes of scenes lifted from the movie stringed up with 15 seconds of interviews do not make up a “Behind-the-scenes” documentary. Too many of these featurettes are nothing but washed-up PR reels that were produced to initially sell the movie and are now reused to create additional bullet points on a sell sheet. These watered-down featurettes degrade the value of real documentaries that can be found on many releases. While studios like Universal regularly create completely new content for their DVDs, many other publishers do not show the same consistency. Off the mill reels on one release, are counterpointed by a truly great original documentary on another release by the same studio. Refurbished or new, becomes a question that is on many DVD owners’ minds these days after having been disappointed by practically mismarked DVD releases.

There are many other options that can make great DVDs, too numerous to recount them in detail here, but ultimately the quality and purpose of a supplement makes all the difference. If you get to wonder why a certain feature is part of a DVD, it’s probably not a very good extra to begin with and is only using up space for something that could be more valuable. Menus are certainly nice to look at, but usually only the first time. While an attractive menu can be intriguing, excessive money spend there could in some cases have been put to better use to create a higher end video presentation of the feature film. No user wants to spend minutes watching transitions to get from one menu screen to another, no matter how nicely done they are. It is a user interface, and user interfaces have to be foremostly efficient. The same is true for Disney’s current enforcement of trailers running in front of the movie. While I understand that a studio is most interested in advertising its other products as good as possible, forcing people to sit through 8 trailers can hardly be considered “good advertising” and I am sure the turn-off is bigger than the pay-off.

It does take money and it does take time to create a DVD that is ‘great,’ I understand and accept that and I also understand that only few releases have the necessary budget to create high quality content. But that’s where the wheat separates from the chaff. Instead of attempting to create what may appear to be a special edition by throwing poor quality supplements on the disc, less may actually be better. If you only have a few thousand dollars in your budget, you’d be much better advised to make sure the transfer, encoding and authoring of the disc is done absolutely perfect, than piecing together a mediocre disc with a 2-minute documentary that is muffled, flawed with video artifacts and clumsily lit. If you can’t afford to do it right, don’t do it at all! Sure, it doesn’t create the impressive list of bullet points for your sales force, and it may not justify a higher retail price tag, but at the end of the day, your customers will appreciate the quality you offer them and begin to associate your product with this increased level of quality.

Since for some studios the addition of a trailer to a DVD justifies the use of the term “Special Edition” it would be great if only the industry could agree upon a solid definition of that term. “Special Edition” - sounds special, doesn’t it? Not in the DVD arena anymore with the current state of affairs, but we’ll have to touch upon that at a later time.

© 1997-2000 by “DVD Review”. All rights reserved.