| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | Right now we lump all featurettes into one via the checkox, regardless if the featurette is indeed about the making of the film on the disc or not.
So, just like we did for Trailers and added a Bonus Trailers to separate non feature film trailers I would like to see a Other Featurettes checkbox added.
For example let's say that there is a featurette about Universal Studios on a blu-ray from that studio. It's a general featurette about the history of the studio and has nothing to do really with the film on the disc.
So, for this Studio history featurette one would check the Other Featurettes checkbox to separate it from the other featurettes that do cover the making of the film on the disc. |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | We could sub-divide Featurettes six ways from Sunday. Let's just keep a single featurette box and save all future arguments about what is "main" and what is "other" | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! | | | | Last edited: by tweeter |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree... I don't see a need to have another check box for this. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | So why did we do it for trailers?
Yet, we don't for featurettes which could cover topics that have nothing to do with the film on the disc at all.
So if a Star Trek movie disc had a featurette about Pee Wee Herman, you would really want it treated and lumped together with the featurettes that do cover Star Trek? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | Actually according to the rules it has to be about the film or the people associated with it to be covered by the Featurette box... Rules Quote: Quote:
Featurettes Any video documentary material regarding the film, or those associated with it. If it isn't about the film or those associated with it then it would go in Other Features. That is how I always done it and never had any problems. I personally think having an Other Featurettes check box would be more confusing... and the way it is now we would have an idea of what featurettes not dealing with the movie or those involved are about. With a new check box we wouldn't. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | But there are times when there isn't enough room in the Other Features to list every single Other Feature and that doesn't include Other Featurettes either.
Another thing is that the rules wording is vague. If there is a featurette about the studio that released the film is that an Other Featurette or just a regular one since the studio is associated with it?
What about a Mummy featurette about real life mummies on a Mummy disc?
That could be considered as a regular featurette since it deals with the subject matter of the film itself.
Or is it Other since it has nothing to do with those associated with it.
Personally I would want the Mummy featurette as Other since it's just a general subject matter about Mummies and not directly about the film. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Why all this hypothtical "What if ..."
Either there is a considerable amount of profiles where this would be needed, or there isn't.
In both cases I'd agree with Pete that for the vast majority of this cases the "Other Features" will suffice.
In the (IMO) few cases where the field isn't big enough an additional checkbox wouldn't be of much help either, since it would bunch up (possibly) completely different Featurettes. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | I guess it was just a stupid request then. |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | I wouldn't mind. Since it doesn't seem popular maybe it could be made to work like Custom Role data. One could add what one wanted but kept local only.
Edit: I know that Tags or Notes could be used but I don't like that. I prefer to keep Crew data with Crew data and Feature data with Feature data. | | | | Last edited: by Kathy |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,245 |
| | Posted: | | | | Ok, let's spin off on Kathy's idea.
What about first adding in a pull-down menu on the featurettes field that would allow users to input the number of featurettes. This would then open up a new field that would allow the user to input the title of the featurette(s). The number of titles allowed matches that of the number entered in the first step.
Personally I would like to see them contributable since re-issues and re-releases can drop certain featurettes or add new ones. This would allow an easy method to compare profiles and what featurettes may have been ported over or dropped from a previous release, |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
I guess it was just a stupid request then. In the same way that there is no stupid question, there is no stupid request. You (possibly) made this request because you saw the need for development. The problem here is that some people don't see the need for this, but this doesn't diminish the value of your request. There is only one person that needs to be convinced of your request: Ken Cole. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | Right... the way I see it there is no such thing as a stupid request. It is either most others agree or most others disagree that the feature is needed. And then no matter how many agree or disagree... all that really matters is if Ken likes the suggestion or not.
As for your new suggestion... if he goes that route I would like to see him revamp most all the features.
Scene Access: How many scenes (names of chapters possibly though I see no need)
Feature Trailers: How Many Trailers and how many TV Sots for film on disc
Bonus Trailer: How Many and Which ones
Featurettes: How Many and names
Commentaries: How Many and Who with
Deleted Scenes: How Many
Interviews: How Many and with who
Production Notes/Bios: Bios for how many and who
Interactive Games: How Many and Names
Music Videos: How Many and Names | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: May 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think Cubby's idea has merit, though I think he thought about it backward.
Instead of an "Other", how about a feature button for "Making of", that would apply strictly to featurette about the making of the movie?
Charlie |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Not sure about that one. I've seen many releases with feature-specific featurettes which cannot be regarded as a "Making of". |
|