Charlie's Angels at Blockbuster

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Hubert Borrmann, Oct 22, 2003.

  1. I stopped at my local Blockbuster and intended to rent Charlie's Angels
    (unrated) to see whether it is good enough to buy.
    They had only "Full Screen" versions.
    The manager informed me that they have widescreen, but only for sale.
    I did not rent it and will go to Mr.Movies, where they have both versions.
    Is this a local problem or nationwide, I wonder?
    Greetings,
    Hubert.
     
    Hubert Borrmann, Oct 22, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hubert Borrmann

    Mark B. Guest

    "Hubert Borrmann" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I stopped at my local Blockbuster and intended to rent Charlie's Angels
    > (unrated) to see whether it is good enough to buy.
    > They had only "Full Screen" versions.
    > The manager informed me that they have widescreen, but only for sale.
    > I did not rent it and will go to Mr.Movies, where they have both versions.
    > Is this a local problem or nationwide, I wonder?
    > Greetings,
    > Hubert.
    >
    >


    I used to have the same problem at my BB, but recently they started carrying
    WS. I'll go to Hollywood Video most of the time anyway, they rent out
    everything for 5 days including new releases.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Oct 22, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hubert Borrmann

    Black Locust Guest

    In article <>,
    "Hubert Borrmann" <> wrote:

    > I stopped at my local Blockbuster and intended to rent Charlie's Angels
    > (unrated) to see whether it is good enough to buy.
    > They had only "Full Screen" versions.
    > The manager informed me that they have widescreen, but only for sale.
    > I did not rent it and will go to Mr.Movies, where they have both versions.
    > Is this a local problem or nationwide, I wonder?
    > Greetings,
    > Hubert.


    I looked into this and discovered the studio(columbia trimark) pulled
    something very tricky and odd with Full Crapple. They released a rated
    version in FOOL screen only and an unrated version in widescreen only.
    Definitely a first, but a stupid idea as well. Blockbuster of course has
    the tendency to dry hump "rated" versions because they're a "family"
    store and thus the reason for them having the "full screen" version.
    Rest assured Blockbuster's policy still remains widescreen and
    widescreen only for 99% of movies.

    For the record, I have not and never will watch a stupid ass movie like
    Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle. I learned my lesson with the first one.
    Why do you need to rent this to see whether it's good enough to buy?
    It's quite clearly a pile of dog shit. When the director calls himself
    "McG" you know you're in for 90 minute of pure crap.
    --
    BL
     
    Black Locust, Oct 22, 2003
    #3
  4. Hubert Borrmann

    Mondo Kane Guest

    I had the one of the most unpleasant evenings of my life, agreeing to go
    along with a hyper friend who wanted to see this.. uh, movie?

    It is indeed one of the worst and crappiest films ever! I got a headache
    not long into the film, and often literally felt like throwing up at
    having to watch it!

    There is nothing of value to CA: Full Throttle... seriously... it sucked
    so very very bad. Warning: I promise you WILL only watch it ONCE! --
    Save your money.

    Mondo Kane
     
    Mondo Kane, Oct 22, 2003
    #4
  5. Hubert Borrmann

    Paul C. Guest

    (Mondo Kane) wrote in news:6010-3F9618ED-361
    @storefull-2198.public.lawson.webtv.net:

    > There is nothing of value to CA: Full Throttle... seriously... it

    sucked
    > so very very bad. Warning: I promise you WILL only watch it ONCE!

    --
    > Save your money.
    >
    > Mondo Kane


    I rented it for someone else as I had no personal interest AT ALL
    but I had free time so I decided to watch. I was surprised that it
    wasn't quite as terrible as I thought although practically a science
    fiction movie in many ways. I certainly enjoyed it more than that
    awful 28 days which I did spend $7.50 at the theater unfortunately.
    Point being, everyone likes different things so one persons opinion
    MAY not be useful to someone else. You can't always depend on
    reviews to make a watching decision as you may be surprised to enjoy
    something others didn't.
     
    Paul C., Oct 22, 2003
    #5
  6. Hubert Borrmann

    Guest

    Mondo Kane wrote:
    > I had the one of the most unpleasant evenings of my life, agreeing to go
    > along with a hyper friend who wanted to see this.. uh, movie?
    >
    > It is indeed one of the worst and crappiest films ever! I got a headache
    > not long into the film, and often literally felt like throwing up at
    > having to watch it!
    >
    > There is nothing of value to CA: Full Throttle... seriously... it sucked
    > so very very bad. Warning: I promise you WILL only watch it ONCE! --
    > Save your money.
    >
    > Mondo Kane
    >


    OMG - it was one of those movies you keep thinking (hoping, praying)
    that it will get better as it goes on. But no, it just goes on and on
    and . . .

    Mike

    I really like the first one BTW.
     
    , Oct 22, 2003
    #6
  7. Hubert Borrmann

    Wade365 Guest

    The first CA movie I saw in the theater because I was on a first date and I
    just couldn't take the stagnant conversation... we were driving past a movie
    theater when I suggested we catch a film and that was the only thing playing
    right then...

    I enjoyed the film... it might have been in relative condition to having to
    entertain this mud dwelling of a girl I was set up with, but I laughed more
    than a few times.

    I'll rent the second one, why not? Probably some calculated T&A like the first
    with bad wire stunts like the first one... who gives a sh*t if the online
    Eberts don't dig it? I mean REALLY? Are you going to have these critics at your
    house? No. Go ahead, rent it for a few bucks.

    And also, IMO, "28 Days Later" was about the best horror movie I've paid to see
    in the last ten years.

    (See how different people can be?)
     
    Wade365, Oct 22, 2003
    #7
  8. problems like this varry from store to store. There's no national computer
    link-up between stores, either, which makes things very difficult sometimes.
     
    Vlvetmorning98, Oct 22, 2003
    #8
  9. Hubert Borrmann

    Mondo Kane Guest

    I agree that the first CA was OK to very good, with some enjoyable
    humour, stunts, and guest stars.

    28 Days later was so-so, but does contain some very exciting moments...
    although it also is too slow, and not worth watching over and over. But
    after seeing it theatrically, I will definitely rent the SpEd DVD to see
    the added content.

    My favorite online rental service is:

    http://www.greencine.com

    Mondo Kane
     
    Mondo Kane, Oct 23, 2003
    #9
  10. Hubert Borrmann

    Black Locust Guest

    In article <Xns941C7DE9CB540abcdefghjklica@198.164.200.20>,
    "Paul C." <> wrote:

    > I certainly enjoyed it more than that
    > awful 28 days which I did spend $7.50 at the theater unfortunately.


    Awful 28 Days Later? While it's certainly not the most original movie
    ever made, it's sure as hell better than watching 90 minutes of MTV
    style editing, bad acting and 3 dumb sluts doing stupid random poses to
    licensed pop songs.
    --
    BL
     
    Black Locust, Oct 23, 2003
    #10
  11. Hubert Borrmann

    Paul C. Guest

    Black Locust <> wrote in news:bl2112-
    :


    > Awful 28 Days Later? While it's certainly not the most original

    movie
    > ever made, it's sure as hell better than watching 90 minutes of

    MTV
    > style editing, bad acting and 3 dumb sluts doing stupid random

    poses to
    > licensed pop songs.


    Again, it's the whole different taste thing. I'd rather not pay for
    either but if I was forced I'd watch the Angels over 28 days any
    day. I don't care about "great film making, just what entertains me.
     
    Paul C., Oct 23, 2003
    #11
  12. Hubert Borrmann

    Wade365 Guest

    I haven't seen the new CA, but I eventually will... winter IS coming... but
    after watching "@8 Days Later" again tonight I have to disagree that it's not
    worth another view or two... again, the taste thing, but hey...

    It's one of the best "End Of It All" films I've ever seen, it makes a lot of
    reality-sense as apposed to say "Dawn of the Dead" where everyone gets fat and
    happy.

    Well, and then dies... but there's some happy bits.
     
    Wade365, Oct 23, 2003
    #12
  13. Paul C. wrote:
    > Black Locust <> wrote in news:bl2112-
    > :
    >
    >
    >
    >>Awful 28 Days Later? While it's certainly not the most original

    >
    > movie
    >
    >>ever made, it's sure as hell better than watching 90 minutes of

    >
    > MTV
    >
    >>style editing, bad acting and 3 dumb sluts doing stupid random

    >
    > poses to
    >
    >>licensed pop songs.

    >
    >
    > Again, it's the whole different taste thing. I'd rather not pay for
    > either but if I was forced I'd watch the Angels over 28 days any
    > day. I don't care about "great film making, just what entertains me.
    >
    >
    >

    I don't think anyone, including the director, can confuse 28 Days Later
    with "great filmmaking". Charlie's Angels, however, wasn't even
    filmmaking; it was a MTV clip.
     
    Tallulah Blanket, Oct 23, 2003
    #13
  14. Hubert Borrmann

    Invid Fan Guest

    In article <fdOlb.162378$>,
    Tallulah Blanket <> wrote:

    > Paul C. wrote:
    > > Black Locust <> wrote in news:bl2112-
    > > :
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >>Awful 28 Days Later? While it's certainly not the most original

    > >
    > > movie
    > >
    > >>ever made, it's sure as hell better than watching 90 minutes of

    > >
    > > MTV
    > >
    > >>style editing, bad acting and 3 dumb sluts doing stupid random

    > >
    > > poses to
    > >
    > >>licensed pop songs.

    > >
    > >
    > > Again, it's the whole different taste thing. I'd rather not pay for
    > > either but if I was forced I'd watch the Angels over 28 days any
    > > day. I don't care about "great film making, just what entertains me.
    > >
    > >
    > >

    > I don't think anyone, including the director, can confuse 28 Days Later
    > with "great filmmaking". Charlie's Angels, however, wasn't even
    > filmmaking; it was a MTV clip.
    >

    Speaking of which, does the dvd have the great bit from the MTV movie
    awards regarding the "Ass Trainer" for the film?

    --
    Chris Mack "Refugee, total shit. That's how I've always seen us.
    'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
    -'Deal/No Deal', CHESS
     
    Invid Fan, Oct 23, 2003
    #14
  15. Hubert Borrmann

    Klaus Guest

    > Rest assured Blockbuster's policy still remains widescreen and
    > widescreen only for 99% of movies.
    >


    Huh? I have found the exact opposite at my two local Blockbusters. They do
    NOT carry widescreen DVD's in many new releases. I have talked to both
    managers about it and they state they have no control on what format the
    DVD's come in. The way I understand it is one of the major studios only
    sends BB full screen DVD's. I have since stopped going there and now rent
    from a local Video Update franchise - the manager there is very good about
    erroring on the side of wide screen. I have noticed that if 20 copies are
    on the shelf for a new release, 10 full - 10 wide - the wides are always
    gone first. I guess Blockbuster is missing out.

    Klaus




    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
     
    Klaus, Oct 23, 2003
    #15
  16. Hubert Borrmann

    Wade365 Guest

    << I guess Blockbuster is missing out. >>

    They're just clueless, from their rental prices to their stock to the
    gawd-awful idea of renting games for as long as the local neighborhood kids
    wanna keep them... there are NEVER any games (I mean NOTHING) on the shelves
    anymore.

    Piss on the blue & gold. I go to Hollywood Video on the rare occasion I want to
    rent something because usually things are in stock, as apposed to the raincheck
    crap BB sets up... try taking a raincheck for a game that's garunteed in
    stock... you'll wait weeks and months.
     
    Wade365, Oct 23, 2003
    #16
  17. Hubert Borrmann

    Black Locust Guest

    In article <>,
    "Klaus" <> wrote:

    > Huh? I have found the exact opposite at my two local Blockbusters. They do
    > NOT carry widescreen DVD's in many new releases. I have talked to both
    > managers about it and they state they have no control on what format the
    > DVD's come in. The way I understand it is one of the major studios only
    > sends BB full screen DVD's. I have since stopped going there and now rent
    > from a local Video Update franchise - the manager there is very good about
    > erroring on the side of wide screen. I have noticed that if 20 copies are
    > on the shelf for a new release, 10 full - 10 wide - the wides are always
    > gone first. I guess Blockbuster is missing out.


    Either you're imagining things or you have shitty privately run
    Blockbuster's in your area(these are the ones that close at 10 every
    night...). I can assure you Blockbuster's policy is widescreen only and
    all 5 stores here in Fort Collins, CO follow that policy to a tee. Read
    the link below:

    http://www.widescreen.org/commentaries/2003_05_may.shtml

    > Klaus

    --
    BL
     
    Black Locust, Oct 24, 2003
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Marcel van Balken

    Angels of Italy...

    Marcel van Balken, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    381
    Marcel van Balken
    Jun 1, 2004
  2. Writer R5
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    522
    John Savard
    Oct 26, 2003
  3. Ski

    Charlie's angels???

    Ski, Oct 24, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    468
    Paul C.
    Oct 31, 2003
  4. TC
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    468
    jayembee
    Jan 26, 2004
  5. Mike McGee
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    459
    Mike McGee
    Feb 27, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page