Forced video AND forced audio from Universal

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Invalid Address, Jan 8, 2004.

  1. Universal's response to customer complaint's about FORCED trailers, is
    that they are now putting FORCED advertising on ALL their dvds.

    Every Universal dvd I have seen these past few weeks have the forced
    trailers. They all have a note that says you can "fast-forward" through
    them.

    If you have to fast forward through a half dozen ads before you can
    watch dvds that YOU PAID FOR, you're not much better off than VHS tapes.
    Some dvd players can't even FF through them.

    Only Universal is doing this, and they are doing it on all their discs
    now. I will not buy a Universal dvd or even pay full rental price. I
    rent tuesday's new releases on the following monday for 99 cents or not
    at all.

    Universal is also the only company that does not use the industry
    standard for closed captioning.

    We use a device called TVGuardian that reads the closed captioning and
    mutes the sound when offensive language is being used. We can choose our
    preference.. from "no censoring" to "strict censoring". User choice.

    Universal takes that choice away, too, just like they take away control
    of our remotes so we cannot SKIP trailers/advertising. Universal has
    developed a way of closed captioning that disables our TVGuardian. Only
    Universal does this.

    Sooooo.... we have to SEE what Universal wants us to see, and HEAR what
    Universal wants us to hear.

    No choice.

    How arrogant can one company get, that they would actually program their
    dvds to disable features of your home dvd players and other electronic
    appliances in YOUR home, that YOU bought and PAID for?

    What's next, when you spend good money to buy a dvd player with all the
    bells and whistles you want and someone like Universal can disable them?
    It's appalling!

    Let Universal get by with this, and other companies will follow. And
    when other companies follow suit, our complaints will be fruitless.

    Think seriously about this... Are we going to allow companies to disable
    features of our home entertainment systems.

    Folks, this is a most serious issue.

    No mail, please .. [no incoming mailbox]
     
    Invalid Address, Jan 8, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:15:44 -0600 (CST),
    (Invalid Address) wrote:
    d for closed captioning.
    >
    >We use a device called TVGuardian that reads the closed captioning and
    >mutes the sound when offensive language is being used. We can choose our
    >preference.. from "no censoring" to "strict censoring". User choice.
    >
    >Universal takes that choice away, too, just like they take away control
    >of our remotes so we cannot SKIP trailers/advertising. Universal has
    >developed a way of closed captioning that disables our TVGuardian. Only
    >Universal does this.


    I don't think that is intentional. I don't like forced trailers, but
    Universal is under no obligation to provide support for the
    electronics you choose to use. They have nothing do do with any sort
    of TVGuardian contraption.

    And on a more personal note, I think the whole idea of the device that
    you describe is rediculous. You can choose to use it, of course, but
    if you don't like the language in some movies, maybe you should watch
    other movies.

    Mischa
     
    Mischa van Dinter, Jan 8, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Invalid Address

    Justin Guest

    Mischa van Dinter wrote on [Thu, 08 Jan 2004 20:31:15 +0100]:
    > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:15:44 -0600 (CST),
    > (Invalid Address) wrote:
    > d for closed captioning.
    >>
    >>We use a device called TVGuardian that reads the closed captioning and
    >>mutes the sound when offensive language is being used. We can choose our
    >>preference.. from "no censoring" to "strict censoring". User choice.
    >>
    >>Universal takes that choice away, too, just like they take away control
    >>of our remotes so we cannot SKIP trailers/advertising. Universal has
    >>developed a way of closed captioning that disables our TVGuardian. Only
    >>Universal does this.

    >
    > I don't think that is intentional. I don't like forced trailers, but
    > Universal is under no obligation to provide support for the
    > electronics you choose to use. They have nothing do do with any sort
    > of TVGuardian contraption.
    >
    > And on a more personal note, I think the whole idea of the device that
    > you describe is rediculous. You can choose to use it, of course, but
    > if you don't like the language in some movies, maybe you should watch
    > other movies.


    if you have to have such a device then what happens in real life when
    real things happen, and real people speak?
     
    Justin, Jan 8, 2004
    #3
  4. Invalid Address

    Bill Guest


    > if you have to have such a device then what happens in real life when
    > real things happen, and real people speak?


    There may be little control in real life at times, but I personally think
    it's commendable that this parent is taking an interest in his children and
    what they see/watch on televison. That's his choice to make, and I see
    nothing wrong with it. Better to have that type of parent in this world than
    the ones who care ***nothing*** about their kids.
     
    Bill, Jan 8, 2004
    #4
  5. Invalid Address

    Justin Guest

    Bill wrote on [Thu, 08 Jan 2004 20:24:49 GMT]:
    >
    >> if you have to have such a device then what happens in real life when
    >> real things happen, and real people speak?

    >
    > There may be little control in real life at times, but I personally think
    > it's commendable that this parent is taking an interest in his children and
    > what they see/watch on televison. That's his choice to make, and I see
    > nothing wrong with it. Better to have that type of parent in this world than
    > the ones who care ***nothing*** about their kids.
    >


    Then if this person is indeed a parent, they should preview every non
    kiddie program their kid watches, instead of relying on technology to do
    it
     
    Justin, Jan 8, 2004
    #5
  6. Invalid Address

    Rich Clark Guest

    "Invalid Address" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Universal's response to customer complaint's about FORCED trailers, is
    > that they are now putting FORCED advertising on ALL their dvds.
    >
    > Every Universal dvd I have seen these past few weeks have the forced
    > trailers. They all have a note that says you can "fast-forward" through
    > them.
    >
    > If you have to fast forward through a half dozen ads before you can
    > watch dvds that YOU PAID FOR, you're not much better off than VHS tapes.
    > Some dvd players can't even FF through them.


    I'm no fan of forced trailers, but the point should be made:

    Why *should* DVDs be treateded differently from VHS by the studios? To them,
    they are essentially the same product, serving the same market.

    > Sooooo.... we have to SEE what Universal wants us to see, and HEAR what
    > Universal wants us to hear.
    >
    > No choice.


    You've already articulated your choice: don't buy. These are luxury goods
    here. Nobody needs them. Nobody has to buy them, and nobody has to sell
    them.

    > Folks, this is a most serious issue.


    I disagree. It's home entertainment. Nothing serious about it at all --
    except to the people who feed their families by making and selling it.

    RichC
     
    Rich Clark, Jan 8, 2004
    #6
  7. >I'm no fan of forced trailers, but the point should be made:
    >
    >Why *should* DVDs be treateded differently from VHS by the studios? To them,
    >they are essentially the same product, serving the same market.


    True, but, as mentioned, there are times where you cannot fast-forward past the
    previews on certain DVD players.

    But, for me it's a non-issue. Universal has simply not made many films that I
    like and is probably THE most mundane and mainstream studio of them all. IMO,
    they never had as impressive a history as Paramount, MGM, Fox, or Warner Bros.
    Even Tri-Star is more illustrious and risk-taking than Universal, IMO. The
    only studio I can think of that now currently caters to the mainstream moreso
    than Universal is Disney (not including Touchstone, Hollywood, Dimension, or
    Miramax). But Disney being most mainstream is understandable, given the kind
    of material they usually produce: children's entertainment.

    There are notable exceptions, like a few Universal pictures that were directed
    by Martin Scorsese, Ron Howard, Robert Zemeckis, Alfred Hitchcock (arguably
    though, as a few ,but not all, of Hitchcock's famous works, like "Psycho" and
    "Vertigo," were originally released by Paramount), and Steven Spielberg. But,
    they are most willing to cater to the mainstream to the point where they
    compromised creative expression simply because what the director wanted wasn't
    perceived as popular by the suits, particularly during the 1980s with Ridley
    Scott's "Legend" being an infamous example. This is also exemplified with god
    knows how many films from Universal that ended up being MST3K fodder.

    Anyways, I would have a beef with them if I had a lot of Universal titles on
    DVD. But, I only have one title from Universal in my collection, "Legend:
    Ultimate Edition," so I don't have anything to complain about in terms of their
    forced commercials. - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 8, 2004
    #7
  8. Invalid Address

    Ian H Guest

    Disney has force trailers as well, if you have the eqipment you can copy the
    dvd leaving out the trailers ;-)

    "LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >I'm no fan of forced trailers, but the point should be made:
    > >
    > >Why *should* DVDs be treateded differently from VHS by the studios? To

    them,
    > >they are essentially the same product, serving the same market.

    >
    > True, but, as mentioned, there are times where you cannot fast-forward

    past the
    > previews on certain DVD players.
    >
    > But, for me it's a non-issue. Universal has simply not made many films

    that I
    > like and is probably THE most mundane and mainstream studio of them all.

    IMO,
    > they never had as impressive a history as Paramount, MGM, Fox, or Warner

    Bros.
    > Even Tri-Star is more illustrious and risk-taking than Universal, IMO.

    The
    > only studio I can think of that now currently caters to the mainstream

    moreso
    > than Universal is Disney (not including Touchstone, Hollywood, Dimension,

    or
    > Miramax). But Disney being most mainstream is understandable, given the

    kind
    > of material they usually produce: children's entertainment.
    >
    > There are notable exceptions, like a few Universal pictures that were

    directed
    > by Martin Scorsese, Ron Howard, Robert Zemeckis, Alfred Hitchcock

    (arguably
    > though, as a few ,but not all, of Hitchcock's famous works, like "Psycho"

    and
    > "Vertigo," were originally released by Paramount), and Steven Spielberg.

    But,
    > they are most willing to cater to the mainstream to the point where they
    > compromised creative expression simply because what the director wanted

    wasn't
    > perceived as popular by the suits, particularly during the 1980s with

    Ridley
    > Scott's "Legend" being an infamous example. This is also exemplified with

    god
    > knows how many films from Universal that ended up being MST3K fodder.
    >
    > Anyways, I would have a beef with them if I had a lot of Universal titles

    on
    > DVD. But, I only have one title from Universal in my collection, "Legend:
    > Ultimate Edition," so I don't have anything to complain about in terms of

    their
    > forced commercials. - Reinhart
     
    Ian H, Jan 8, 2004
    #8
  9. >Disney has force trailers as well, if you have the eqipment you can copy the
    >dvd leaving out the trailers ;-)


    Better not tell Michael Eisner that. Heheh. ;-p - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 8, 2004
    #9
  10. In article <>, Ian H says...
    > Disney has force trailers as well, if you have the eqipment you can copy the
    > dvd leaving out the trailers ;-)


    With the Disney DVDs I have (including the very recent Pirates of the
    Caribbean and Lion King), you can skip from the "forced" trailers right
    to the main menu by pressing the MENU button.

    Edward
     
    Edward Curtis, Jan 8, 2004
    #10
  11. >But, for me it's a non-issue. Universal has simply not made many films that
    I
    >like and is probably THE most mundane and mainstream studio of them all.

    IMO,
    >they never had as impressive a history as Paramount, MGM, Fox, or Warner

    Bros.

    I have about 100 movies on DVD and LD. I have only nine Universal titles, and
    I can't think of any more I want, available or not. The better Universal
    titles are the Spielberg ones.

    --
    Monte Castleman, <<Spamfilter in Use>>
    Bloomington, MN to email, remove the "q" from my address
     
    Monte Castleman, Jan 9, 2004
    #11
  12. Invalid Address

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:l0jLb.16618$...
    > There may be little control in real life at times, but I personally

    think
    > it's commendable that this parent is taking an interest in his

    children and
    > what they see/watch on televison.


    If he really cared about what his childred saw on television, he
    wouldn't let them watch movies with lots of swearing and violence in
    them in the first place.

    Bleeping some words out is never going to make Showgirls a movie
    appropriate for children.
     
    Joshua Zyber, Jan 9, 2004
    #12
  13. Invalid Address

    Video Flyer Guest

    On 1/8/04 4:21 PM, in article ,
    "LASERandDVDfan" <> wrote:

    >> I'm no fan of forced trailers, but the point should be made:
    >>
    >> Why *should* DVDs be treateded differently from VHS by the studios? To them,
    >> they are essentially the same product, serving the same market.

    >
    > True, but, as mentioned, there are times where you cannot fast-forward past
    > the
    > previews on certain DVD players.
    >
    > But, for me it's a non-issue. Universal has simply not made many films that I
    > like and is probably THE most mundane and mainstream studio of them all.
    >
    > There are notable exceptions, like a few Universal pictures that were directed
    > by Martin Scorsese, Ron Howard, Robert Zemeckis, Alfred Hitchcock (arguably
    > though, as a few ,but not all, of Hitchcock's famous works, like "Psycho" and
    > "Vertigo," were originally released by Paramount), and Steven Spielberg. But,
    > they are most willing to cater to the mainstream to the point where they
    > compromised creative expression simply because what the director wanted wasn't
    > perceived as popular by the suits, particularly during the 1980s with Ridley
    > Scott's "Legend" being an infamous example. This is also exemplified with god
    > knows how many films from Universal that ended up being MST3K fodder.
    > Reinhart



    I'm not a fan of "Legend", myself, but one only needs to take a look at the
    fracas surrounding Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" to see a particularly galling
    example of this mindset. I'm certainly not holding my breath for a
    cleaned-up, anamorphic Universal release of THIS film, that's for sure - at
    least not Gilliam's version.

    Which reminds me, by the way (speaking of Gilliam), that "12 Monkeys" WAS
    actually released by Universal in a surprisingly good presentation with some
    nice extras........waaaaaaay back in the days before they stooped to forced
    ads.

    Neal
    --
    "If morons could fly, it'd be pitch black." - Anonymous
     
    Video Flyer, Jan 9, 2004
    #13
  14. Invalid Address

    Codswallop Guest

    On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:40:31 GMT, Joshua Zyber wrote in alt.video.dvd:

    > If he really cared about what his childred saw on television, he
    > wouldn't let them watch movies with lots of swearing and violence in
    > them in the first place.


    Yeah but some movies are fine with the exception of a few "bad" words
    here or there.

    Unless the child is particularly sheltered, they will hear these words
    before they're 10 anyway.

    --
    - Cods


    (un ROT-13 to email)
     
    Codswallop, Jan 9, 2004
    #14
  15. Invalid Address

    Bill Guest


    >
    > Yeah but some movies are fine with the exception of a few "bad" words
    > here or there.
    >
    > Unless the child is particularly sheltered, they will hear these words
    > before they're 10 anyway.
    >
    > --
    > - Cods
    >
    >
    > (un ROT-13 to email)


    An excellent example can be heard in a film that's quite old--a Disney movie
    from the 80s called "Flight of the Navigator." Possibly to achieve a rating
    above "G," the line, "Don't let them give you any shit, Joey" was thrown in.

    I'm not a parent, never intend to be one, but as an adult I found the line
    jarring/out of place at the time, considering the type of movie that this
    was. It didn't belong--this was not "Blazing Saddles," it was Disney.

    I have no qualms with a concerned parent trying to exercise some control
    over what his children watch--and if that means utilzing an electronic
    device that censors a few words out of DVDs, more power to that individual.
     
    Bill, Jan 9, 2004
    #15
  16. Invalid Address

    Rich Clark Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:VKnLb.33830$...

    > I have no qualms with a concerned parent trying to exercise some control
    > over what his children watch


    I agree with that.

    > --and if that means utilzing an electronic
    > device that censors a few words out of DVDs, more power to that

    individual.

    And I think that following such a strategy is to abrogate that
    responsibility. To simply shield children from coarse language by replacing
    it with silence only makes them want to know what's being deleted. Unless
    they already know, in which case watching the actors' lips move while the
    word is blanked will only make them think their parents are stupid. If they
    don't, they will want even more to find out.

    Parenting is about teaching and creating role models. Don't think kids don't
    notice when their parents subcontract those jobs to somebody or something
    else.

    RichC
     
    Rich Clark, Jan 9, 2004
    #16
  17. >I'm not a fan of "Legend", myself, but one only needs to take a look at the
    >fracas surrounding Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" to see a particularly galling
    >example of this mindset.


    http://www.figmentfly.com/legend/question9.html

    Fantastic resource about some of the screwy things that happened with Legend on
    the executive side along with a great mention of the same thing happening (or
    close to happening) to Brazil. A lot of what I've learned about this movie and
    that of Brazil in relation to studio meddling [I had forgotten about that film
    until you brought it up, thanks for the refresher! :)] came from this webpage.
    You do have to scroll down on the page to get to the reading.

    >Which reminds me, by the way (speaking of Gilliam), that "12 Monkeys" WAS
    >actually released by Universal in a surprisingly good presentation with some
    >nice extras........waaaaaaay back in the days before they stooped to forced
    >ads.


    Well. As I said before, Universal made some good films, but ultimately they
    are the least impressive Hollywood studio. As for the DVD release, I wonder
    what made Universal release forced ad DVDs in the first place after DVDs like
    "12 monkeys?" - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Jan 9, 2004
    #17
  18. Invalid Address

    Stan Brown Guest

    It seems "Rich Clark" wrote in alt.video.dvd in article
    <>:
    >And I think that following such a strategy is to abrogate that
    >responsibility. To simply shield children from coarse language by replacing
    >it with silence only makes them want to know what's being deleted.


    It's quite interesting to me that the OP never once mentioned
    children, but about a dozen responses have assumed that the OP
    wanted to use the TV Guardian device to shield children from hearing
    dirty words as a substitute for parental involvement.

    Has no one but me even considered the possibility that the OP
    themselves might simply not wish to hear those words? Personally I
    would not use such a device, but I can sympathize a little with the
    desire some people might have for it.

    --
    Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
    http://OakRoadSystems.com
    DVD FAQ: http://dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html
    other FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
     
    Stan Brown, Jan 9, 2004
    #18
  19. Invalid Address

    Justin Guest

    Stan Brown wrote on [Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:42:05 -0500]:
    > It seems "Rich Clark" wrote in alt.video.dvd in article
    > <>:
    >>And I think that following such a strategy is to abrogate that
    >>responsibility. To simply shield children from coarse language by replacing
    >>it with silence only makes them want to know what's being deleted.

    >
    > It's quite interesting to me that the OP never once mentioned
    > children, but about a dozen responses have assumed that the OP
    > wanted to use the TV Guardian device to shield children from hearing
    > dirty words as a substitute for parental involvement.
    >
    > Has no one but me even considered the possibility that the OP
    > themselves might simply not wish to hear those words? Personally I
    > would not use such a device, but I can sympathize a little with the
    > desire some people might have for it.


    Then it's a simple matter of "If you can't stand the heat get out of the
    kitchen"
     
    Justin, Jan 9, 2004
    #19
  20. Invalid Address

    Rich Clark Guest

    "Stan Brown" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > It's quite interesting to me that the OP never once mentioned
    > children, but about a dozen responses have assumed that the OP
    > wanted to use the TV Guardian device to shield children from hearing
    > dirty words as a substitute for parental involvement.


    Valid point. Hard to imagine the adult movie fan who would be willing to
    butcher their filmwatching experience that way, but... valid point.

    RichC
     
    Rich Clark, Jan 9, 2004
    #20
    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. Invalid Address

    Universal's response to "forced ads"

    Invalid Address, Dec 14, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    40
    Views:
    1,330
    Stan Brown
    Dec 30, 2003
  2. Peter
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    547
    Scot Gardner
    Dec 17, 2003
  3. Barry Collins

    nVidia WDM Video Capture (universal) Error

    Barry Collins, Nov 16, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    976
  4. kaash
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    631
    Roy G
    Jul 29, 2007
  5. John
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,347
Loading...

Share This Page