DVD

DVD

Hello Mr Mulvaney,

I want to say firsthand that the primary reason I got into laserdisc the great work you folks do over at Criterion. I have been buying laserdiscs for about 10 years and I still think that the best examples of the format are those from Criterion.

And now, with the advent of DVDs, I am most gratified that Criterion is venturing into that terrain. I have high hopes for the DVD format, and feel at least partly justified now that Criterion is involved. While I haven't yet bought a criterion DVD (havent seen one yet), I am sure they will be excellent quality.

I am a little dismayed, however, with your somewhat (alothough not strongly) dismissive tone when it comes to DVDs. I know you are releasing versions of your movies on DVD but it seems as though DVD is viewed (at least by you; Jon Mulvaney) as an inferior sibling to LD. This, taken by statements such as "laserdisc is still the only way to get an uncompressed image on your TV.". This statement is largely innacurrate - and even if it were, it is a non-sequiter.

I think what you intended to say was "Laserdisc still provides the best uncompressed video quality on your television" (not the only obviously). But even this statement doesn't mean much.

YES, DVD is a compressed format - but does that mean it is in any way inferior to LD? Yes, it is compressed, but it also has a much higher resolution. And no analog video noise. I find it amusing when people note the artifacts in a DVD picture but don't mind the analog noise that comes with even a good LD transfer. Its just one kind of noise versus another in my opinion - I actually prefer the smoothness and sharpness of the DVD picture.

With the experience that a year of making transfers to DVD has brought, most of the new transfers on DVD are excellent yielding no noticeable artifacting at all. This medium is surely showing signs of being an perfectly suitable alternative to LD. And its convenience (along with its ability to play a movie uninterupted) is superior.

And as for the "lossy" compression of DVDs, it is important to remember that even transferring film straight to laserdisc video is a kind of lossy process. Loss does not necessarily imply inferiority if the losses are in the right places. As an engineer who works in imaging science, I know from experience that lossy digital video can look almost indisitinguishable from non-lossy digital video with huge amounts of compression (if it is done correctly). Kodak Photo CD is a perfect example of a lossy video format that still has excellent image quality ( a little plug for my company there!

Anyhow, I dont mean to rant - but I would like to end by saying one last thing; As Criterion edges into the DVD world, I think it is important that you not prolong any artificial biases towards DVD. I was skeptical about DVD initially , but after doing sever A/B comparisons I have decided that DVD has the capability to be a much better video format than LD -- but thats my personal opinion. Please dont make it any harder for someone else to make the same *unbiased* comparison themselves. Remember that DVD is going to be an important part of Criterion's business in the years to come - dont shoot yourself in the foot now saying LD is better and have to recant later if you decide to stop producing LDs (heaven forbid).

That said, I have one request: Please dont turn your back on the text supplements on the DVD format. I know in the past you have stated that it is Criterion's decision to make the supplements on DVD be more of the format of video instead of text (as on the LDs), but these supplements are very interesting and there is no reason they wouldnt work just fine on DVDs.

Thanks for your time, and take care!

-- Frank Caico



Laserdisc

Dear Mr. Mulvaney,

This is in response to the letter from Frank Caico published on your website.

So many DVD aficionados have absorbed so much information from advertiser-beholden home theatre magazines, that they are starting to accept them as fact. I thought some other facts, both objective and subjective, might be in order.

Mr. Caico states that, although DVD is compressed, it has a "much higher" resolution. The better LD players are generally measured at 425 - 430 lines of resolution. DVD has 480 (NOT 500 or more as many, though not Mr. Caico specifically, claim) lines. That is roughly a mere 10% difference. However, LD can compensate for that difference via its utilization of an uncompressed image that includes all 24 frames per second of a film. David Paul Gregg (inventor of the optical disc) has stated that, image-wise, LD will take whatever is thrown at it.

Video noise is another item that is constantly brought up. While it is true that this is part and parcel of the analog format, many contemporary players have additional circuitry and filters that minimize and/or eliminate this problem. (The CLD-99 even has a 3-D comb filter!) Those who constantly notice video noise may still be using the same player they bought 4 or 6 or more years ago, having never upgraded.

While it says a lot about the longevity of those players (which DVD players have yet to achieve), hardware improvements did not cease with the purchase of those units. Do you think those who have already purchased a DVD player will continue to use only that model for the next six years? My guess is that many will be upgrading every 1 1/2 to 2 years to keep up (DTS, DIVX, Progressive Scan, HD, etc.).

As for smoothness and sharpness on DVD, sometimes it appears artificially so. (The close-up of Tom Noonan at the beginning of Last Action Hero on DVD caused one friend to remark that "It looks more like CGI than an actual actor.") I find DVD to have a very glossy look. That's okay for some films. But for those of use who still visit movie theatres, how many movies do you see that have that type of look? But that's how they generally appear on DVD.

And artifacting still does appear. Those of us aren't planning on buying one of Toshiba's projectors (i.e not using component input or 16X9 enhancements) must deal with a shimmery, undulating effect that often occurs during camera pans. Some have said that the $1000 Sony player compensates for this. But if so, that still leaves the rest of us. (As an example of what I'm referring to, check out the overhead camera pan over the photo cutouts on the table in the Joker's lair in Batman. Or, during the beginning of Executive Decision, watch the side of Kurt Russell's plane, particularly as it gets closer.) To be fair, this is mostly relegated to ancillary or background objects, which may be why many don't notice (or ignore) it. But to my mind, this is distortion of the filmed image.

It should also be noted that most DVDs are cropped. Yes, I'm talking about the widescreen versions. It appears that most titles are cut down to 1.79:1, losing picture information from 1.66, 1.85, and even a few 2.35 ratios (almost always when viewed in anamorphic mode).

For LD, what it really comes down to is the quality of the transfer and the pressing. Most DVDs are newly transfered and/or remastered, again giving the illusion of video superiority over an LD title that was done years ago. However, when the same is provided for the LD, the result is at least equal, and often superior to the DVD (Blazing Saddles, Goldfinger, Beetlejuice, Crimson Tide et. al.). Certainly, the Criterion releases of titles such as The Rock and Menace II Society are superior to both the DVD and earlier LDs.

While many claim they've done A/B comparisons, they should always indicate which LD they used. Also, it should be remembered that the monitor settings should be DIFFERENT for each format. DVDs are darker (obscuring detail), so many will have their sets adjusted with the brightness higher, the color lower--whatever it takes to make the DVD look it's best. But if these settings are left unaltered, than the LD will look washed out in comparison. Many people forget this, usually just toggling back and forth and assuming "Gee, the DVD sure has better color!" On a truly level playing field, with the same transfer, the verdict is different.

Let's also look at the hyped extras of DVD. Multiple versions were promised. But to date, only two titles have shown this feature. And guess what? Both were LDs from Criterion. On both Halloween and Close Encounters, the ability exists to insert or omit additional scenes by programming the player. But I'm sure LD will never get the credit for first creating this option. You'd be surprised at how many out there who are raving about DVD extras have no idea that they are merely enjoying LD rehashes. And for those who have the Boogie Nights DVD, beg borrow or steal the Criterion LD and see how a real Special Edition is done. (Unsolicited plug.)

Let's also not forget sound. I have NEVER heard a DVD that sounded better than a laserdisc. A few have come close, or matched it. But the majority are much weaker and thinner on 5.1 audio than the LD. And the differences are even more pronounced on Pro-logic. Many will point out that both are mastered at 384 kbs. So what? What counts to me is the end result, not how it got there. If the end result is lacking, so is the product. Many people are quite happy with DVD sound, and that's fine. But for those of us who are looking for the best possible presentation, the audio rates an obvious second place.

Durability should also be a concern. DVD, being two discs bonded together, can be susceptible to the same temperature and oxidation problems as LD. And it is far less able to handle scratches and the like. Anyone who has ever rented LDs can attest that those rental discs sometimes look like someone had gone ice-skating on them. Yet they still play. Try it with a DVD.

The last thing I'll mention is titles. While a lot is said over LD having a back catalogue of 10,000 or so titles, what is forgotten is that new titles are coming out WEEKLY that may never appear on DVD. The catalogue keeps growing, while DVD is simply regurgitating the Rocky films, the Bond films, and various LD reprints. While there are a handful of new titles making it to DVD (and even fewer DVD exclusives), the LD line-up continues to increase with new, remastered, or "first-time on disc" films. Put simply, no home theatre is complete without LD.

In a nutshell, either format can look better than the other, given any particular title at any particular time. I apologize for the length of this, but I feel the attitude of retailers, as well as the "DVD is always better" crew should be addressed. Keep in mind that I am talking from a Direct-View monitor perspective, using a High-Res S-Video interconnect. I am aware that DVD will look superior to LD when using component and anamorphic mode. However, that is not the set-up that most of us have.

Sincerely,
--- Joe Rusnak

DVD or LD: some final thoughts

Following April 30's post from Joe Rusnak on laserdisc, I received yet more responses on this topic, including one particularly interesting one from Morgan Holly.

That name should ring a bell among those who read the "Laserdisc Production Credits" on Criterion jackets, as Morgan served as our technical director from its beginnings until 1995. He has a fine gift for relating technical minutiae in a manner which even I, Jon "Cementhead" Mulvaney, can understand (although I will say that the following post is still pretty dense, though doubtless not for Criterion's average emailer who is roughly fourteen times more technically savvy than myself). As one who literally grew up with thi technology, he is probably more versed in the intricacies of both the laser and DVD mediums than anyone known to Criterion. His letter offers perhaps the most up-to-date and well-rounded look at the two mediums that we can provide, so without further ado, here's Morgan.

Hi Jon,

I wanted to add a little squeeke from the trenches of technical DVD production in response to Joe Rusnak's letter on your site. I won't get too deep into the format war, but will say that I am excited about the new creative challenges DVD presents to content producers. As a consumer I am equally excited about the cost savings and superior image quality DVD delivers. I'll respond point-by-point to a few technical issues Mr. Rusnak brought up.

Resolution
Many people confuse horizontal and vertical video resolution. NTSC video has 525 lines of vertical resolution. That goes for DVD, VHS, broadcast, laserdisc, etc. MOST of that is active picture information, some of it is for closed captioning, timecode, digital audio, or whatever else people want to insert. In the case of DVD the active picture occupies 480 lines of vertical resolution. This is 6 pixels (or lines) shy of what D1, D5 or digital betacam masters have. Video that ends up on a laserdisc or DVD should, and generally does, originate from these component digital master formats. Hence: The best case scenario for NTSC vertical picture resolution is 486.

Horizontal resolution of digital masters is 720 pixels. D1 is a 4:2:2 format which means the color component of the signal is only 360 pixels, but lets not get into that today. We'll wait until somebody flames me for neglecting to speak about D1's 4:2:2 sampling vs DVD's 4:2:0 sampling. The final horizontal resolution of DVD is 720 pixels, equal to D1. Horizontal resolution numbers for laserdisc are usually derived from a formula involving the ~4.5MHz video bandwidth of the format. These formulas look good on paper, but don't equate to real-world perfomance.

The bottom line is that DVD carries a 720X480 component digital stream. With a reasonable bitrate (3.8-4.5Mbits/sec) and a good compression box the video is indistinguishable from the master tape it was made from. Having said that, there are a lot of bad compression boxes, sloppy compression operators, and bad master tapes out there. Taking this into account, the end results will vary.

Laserdisc, on the other hand, is mastered from D2: a composite digital tape format. It's very easy to see the difference between a D2 and the component digital master it was made from. That D2 feeds an analog composite signal to the laserdisc mastering machine, furthering the degradation of the video quality. Apply all the 3D filters you want, it will never look like the original D1 after that.

Compression
Let's get off this compression kick, guys. VHS is uncompressed as well. Fuck, even pixelvision is uncompressed, but unless you're delivering DIGITAL images at 720X486 as a component stream you're losing resolution. No laserdisc is not compressed, but its not a 6MHz signal with a 100db S/N ratio either. A properly created DVD stream of film-originated material discards extraneous fields. This does not degrade the image. All 24 fps are preserved. a video frame only needs 2 fields to be defined, the 3rd is time filler. The removal of these fields allows all properly made DVD's to act like a CAV laserdisc. I like that.

Hardware Wars
Laserdisc is a mature format. After over a decade of tweaking, it looks about as good as it can (which is still damn good). DVD is just getting warmed up. I sit in a room all day long and watch MPEG streaming into component broadcast monitors from expensive decoders. The set-top players have a long way to go in terms of doing justice to the streams they're rendering. But the resolution is in the software, and exsisting players already yield a picture better than laser. Let's not forget what the original gas-neon lasers looked like when laserdisc was introduced.

I have several laser players: a Magnavox 8040, an NAD 900, a 1030, and two 3080 units. The 8040 let me play CLV discs, the 900 gave me digital audio and CD playback, the 1030 let me play heavy technidisc pressings, and the 3080 gave me CLV stills in addition to molecular-level aluminum compression to flip a 12" disc in a 1" space. I still can't get AC-3 sound without another upgrade. It's the nature of technology (thank god), laserdisc is not immune, hopefully DVD will continue to evolve.

Noise reduction
Many DVD compression operators use noise reduction on the image prior to compression. Although this is necessary for some boxes to yield a good image, many do not require it. I'm using a Minerva Compressionist 250 and have found that it makes very pretty pictures without the introduction of noise reduction.

Does DVD crop films?
This is a difference between players. When Criterion released Five Easy Pieces at 1.66:1, we got a slew of calls from customers saying the film was not letterboxed. Different TV sets have different amounts of overscan. If your set has excessive overscan the image will appear cropped. As stated above, DVD retains all but 6 pixels (3 top, 3 bottom) from the original master tape.

A/B comparisons, format to format
I sat in a room with a staunch defender of laser to do an A/B comparison of Platoon. Although the DVD looked much better to me, the laser guy contended that the laser looked better. Both Laser and DVD were made from the same transfer. Later I put all 3 up on a scope for fun. No contest. The DVD colors (from a consumer player) were more accurate, it had much better resolution, and the signal to noise ratio was vastly superior. This whole thing feels like a repeat of the vinyl vs. CD debate. No warm analog artifacts for me, thank you.

Sound
Now we're in digital land. The word from 8-year Dolby veteran Steve Thompson is "bits are bits, the streams are identical." If a stream is put on LD and DVD and played through the same outboard decoder it will sound the same. Pro Logic is another matter. DVD 2 tracks are AC-3 encoded, laserdisc 2 tracks are uncompressed 44.1 PCM goodness.

-- Morgan Holly

 That's all, folks. Not because we think that Zeus has spoken and you all better go out and buy DVD players now, but because at this point, we've probably given you all the information we can. For what it's worth, here in the office, we have a few staunch laser defenders. I personally have seen some things that look better on laser and others that I like best in DVD. But the truth is, as long as I don't have to watch releases on VHS, I'm happy.

DVD Subtitiles

For foreign films, are you planning on burning in subtitles into the print itself, or are you going to take advantage of DVD's subtitling system? I remember that, while La Strada was a fabulous disc, it was rather annoying to have subtitles present if I wanted to watch the English version of the disc. Also, there are certain films like 8 1/2 where having the choice between dubbing and subtitles would be extremely useful (as the subtitling tended to lose too much of the flavor of the original dialogue).

We will not burn subtitles into the print. Any upcoming DVD releases feature the ability to switch the subtitles on and off, which is truly one of the great features of DVD. For what it's worth, most staffers feel subtitles are always preferable to dubbed voices, but this certainly hasn't stopped us fromm including dubbed tracks on several discs, including Hard Boiled and Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

DVD sides (layering)

Please tell us that you're looking at using the RSDL dual-layer technology that's starting to be used so successfully. It seems like side-flipping is becoming a thing of the past, and it would be lovely to hear that Criterion is looking ahead in this manner.

We agree, flipping sides is a thing of the past. Where appropriate, we have used dual-layer technology; DVD releases currently in production that are dual-layered are Hard Boiled, Amarcord, A Night to Remember, and Seven Samurai.

DVD Region coding

What's your position on Region Coding: are you going to release DVDs without coding, or activated only for Region 1 (North America)?

We currently have only North American distribution rights on any of our releases. We haven't really explored the finer points of region coding because we've been too busy with fine-tuning other important features in the DVD format. However, keep posted to the Web site for news of any developments along this front.

DVD, laser, or both?

Finally, is there no chance that we'll see some of the higher-profile and imminent Criterion releases on DVD anytime soon? I know that I would much rather see a Criterion DVD version of The Game than have to buy the standard version (I hate those Polygram cases!). Are you starting to take a dual-track approach in negotiating rights for upcoming releases, encompassing both LD and DVD versions of a title?
Anyway, thanks for your support of the DVD format, and as always, for continuing to enhance the enjoyment of the cinematic experience for fans like myself.
-- Dimitri

A number of planned DVD releases for this year fit the "high profile" category. As has been said before on these pages, the first block of titles was selected with an eye to curation, as well as to establishing a context for films to come. We will be posting the next batch of DVD releases shortly. Check back to the Web site for news.

LD vs. DVD blues

Dear Sirs,
I feel really bad for people who spent $125 on their CAV versions of HARD BOILED or THE KILLER. Now, for like $40, they can have ALL the same extras INCLUDING the commentary track. Don't you think this is a little unfair? People like me who might be inclined to spend $125 for CC's HARD BOILED, we want to feel like we're getting something SPECIAL that people WILL NOT SEE (or hear) if they buy the CLV version or the DVD version. When I read the ad for the HARD BOILED dvd, i must admit, I felt like a real SUCKER.
What do YOU think?????
-- jeff

Don't feel like a sucker. You're just ahead of the curve. Time passes and technology marches on, but that doesn't make the people who were there first any less prescient, and it certainly doesn't make them suckers. Many longtime cinephiles began by collecting 16 and 35 mm prints for hundreds of dollars. We know a lot of these people, and we don't think they were suckers. What about the days when a VCR cost $1200? We remember the people who got there first and we think they're pretty cool. But the reality is that expensive technologies tend to give way to more affordable ones. It is true that it is much less expensive to manufacture a DVD than it is to manufacture a laserdisc, and that DVD allows us to pass that savings on to the consumer. But don't take that logic too far: you might find yourself waiting through format after format, looking for the best possible deal, in the meantime building no collection at all.

That said, let's look at the advantages laser customers have had over those who've waited for DVD. The Criterion Collection has swelled to 300 titles, many of which have been available to laser customers in pristine laser editions with luminous digital transfers for more than 10 years. Laser customers, especially those who prefer full feature CAV discs, are treated to the only uncompressed digital image available even now. That means a great deal to many of us at the Criterion Collection who have approached DVD with appropriate skepticism because compression, despte the advantages it offers, is one more layer of technology between you and the film that originally passed through the camera. For further thoughts on this, read my answer on video restoration.

DVD pricing, title selection, and area coding

I am heartily glad to see Criterion getting some of their fine presentations onto DVD. As someone who came late to Laser this means their is an opportunity to build a collection from scratch without having the massive expense of trying to back purchase the laser disc catalogue . However a number of things bother me about the first few offerings.

1. Pricing. The Criterion DVD's carry (for the most part) a large premium over those being released by the majors (and even some other house such as Elite , who whilst specialising in Horror do something like what Criterion do) as much as $15. Whilst I understand that quantity of manufacture is to some extent a cost variable , I cannot believe that LA Confidential (with its numerous supplements ) was made in large enough quantity to offset the differential between it and say The 400 Blows. Whilst many new studio release DVDs carry newly originated material the Truffuat is as the laser disc , except for animated menus. All of Criterion's additional cost in creating supplementals has long been amortised and should have no real impact on the cost of manufacture. As you yourself have said in these pages the cost of producing DVD is significantly cheaper than that for Laser. Taking all this in to account why are the prices so high?

Maybe this is a strategy to allow all those still buying your core product , lasers , (myself included actually , I don't imagine we will see The Night Porter on DVD anytime soon) to not feel that all their investment in the format should stop now and wait for cheaper DVD.

I'm not saying I wont buy Criterion DVD (I'm desperate for many titles, Magnificent Ambersons with laser supplements anytime soon?) but I do feel that the differential seems prepostorously high. Could you outline your policy for us?

2. The choice of movies seems a little strange (I know this is highly subjective ) and seems to vary widely from your original Laser selections. John Woo already ??? before Welles, Powell and Pressburger, Lean, Ford et al. Does this indicate that we are likely not to see a large number of the laser collection duplicated? If you know those titles that definatley won't go to Criterion DVD, could you let us know so as we can seek out the lasers before it's to late? I've seen Citizen Kane marked down for later this year , but somehow I can't imagine it without the supplements. Is this a case of C'est la vie?

3. You have mentioned that currently you have not thought thru the policy on area coding . As someone who has to buy in the UK I would urge you to go for open if at all possible . Your discs at retail here are over $50 and if they were playable on both UK and US machines perhaps a distributor would pick them up for the UK market allowing us all lower prices.

Best regards
Kenny Penman

 Our DVDs run between 29.95 and 39.95 each, which we well know is the high end of the market. We're sometimes asked, why? when major studios are charging consistently less?

Well, we're charging the lowest possible price we can that will allow us to a) not compromise quality and b) stay in business. Restoration is a meticulous, time-consuming and expensive process, and we think it's worth the extra ten bucks that our discs run to the people who care about a great-looking Lady Vanishes, which has been significantly improved since its LD release. I get hundreds of letters from customers confirming their expectations from Criterion, and we have no intention of coming up short of those high marks.

Major studios have a different mission altogether; they're market makers, and have gone on the record saying that they're committed to losing millions on DVD before hoping to turn a profit as part of their strategy.

Criterion doesn't have millions to lose, and we are still intent on bringing you the same quality that we've become known for. When it's possible to drop our price significantly, we do it (see Walkabout and the upcoming Samurai Trilogy). If a disc is 39.95, it's because that's the only price that allows us to do what we do. And one of the things we do is take the time to present important films that do not have, sad to say, anywhere near the initial numbers of an L.A. Confidential, much less a Titanic.

As to initial selection of titles, you're correct to say that this is very subjective indeed. In the hundred or so emails I receive each week, I get requests at some point for virtually every title in the collection as a DVD rerelease (admittedly, some titles obviously appear more often than others). I've mentioned before that the first titles were selected with an eye to creating a solid foundation for the films to come. Why is Woo in with Truffaut, Kurosawa, and Cocteau but not Welles? We want the DVD collection to be as eclectic as possible from the beginning, and feel we've succeeded on that front by offering new classics along with the older ones (and we do feel that Woo's Hong Kong films are in the same league as those of the tried and true masters). Additionally, we have the unromantic but necessary consideration of contracts and licensing agreements; some titles are simply more accessible than others at a given point and we have to strike while the iron is hot, if you'll pardon the cliché.

Sorry about this, but we can't make public the information that many customers request, i.e., how long any given title will remain in print. Compare us to a book publisher. You can buy a hardcover at the full retail the day it comes out (or at 20% off in some places, including over the Web). You can instead, if you don't need the book right away, wait for it to go on sale or wait a little longer for it to appear on the remaindered table, and if you miss out on all these opportunities, you can try and find a used copy. But asking the publisher to provide you with a list of the titles they know or anticipate becoming unavailable? That's not a terribly realistic request, from the point of view of any viable retail business, which, like it or not, Criterion needs to be.

As to region coding: We have ONLY North American distribution rights, and have no international distribution rights whatsoever, rendering region coding moot. We're glad you like the discs, but we receive nothing from any overseas sales, and therefore can't comment on the markup you're experiencing.

DVD?

I get over a thousand customers a month who ask me if you guys will hit DvD. Please help me.
--Michael DeGrecio

 The news of Criterion's initial DVD launch has been received with virtually unanimous approval. To view the slate of our first offerings in the new format, read our press release of November 10, 1997.


Back to index

DVD 2: Which titles, when?

I am VERY excited about Criterion's entry into the DVD market! I was eagerly awaiting the announcement, and since it came I could hardly be happier. I have been on the fence about whether to buy ALL Criterion DVD titles as they become available or whether to buy only the ones I know I love. At the moment, I'm leaning towards buying them all. That should make your accountants happy. Do you have plans to release the entire Criterion Collection on DVD?
--Louis Cassorla

I've been seeing hints that Criterion editions will start appearing on DVD in February/March. Is there going to be any rhyme or reason as to the order in which your existing titles will be released on DVD? A number of us at Pixar just got Laser/DVD players and are interested.
Thanks --
Gregg Olsson

The Criterion Collection on DVD will evolve in its own way, with a somewhat different identity from the laser collection, although our mission -- to collect the greatest treasures of world cinema and give them the best possible treatment, presenting them the way that the filmmakers originally intended -- will remain the same for the new format. We are proud of our position as industry leader on laserdisc and have every intention to continue to set the standards for special edition treatment of movies in the new format.

Our first twelve titles were chosen with an eye to curation. We want the Criterion Collection on DVD to be founded on a solid base of classics from the master filmmakers; as the collection grows, we'll be taking more chances, just as we have in the laser collection in the 15 years since it began. We look forward to an eclectic, robust DVD collection in the future, to which our first 12 titles provide a great introduction.


Back to index