Monday, July 10, 2006

Even the Disk Sucks


I don’t really mean to be so very harsh. To tell the truth, after the initial disappointments, the new Pride and Prejudice (2005) actually started to grow on me. The pacing of the story (and the dialogue) is still far too fast, and I still worry that this version relies too much on having an audience already familiar with the story, but the look of the film is lush and lovely, and there are a few nice touches.

However, I have been less than charitable towards the thing since I have had my computer crash four times and my regular DVD player do long sessions of confused spins more times than I care to count.

I bought a copy of the new P&P at HMV, in their always-welcome 2/$30 sale, and the first copy killed my comp at the end of chapter 9. I tried again to no avail. I tried it on my entertainment system, which is usually a more rickety enterprise since the machine is about five years old now. This time it only skipped chapters 10 and 11, but no smoke rolled out.

Annoyed, I trucked back to HMV last week to get a new copy. Again, at chapter 10 it died, taking my computer with it. Today, I got yet another copy. Again, chapter 10 would not play.

I turned to the internet, which is one of the few luxuries of the modern world that I do appreciate, and found that I was not the only one with this problem. In fact, in reviews of the Canadian widescreen edition (the one with the little red maple leaf on the spine), I found that several complaints had been launched, and that many copies stopped, froze or pixilated at chapter 10, about one hour and thirteen minutes into the movie. It seems it was a factory issue, and some stores were more than cranky over granting refunds, forcing some customers to try copy after copy until some just gave up.

I can understand those who gave up. Part of me wanted to not bother with this. Chapter 10 is only three minutes long, and features the famous “Darcy’s Post-Rejection Letter” scene. I told myself, “You know what happens here. Just settle.” However, I saw Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) too many times as a child, and I decided to take HMV on. So, I left the house again ranting about “Demanding satisfaction,” a la Alexander Pushkin or something.

HMV, if you’ll remember, firmed up its returns and refunds policies about four years ago in response to DVD/CD burning technology, and declared that exchanges could only take place on unopened items. In the case of flaw, DVDs could only be exchanged for new copies of the same DVD.

Seeing that this was a factory flaw, and that the local HMV does not carry the American version (which apparently is trouble-free), I was unwilling to accept anything else but a refund or a totally different movie. I may only be a humble student, but I still do not have the time to waste trying copy after copy, and running back and forth to HMV, where they seemed to be sure I was running some kind of scam on them.

Well, it turns out that the wonderful, fabulous, lovely and kind store manager (always ask to see a manager when one seeks satisfaction) was well aware that the first print of this DVD from March had this issue. I was told that Universal claims to have fixed the problem and that the new batches are fine, but this was certainly not the case here.

So, if you see a store burning off batches of the new Pride and Prejudice, Canadian edition, you’re probably better off saving your money. (Actually, you may be better off saving your money even if copies of the so-so melodrama are fine.)

In case you’re wondering about what I got in exchange, I selected Hitchcock’s Lifeboat (1944), which I should have gotten in the first place.

Lesson learned.

4 Comments:

Blogger fifipoo07 said...

If you can get the 1995 BBC series version with Colin Firth. I have to confess still haven't seen it all but it is incomparable. Trust me when I say 99.9% of the women in the UK would agree with you. The Mr Darcy emerging from the water moment has no comparison in the new movie version. Oh and I think keira knightley got an oscar nod just cos she demonstrated a modicum of acting ability and then hollywood could justify its collective salivating over her. What do you think?

6:07 p.m.  
Blogger H. said...

Yes, the 1995 version is THE version, and I wonder why exactly they needed this one. In my view, it wasn't really justified. However, I wanted to avoid making too many "OMG Colin Firth is so AWESOME!" gushes.

And it is pretty easy to get an Oscar nod if you are British, especially if female as they are pretty sure you only have a few good seasons in you.

I hate to be harsh on any member of our sex, but there it is.

8:59 p.m.  
Blogger fifipoo07 said...

Yep that seems to be a sad fact on both counts. Do you think they just nominate us cos they like the accent? Actually come to think of it the age thing is changing slighty, 4 example most British actresses in Hollywood now. Pippa P.S Am hoping to get a few film reviews up in the next few days. The Lakehouse, Meet the Fockers, Over the Hedge and if I see it Superman Returns.

6:19 p.m.  
Blogger H. said...

As to age, there are phases. The first bloom of the career goes like gangbusters until the 30s. Then the actresses seem to languish on the stage and occasional TV movie work. Then they come back in their golden years to get pity Oscars and/or blow everyone away by the fact that perfect legs and a taut ass IS NOT crucial to acting skill.

Example: Gloria Swanson.

Future example... I'm gonna guess Meg Ryan and Julia Roberts will go that way.

But then there is always Dianne Keaton, who is a killer at ANY age. Good for her.

12:12 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home