|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Feb 27, 2008 20:35:42 GMT -5
Suppose WWE was to re-release all previous DVDs unblurred, unedited, EXACTLY the way they were originally presented, but would have to jack up the prices to cover any legal and/or licensing costs for them. Would you be willing to pay more for that? Say for example they re-released the Wrestlemania and Royal Rumble anthologies untouched, but had to charge $200 each, or they would have to charge $30 for individual PPVs. Would you do it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Feb 27, 2008 20:37:12 GMT -5
Yes. It's worth it for all the uncensored goodness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Feb 27, 2008 20:38:14 GMT -5
I don't watch wrestling for entrance music, and I've gotten used to the blurring. I can't see paying extra being worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Feb 27, 2008 20:41:00 GMT -5
Yup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Feb 27, 2008 20:42:29 GMT -5
Just for the record, as the man who started this poll, I voted a resounding YES.
|
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on Feb 27, 2008 20:43:03 GMT -5
For the Attitude era stuff, yes, because the editing just gets unbearable. I couldn't even get through Disc 2 of the Best of Raw because the blurring was so terrible. Some blurring I don't mind, but some of it's just plain sloppy. The pre-1998 stuff I don't mind because I can bear the F being silenced and the odd theme being changed. But anything with blurring, give me the unedited material any day of the week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bishblast on Feb 27, 2008 20:43:54 GMT -5
I would pay a full 10 dollars more for unedited Raw 15th Anniversary (the second disk is insanely edited) and 20 dollars more for unblurred Wrestlemania and Royal Rumble sets.
The big blurs really get on my damn nerves, and I never watch their Attitude era DVD reissues.
|
|
OriasPool
Samurai Cop
May the power protect you
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by OriasPool on Feb 27, 2008 20:46:20 GMT -5
yes I would, no edited revisionist history for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Feb 27, 2008 20:46:32 GMT -5
For the Attitude era stuff, yes, because the editing just gets unbearable. I couldn't even get through Disc 2 of the Best of Raw because the blurring was so terrible. Some blurring I don't mind, but some of it's just plain sloppy. The pre-1998 stuff I don't mind because I can bear the F being silenced and the odd theme being changed. But anything with blurring, give me the unedited material any day of the week. I gave away my Best of Raw DVD set for that reason. I spent $25 on it then gave the thing away a week later because it was damn close to unwatchable. |
|
|
|
Post by ultimatekennedy on Feb 27, 2008 20:46:59 GMT -5
A better question would be would I BUY more WWE/F DVDs in general. Those blurred out WWF logos are stupid, cutting off the F in WWF gets annoying and cutting off Ventura in a lot of those old DVDs sucks too. (I like Ventura)
|
|
|
|
Post by Well, Youre Wrong on Feb 27, 2008 21:08:53 GMT -5
Yes I would in a heartbeat, the blurs during the attitude era stuff is completely unbearable
|
|
|
|
Post by Branimal on Feb 27, 2008 21:20:00 GMT -5
The blurring has actually gotten a bit better. Its a lot less noticable on some of the matches contained within the Austin DVD..and I noticed some mistakes too..
In his match with HHH at Survior Series..there is a member of the crew that is clearly visable..wearing a WWF attitude shirt that is totally unblurred.
|
|
