Special Features Every DVD Should Have

Filed Under Culture

I’ve been an avid DVD collector since Christmas of ‘00 when I got my first player. I remember the first DVD I ever purchased was Ridley Scott’s “Gladiator.” Since then, I’ve filled two bookcases with DVDs and that’s not counting all the ill-informed blind buys I’ve sold back to Amoeba Music over the years. I have no idea how many DVDs I currently own, but it’s a fairly obscene amount.

I don’t buy as many DVDs as I used to. I’m on the fence about whether or not I should upgrade to a Blu-Ray. Part of me wishes that Blu-Ray will die on the vine like Laserdisc. For years, I was under the impression that DVD was as good as home video was going to get in terms of picture and sound. When HD-DVD and Blu-Ray came down the pike, it was like a slap in the face. I’ve dropped untold thousands on DVDs and double-dipped on more than a few of them. Now there are even better looking and sounding versions of many of those films on Blu?! Terrific. But that’s a whole ‘nother rant.

Setting aside the fact that Blu-Ray is supposed to trump DVD as far as bells and whistles go, there’s another reason I don’t buy DVDs as much as I did: DVDs have the either anemic or janky special features nowadays. I’ve blogged about extremely boring featurettes before, but I’ve never gone into detail about what features every DVD should boast. DVDs are intended to be collected and revisited. Part of what should entice people to buy the things are all the additional crap they’re going to get, stuff they’ll never get to watch if they’re just renting the thing. Interactive menus are not a special feature.

So what features should every DVD offer? Read on…

The original poster art for the film.

DVD covers, for reasons completely beyond my understanding, are the ugliest, most hideously Photoshopped nightmare factories I’ve ever seen. Many of them do not use the original poster art, opting for floating head mash-ups that always look crudely done. I don’t want to buy a DVD that looks like a bootleg. I want to see the great art that was used during the film’s theatrical run. This is especially true of older films, since many posters these days look like dog’s breakfast.

A director’s commentary that’s genuinely interesting.

Film directors by and large sound so broken down when they’re doing commentaries. They never seem to know what to talk about, so often you get long stretches of uncomfortable silence or the filmmaker talking about what we’re looking at on the screen. It’s almost as though they’re afraid to talk about what the film’s trying to say. I’m not interesting in hearing the director tell me what a “trooper” so-and-so was on the day they had to do multiple takes of a difficult scene. I want to hear about their vision for the material, which is way more interesting than the boring minutae (“We shot the film out of order!”) they get caught up in when they’re avoiding talking about anything directorial.

The theatrical cut of the film and the extended edition.

I hesitate to call the extended version of a film the “director’s cut” because oftentimes it’s not. It’s just a longer version that was cut for time and/or to get a softer rating from the MPAA. That said, it’s a total gyp when studios put out different versions of a film on separate DVD releases; there are three cuts of “Watchmen” floating around — the theatrical version, the director’s cut and the ultimate edition. I’m curious about longer versions of films, but not curious enough to buy multiple versions of the same film that are only marginally different in that one restores a handful of deleted or extended scenes. What’s worse is when the only version of a film that’s available on DVD is the extended edition, which is sometimes a crummier release.

Deleted/extended scenes, alternate endings, etc.

Every frame of footage that was chopped out of a film should be included in the DVD release. I don’t care if the special effects aren’t finished or the color timing is off. I want to see what was removed and make up my own mind as to whether or not it should’ve been left in.

“Making of” documentaries that aren’t a crushing bore.

Featurettes are a mixed bag. They’re either too comprehensive, showing every waking moment of the entire pre-production, production, and post-production processes, or they’re a few minutes long and barely scratch the surface. I can understand that everyone involved wants to save face in the event that the shoot was difficult, which it more than likely was. We’re not going to see anything like “Hearts of Darkness,” the feature length documentary about the making of “Apocalypse Now” that’s light years better than “Apocalypse Now.” But I would like to get a glimpse into all the different stages of production without being bored stiff. I also don’t want the thing to be over in an eyeblink. They need to find a middle ground.

Trailers, TV spots, etc.

Usually, the movies I like have great trailers. So it’s disappointing as hell when the trailer isn’t included in the DVD release for whatever reason. I want to see all the promotional materials for the film. It’s interesting to see how things are marketed differently in other countries. Trailers that are cut for Japanese audiences are almost always way better than the crap that hits U.S. screens (“In a world…”).

What I’m sick to death of are the inevitable double-dips. There should only be one DVD release of a film, one with all the goodies. Too often are films put out on “bare bones” discs with zero special features, and then sometime later another version will be made available with all sorts of extras. This is horseshit. If studios want to know why DVD sales have flatlined in recent years, it’s because they’ve made consumers afraid to plunk down money on a film that’ll more than likely be arbitrarily re-released again and again. “Army of Darkness” probably holds the record for most frivolous double-dips.

What are some features you think should be standard for all DVDs?

-Brad Lohan

If you like this post, share it!