• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

MGM DVD Class Action Settlement

Steve_010

Steve_010

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
27,363
MGM has been naughty and are now the subject of a Class Action settlement. Basically they marketed DVDs as widescreen, when in fact the DVDs are just P&S with the top and bottom chopped off.

325 DVD movies are included in the list, and you can get a true WS replacement or claim $7.10 per DVD. To request a Claim Form, you must call 1-800-285-2168.

check out http://mgmdvdsettlement.com/ for more info.

Props to Ben's for the info http://www.bensbargains.net/ktalk/1106765693,10873,.shtml
 
P&S with the top and bottom cut off? woah!! you're missing like 1/2 the picture. No wonder people want to sue. I have spaceballs, but it seemed to be true widescreen. I can't remember though
 
Scanned thru my DVDs, and it appears spaceballs is the only one I have on that list.

Will have to check out my mothers DVDs. I think she's more likely to have some of the movies listed there.
 
Damn this sucks!
It says my "KILLER KLOWNS FROM OUTER SPACE" is eligble. I'm serious! :mad:
 
How do people find out about those and become a part of them?? My friend got a different settlement like that about a year ago (different case). I have some of those movies too... :(
 
The guy, Bernard J. Farber is a freakin tool.

First, this is just another frivolous lawsuit.

The second thing, is that if for some god knowing reason this thing actually passes, you won't get a new DVD as the DVD's are fine. They are true widescreen preserving the Original Aspect Ratio as shown in theatres already. The most you will get is a new slipcover or insert.

So let me explain. The movies in that list (most if not all, haven't confirmed them all yet) are shot in what is called Open Matte. This is when a filmmaker shoots in basically a 1.33:1 frame but intends to softmatte the image down to the widescreen aspect ratio of 1.85:1. The top and bottom of the frame were never meant to be seen. The problem is that on certain full screen releases, instead of cropping the 1.85:1 matted image down to 1.33:1 they just remove the mattes. Some may say, well I get more image that way. In essense true, but that is like saying if you remove the frame of a painting you get more image....ie the wall. It was never meant to be seen and that is usually when you will see wires on the floor, boom mics, or pants on John Clease when you are supposed to be under the impression that he is butt naked.

Bernard does not understand the letterbox process on these types of films. He never has and has gone on countless crusades to end the practice. Long story short, he is a moron. His head would probably pop if tried to explain Super-35 to him.

MGM did make a mistake though. The image they used on the back of dvd or on the inserts were made incorrectly. They took the widescreen screen cap and cropped that to 1.33:1 which technically is how most films are when presented in full screen. You lose the sides. However, in these cases they stupidly remove the mattes for the full screen version so the width is still the same as the widescreen. Either it was an oversite or the person doing the images didn't know the film was open matte.

So the widescreen version of those films is exactly how it was seen in the theatre, and you aren't missing any of the image from the sides or top for that matter. Space Balls dvd is formatted correctly. Killer Klowns From Outer Space dvd is the same.
 
LynxFX said:
The guy, Bernard J. Farber is a freakin tool.

First, this is just another frivolous lawsuit.

The second thing, is that if for some god knowing reason this thing actually passes, you won't get a new DVD as the DVD's are fine. They are true widescreen preserving the Original Aspect Ratio as shown in theatres already. The most you will get is a new slipcover or insert.

So let me explain. The movies in that list (most if not all, haven't confirmed them all yet) are shot in what is called Open Matte. This is when a filmmaker shoots in basically a 1.33:1 frame but intends to softmatte the image down to the widescreen aspect ratio of 1.85:1. The top and bottom of the frame were never meant to be seen. The problem is that on certain full screen releases, instead of cropping the 1.85:1 matted image down to 1.33:1 they just remove the mattes. Some may say, well I get more image that way. In essense true, but that is like saying if you remove the frame of a painting you get more image....ie the wall. It was never meant to be seen and that is usually when you will see wires on the floor, boom mics, or pants on John Clease when you are supposed to be under the impression that he is butt naked.

Bernard does not understand the letterbox process on these types of films. He never has and has gone on countless crusades to end the practice. Long story short, he is a moron. His head would probably pop if tried to explain Super-35 to him.

MGM did make a mistake though. The image they used on the back of dvd or on the inserts were made incorrectly. They took the widescreen screen cap and cropped that to 1.33:1 which technically is how most films are when presented in full screen. You lose the sides. However, in these cases they stupidly remove the mattes for the full screen version so the width is still the same as the widescreen. Either it was an oversite or the person doing the images didn't know the film was open matte.

So the widescreen version of those films is exactly how it was seen in the theatre, and you aren't missing any of the image from the sides or top for that matter. Space Balls dvd is formatted correctly. Killer Klowns From Outer Space dvd is the same.
Click to expand...
Heh, thanks for the real story. :)
 
is it possible to make money off this? I mean.. Biodome.... :D
Purchase for $5 and get $7.10 out of it? :p
 
Bullitt said:
is it possible to make money off this? I mean.. Biodome.... :D
Purchase for $5 and get $7.10 out of it? :p
Click to expand...

you'd actually want to PAY for a Pauly Shore movie, even if you could make $2.10 on it?

QM
 
MGM probably saved themselves here by only producing crappy movies that no one buys!

;)

I have around 200 DVD movies and only 3 on the list from MGM qualify

ROCKY
SPACEBALLS
PRINCESS BRIDE

not sure if it's worth the effort.
 
Archaea said:
I have around 200 DVD movies and only 3 on the list from MGM qualify

ROCKY
SPACEBALLS
PRINCESS BRIDE

not sure if it's worth the effort.
Click to expand...

Funny, an MGM film I own which is not on the list is HACKERS.
I'm positive that DVD is in true widescreen format though. :) I own 2 copies and used to watch it all the time in college.
 
WTH?

Remo Williams hasn't had a widescreen release yet. If it had I would have bought it. (It was only in 1:33 when they released it last year.)

I do see several movies I own, plus some I need to buy, but everything I've watched seemed fine to me widescreen.

/me starts making a Chuck Norris movie list to buy.
 
Rocky IV and Goldfinger. Is it worth it? I'll have to look over them to see if they are alright. Can anyone here confirm either of them?
 
I have The Terminator but I'm not going to encourage this sort of nonsense by making any claims. The DVD is fine. MGM made a stupid marketing mistake and are being arseraped for it.
 
LynxFX said:
The guy, Bernard J. Farber is a freakin tool.

First, this is just another frivolous lawsuit.

The second thing, is that if for some god knowing reason this thing actually passes, you won't get a new DVD as the DVD's are fine. They are true widescreen preserving the Original Aspect Ratio as shown in theatres already. The most you will get is a new slipcover or insert.

So let me explain. The movies in that list (most if not all, haven't confirmed them all yet) are shot in what is called Open Matte. This is when a filmmaker shoots in basically a 1.33:1 frame but intends to softmatte the image down to the widescreen aspect ratio of 1.85:1. The top and bottom of the frame were never meant to be seen. The problem is that on certain full screen releases, instead of cropping the 1.85:1 matted image down to 1.33:1 they just remove the mattes. Some may say, well I get more image that way. In essense true, but that is like saying if you remove the frame of a painting you get more image....ie the wall. It was never meant to be seen and that is usually when you will see wires on the floor, boom mics, or pants on John Clease when you are supposed to be under the impression that he is butt naked.

Bernard does not understand the letterbox process on these types of films. He never has and has gone on countless crusades to end the practice. Long story short, he is a moron. His head would probably pop if tried to explain Super-35 to him.

MGM did make a mistake though. The image they used on the back of dvd or on the inserts were made incorrectly. They took the widescreen screen cap and cropped that to 1.33:1 which technically is how most films are when presented in full screen. You lose the sides. However, in these cases they stupidly remove the mattes for the full screen version so the width is still the same as the widescreen. Either it was an oversite or the person doing the images didn't know the film was open matte.

So the widescreen version of those films is exactly how it was seen in the theatre, and you aren't missing any of the image from the sides or top for that matter. Space Balls dvd is formatted correctly. Killer Klowns From Outer Space dvd is the same.
Click to expand...


If what you are saying is true, why did MGM agree to settle this case (in the manner chosen)?

If Bernard is such a moron, why didn't MGM have their representatives explain to the court why this case has no merit and request it to be dismissed or proceed with the case to a guaranteed victory?
 
and who is Bernard J Farber?

The suit says that Warren Eallonardo is the plaintiff (with a second plaintiff named, Joseph Corey)
 
needmorecarnitine said:
and who is Bernard J Farber?

The suit says that Warren Eallonardo is the plaintiff (with a second plaintiff named, Joseph Corey)
Click to expand...

He's got to be the lawyer for the plaintiffs. Oftentimes they're the ones that start these things, then find a couple schmoes to be the initial plaintiffs. The only person who makes out on these things are the lawyers. Class actions are more intended to punish the big company than reap any meaningful rewards for those who were "wronged".
 
that being said, the one concession that LynxFX did give Bernie is:

LynxFX said:
MGM did make a mistake though. The image they used on the back of dvd or on the inserts were made incorrectly. They took the widescreen screen cap and cropped that to 1.33:1 which technically is how most films are when presented in full screen. You lose the sides. However, in these cases they stupidly remove the mattes for the full screen version so the width is still the same as the widescreen. Either it was an oversite or the person doing the images didn't know the film was open matte.
Click to expand...


which seems to be what the case is actually about:

The gravamen of Plaintiff's Complaint is that certain representations on the label and package insert of MGM's widescreen DVDs are false and misleading because MGM's widescreen DVDs for films shot in 1.85 to 1 aspect ratio have the same image width as MGM's standard screen format DVDs
Click to expand...
 
needmorecarnitine said:
If what you are saying is true, why did MGM agree to settle this case (in the manner chosen)?

If Bernard is such a moron, why didn't MGM have their representatives explain to the court why this case has no merit and request it to be dismissed or proceed with the case to a guaranteed victory?
Click to expand...
You got me. They already said they did nothing wrong and aren't moving from that position. And it is true, the widescreen dvd's are exactly how they should be. It's their marketing people the mucked up on their wording and some screencaps. MGM probably figured it would be cheaper just to settle instead of taking the whole thing through our court process. Seeing as how the company was being sold anyway at that time, probably was a smart decision. Now it is Sony's burden. If it passes, which it still may not, most people probably won't know about it or go through the process of trying to get a few bucks for free.

Now if you want a frivolous lawsuit worth doing, someone should sue all the studios that put 'full screen' on the packaging of pan and scan/open matte titles. The 'full screen' dvd sure doesn't fill my widescreen tv. :rolleyes:

As for Bernard, I'm not 100% positive it is him, but all logical reasoning points to him. He's been trying to do this kind of shit for years. And that link needmore posted would show you why. :D
 
*Off to eBay to buy all crappy eligible DVD's under $7.10 and profit*

a.k.a.

1. Buy crappy eligible MGM DVD's under $7.10
2. Request claim forms for all the movies
3. ???
4. Profit

LOL
 
Bullitt said:
is it possible to make money off this? I mean.. Biodome.... :D
Purchase for $5 and get $7.10 out of it? :p
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. A resourceful person can grab that list of movies and go buy as many as possible dirt cheap. Then make a profit off them. Although MGM might get suspicious if you send them 2 dozen of the same movie.... :p

Got to make sure the movie has that P&S fualt and are not true WS or you get no $$ and youre SOL.
 
garry26 said:
Got to make sure the movie has that P&S fualt and are not true WS or you get no $$ and youre SOL.
Click to expand...
Once again, there is NOTHING wrong with the widescreen versions of the DVD's. They are matted exactly how they were shown in the theatre and that is exactly how they should be shown when preserved to DVD. The problem was how they explained the widescreen vs full screen aspect ratios. In most cases, what they said is absolutely true. Unfortunately for them, they put it on DVD's where pan and scan wasn't part of the process, instead removing mattes was. What's really stupid is that both versions are on most of those DVD's so if you don't like the original aspect ratio as shown in the theatre and as meant by the director (widescreen in this case), you can watch the openmatte version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top