Talk:Direct-to-video

Hard facts about direct-to-video market

Has anyone found a source for financial stats on movies made for the direct-to-video/dvd market? If so, could they kindly list it here for future reference? Thanks. Darryl

Yes, I've added one link to an article on the new phenomana of DVDP (DVD Premieres). There's another article on the Straight-to-DVD market I'll add when I can find it again. Scott197827 16/2/2006

Articles about the DTV market are easy to find such as though below but I did not see any that neatly summarize financial data.

[1] - Direct-to-video is a sales driver - consumer video recordings.
[2] - Direct Objects - Independent video operators are bracing for more competition as the major studios ramp up direct-to-video efforts.
[3] - Not Coming to a Theater Near You - Once the black sheep of the entertainment world, direct-to-videos are now the industry's fattest cash cow.

I even ran across a company that does on-demand-DTV, http://www.indieflix.com/, though I suspect linking to this would add too much of a commercial flavor to the wiki-article. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 17:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any direct to video or DVD films which have met with critical aclaim?

Yes, I know there are plenty, tho I'd have to chase them up. Just like films that do poorly on the first run, there are plenty which are sleepers and get word of mouth treatment that eventually turns them into cult classics or even bona fide mainstream hits. Erasherhead springs to mind, as does Easy Rider, Duel. There are many many others. Actually, now that I think of it, that would make a GREAT novelty book for the Xmas trade. The films that everyone thought would be turkeys, but which conquered the world. How about "Life is Beautiful", Myles325a 05:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed

Someone needs to lay off on the citation needed button. A lot of it is common knowledge. Example However, the word "video" does not specifically have to refer to VHS cassettes[citation needed] Telepheedian 16:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can common usage for English phrases be cited? Google finds over 17,000 pages with many of them looking like news articles. I did the Google because the Wikipedia article used "DTV" way down in the section about Japan and I wondered if it was a common abbreviation. It is but there's no clean place at the head of the article to insert this. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 17:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came here from the clean-up pages to see if I could help, and I'm a little confused. There's a tag saying that this article doesn't list any references or sources, but I see TEN references? What am I missing? eveningscribe 19:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of Direct to Video

Would a movie that was first shown on T.V. (ex. The 10th Kingdom, Jason and the Argonauts) and then went to video be considered direct to video?

What about a very limited theatrical release (ex. The Boondock Saints, released in 5 theaters for a week)?

It depends if the movie was made for TV with a DVD release planned, or if the movie was made for DVD with the TV airing planned as promotion for the DVD. As for The Boondock Saints, that's a theatrical movie, but a limited release.-t

No, it wouldn't. It has to be on a physical medium (Laserdisc, VHS, DVD, HD DVD or Blu-ray) to be considered as direct-to-video. --Marceki111 (talk) 10:17, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of movies

The list of DtV releases is perhaps overkill for this article. Perhaps it should be removed and turned into a list article of its own. There are literally hundreds of movies that could go on such a list which makes it inappropriate for this page. --Lendorien 13:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed it.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 21:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen

How are they not featured in this article? They made their fortune selling videos. I am not the person to add it but someone should. Also does Troma release straight to video? How about Richard Simmons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.250.251.211 (talk) 00:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Essay tag

While this article does provide some citations, it essentially reads like a class paper, with much POV and original-research conclusions. The "reasons" section, for instance, needs to be shorter, with less of a tone of rationalization, and placed further down the article, after the article establishes the nuts and bolts of what direct-to-video movies are, the history of them, examples of them, etc. I'll come back to the article when I have more time, but this is a big topic and should have a few of us working on it.

In the meantime, I've found a 1991 Entertainment Weekly article from early in the direct-to-video phenomenon: [4] --207.237.223.118 (talk) 18:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to make a grammatical correction to 207.237.223.118: Your sentence "the history of them" should be "their history".

I would also like to point out that the term "film-length" in the phrase "film-length episodes" is incorrect English usage. It should be "feature-length episodes". I'm changing that now. --Marceki111 (talk) 10:29, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Direct-to-video films screened theatrically

The movie Toy Story 2 was originally planned to be direct to video, but that was changed at the last minute. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article?173.58.64.64 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The stigma of direct-to-VHS vs direct-to-DVD

It seems that there is less automatic stigma about a film being direct-to-DVD then what you typically saw with most direct-to-VHS movies. I think the article could address this point more clearly. --Cab88 (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup Tag

Having taken a look at this article as it exists now, I would like to propose that the cleanup tag be removed, and will make the same suggestion over at the cleanup patrol page. Frmatt (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My Little Pony: Equestria Girls

I want to add My Little Pony: Equestria Girls as another example of type two ("in order to build excitement for the actual release") in #Direct-to-video films screened theatrically section. Any tips or objections? JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 18:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since the article already has examples, I don't see how adding it could improve the article, but if there is something special about it then be sure to include the info along with the reference. Just an opinion, anyone can edit. :) Wickedlizzie (talk) 01:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
unneeded Barely notable movie, doesn't add anything important to the section. Seems like linkspam to me. Gaijin42 (talk) 03:07, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that the 'reference' cited for the existing examples doesn't actually give the reason for the release, as such. Do you have a reliable source that explicitly states the reason in the case of My Little Pony: Equestria Girls? William Avery (talk) 16:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

bd?

Why is it called Direct to DVD though, instead of blu-ray? DVD is an antiquated format. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 12:56, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

== Clearly, DVD is not antiquated, as many of us own and regularly use it, five years after the condescending comment above.

Also, it would be nice if someone edited this article to reflect the changing perception of direct-to-video movies. People who infer that a movie is bad or of lesser quality just because of it being released this way (or direct to Netflix) are doing a disservice, especially in the family-friendly genre. 192.69.183.59 (talk) 04:55, 3 September 2018 (UTC)CucFan[reply]

Quality of Direct-to-DVD releases

Some contributors to this entry seem to have strong opinions about the quality of direct-to-DVD releases as compared with films or TV, but perhaps we should stick to well-documented facts rather than speculate. If people could provide quotations to respected authorities, that might be helpful. Dongord (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Netflix

Do films released originally on this qualify as direct-to-video? I'm confused over whether this film does. --Kailash29792 (talk) 10:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OVA and V-Cinema in Japan

I rewrote the entire section (previously "The V-Cinema and OVA markets in Japan") with sources and citations, as it was in violation of WP:NOTESSAY. -- Primium (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move OVA article to a section in Direct-to-video

NOT DONE

There is clearly a consensus not to perform this merge. (non-admin closure) Vaticidalprophet 20:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The entire OVA article has had multiple problems (few sources, original research, WP:NPOV) persisting since the mid-2000s. The content seems mostly padded and trivial. I proposed in the talk page that the entire article be moved to a section in Direct-to-video. I already covered much of the relevant content in this article's OVA and V-Cinema in Japan section. If no one's opposed, I will work on doing that. -- Primium (talk) 20:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Even if the OVA article is terrible and full of OR, I still feel it has enough in it to warrant a stand-alone article. Link20XX (talk) 20:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I have to agree with Link20XX. OVA is noted in the encyclopedia of ANN, recognized by Crunchyroll (also see here), Wikimedia, Anime Cafe, and CBR (also see here), the Anime Project, The Artifice, Wiktionary, Rice University, Den of Geek, Elizabeth F.S. Kalen's Mostly Manga: A Genre Guide to Popular Manga, Manhwa, Manhua, and Anime, The Animation Studies Reader, Rayna Denison's Anime: A Critical Introduction, A. Magazine: The Asian American Quarterly, and Mitsuyo Wada-Marciano's Japanese Cinema in the Digital Age, to give some examples. Even though the article for OVA isn't great, it has enough notability to be its own article. I would in fact counter that the direct-to-video content about OVA should be moved into the OVA article, rather than the other way around. I'm not sure why you would ever think this would be a good idea, sorry to say. --Historyday01 (talk) 00:22, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Notable term and the article — although poor — explains the cultural impact not really fit for a more general direct-to-video article. RoseCherry64 (talk) 07:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The writing quality of the OVA article is irrelevant to the significance of the topic the article coverages in relation to the Japanese animation industry, as mentioned by the above editors. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 00:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Historyday01. Those bunch of references show why OVA is its own topic. The article's quality is irrelevant to its notability. enjoyer|talk 07:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Link20XX and Historyday01. The best solution for the long-term quality issues of OVA may be to just WP:STUBIFY the article so it can be re-written at a later date. Morgan695 (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

reference six and ten

There is no access to the article in reference six on this page & for reference ten, it only shows the website. It is just the link? I looked up "BIG NAMES LOOK FOR BRIGHT LIGHTS IN VIDEOLAND" on google and it shows the article. The same thing happened when I googled in "Direct-to-Video Family Films Are Hitting Home". Evan

First Direct to Video Animated Movie

It’s states that tiny toons in 1992 was the first, however GI Joe animated film in 87 which was slated for theaters ended up getting straight to video treatment due to previous box office failures for transformers and my little pony. 72.213.144.28 (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]