Customer Review

57 of 61 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Exactly the same as the 2003 release, November 7, 2008
This review is from: A Christmas Story (Two-Disc Special Edition) (DVD)
Revised 12/09: The 2003 "Anniversay" edition of the DVD is now out of print, making this the only deluxe version of the movie available at the current time. A year ago, there were two identical Christmas Story DVD sets on the market at the same time, and this was the more expensive of the two. Seeing as how this is no longer and issue, I'm upping the score for this item from three stars to five.

Original review:
Don't get me wrong - I love "A Christmas Story," and I would give the film a 5-star review. The issue here is that the 2008 DVD release is EXACTLY the same as the 2003 version (aside from some slightly different artwork on the slipcover and case). There are no new special features, and the print quality is the same as before. There is absolutely no need for the studio to release this needless double dip DVD. If you don't already own the 2003 version, then this is a must have DVD; if you do, there's no need to buy the new version, unless you go for the Ultimate Collector's Edition, which has some neat extras (which admittedly aren't worth the price if you already own the film on DVD). Check out the Blue-ray version if you're looking for slightly improved picture quality.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 1, 2008 8:37:11 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2008 8:50:45 PM PST
Timmy K. says:
If it's exactly the same DVD what's wrong with them keeping it available for people to buy? That's not a double dip. All it means is that they wanted to continue selling the DVD, but realized that it's kind of stupid to still have a "20th anniversary edition" DVD on the shelves five years after the 20th anniversary. All they did was change the DVD artwork to fix that. I definitely understand about being angry at unnecessary and greedy DVD double dips, but this definitely isn't one of those. It's just the same DVD still being sold simply so that people can buy it. It also isn't first time that companies have just updated the artwork on DVDs that have already been available for a while, especially if it's simply to remove references to some long past anniversary, and it's also not the first time that a DVD that has already been available for some time was repackaged with some extra stuff (non DVD things I mean) to make a gift set. It's nothing new, and there's nothing wrong with it. A person who just impulsively buys a DVD they already have without checking the features to see that it's exactly the same version that they already have is doing something really stupid, and it's their own fault.

Giving this DVD a lower rating just because there's nothing new on it is pointless. You're basically complaining that the studio ran out of the original supply of a DVD they were selling, and had to make more of them.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 19, 2008 9:40:29 PM PST
Hud says:
Your point would be valid, except the original supply you are referring to is still available and it is cheaper than this 2008 version.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 24, 2008 12:40:04 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 24, 2008 12:51:54 AM PST
NewsView says:
Cheaper for the 2003 anniversary edition, currently listed at $13.99 or thereabouts? You have to add $10 to qualify for free shipping, or you can pay for basic shipping and in so doing nearly approach the price of this gift set sans the extras. And speaking of extras, some people really do bake gingerbread cookies and would find that lamp leg cookie cutter a novelty (a cookie conversation piece, if you will).

Perhaps I am in the minority but I almost never buy a DVD I already own. In the ONE case where I already owned a copy of a particular title on DVD and just wanted some extra discs that came with some "special edition" that was released less than a month after I bought my first copy (from the LOTR series), I had someone in mind to give my first copy away to. So forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't get all the frustration over possibly duplicating what you already have (other than the fact that it takes up too much shelf space). Doesn't anyone have a retirement account or the kids' college funds they should be saving for rather than contemplating the purchase of EVERY new release of a given film on the assumption some "extra" will come with it? I mean, there's no danger in duplication if you don't already own the film on DVD in the first place, right? Moreover, aren't there only so many extras a studio can release on a movie that was filmed before filming/editing extra content for DVD releases was the norm?

For me, the bottom line is simple: You either own it on DVD or you don't. Therefore, the complaint with respect to the lesser expensive 2003 version is essentially a moot point for the vast majority of shoppers. There's no need to beat a dead horse by repeating what has already been pointed out before.

Posted on Dec 8, 2014 6:54:48 PM PST
Newman says:
It is not entirely the same. Unlike the 2003 release, the commentary now has Melinda Dillon. Whether or not Bob Clark's and Peter Billingsley's commentary is different, I could not say.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›