Unclear Description: Alternate DVD Commentary

What makes these commentaries alternate? Is it the snark, or the downloading? Either way, some examples don't fit.

Yeah, I already covered this in another thread, but it didn't really get anywhere. To summarize, I feel there are four categories of DVD commentaries:

• 1. Official ones actually found on the disc.
• 2. Official ones not found on the disc, you'll have to download them later. Some directors have created them after the fact, or the actual disc doesn't exist due to Keep Circulating the Tapes reasons, but the creators still wanted to make one, etc.
• 3. Commentaries you have to buy through MST 3 K and its descendents (Rifftrax, The Film Crew, Cinematic Titanic, etc.)
• 4. By fans, for fans commentaries, released for free on blogs, Zarban's House of Commentaries, etc.

In reality, these four should be independent pages.

edited 10th May '12 7:30:45 AM by NateTheGreat

A lot of the examples seem to amount to wacky official ones that are done by a character or have some other gimmick. These should probably be a sub category in the DVD commentary article and not put on this ambiguously-titled one.

Since no oen else is weighign in, I want to see this merged with DVD Commentary, which should be renamed to audio commentary, since they also occur on laserdisc, HD DVD and Blu-ray.

Eh, I'm not a fan of that option.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Why not? I don't think the idea that commentaries are sometimes available through alternate means instead of on the disc is tropeable. That previous sentence covers pretty much all there is important to say about the subject. The idea that commentaries are sometimes their own kind of fiction with characters enacting a story instead of real people giving real-world info about the film may be tropeable, I suppose, but I'd want basically a whole new article if we were going to split on that basis.

Bumping to get more feedback. How many articles do we need about audio commentaries? If more than one, what should be the basis for the split?

My own view is that we don't need two articles, but if we do the split should be traditional commentaries with real people giving an out-of-universe perspective on the movie vs fictionalized ones. Distribution methods are not worth splitting over. A commentary is effectively the same thing whether it's on the disc on downloaded later. In many cases, the commentaries were offered by different methods. The page needs to cover the idea that there are several distribution methods, but it isn't a different trope.

I strongly disagree. Bundling a commentary with the DVD is not the same as a third party recording their own independent commentary.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Who's a third party, though? Off-color films includes Mike Nelson commentaries not too different than the Rifftrax. Rifftrax themselves releases DV Ds of their public domain movies. Many DVD publishers had nothing to do with the production of the movie itself.

There are three major categories of DVD Commentaries:

• 1. Official ones, either on the disc or downloadable. However, in any case these are actually from experts, whether production staff, actors, or film historians.
• 2. Unofficial for-profit. Rifftrax, Film Crew, etc.
• 3. By fans, for fans, for free.

These are three pages.

Any other opinions on this? I don't think that the official/unofficial distinction is meaningful thanks to home video rights getting shuffled around. Joe Bob Briggs had no more involvement with The Double-D Avenger than I did and publisher Elite Entertainment was also not part of the production. This goes double for Public domain movies. The computer I'm writing this on has everything I need to record a commentary for Night of the Living Dead and burn it to DVD, which I could legally sell. What makes Mike Nelson's commentary of Legend Film's release any more official than mine. Media also doesn't matter since it's quite common for the same commentary to be released multiple ways.

The split we need is people using commentaries for their original purpose of providing information about the production and film criticism and parodies of this concept with fictional characters, made up info and what-not.

At any rate, we seem to agree that the current split is terribly unclear as to what goes where. Any other opinions on how to fix?

There Is No Such Thing As Notability, so if you made one and it had a page on the wiki, it would be an example of the trope. This isn't really a problem.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Right. My point was it would be an example of the same trope as Mike Nelson's commentary, not a different one.

edited 23rd Jun '12 2:19:04 PM by AceOfSevens

I think it's possible you're just confused about the trope then, because I am failing to see anything ambiguous here.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

The ambiguity is that the description and examples don't match. The description says it's for commentaries available for download instead of on a disc. I don't think that's a tropeable distinction seeing as how the same commentaries are often available both ways and we don't generally split other things along these lines.

If you look at the examples, some match the description, some are joke commentaries found on the discs and some are serious commentaries found on the discs but not by the people you'd normally expect to do a commentary. It's not at all clear what the line between this and a regular Dvd Commentary is.

edited 23rd Jun '12 7:31:10 PM by AceOfSevens

We need to move all of the "official ones you have to download later" examples over to the main DVD Commentary page so there's less confusion.

DVD Commentary is part of the Paratext that comes on the DVD. Alternate DVD Commentary is an unofficial third-party commentary track that does not come on the DVD. Simple enough.

I do see some of the examples are wrong. Definition's pretty clear, though.

edited 23rd Jun '12 11:44:28 PM by troacctid

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Those two options are not comprehensive. There are also official tracks for download in many cases. Besides, what makes something official, especialy if there's no rights-holder?

To me, "official" means either:

• It came on the commercial disc.
• You download it later, but it's made by people directly involved with the film.

Not much room for leeway, is there?

I don't see how it's relevant whether you get it on the disc itself or on the company website or whatever, or whether it's relevant whether you have to pay for it or not. It strikes me that the crucial difference is whether the commentary is made by the authors or by fans.

Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!

So you would say that David Kalat's commentary on Godzilla would be an alternate? What about commentaries that include authors and fans? This is pretty common. You'll have a film historian or the like moderate a discussion.

Who is David Kalat?

One trope is "author commentary". Another is "fan commentary". If a commentary is made by both authors and fans, then that is a case where the two tropes overlap. I don't see how that is a problem.

Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!

How are we counting official yet atypical commentaries? What I'm thinking of is something where the actors comment on the show, except they do it in-character as if they're watching a documentary of their own life. Sort of a self-MST. Clearly it's not an ordinary commentary, but does it not count as alternate because it's made by the creators and comes on the disc?

edited 24th Jun '12 6:36:38 AM by Clarste

Completely different trope. Also the primary source of misuse on this page.

Rhymes with "Protracted."