Will Munney brings up an excellent point, and one I think has been missed on the whole. From my perspective, DVD folks seem to belong to two different groups.

The first group had the means to buy players before the prices came down as well as the means to set up nice home theatre/sound systems. For this group, the quality of the transfer, anamorphic, and 5.1 sound seem to be a priority when they consider buying a new disc.

The second group are those (like myself) who only purchased players after the prices dropped. For this group, their televisions are unlikely to be widescreen, and perhaps unlikely to have a better sound system than the TV's own speakers or having the sound from the TV going through a simple 2 speaker stereo system. For this group, the quality of the transfer, anamorphic, and 5.1 sound probably aren't a priority. The one thing this group can take advantage of is DVD's ability to include lots of extras. So, this group tends to be frustrated at a lack of extras on their favorite films.

Personally, I try pick discs that have anamorphic and 5.1 sound because, even though I can't take advantage of these features yet, I hope to do so in the future. But meanwhile, movie buffs like myself are going to continue bemoaning a lack of director commentary, alternate angles, and other goodies when the it's a film we already enjoy, but want just a little more

Concerning this post, I don't mean to imply that folks in the first group are all rich or don't care about extras, or anything other else. Or to imply that folks in the second group wouldn't know good video or sound if it bit them on the nose, or anything else. Just that DVD fans have inadvertently fallen into two different groups, and that these groups have different priorities where disc content is concerned, in my opinion of course.

Peace,
AB