Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Are you gonna get Disney+?

This is topic Are you gonna get Disney+? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007699

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-20-2019, 01:42 PM:

EDIT: After posting this, I realized I already created a thread for this a year ago, called "Are you gonna sign up for Disney's new streaming service?" So I guess we can either weigh in with folk's current opinions here, or the moderartors can delete this thread. It's up to the powers that be.

---------------------------------------------

Time for the latest entry in my long running series of "Are you gonna get" threads, which for you newbies, has previously covered the iPhone, the iPad, the iPhone X, and the Apple HomePod. (Do they even still make that?)

This time our topic is Disney's new streaming service, Disney+.

I'm on the fence about whether to subscribe to Disney+ or not. It has lots of movies I like of course, and it's certainly cheap enough, but do I really have the time to add another channel to my TV menu? In other words, am I that dissatisfied with my current TV channels that I need to add it?

I had thoughts about binge-watching "The Simpsons" (which I think I would enjoy, but have never seen except for the occasional clip) but then I heard that they're "stretching" the early episodes' image to fill wide screen TVs, thereby ruining the already crappy look of the show, so I've kinda lost interest in that.

After thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion that I don't have time to watch what I want to now.... how can I possibly add a ton of Disney movies to the mix? And I don't really give a hoot about "The Mandalorian" or National Geographic, and I really don't have any desire to watch a Marvel or Pixar movie anywhere but on the theatre screen. So I guess I'll wait for the inevitable "bargains" that will come along to try to change my mind.

What about the rest of Film-Tech-dom?

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 11-20-2019, 02:15 PM:

Pretty much with you. No time, no current plans on getting the service.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-20-2019, 02:17 PM:

No.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 11-20-2019, 03:00 PM:

They did their initial trial launch in the Netherlands and I've had it for free for a few months. I've let the subscription lapse. It might be worth it if you've got some little kids to entertain, but most of the content on there I'm interested in, I do have in the form of a Blu-Ray or DVD.

Posted by James Wyrembelski (Member # 9037) on 11-20-2019, 03:30 PM:

I got it just to see what was available.

Ive already watched a few of the classics that I don't already own. Been going through the Simpson's and plan on refreshing myself on Star Wars. Once I'm done with that, I'll probably cancel my service...along with Netflix as well.

We generally only use Hulu and Youtube.

Posted by Ed Gordon (Member # 10866) on 11-20-2019, 04:02 PM:

No, for all the reasons Mike listed. As Marcel points out, having kids will probably have a lot a parents signing up for it. Seven bucks a month for a baby sitter is a pretty good deal.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-20-2019, 05:53 PM:

Nope.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-20-2019, 07:49 PM:

I haven't signed up for Disney+ yet. The $7 per month price seems like a serious bargain. Netflix costs nearly double. HBO is $15 per month.

Ultimately it comes down to content (and having enough free time to watch it).

I'm not really itching to watch The Mandalorian. I've heard it's pretty decent, but still I'm just not Jonesing to check it out. What other original content does Disney+ have to offer? They do have a lot of catalog movies and TV shows, but most of what they have that's good I've seen already.

Is Disney+ mostly just "family-friendly" content? The Mouse House also owns/owned Touchtone Pictures and Hollywood Pictures, two brands that distributed "grown-up" movies, even some that were R-rated. And there's 20th Century Fox' library, which also includes a lot of R-rated movies for adults. Do they offer any of that content? Some of the Marvel content previously on Netflix was definitely not for kids.

The $15 bundle featuring Hulu, Disney+ and ESPN+ seems tempting.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 11-20-2019, 07:55 PM:

I got a free year of Disney+ from Verizon for having an unlimited data 4G plan. I must say I have really been enjoying The Mandalorian (its actually really good so far)and checking out classic Star Wars episodes in HDR.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-20-2019, 08:13 PM:

I would sign up for Disney+ right friggin' now if they offered the original "de-specialized" versions of the 1977-83 Star Wars trilogy. Disney is literally leaving money on the table by not offering that on Blu-ray or any other medium.

I read The Digital Bits review of the Star Wars movies as seen on Disney+. They're still the SE versions, complete with numerous additions over the years, including the extreme cringe-inducing "NOOOO" moment on ROTJ. I can't watch that part and I fast forward past the lame music number in Jabba's lair. The Digital Bits said all the original, film-based imagery looks great, but the SE stuff from the 1990's looks even more obvious since it is heavily up-rezzed and even rife with edge enhancement.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-20-2019, 09:33 PM:

Harmy’s despecialized editions are the only way to go.

No Maclunkey.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-20-2019, 10:18 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
the original "de-specialized" versions of the 1977-83 Star Wars trilogy. Disney is literally leaving money on the table by not offering that on Blu-ray or any other medium.

They don't exist anymore, remember? Isn't that what George L. said?

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 11-20-2019, 11:13 PM:

He sounds more like George Orwell than George Lucas at times...

And he may tell the truth to some extend. Maybe they did destroy part of the original camera negatives while making the special editions in the late 90s and has hidden or even destroyed many of the still existing copies of the originals...

Yet, if some dedicated fans and bootleggers on the Internet are capable of making a pretty decent "original restoration", based on multiple "public" sources, then a gazillion dollar company like Disney could surely do so, if they wanted.

But we don't know what's in the contract between the Mouse and George L., maybe he put in a clause that the original trilogy is never to be resurrected. [Wink]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-21-2019, 12:21 AM:

As it stands, Star Wars is a property that is AGING, like it or not. People born after the year 2000 probably couldn't give two fucks about that whole saga.. It's NOT their jam. And that's putting it nicely.

That's really where I have to get harsh with both George Lucas and Disney. Both those camps are totally forgetting the people, not to mention the late 70's-early 80's era, that propelled them to success and riches. Their frame of reference does not matter anymore. Their ideas and sense of "creativity" is completely outdated. That was plainly obvious in some of the cringe-inducing dialog written into The Phantom Meanace. They're not young anymore. If they want to keep re-selling this "property" they need to remember the people in MY age group. I was days from my 10th birthday when the first Star Wars movie was released. Now I'm in my early 50's. The version of Star Wars I cherished as a kid isn't the version that was "rendered" in 1997.

Perhaps the Star Wars saga might "speak" to some young adults and children these days. Even if the idea can "sell" it sure as hell ain't selling on any genuine basis of being "new." Star Wars doesn't have any top flight wow-factor like it did 30-40 years ago. So at this point the primary group of people the saga is selling to is the Baby Boomers and Gen-X crowd who loved Star Wars when it was new.

People, like me, who've seen Star Wars countless numbers of times can often quickly identify all the artificial CGI-enhanced scenes that have been cobbled into the movie during the last 20 years. They don't really work. They don't really add anything to the story.

If it was up to me to do a restoration of Star Wars I'd have everything reverted to the original 1977 release as closely as possible. It would even be a judgment call on whether to keep garbage mattes visible around spacecraft. Having had 20 years to look at the SE additions, virtually none of them have improved on the originals. They just need to clean up the original cuts of the first 3 movies as closely as possible.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-21-2019, 10:25 AM:

Bobby, have you seen Harmy's Despecialized Editions?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-21-2019, 01:28 PM:

quote:
Star Wars is a property that is AGING, like it or not. People born after the year 2000 probably couldn't give two fucks about that whole saga.

I assume this is why they're putting Luke Skywalker and the whole rest of the cast of that saga to bed after this next movie and starting out afresh with a new trilogy with "new" characters (not to mention The Mandalorian which is also new stuff, from what I can tell).

Also I'm sure it's the reason why, for the new "Star Wars Land" at the theme parks, they are located on a previously unheard-of planet with a bunch of new characters. The only connection to "old" Star Wars is the Millenium Falcon.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 11-21-2019, 05:45 PM:

Got Disney+, the question is whether I am going to keep it after I catch up on their classic films that I missed in my childhood.

Presently there is not sufficient original Marvel programming to keep me. As too Marvel feature films, Netflix will eventually send me the BluRay. I am not interested in children/young adult programs.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 11-21-2019, 07:28 PM:

Yes Bobby I wish they would have put that stuff on the Blurays as extras at least.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-21-2019, 07:52 PM:

quote: Geoff Jones
Bobby, have you seen Harmy's Despecialized Editions?

No, I haven't seen it. I haven't watched the Project 4K77 version either. It seems like a great deal of effort went into both editions. Fox/Disney would likely possess even better materials. It's just stupid that they don't do a proper, official restoration.

quote: Mike Blakesley
I assume this is why they're putting Luke Skywalker and the whole rest of the cast of that saga to bed after this next movie and starting out afresh with a new trilogy with "new" characters (not to mention The Mandalorian which is also new stuff, from what I can tell).

There's little doubt about their motivations. Obviously Disney wants to pitch Star Wars to new generations of kids. The problem is the whole saga is based on something made for previous generations 40 years ago. It kind of reminds me of the 70's and 80's when Disney was really in kind of a funk. When I was a kid I really wasn't all that interested in animated movies made 20 or more years before I was even born. But Disney was relying on those old properties rather than working hard to develop something new. They started turning it around when they released The Little Mermaid and went into the 1990's on a hit streak. It was with all new properties. Pixar added to their fortunes.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 11-21-2019, 08:05 PM:

Pay for Disney+? ...after they make the 20thCenFox library unavailable, but still get the government to give them free copyright protection (plus the services of the FBI thrown in to boot?) HELLS NO!...just on principle.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-22-2019, 11:21 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Fox/Disney would likely possess even better materials. It's just stupid that they don't do a proper, official restoration.

They may have better access, but I’m not sure their dedication and attention to detail would come close to the efforts made on the fan restorations. Just look at the miscolored lightsabers and screwed up sound mixes that have showed up in the official releases.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 11-22-2019, 08:17 PM:

I sprang for a deal in which I signed up for a free D23 membership, paid in advance for two years of Disney+ and got a third year free, which works out to slightly less than $4/month.

So far I've only watched The Mandalorian, which is really good so far (but then it'd better be, at a reported $15M per episode). I was excited to show my wife The Simpsons (she grew up not watching it, and so missed those first 10 or so glorious years), but they are currently streaming cropped to 16:9 - I understand the 4:3 versions will go up sometime in early 2020. Also interested in the MCU tie-in shows.

I haven't poked around the service too much, but I am hearing a lot of frustration around a lack of metadata. It's not easy to search the service to find things, and related programming doesn't show up together in search results.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 11-23-2019, 07:13 AM:

Since my house is about to become cable tv free and I do have kids.

Yes.

I watched "The Back Cauldron" already, which is my favorite Disney animated film. Also, I checked out "The Phantom of the Megaplex", which I enjoyed (Mickey Rooney).

It also helps that I have it free for one year.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 11-23-2019, 03:10 PM:

I haven't had cable TV for more than twenty years or more and I don't plan to get it.

I don't care to pay upwards of $100 per month for crap I don't want to watch.

Previously, I received OTA television with an antenna on the roof but, now, I live in an apartment building where I'm not allowed to put up an antenna. Most indoor antennas suck and the ones that do work well cost more than I want to pay.

I just don't care about television enough to pay that much to have it.

I have an Apple TV box that I use to get my "On-Screen Entertainment." There are plenty of free things to watch. There's "Tubi," "Crackle," "YouTube," "PBS" and others.

I do have accounts with NetFlix and Hulu but I don't pay the monthly subscription.

I am absolutely dead-set against anybody taking money out of my account without my express permission for that particular transaction. It's morally wrong!

Instead, I pay for my subscriptions with gift cards.

I buy a gift card at the store, use it to charge up whatever account I want to use and let it ride until the card is used up. When it's time to recharge the account I buy another card.

One time, I'll recharge my NetFlix account. The next time, I'll recharge my Hulu account. Since Hulu and NetFlix change their content, roughly, on a monthly basis, by the time my account on one of them runs empty, the other has changed content to something interesting. That way I'm never paying money for crap that I've already watched.

As far as Disney goes, I'm just not interested enough to even look into it.

It's just another monthly bill that I would have to pay (or manage with gift cards) in order to have access to crap I'll never watch.

And, as others have pointed out, the way Disney is hoarding the Fox catalog, I feel biased against Disney in the first place and I am even less likely to sign up.

So... As I said above. Just, plain, "No."

Posted by Kyle Mikolajczyk (Member # 10859) on 12-09-2019, 08:04 PM:

quote: Dennis Benjamin
I watched "The Back Cauldron" already, which is my favorite Disney animated film. Also, I checked out "The Phantom of the Megaplex", which I enjoyed (Mickey Rooney).

I have never seen this movie before but I have heard it has been regarded as the "worst Disney animated movie". I am impressed that you call it your favorite!

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 12-14-2019, 10:33 PM:

I had high hopes for this but tried it out the first night it went live and immediately cancelled because they are kicking you out during the end credits, just like Netflix. I would've thought Disney would have more respect for their own content, especially since so much of it has after-credit scenes and such, but no. Guess I shouldn't be surprised when they've had ridiculous logo bugs on the Disney Channel for a long time.

Here's how "10 Things I Hate About You" ends- the screen-shrinking triggers a good 30 seconds before the first credit even appears, and the movie has footage going on to the very end- why the fuck would they encourage people to quit watching it early?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lZT4A5dDts

It suggests you cut it short to watch "Never Been Kissed"- just for fun I clicked on that and skipped to its end credits, which have high school yearbook photos of most of the cast and crew accompanying it (I made up the film print for that and didn't cue the lights to come up until they had finished). The shrinking didn't kick in as aggressively as the previous movie, but when it did it suggested "10 Things I Hate About You," which I had just "watched"! Seriously, fuck this shit- I'd rather watch VHS tapes than this, at least they don't tell me when to stop watching.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 12-15-2019, 09:05 PM:

quote:
As it stands, Star Wars is a property that is AGING, like it or not. People born after the year 2000 probably couldn't give two fucks about that whole saga.. It's NOT their jam. And that's putting it nicely.

I don't know on what basis you can make that assessment. Go to a toy store and look at how many Lego Star Wars sets there still are. Anecdotal, but my 10-year-old grandson loves Star Wars, even the prequels and so do his friends. He's a very smart kid and when we watched together when he was a bit younger, he laughed at everything Jar Jar did, which made me realize that Lucas wasn't as stupid as I thought he was. My 16-year-old granddaughter would watch the films when others are watching, but she doesn't care much about them, but she's quite sophisticated and is far more into music than movies. They were both also very into Harry Potter and still are.

I don't think Star Wars is "aging". It just may be that the people who have lived with it for over 40 years are tired of it, like the big hit song that you once loved, but has been so overplayed that you never want to hear it again. There's a difference.

The older Star Wars films may be aging from a special effects standpoint, but the stories and characters are just as valid now as they were in 1977, just as the Wizard of Oz is still considered a classic and watched by many.

And personally, I'm no fanboy (and no hater) of the Star Wars films. I can certainly see the flaws in all the films, but I don't get crazy about it. If you check some of the Star Wars threads on other sites, people are completely obsessed and crazy and I dare say, even psychotic. They just can't let their complaints go. Personally, when I don't like a film, I pretty much just forget about it.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-15-2019, 09:47 PM:

quote: Martin Brooks
I don't know on what basis you can make that assessment. Go to a toy store and look at how many Lego Star Wars sets there still are. Anecdotal, but my 10-year-old grandson loves Star Wars, even the prequels and so do his friends.

What other choice do the kids have? That's the real point.

I feel sorry for children and teens these days because there is way too little of anything that's actually new and original made from scratch for their era. They're getting re-sold hand-me-down content from my generation (Gen-X) and older. Movie box offices have been dominated by super hero movies from Marvel and DC; those movies are technically new, but many of the characters were created when I was a kid or even much older than me.

I don't doubt children of today like Star Wars. But, again, that level of "like" isn't to the insane degree that it was back in the late 1970's when it was a genuinely new thing. For crying out loud, they made a disco album of the Star Wars music back then! It was crazy.

This new Star Wars movie will surely rake in a ton of money, and probably gross way more than the original did 42 years ago. But is anybody really going to care? It's not going to be some ground-breaking new cultural phenomenon.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-15-2019, 11:34 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I feel sorry for children and teens these days because there is way too little of anything that's actually new and original made from scratch for their era.

When I was a kid the hot toys were Tinkertoys, Erector Sets, Lionel trains and board games. These were all things that were around for generations before I came along. The hot new thing was G.I.Joe, or Rock'em Sock'em Robots. Basically anything that the TV announcer said "By Marx!" at the end, was a must-have toy. (And I still play with Lionel Trains today, so they had a lasting impact!)

The point is, the Star Wars and Lego stuff is just carrying on a time honored toy tradition. The really big new thing that sticks is one of the most difficult things to come up with.

Lionel made it happen in the train world when they licensed "The Polar Express" 15 years ago... today they are still making a complete line of Polar Express trains in three different scale sizes, with cool new stuff coming out all the time. One particular engine (for adult collectors) sells for north of $1500. And they have gone on to license at least a dozen other hot properties, including Disney AND Warner Bros.' Looney Tunes. (How they pulled that one off is a mystery to me.)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-16-2019, 10:03 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
The point is, the Star Wars and Lego stuff is just carrying on a time honored toy tradition. The really big new thing that sticks is one of the most difficult things to come up with.

Yet most previous generations had their "big new thing that sticks" with movies, music and all sorts of other stuff. Gen-X definitely had a lot of big things we got to call our own. Same for Baby Boomers, the Silent Generation and Greatest Generation. There's not so much of that these days. Things started getting stale as Millennials were coming of age in the 2000's. I think Gen-Z has kind of gotten ripped off. The "cultural phenomenon" going on now is our Internet of Things devices spying on us or getting hacked.

Lately I've been seeing a bunch of these throw-back video game cabinets in stores offering multiple 1980's video games using the original ROMs. They seem pretty cool to me at first glance (I'd love to see a Robotron: 2084 game), although the flat panel monitors change some of the original look. At the same time it seems like tyranny of nostalgia. Old ideas being sold as new again.

Speaking of trains, I used to be a real train geek when I was a kid. I thought good electric trains (model or ready-to-run) were pretty expensive back then. It seems like it would cost a fortune now to build a great quality train layout now, especially if someone wanted to build a big O-scale based layout.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-16-2019, 12:05 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I used to be a real train geek when I was a kid. I thought good electric trains (model or ready-to-run) were pretty expensive back then. It seems like it would cost a fortune now to build a great quality train layout now, especially if someone wanted to build a big O-scale based layout.

I was deep into trains when I was a kid, then moved into other typical things when I grew up, and got back into it when my grandfather died - we decided to put up a train layout in tribute to him, because he had always had a train around his Christmas tree. Then I discovered that there is even more O gauge stuff being made now than there was when I was a kid, so I got back into it and have been collecting stuff ever since the early '80s.

A friend and I are working on a new layout right now... it's about 350 square feet, which is nice and big, although not "big" by O gauge standards, it's more mid-sized. We've been working on it off and on since February of 2018. We just finished up wiring the track last weekend, and I'm working on wiring the switches and control panel right now. Then comes the scenery detail work. We could have put it together much faster if it wasn't for these pesky jobs, and having to "save up" in between supplies purchases! (I don't really know how much we've spent on it and and I don't think I want to know.)

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-16-2019, 01:25 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Basically anything that the TV announcer said "By Marx!" at the end, was a must-have toy.

I live just a couple of blocks away from the old Marx Toys factory.

The building is still there but, now, it’s a small business incubator... One of those places where people can rent shop space when they want to start up a small manufacturing business. Even so, the place is still a local landmark and people still call it “Marx Toys.” When people ask where I live I can say that I live near the old Marx Toys plant and most people will know where that is.

An uncle of mine used to work there and he used to bring us Marx toys for Christmas and stuff. We got things like Rock em Sock em Robots, Magic Shot Shooting Gallery and Gnip Gnop almost before they were supposed to be on the market.

As I remember, the company used to encourage employees to take toys home to their kids because they considered it like a form of market research.

So, in a funny way of looking at it, I guess you can say that my brother and I are part of the pre-history of Rock em Sock em Robots. [Wink]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-16-2019, 01:30 PM:

I remember putting Rock em Sock em Robots on my Christmas list several times but never getting it. I had a neighbor across the street who had it and I was so jealous. My mom told me they always decided not to get it for me because they thought it would encourage real-life fighting. Since I've never been a "fighter" (physically that is) it was probably a good decision!

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-16-2019, 01:41 PM:

I don't think that Rockem Sockem encourages fighting because they are robots, not real people.

Even when one robot loses you can push its head back on and keep playing. The sound that they made when their heads popped up was so funny that, sometimes, we would lose on purpose just to hear them go "BZZzzz!"

I remember a few occasions when us kids would settle arguments with Rockem Sockem. We would play Best-of-Three matches to see who would get to have first choice of what to watch on TV and stuff like that.

In the end, Rockem Sockem actually helped DISCORAGE fighting. [Smile]

Also, did you ever notice that most Marx toys were two-player interactive games that encouraged kids to play and socialize together?

There aren't many toys like that, anymore. Are there? [Frown]

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-16-2019, 02:03 PM:

quote:
I remember putting Rock em Sock em Robots on my Christmas list several times but never getting it. I had a neighbor across the street who had it and I was so jealous. My mom told me they always decided not to get it for me because they thought it would encourage real-life fighting. Since I've never been a "fighter" (physically that is) it was probably a good decision!

Wrong! That decision prevented you from BECOMING A ROBOT.

(Also, by your logic, I assume you held a job working on a train at some point?)

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-16-2019, 05:50 PM:

Nope. Just model trains.

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-16-2019, 08:13 PM:

Being a parent of a 4 year old girl and 7 year old boy, it was almost a prerequisite to sign up for Disney+ (not to mention my wife is a huge Marvel nerd). We decided to sign up for the entire year. So far we all have found the service useful. This compliments our Netflix and Amazon prime video accounts nicely. My brother is kind enough to share a Youtube TV subscription with us as well. We do not have any other form of pay television since I cancelled DirecTV 11 years ago. I can pick up some stations OTA out of Sacramento but it's rare I even tune those or youtube TV in.... maybe once or twice a year to watch the Times Square ball drop on New Year's eve or the Superbowl.

quote: Mike Blakesley
I was deep into trains when I was a kid, then moved into other typical things when I grew up, and got back into it when my grandfather died.

My 75 year old uncle announced to me that he is gifting his Lionel collection to my kids. They are all in original boxes in his closet and haven't been touched in decades. Any tips on getting them going eventually would be appreciated!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-16-2019, 11:08 PM:

quote: Sean Weitzel
Being a parent of a 4 year old girl and 7 year old boy, it was almost a prerequisite to sign up for Disney+ (not to mention my wife is a huge Marvel nerd). We decided to sign up for the entire year. So far we all have found the service useful.

If they go deeper into the Fox catalog I might be more enticed to subscribe. I already have a Blu-ray 3D of Avatar, an Alien Blu-ray box set and multiple copies of Die Hard. But there are plenty of other movies in the Fox catalog worth watching again, or for the first time.

quote: Mike Blakesley
We could have put it together much faster if it wasn't for these pesky jobs, and having to "save up" in between supplies purchases! (I don't really know how much we've spent on it and and I don't think I want to know.)

When I see the prices of choice pieces of O-gauge gear like this legendary huge diesel-electric locomotive I can understand why one wouldn't want to know the full price of the entire layout!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-17-2019, 12:41 PM:

quote:
My 75 year old uncle announced to me that he is gifting his Lionel collection to my kids. They are all in original boxes in his closet and haven't been touched in decades. Any tips on getting them going eventually would be appreciated!

Well one big tip is, SAVE THOSE BOXES. Not too many Lionel items are worth a ton of money, but some are... and having the original box can double the value. There are some items where the box is worth more than the item in it. And, also don't throw away the inner wrapping paper, instructions or anything that's IN the box. The more complete an item is, the better.

If the kids are going to play with the trains, the key word is lubrication. Old trains are pretty much bulletproof, so long as they're not completely worn out. Even if they are, it's relatively easy to change out a motor, or put new brushes in a motor. But in a majority of cases, a good clean/lube is all an engine will need. (I think the key thing with old trains is making sure the kid is old enough to play with them properly... if the kid is going to be like Sid from the first Toy Story movie, please leave the old trains in the attic until he gets older!)

quote:
When I see the prices of choice pieces of O-gauge gear like this legendary huge diesel-electric locomotive I can understand why one wouldn't want to know the full price of the entire layout!

Yeah, the gear is not cheap. The key for us regular folks is to find blowout sales, or good used items, and stick to the middle of the line where the "retail price" is much lower. I have a fleet of those mid-range steam engines but I've never paid the "retail price" for one. I've been collecting this stuff since 1980 so I haven't bought a new engine in quite a few years.