MovieChat Forums > Top Gun (1986) Discussion > This movie practically created the home ...

This movie practically created the home video market

posted 2 years ago by MaximRecoil (4631)
18 replies | jump to latest

Before this movie was released on home video, not many people owned movies, not counting ones they'd recorded off TV. That's because most movies sold for around $80 ("priced for rental").

When Top Gun was released on home video, it was around $25, and there was also a huge marketing campaign for it aimed directly at consumers. As far as I know, there had never been such a major marketing campaign for a home video release before, and that, combined with the relatively low price, made it a huge success. Studios followed suit with subsequent home video releases, and by the late '80s / early '90s, new releases in the $20 to $25 price range became the rule rather than the exception.

The "catch" with Top Gun was that there was a Diet Pepsi commercial at the beginning of it, but since it tied in with the movie, I'm guessing that most people who liked the movie liked the commercial too:

https://youtu.be/0hUvoiYiCLw

Even after $20 to $25 home video releases became the norm, you could still get hit with a hefty ~$80 charge from your local video rental store if you lost or ruined one of their tapes though.

[–] Keelai (34880) 2 years ago

"$80 charge from your local video rental store if you lost or ruined one of their tapes"

Probably because video stores were still being forced to pay $80 while consumers paid only $20-25. Meanwhile, consumers were charged $1 to $4 to rent. I used to feel sorry for video store owners.

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

"Probably because video stores were still being forced to pay $80 while consumers paid only $20-25."

I believe that's true, with the higher price being necessary for the right to rent them out to customers. I don't know for sure since I never worked in a video rental store, but I remember talking to the local video store clerk about it; I asked him why someone couldn't just go buy one at Walmart to give to them instead of paying $80 and he said they're not allowed to do that. He was just a clerk, not the owner, so take that for what it's worth. It seems to me that even if they weren't technically allowed to do that, they could probably still get away with it. I can't imagine that there were any "video rental police" doing routine investigations into such things. Maybe if a big chain like Blockbuster was making a habit of it, it would raise some eyebrows, but the only dedicated video rental store in my town was privately owned.

"Meanwhile, consumers were charged $1 to $4 to rent."

Yeah, it took quite a few rentals just to break even. At the place in my town it was $2 when I first started renting in '87, and then at some point in the '90s they changed it to $3 for new releases and $1 for everything else. Plus they had a "Dice Day" where if you rented two movies, the price of the second rental was determined by rolling a pair of dice, one at a time, so it would cost anywhere from $0.11 to $0.66.

[–] Keelai (34880) 2 years ago

My friend's brother owned a few video stores and I had many questions about the business model, but my uninterested friend new nothing.

I think videos were sold to video rental stores before consumers could buy them, at least initially. Maybe video stores had to place a minimum order from their distributor or wholesaler.

"The release windows system was first conceived in the early 1980s, on the brink of the VHS home video market, as a strategy to keep different instances of a movie from competing with each other, allowing the movie to take advantage of different markets (cinema, home video, TV, etc.) at different times.

In the standard process, a movie is first released through movie theaters (theatrical window), then, after approximately 3 months, it is released to home video (such as DVD or VHS) and VOD services (entering its video window). After an additional number of months, it is usually released to pay television, and approximately two years after its theatrical release date, it is made available for free-to-air television."

No mention of rental stores. I read part of the profits was from late fees.

[–] millsey72 (10334) 2 years ago

Think it was The Godfather that started the home video market trend.

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

No, it was Top Gun, as I already said:

https://www.everything80spodcast.com/how-the-top-gun-vhs-changed-home-video-forever/

[–] millsey72 (10334) 2 years ago

Ok, no need to rub it in. You were right

[–] chilidoggg (14305) 2 years ago

The story in that link doesn't really give much information, but it did have this nugget:

"It would take the release of a much loved Air Force movie to put the whole market in motion."

LOL

I wonder if they tried to do this before with other movies, Purple Rain, Beverly Hills Cop, Ghostbusters, but those just couldn't get traction...

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

Yeah, it's not the best article; it's just the first one that turned up in a Google search when the poster above disputed things. The author is admittedly just reiterating something that was published by Cracked:

This is a very interesting story that needs a shout out to the people at Cracked and their YouTube video that revealed this whole history.

I haven't seen the Cracked video, but mixing up the Navy and the Air Force is probably the author's own "contribution" rather than Cracked's.

I first looked into it about 20 years ago. I was already pretty sure it was Top Gun based on my own memories from the '80s, but I was mainly looking for the reason why VHS movies were so expensive and why they suddenly dropped to $20-$25 back then. I didn't find any articles about it, but I found people discussing it on a forum, and the general consensus was that it was Top Gun, and that's where I first saw the term "priced for rental," which they were using in their explanations of the ~$80 prices.

[–] mitzibishi (1857) 2 years ago

What are your views on Jane Fonda's Workout in 1982?

[–] ebhaynz (3689) 2 years ago

Yes, the Diet Pepsi commercial was one of the reasons they could sell Top Gun for so cheap. I remember when Top Gun VHS was released, approximately Mar of 1987. I think it was my first VHS purchase ever, and I paid $19.99? Back then I had a 5+2 Hi-Fi VHS player, that thing cost me $600 ON SALE. It wasn't even HQ, that feature didn't come out until later. I was stationed in Turkey when all this happened, I remember my friend across the hall bought a copy of Aliens in early 1987 for $100 freaking dollars. I would buy VIDEO magazine at the Stars & Stripes, they would have whole articles on prices of VHS movies. I think they mentioned the manufacturing process became easier over time, or that there were more factories churning them out. I can't remember exactly.

Back then the best Video quality you could get was via LaserDisc, which really was a quantum leap over VHS. Almost DVD quality. We thought they would last forever, but there was an article saying they were victim of "Laser Rot". I wonder if that really ruined Laserdiscs or are there still some out there (from 1986/1987 timeframe)working today? I ended up buying a Laserdisc player in 1992 and almost exactly 10 years later they were stuck in a storage shed in Honolulu. When I cleared that shed out I offered them to the person that worked there. By then DVD had made the Laserdisc obsolete.

One final note VHS really stuck around a long time. I rented VHS tapes beginning in 1984 all the way to 2003, when my favorite rental store finally went completely DVD. NINETEEN years, that's quite a run.

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

"I remember when Top Gun VHS was released, approximately Mar of 1987. I think it was my first VHS purchase ever, and I paid $19.99? Back then I had a 5+2 Hi-Fi VHS player, that thing cost me $600 ON SALE. It wasn't even HQ, that feature didn't come out until later."

What do you mean by "5+2"? I've never heard that term in relation to VCRs.

HQ did exist in 1987. I have the first model that ever had it: a JVC HR-D566U, which was JVC's top-of-the-line VCR when it was released in 1985, and retailed for $900. Here's a short December 1985 Popular Mechanics article about it:

https://i.imgur.com/8UntFXf.png

I bought it several years ago for something like $50. It's an awesome VCR (after I replaced all of the electrolytic capacitors in the power supply and cleaning the heads). As an experiment I made a recording of The Terminator from the Blu-ray, using the fastest (highest quality) recording speed, i.e., the speed that gives you 2 hours of recording time on a standard T-120 tape, and it looked way better than the official VHS release (which I own); a night and day difference.

At my normal viewing distance of 10' away, connected to a 32" CRT TV with a composite video cable, it looked nearly identical to a DVD under the same conditions. The only thing that made it obvious that I was watching a VHS tape was the occasional speck or other artifact that would flash on the screen, and even that probably could be eliminated if I'd used a new, high-end blank tape, such as a Maxell Epitaxial HGX Gold, rather than some old bought-at-the-grocery-store tape I had kicking around that I taped over a bunch of times in the 1990s.

VHS has a reputation for bad picture quality, but that's because most people have never seen them at their best (and that includes me before I got that high-end VCR and did that experiment). Even people who had top-of-the-line VCRs way back when never saw them at their best, because there were no high-quality sources to record from. Mass-produced official movie releases were poor to mediocre in quality, and the best possible source to record from was a LaserDisc. The problem with LaserDiscs is that you need a high-end player to get the best quality out of them (because they are an analog video format), and even at their best, they still weren't as good as a well-mastered DVD, let alone a Blu-ray.

The typical scenario was a low- or mid-grade VCR, watching rental tapes or home recordings of over-the-air or cable TV broadcasts. To make matters worse, many, if not most, people recorded at the slowest recording speed to get 6 hours of recording time from a T-120 tape, and most TVs in the '80s only had an RF connection, which is bottom of the barrel.

[–] ebhaynz (3689) 2 years ago

That's amazing that you could record from Blu-Ray to VHS, I didn't know that was possible. I didn't know HQ was around that early..I do remember going to a south Miami Circuit City in 1992, when I thought I knew everything about electronics). I mistook the salesman for a lackey, I said "that VCR doesn't even have HQ" he said "it's in all the VCR's nowadays, they don't bother to advertise it anymore". I was impressed by his quick reply so I bought the VCR from him.

Back to my "5+2" super duper VCR. Man, it's been a long time since I've seen it. It took me awhile to remember what brand it was. At first I thought it was a Sansui, did some googlin' and nah, not Sansui. Then I thought JVC or Akai, I knew it was a premium brand. Finally I realized it was a Toshiba, because I would brag about it, calling it a Toh-Shee-Bah" to everyone in the barracks. A few years ago I did find the exact model on the web, right now I'm looking and it's not the 9485, that model came later it looks similar, but not as cool as mine. Not the 7900C neither. It was a work of art, at least in my mind. I bought it in mid 1986, a guy next to me in the dorm had bought 2 he sold me on it. He was watching Emerald Forest telling me how special the "flying heads" were and that it had 7 heads yada yada yada. I became a gear head right then and there. I'll find it, but it's gonna take me a day or two.

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

"That's amazing that you could record from Blu-Ray to VHS, I didn't know that was possible."

Yeah, you just need a Blu-ray player that has composite video output, which pretty much all of them did up until about the early/mid 2010s when a lot of them started ditching the analog video outputs (composite and component), leaving only HDMI. When I looked for a Blu-ray player to buy several years ago I specifically looked for an older one that had analog video outputs in addition to HDMI.

"I said "that VCR doesn't even have HQ" he said "it's in all the VCR's nowadays, they don't bother to advertise it anymore"."

The thing about HQ is, most of them that had it only had a partial implementation of it. JVC, who invented VHS in the first place, also invented the HQ circuitry, and it originally had four elements to it. My VCR, being the first model to have HQ, has the full implementation of it of course. When other companies licensed HQ from JVC, they started to complain about the expense of the circuitry, and eventually JVC compromised, allowing them to label their VCRs as HQ if they had at least two of the original four elements of the HQ circuitry. So once that happened, nearly all "HQ" VCRs, aside from perhaps high-end ones, had the watered down version of HQ.

The best VHS VCRs with full HQ were on par with the best Betamax VCRs in terms of picture quality. Before HQ was invented, Betamax had an edge over VHS. The idea that Betamax was superior to VHS was somewhat true, but it was always temporary. For example, Betamax had Hi-Fi stereo before VHS did, so during that year or so, Betamax definitely had an edge in sound quality. And before HQ came along in 1985, Betamax had an edge in picture quality (~240 TVL vs. ~250 TVL), but with full HQ, VHS could do ~250 TVL as well.

"I bought it in mid 1986"

That would explain why it didn't have HQ. According to that Popular Mechanics article I linked to:

Most other VHS makers are expected to offer HQ models by mid '86. A few, including Zenith and NEC, might do so by the end of '85

So when you said, "It wasn't even HQ, that feature didn't come out until later," you were probably right with regard to most, if not all, brands, except for JVC.

[–] ebhaynz (3689) 2 years ago

That's interesting about the HQ history, not a lot of people know anything about it. I certainly didn't know it had so many different elements to it.

My first VCR was a Quasar, Top Loader for $400 bought new in 1984, I think I sold it when I first got to Turkey in 1986. Back then the Turks made you register every big item with them, they took down the serial # and model, practically took pictures. They didn't want our stuff to be sold on the Black Market. It was similar when I was in S. Korea as well..but the Turks were more meticulous about it. So, to sell that VCR both me and the buyer had to go to the Turkish office to fill out forms, transferring my VCR to his account. Pain in the ass but we were young lol.

[–] ebhaynz (3689) 2 years ago

OK I did a lot of digging and found my old 7 head VCR, it's an Hitachi not Toshiba. The very rare Hitachi VT-89A. I had this from mid 1986, it broke in South Miami in late 1991 it was like my dog died. Electronics were almost impossible to get fixed cheaply back then. I took it to a little electronics repair store next to a gym and a Publix. There was this big bodybuilder, he gave me the spiel "oh, I'll replace some belts, adjust the idler assembly" I was very skeptical he knew what he was doing. Man, he fixed my Hitachi in just a day or two, only charged $50 I couldn't believe it. The next year we got whacked by a hurricane Andrew, I hightailed it to S. Korea I forget what I did with that Hitachi but at least I got 6 years out of it.

Here it is:

https://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649075845-hitachi_hifi_vcr_rare_vt89a_1985_7_head_top_model/images/885972/

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

That's a nice VCR. It has a flying erase head, which allows for seamless, professional editing.

The first VCR we had when I was a kid was a General Electric VG-7720, which was manufactured by Panasonic. We got it for Christmas, 1988, when I was almost 14. It was a good, reliable VCR (I still have it, and it still works; never been repaired), but it was fairly low-end. It didn't have Hi-Fi stereo, and it didn't have A/V inputs (it only had A/V outputs and RF input and output). It also had only the bare minimum of controls on the deck itself, which didn't include FF or RW, and it didn't have a display either, so no clock or programming it from the deck. All of those functions were on the remote control, and it had an onscreen display with a clock for programming it. The remote control was quite big compared to a typical VCR or TV remote; my friend Tom used to call it "the bat" (as in, baseball bat).

It did have HQ and 4 heads, and it had the steadiest, clearest pause I ever saw, even in comparison to other 4-head VCRs. It also had frame advance (which could go forward or backward one frame at a time) and slow-motion (the same as frame advance, just automated instead of manual), which I loved, especially since it was such a clear and steady picture when doing it. So it was kind of a mix of low-end and high-end; mostly low-end, but the quality of its pause / frame advance / slow-motion functions was very high-end.

You can no longer set the correct date on it, since it maxed out in 2005. I discovered that when I was a kid. I used to play around with the date setting on it to see, for example, what day of the week my birthday would fall on in the year 2000. Back then, 2005 seemed so futuristic; a date that would take forever to reach.

GE never actually manufactured VCRs, and as far as I know, no other American company did either. The only countries I know of that definitely manufactured VCRs are Japan and South Korea. Goldstar, now known as LG, is the only Korean company I know of that ever manufactured VCRs. Several Japanese companies manufactured them though.

[–] bozo_500 (13130) 2 years ago

Star Trek II was the first major movie VHS release at an afforable price

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek_II:_The_Wrath_of_Khan_(VHS)

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was first made available for sale in November 1982.

With commercial VHS sales still largely based on the rental market, limiting the ability of motion picture companies to gain revenue, Paramount elected to take a risk with Wrath of Khan. In September 1982, it announced that it would be selling the release for just $39.95, when other studios were still pricing retail editions at $79.95. [1] Doing so was a gamble, because the release needed to sell triple the volume to earn the same amount of profit for the studio. Responsible for this new strategy was recently appointed head of Paramount Home Video, Mel Harris, who was convinced that a low-pricing strategy would greatly add to Paramount's profits, and it was Harris who selected the Star Trek title as proving ground, which incidentally, also applied for the Betamax counterpart tape. (The Encyclopedia of Television, Cable, and Video, 2012, p. 411, ISBN 1468465236)

Aiming for a total of 60,000 copies sold to meet that goal, over 80,000 copies had been shipped ahead of release date, [2] and ultimately, 120,000 were sold. [3] Proving Harris right, the success of the Wrath of Khan pricing ultimately lead to VHS (and Betamax) prices dropping further and the market shifting towards retail, a format that became known as the sell-through market.

[–] MaximRecoil (4631) 2 years ago

$40 isn't what I'd call an affordable price for a VHS movie, and 120,000 copies isn't a lot. They would've had to drop the price another $15 to $20 and launched a big marketing campaign, for it to have had any chance of coming close to the success and influence that the Top Gun VHS release had. But even if they'd done that the timing wasn't right, because VCRs were still very expensive in 1982; way more people owned one when Top Gun was released on VHS, because by that time entry level VCRs had dropped in price to around $250.