As people have noted, this is retarded.

The problem here is that Apple doesn't have the massive movie market that it does with audio. Therefore it will capitulate, no one will buy, and the prices will come down anyways (in a perfect world).
-Mole

I disagree with everyone saying it won't look good on a TV. Has anyone here ever played a downloaded movie on a TV? I played some of the lost episodes I got on iTunes on my TV, and while they were far from HD, they were no less acceptable than broadcast or cable TV. For $2, with no commercials... I think its a fabulous deal.

Idiots.. why would you pay the same price for a castrated, DRM loaded version as the DVD version at Wal-Mart? Oh, well, back to bt for me.

Does Netflix+rip work better than Blockbuster+rip. It seems like almost every disc I get from Blockbuster is damaged enough that it has a problem spot or doesn't rip well at all. I don't have this problem with movies I've purchased and my neighbors kids didn't use as coasters or frisbees.

a fixed $9.99 scheme could give users a clearer incentive to buy movies online rather than drive down to the store and spend their $19.99 on a full high-resolution DVD with extras and commentary

.... you have to be kidding .... yeah i agree with Wajo... i call bunk on 10-20$ for 320 x 200.

Now i would pay for a license pack that :

1-allows me ot download a PSP / IPOD format movie
2-allows me to *also* download juts the main move in (us) standard 720x480 format and allow me to burn the damn thing..

oh wait that will never happen :(

I see absolutely no point in spending 20 dollars for a 320x240 castrated version of a movie with lossy compresion (yes, i know the MPEG-2 codec used for DVD's is also quite lossy when compared to MPEG4) when you can get the DVD for the same price...

Why don't the studios get that if they keep pricing movies that high, rampant piracy wont stop?

Only the ignorant, the lazy, or those who just don't care will buy these.

I don't think it's worth it. $10-20 dollars for a low-res, drm'd, no-extra's version?
I can find fully featured DVD's for $10 and sometimes less. While it may be good for the consumer who doesn't know jack about dvd ripping, if you know anything it doesn't make much sense.

A subscription format would be better for movie content. Let's say I want to watch every Akira Kurosawa film (and I've never seen even 1). I'll pay at least $10 per. Out of about 30 movies lets say I hate 20. That's 200 lost dollars. Doesn't look like a good alternative to the Netflix+rip.

The thing about video on iTMS that interests me in the long run is the possibility that we might see high quality original content that is only distributed through iTMS (or other online venues). In that case, it's not a question of iTMS vs DVD, but a question of iTMS versus not getting it at all. If the BBC had decided to sell Dr. Who episodes through iTMS rather than airing on Sci-Fi, I'm sure I would have bought them.

But otherwise, i agree -- if I have a choice between DVD and iTMS, DVD wins every time. Even better -- rent from Netflix, rip, and burn -- far, far better and cheaper than iTMS (though not technically legal, which is of course why *I* would never do it -- I'm merely observing that other people could probably do that)

Arrrggghhhh! Ahoy matey!

This just goes to prove how out of touch the movie industry really has become with their market. Of course, people will pay anything. Especially for convenience. I personally would never buy a movie through iTunes unless a standard def or HD version were offered. The quality of the iTunes videos, while a mixed bag because of the digital format, still don't look even as good as VHS when played on a TV. And I can't see myself watching a whole feature length film on my tiny iPod screen.

While I personally wouldn't use that part of the iTunes service it would be a beginning to the online availability of movies. Although, I trust that the movie industry will probably try to stifle online sales as much as possible to keep the current retail store model.