Blood Pie wrote: I ALWAYS rent DVDs and in the rare case something I absolutely have to own is only available on DVD I will buy it (or keep my DVD version if it doesn't have a quality BD counterpart in retail or one coming down the line) .
this is also my stance.
I asked Criterion the other week if the Human Condition will see a blu release in the near future, and they lamented a strong 'no'. I viewed parts 1 and 2 over the weekend, and am convinced it is one of the best films I have ever seen (Top 50 for me). I begrudgingly might be purchasing this set this week since there is no hope of a Blu release.
Watching 3 tonight and cannot wait to see how it ends.
mteller wrote:My philosophy is that any film worth owning is worth owning on the best available format...
And that simply sums up my stance. Well said.
Even if the best available format for a particular film is on DVD?
Speaking for myself it depends on how bad I want the film. Usually if its a new release or a library title not given the BD treatment I will rent the title in hopes of it coming out at a later date. I honestly can't think of any title that a friend doesn't own, that I can't rent, or that I can't track down a DVD copy off the internet to tide me over that I don't already own.
So I think the difference in opinion between you and I is that if I am to buy something it will be on Blu Ray and if it is only on DVD I'll likely rent it. If years pass and the title still hasn't been released I'd obviously consider purchasing it on DVD.
Cinephrenic wrote:To go off-topic for a second, does Criterion have to re-secure rights to release on Blu-ray, meaning seperate license than regular DVD?
It definitely looks that way, given how the Blus of Contempt and Ran panned out, not to mention non-Criterion BR upgrades like Universal's botched Do the Right Thing.
My major concern is how their deal with Paramount is structured, because I want my Days of Heaven Blu-ray now, damnit!
Cinephrenic wrote:To go off-topic for a second, does Criterion have to re-secure rights to release on Blu-ray, meaning seperate license than regular DVD?
It definitely looks that way, given how the Blus of Contempt and Ran panned out, not to mention non-Criterion BR upgrades like Universal's botched Do the Right Thing.
Now that's something I'd forgotten about - instances (like Do the Right Thing) where a BluRay might be inferior to the existing DVD.
Cinephrenic wrote:To go off-topic for a second, does Criterion have to re-secure rights to release on Blu-ray, meaning seperate license than regular DVD?
It definitely looks that way, given how the Blus of Contempt and Ran panned out, not to mention non-Criterion BR upgrades like Universal's botched Do the Right Thing.
Now that's something I'd forgotten about - instances (like Do the Right Thing) where a BluRay might be inferior to the existing DVD.
It's not, if you refer to the colour tinting, nothing is certain yet.
aox wrote:New report says Blu is up 83% this year.
In particular it pushes the 10% figure I unearthed for a post a few pages back up to 12% (for the last quarter.) So overall media sales are currently running around 88% for dvd, 12% for bd.
perkizitore wrote:It's not, if you refer to the colour tinting, nothing is certain yet.
Huh? Are the Beaver caps way off or something? Because if they're even vaguely representative of the BluRay, it's a complete misrepresentation of the film, as anybody who's seen a 35mm print of it can attest.
perkizitore wrote:It's not, if you refer to the colour tinting, nothing is certain yet.
Huh? Are the Beaver caps way off or something? Because if they're even vaguely representative of the BluRay, it's a complete misrepresentation of the film, as anybody who's seen a 35mm print of it can attest.
A remastered 35mm print or the release day one (i know the film is not that old, but still...)?
Film prints do not get "remastered." Believe it or not, there are those of us on this forum old enough to have seen Do The Right Thing in first release in a theater and yet not old enough to have forgotten what it looked like.
I'm surprised nobody has pulled the quote from the MoC FAQ:
Will you be releasing all of your back catalogue on Blu-ray?
No. Many of our titles are small, niche films which sell modest amounts. The DVD format will remain the best market for many of these titles over the next decade or so. We will be handpicking big sellers (METROPOLIS, SUNRISE, etc) for the Blu-ray format as and when we are satisfied with the HD masters. It costs much more to prepare a film for Blu-ray than it does for DVD and we often have to make harsh decisions about whether or not to pursue a particular film on Blu-ray. It goes without saying we’d like to have immaculate HD masters for all our films and everything out on Blu-ray but in the real world, that’s just not going to happen.
Also remember that some films released on VHS still haven't made it to DVD-- The same trend will continue for Bluray.
How about if nobody buys any discs and we just purchase films and extras to watch online?
We'd miss the digipacks but then everyone would stop complaining!
Minkin wrote:How about if nobody buys any discs and we just purchase films and extras to watch online?
We'd miss the digipacks but then everyone would stop complaining!
I'd complain. Boy would I complain. I will never accept digital files as a replacement for hard media. If I'm paying for music/films/books, I want to be able to hold it in my hands. I want to be able to put it on my shelf.
Minkin wrote:I'm surprised nobody has pulled the quote from the MoC FAQ:
Will you be releasing all of your back catalogue on Blu-ray?
No. Many of our titles are small, niche films which sell modest amounts. The DVD format will remain the best market for many of these titles over the next decade or so. We will be handpicking big sellers (METROPOLIS, SUNRISE, etc) for the Blu-ray format as and when we are satisfied with the HD masters. It costs much more to prepare a film for Blu-ray than it does for DVD and we often have to make harsh decisions about whether or not to pursue a particular film on Blu-ray. It goes without saying we’d like to have immaculate HD masters for all our films and everything out on Blu-ray but in the real world, that’s just not going to happen.
Also remember that some films released on VHS still haven't made it to DVD-- The same trend will continue for Bluray.
How about if nobody buys any discs and we just purchase films and extras to watch online?
We'd miss the digipacks but then everyone would stop complaining!
Im not sure its exactly like that quote still, but instead of me just quoting Nick, maybe he can answer.
re: UNE FEMME MARIEE on BD. Things move quickly. When we were working on the SD disc this time last year it wasn't considered a candidate for BD. Now, costs have come down, we're throwing ourselves behind the format, and there will be hundreds of folk excited about this BD for each person who thinks releasing this title on BD now "sucks". We didn't decide to do this now in order to personally spite you and your purchase of the SD, for which we're very grateful, and which directly contributed to the BD release.
Cinephrenic wrote:To go off-topic for a second, does Criterion have to re-secure rights to release on Blu-ray, meaning seperate license than regular DVD?
It definitely looks that way, given how the Blus of Contempt and Ran panned out, not to mention non-Criterion BR upgrades like Universal's botched Do the Right Thing.
Now that's something I'd forgotten about - instances (like Do the Right Thing) where a BluRay might be inferior to the existing DVD.
Yep. That Blu-ray will, I predict, become the example of choice whenever arguments about the essential superiority of blu-ray to standard dvd are made. It's why I recently took advantage of the B&N Criterion sale to pick up Do The Right Thing.
Just cause somebody f-ed up the colors doesn't mean DVD is superior to Blu-ray... although along similar lines I'm not all that smitten with North By Northwest, at least after an initial viewing.
fdm wrote:Just cause somebody f-ed up the colors doesn't mean DVD is superior to Blu-ray... although along similar lines I'm not all that smitten with North By Northwest, at least after an initial viewing.
Sure, if the CC dvd was interlaced, pockmarked and suffering anyone of the following: chroma, excessive noise reduction, or contrast boosting, I'd agree with you. But such is not the case. The extra resolution does not compensate for changing the overall "weather".
fdm wrote:Just cause somebody f-ed up the colors doesn't mean DVD is superior to Blu-ray... although along similar lines I'm not all that smitten with North By Northwest, at least after an initial viewing.
Obviously. But when the choice is between a Blu-ray release with the wrong color palette and a standard DVD with the correct coloration, then simple-minded claims that Blu-ray is always superior and always the way to go are foolish.
The point being made is that there are other factors to take into consideration than just the format (hi-def v. standard). I'd rather watch an upcoverted standard DVD on a Blu-ray player if it was truer to the director's/cinematographer's intent than a Blu-ray disc.
skuhn8 wrote:
Sure, if the CC dvd was interlaced...
Just wanted to point out that while the first half of the Criterion transfer is progressive, the second half of the film is interlaced. They did something similar with L'Avventura I believe and I don't know the reasoning.
