criterionforum.org

Oh, the Anti-Blu-Ray Illuminati. Forgot about them. Got a Glenn Beck chalkboard diagram for us while you're at it?

CSM126 wrote: IlluminatiGot a Glenn Beck chalkboard diagram for us while you're at it?

That would historically be on the Conservative side.

Jeff wrote: All of that being said, I'm not in any hurry for DVD to go away, I have no problem continuing to buy standard DVDs from Criterion or anyone else, and I don't really care if Tribe goes Blu or not.

Notwithstanding being an Ohioan, I do root for Michigan...so, go BLUE!!!

aox wrote: 2. I simply answered Tribe's question. Sorry some of you didn't like the answer, but this transcends way past me, Tribe, you or anyone else. It's a very frustrating situation. Not the people who haven't gotten around to upgrading to something they will eventually and understand the benefits; but, the people who are completely intellectually dishonest about the benefits and/or actually rail against the coming technology as if it is offensive. I don't understand this defiant phenomenon. If you aren't ready to upgrade, that's cool. But to actively be against something you eventually will have to, is infinitely perplexing. These same people come out in droves every 10-20 years. Has history taught us nothing?

To be clear, I'm hardly against Blu (not that anyone said I was), and undoubtedly the day will come when I will upgrade, so I'm not being a Luddite about this. As with any other piece of new technology, I don't want to do it until I have to since I'm perfectly happy with my current comfort zone. I can afford to upgrade, I acknowledge the advances of Blu...I just want everyone to get along.

perkizitore wrote:They want the upgrade, they just don't know it yet! Why did they dump their VHS players 6 years ago?

Not only did I not dump my VHS players, I'm still buying them (another this afternoon!) I've still got hundreds of films and movie documentaries to transfer from VHS that haven't been released on DVD, let alone Blu-ray!

aox wrote:2. Those who are defiantly not upgrading and are actively spending energy railing against the technology, as if offensive somehow.

Look, progress moves slow (see Group 1), but Group 2 is ultimately offensive. Progress moves slow by itself. It doesn't need Group 2 championing its demise.

I was speaking about Group 2, and have been the whole time. Sorry those two groups seemed conflated.

Is there really that many people that fall into Group 2? Enough that if they upgraded The Human Condition would have been released on blu? I don't know a single person that could be categorized that way. There are so many different reasons why people don't upgrade. Most people I encounter just don't care enough about the presentation of media to warrant the upgrade expenses or just flat out can't afford it.

I couldn't afford it for quite sometime and just upgraded late last year, but was still hesitant. Because of my constant travel I rarely watch movies at home in my living room, (I mostly watch them on my laptop while on the road.) I have about 50 blus now and have only watched about 10 of them. Point being there's a lot of legitimate reasons for people not to upgrade.

To be fair, you may run in different circles than I do where people are rebelling against the technology while being fully dedicated to the medium of film and intellectually aware of the enhancements blu offers all the while having deep pockets to boot. (<Completely honest thought, not trying to be snarky.)

aox wrote:I am tired of arguing with people (nothing personal against you Jeff. I just mean in general) about something they are going to upgrade to anyway in the coming years.

Not as tired as we are of listening to it.

You've made your points, people know where you stand, now stop already.

Mr_sausage wrote:

aox wrote:I am tired of arguing with people (nothing personal against you Jeff. I just mean in general) about something they are going to upgrade to anyway in the coming years.

Not as tired as we are of listening to it.

You've made your points, people know where you stand, now stop already.

I had stopped. I stopped over an hour ago. Clarification is not arguing. But you knew that. I don't know why this was bumped.

There is nothing left to say.

aox wrote:

Mr_sausage wrote:

aox wrote:I am tired of arguing with people (nothing personal against you Jeff. I just mean in general) about something they are going to upgrade to anyway in the coming years.

Not as tired as we are of listening to it.

You've made your points, people know where you stand, now stop already.

I had stopped. I stopped over an hour ago. Clarification is not arguing. But you knew that. I don't know why this was bumped.

There is nothing left to say.

Alright. Since you're going to be difficult, I'll break this down:

aox wrote:I had stopped. I stopped over an hour ago.

You should have stopped eight months ago back when you received the first and most obvious clue. But you've stayed oblivious. It's become trolling as far as I'm concerned and I'm sick of having to put up with it. I bet I'm not alone on this.

aox wrote:Clarification is not arguing. But you knew that.

Did I? Before you tell us all about what I know, let's do a bit of clarification ourselves. Specifically, let's clarify what the term "circumlocution" means. Circumlocution is when someone pretends they aren't doing A by replacing the word for what A actually is with a softer, friendlier, more benign, less negative sounding word. There are several ways to go about this: you've chosen to pick an aspect of A and pretend that said aspect is mutually exclusive with it. Unfortunately, clarification is not mutually exclusive with argument. How can we tell? Because you, aox, have to have been clarifying something, and that something must be your position, and one only takes a position in a discussion in order to debate its merits against representatives of the other side. The very definition of argument.

Also, you say yourself: "I am tired of arguing with people (nothing personal against you Jeff. I just mean in general)." So by your own words you are arguing. Not only that, but you admit you were arguing with Jeff, else you wouldn't bother to tell him you're not singling him out but lumping him in with everyone else you say you're arguing with.

I'm kind of annoyed you'd try to hoodwink me and then on top of that tell me I've always thought the hoodwink was true.

aox wrote:I don't know why this was bumped.

Because here you are, arguing with everyone about Blu-Ray. Again. What I don't know is why you think leaving your computer for an hour saves you from the accusation that you are trolling an issue, unless of course you were planning on not coming back. But you do come back, and I don't doubt you'll bring this up again whenever the next Criterion doesn't get a Blu-Ray, or possibly sooner.

aox wrote:There is nothing left to say

Can I count on you to leave this issue alone, permanently, then? Or will I have to start deleting posts? I am very, very tired of this.

With all respect, I will not try to 'hoodwink' you or be coy. I think there are a lot of misunderstandings. And sorry if I seem short, I don't have time to type a whole lot at work. I have to be succinct even if that risks being unclear (Hence, my "clarification" above that I will get to.)

Mr_sausage wrote:You should have stopped eight months ago back when you received the first and most obvious clue.

That's awesome. I had not seen that thread. I will read it. I hate when posts and topics get moved around. It happens a lot and is hard to follow, you know.

But you've stayed oblivious. It's become trolling as far as I'm concerned and I'm sick of having to put up with it. I bet I'm not alone on this.

I hadn't seen the thread. Sorry.

aox wrote:Clarification is not arguing. But you knew that.

Did I? Before you tell us all about what I know, let's do a bit of clarification ourselves. Specifically, let's clarify what the term "circumlocution" means. Circumlocution is when someone pretends they aren't doing A by replacing the word for what A actually is with a softer, friendlier, more benign, less negative sounding word. There are several ways to go about this: you've chosen to pick an aspect of A and pretend that said aspect is mutually exclusive with it. Unfortunately, clarification is not mutually exclusive with argument. How can we tell? Because you, aox, have to have been clarifying something, and that something must be your position, and one only takes a position in a discussion in order to debate its merits against representatives of the other side. The very definition of argument.

Also, you say yourself: "I am tired of arguing with people (nothing personal against you Jeff. I just mean in general)." So by your own words you are arguing. Not only that, but you admit you were arguing with Jeff, else you wouldn't bother to tell him you're not singling him out but lumping him in with everyone else you say you're arguing with.

Of course I have been discussing/arguing (for 8 months as you say, and in this thread). I didn't deny that. I stated in this thread that I was going to drop it (I needed to get some work done). I was merely clarifying what I felt was misconstrued about what I was saying. It took two posts. Do I not have a right to clean up my own mess when I have obviously not been clear and other people have mistaken what I have said? Then it was done. Arrow and Tribe responded in kind (good responses in kind). That was it. It was done. Your post was 2 hours later.

This is a hot topic on this board (HD/BD) and an exciting time to be in technology-wise. These discussions happen often. I don't recall initiating one months, if ever.

I'm kind of annoyed you'd try to hoodwink me and then on top of that tell me I've always thought the hoodwink was true.

Certainly wasn't my intention. I apologize for assuming. I thought you had it out for me, and were purposely obfuscating argument and clarification. I see that it means the same to you even if I don't agree. My apologies.

Because here you are, arguing with everyone about Blu-Ray. Again. What I don't know is why you think leaving your computer for an hour saves you from the accusation that you are trolling an issue, unless of course you were planning on not coming back.

Trolling? If that is trolling, it's some weak trolling on my part. I only mentioned the bump because those posts were from almost two hours before you made your post. It was obviously dead and buried. And I am not arguing with 'everyone'. Plenty of people agree with me on this topic. Strident versus Passionate?

But you do come back, and I don't doubt you'll bring this up again whenever the next Criterion doesn't get a Blu-Ray, or possibly sooner.

I post here daily. A lot of people here are quite friendly and knowledgeable. The board is sometimes more interesting than any film journal. As for Criterion not HD'ing their releases. I don't recall it being a problem. CC has stepped up their game for the most part. People have very little to complain about. In fact, I would wager, we are getting better BD's today than DVDs in 1999, and far more releases.

aox wrote:There is nothing left to say

Can I count on you to leave this issue alone, permanently, then? Or will I have to start deleting posts? I am very, very tired of this.

I suppose. It's a topic that interests me. And Tribe's post stuck out to me.

Again, sorry to cause you great headaches. And sorry for my part in the past few posts of veering this off topic.

aox wrote:I stated in this thread that I was going to drop it (I needed to get some work done). I was merely clarifying what I felt was misconstrued about what I was saying. It took two posts. Do I not have a right to clean up my own mess when I have obviously not been clear and other people have mistaken what I have said?

I count five posts on this subject from today. Not two. And not one of those announced an intention to drop this subject.

aox wrote: I only mentioned the bump because those posts were from almost two hours before you made your post. It was obviously dead and buried. And I am not arguing with 'everyone'. Plenty of people agree with me on this topic

This isn't an instant message service, it's a discussion forum. It's not time sensitive. Moreover, not only had you failed to annouce any intention of discontinuing, people were still arguing with you an hour before I posted. I had--and have--every reason to assume you were planning to continue, this being your trademark subject.

You're done in this thread. No discussion. No reply. It's over. No more Blu-Ray arguments, here or elsewhere.

I think your two groups are way too simplistic. You're really dealing with a bunch of positions:

* DVD is "good enough" and will be for the foreseeable future (these people probably upgraded to DVD for the convenience, not the quality)
* Blu-ray's not mainstream enough and I don't have the money/space/inclination to be an early adopter. I mean, if I can't lend my discs to anyone, what's the point? We'll get there though.
* Blu-ray will have it's time, but I wish companies would focus on putting films out on DVD. I mean, what's available on DVD is a pathetic list compared to the list of titles that used to be available on VHS. What's available on CD is a pathetic list compared to the list of things that were put out on LP. Etc.
* Wtf? You buy movies? Why don't you just rent them when you want to watch them? Where did you get all that money anyways? (this is probably why Blu-ray has a bigger marketshare on purchases than rental)

In any case, I think you're mostly fighting the "blu-ray will happen and it's all good, but let the primary focus be on expanding the collection" crowd. I mean, if you take an extreme position and pretend that CC were to focus 100% on Blu-ray and spent the next 7 years putting out their entire collection on Blu-ray, and then 4K came out. When do we get this Out 1 that everyone keeps talking about?

I think there's a happy medium. As long as the collection continues to expand, I think it's worth putting energy into BR upgrades. Frankly, I think CC is doing an excellent job, and I'd hate to see them move too far in either direction from where they seem to be now. I, too, would love HC and The War Trilogy on Blu-ray, but if that meant pushing everything else on their schedule out a month, I'm not sure it would be worth it. I mean, of course there are a few titles I wouldn't mind sacrificing from the collection to have the BR upgrades sped up a bit. But it applies to which titles I'd like to see happen sooner as well, on any format. And that's taking my personal preferences a bit far, and we've got a whole nother thread for that.

Whoops! I can delete my last post if needed

No need. So long as aox isn't going to reply, it's fine.

Peacock wrote:It's simple, because if companies decide to go BD-only they will (maybe not right away as you'll have to wait for a few people to upgrade to Blu as a result) be able to afford to release more films than they would if they just did two formats.

that's not simple, that's conjecture with no basis in fact or reality. How on earth do you know this? Because I would hazard a guess that if any company went BD only their sales would suffer so badly they'd be out of business in 6 months - or quickly apologize to their customers and start issuing SDVDs again.

HistoryProf wrote:

Peacock wrote:It's simple, because if companies decide to go BD-only they will (maybe not right away as you'll have to wait for a few people to upgrade to Blu as a result) be able to afford to release more films than they would if they just did two formats.

that's not simple, that's conjecture with no basis in fact or reality. How on earth do you know this? Because I would hazard a guess that if any company went BD only their sales would suffer so badly they'd be out of business in 6 months - or quickly apologize to their customers and start issuing SDVDs again.

As conjectural as the post you quote may sound, I'd say you more than out-conjectured the chap in your own "guess."

aox wrote: the people who are completely intellectually dishonest about the benefits and/or actually rail against the coming technology as if it is offensive. I don't understand this defiant phenomenon. If you aren't ready to upgrade, that's cool. But to actively be against something you eventually will have to, is infinitely perplexing. These same people come out in droves every 10-20 years. Has history taught us nothing?

huh? I have a blu ray player and a 1080p LCD tv...I enjoy a lot of blu rays and own many. that doesn't mean i also can't see the reality of the market and understand that blu-only would be financial suicide for any company - especially one like Criterion. The condescension and judgmental name-calling is ridiculous and does you zero favors.

aox wrote:

matrixschmatrix wrote:How do you get from people continuing to buy things on dvd (which is where this started) to

people who are completely intellectually dishonest about the benefits and/or actually rail against the coming technology as if it is offensive.

There are two groups:

1. Those who aren't upgrading for various practical reasons based on one's own situation; nothing to do with the technology itself or lack of want.
2. Those who are defiantly not upgrading and are actively spending energy railing against the technology, as if offensive somehow.

Look, progress moves slow (see Group 1), but Group 2 is ultimately offensive. Progress moves slow by itself. It doesn't need Group 2 championing its demise.

I was speaking about Group 2, and have been the whole time. Sorry those two groups seemed conflated.

I'm pretty sure group 2 is a figment of your imagination.

CrazedCollector wrote:

HistoryProf wrote:

Peacock wrote:It's simple, because if companies decide to go BD-only they will (maybe not right away as you'll have to wait for a few people to upgrade to Blu as a result) be able to afford to release more films than they would if they just did two formats.

that's not simple, that's conjecture with no basis in fact or reality. How on earth do you know this? Because I would hazard a guess that if any company went BD only their sales would suffer so badly they'd be out of business in 6 months - or quickly apologize to their customers and start issuing SDVDs again.

As conjectural as the post you quote may sound, I'd say you more than out-conjectured the chap in your own "guess."

that's kind of my point. anyone can guess...but no one knows despite peacock's confidence in his hypothetical - it remains precisely that: Hypothetical.

With that, I just saw Mr. Sausage's post and will refrain from continuing this silly argument. I was not aware of aox's long history with the subject. My apologies for engaging him/it.

Jeff wrote:There is no way Criterion would have gone Blu on The Human Condition anyway. The materials are in awful shape.

Not to weigh into this (now apparently dead) debate, but I don't think this is quite true. I saw a 35mm print just last year before the DVD was issued, and it was in perfectly reasonable shape. And if it's good enough for 35mm, it ought to be good enough for Blu. If aox heard straight from Criterion that financial considerations were the issue, that's far more plausible than the materials not being up to grade.

HistoryProf wrote:

aox wrote:There are two groups:

1. Those who aren't upgrading for various practical reasons based on one's own situation; nothing to do with the technology itself or lack of want.
2. Those who are defiantly not upgrading and are actively spending energy railing against the technology, as if offensive somehow.

Look, progress moves slow (see Group 1), but Group 2 is ultimately offensive. Progress moves slow by itself. It doesn't need Group 2 championing its demise.

I was speaking about Group 2, and have been the whole time. Sorry those two groups seemed conflated.

I'm pretty sure group 2 is a figment of your imagination.

Not quite.

N.B. the O.P. is from only four days ago. These individuals DO exist.

Jun-Dai wrote:I think your two groups are way too simplistic. You're really dealing with a bunch of positions:

* DVD is "good enough" and will be for the foreseeable future (these people probably upgraded to DVD for the convenience, not the quality)
* Blu-ray's not mainstream enough and I don't have the money/space/inclination to be an early adopter. I mean, if I can't lend my discs to anyone, what's the point? We'll get there though.
* Blu-ray will have it's time, but I wish companies would focus on putting films out on DVD. I mean, what's available on DVD is a pathetic list compared to the list of titles that used to be available on VHS. What's available on CD is a pathetic list compared to the list of things that were put out on LP. Etc.
* Wtf? You buy movies? Why don't you just rent them when you want to watch them? Where did you get all that money anyways? (this is probably why Blu-ray has a bigger marketshare on purchases than rental)

In any case, I think you're mostly fighting the "blu-ray will happen and it's all good, but let the primary focus be on expanding the collection" crowd. I mean, if you take an extreme position and pretend that CC were to focus 100% on Blu-ray and spent the next 7 years putting out their entire collection on Blu-ray, and then 4K came out. When do we get this Out 1 that everyone keeps talking about?

I think there's a happy medium. As long as the collection continues to expand, I think it's worth putting energy into BR upgrades. Frankly, I think CC is doing an excellent job, and I'd hate to see them move too far in either direction from where they seem to be now. I, too, would love HC and The War Trilogy on Blu-ray, but if that meant pushing everything else on their schedule out a month, I'm not sure it would be worth it. I mean, of course there are a few titles I wouldn't mind sacrificing from the collection to have the BR upgrades sped up a bit. But it applies to which titles I'd like to see happen sooner as well, on any format. And that's taking my personal preferences a bit far, and we've got a whole nother thread for that.

Excellent post! Thank you for your insight. I really enjoyed reading this and it has given me a lot to think about. I tried to send you a PM to thank you, but I guess the board was being a bit flicker'y this morning.

CrazedCollector wrote:Not quite.

N.B. the O.P. is from only four days ago. These individuals DO exist.

incoherent trolls on amazon forums hardly make a trend. and his mention of HD DVD suggests he's a left over format war whiner to boot. That's the first time i've personally seen anyone actively ANGRY about blu-ray...so don't act like it's some big movement that is holding film companies back. The fact remains that the VAST majority of Americans are perfectly okay with their regular - and considerably cheaper - DVDs. THAT is the issue at the heart of it all. My dad is the only other person I know with a blu-ray player, but he's always had the best/newest AV toys - way back to hi-fi days in the 60s and 70s. I inherited the obsession from him....but my brother could care less. He still records tv shows with his vcr! He can appreciate a movie on blu at mine or my dad's houses, but in the end he simply doesn't care enough to spend the money himself.

Face it, in the end, we're rather weird compared to the general populace. everyone I know looks at my wall of films and just shakes their head

HistoryProf wrote:incoherent trolls on amazon forums hardly make a trend. and his mention of HD DVD suggests he's a left over format war whiner to boot. That's the first time i've personally seen anyone actively ANGRY about blu-ray...so don't act like it's some big movement that is holding film companies back.

I used the word "individuals" precisely to avoid just that - making it look like something it isn't, a "big movement" as you said. But the fact remains that there are, indeed, persons (however few!) who try to proselytize an anti-Blu message.

HistoryProf wrote:Face it, in the end, we're rather weird compared to the general populace. everyone I know looks at my wall of films and just shakes their head

Yah, we're a crazy bunch - and I do believe we're lovin' it \:D/

While most collectors (mainly of older films) I know are indifferent to Blu-ray, they do become angry with it when a title they want is released only in that format. One of these has genuinely fallen on very hard times in old age and now has to weigh every purchase with great deliberation, so even what may seem to us the modest outlay for a new player is beyond him. Plus (he argues) it's only 2-3 years since he bought a new region-free DVD player and it's extremely unlikely he'll ever afford a proper HD display to take real advantage of Blu (he currently has only a 4:3 TV). That said, he's not someone who would ever make his views known beyond his circle of friends, let alone campaign against Blu-ray.

One of my few personal friends to have a proper 1080p set-up tells me that, while he can see the difference on a range of discs, he doesn't think Blu-ray was worth the upgrade or anything to get excited about (and he does collect modern films too). On the other hand, he finds the HD improvement on his live TV feed (the same display) quite stunning and well worth it! I haven't actually seen his system so cannot comment.

Another friend who is keen to acquire Blu-ray and a full HD set-up tells me that, having sampled a wide variety of Blus on other people's systems, he'd only use it for modern films. He disliked the way scratches and other artifacts were more prominent on older films, despite the great improvement otherwise (I believe he's talking about silents and others that have not survived or been restored to pristine state). Perhaps he'd get used to this in time but I know he does attend live screenings of old films on 35mm prints, where he doesn't seem bothered by the inevitable defects.

I'm quoting these examples only to show there's a subtle diversity of positions on Blu-ray (even among adopters or would-be adopters), not just hatred, fanatical support or even indifference. My own position - most of which I've outlined before on other threads - is quite complicated too!

HistoryProf's right—he's just an angry format war victim. He's not railing about the improved quality of BR, he's railing about everything else. And I have to say, the improved image quality is about the only thing BR's got going for it. The format sucks. The need for constant firmware updates sucks (my uncle just had to have his third firmware upgrade disc shipped to him). The marketing sucks. The packaging sucks (and thank you CC for not going that route, even if it means you probably get a few returns). The menus almost universally suck.

That said, at the end of the day I'm watching films at 1080p, and I can just ignore the rest of it.