5 Kubricks coming to Blu-ray/HD-DVD 10/23 (1 Viewer)

[Mark Zimmer]

I'm cautiously hopeful about 2001; the master used for HDNET airings has a boatload of edge enhancement, so I hope they've gone back to a clean source. And I definitely hope FMJ has received a new transfer because the original is one of the worst HD DVDs released from a PQ standpoint.

 

[WillG]

Amazon has these up for pre-order for $19.99 apiece

 

[Shawn_KE]

So The Shining will be 1.78:1 Widescreen and not Full Screen like the current DVD?

 

[Jari K]

All of them will be in widescreen (1.66:1, 1.78:1 or 2.20:1). Did you read the specs a few posts earlier?

 

[Shawn_KE]

I read the specs, but was curious since there was always a debate on the format The Shining was ment to be shown in.

 

[Dave Mack]

[url=https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/a/a3/htf_imgcache_11829.jpeg] [/url]


For the theatrical release, Kubrick wanted and instructed the shots to be composed for 1:85-1. That's all I want, the OAR version...

 

[TravisR]

I know it's an issue that is still very hotly debated but my understanding is that Kubrick composed movies for the theater but he wanted a full frame presentation for home video (due to the lack of resolution of the various formats). Now that resolution is better, it would stand to reason that he would want the theatrical AR used for HD releases as well.

 

[Jari K]

To my understanding, Kubrick didn´t like the "black bars" on 4:3-TV (WS-TV was not very common back in the days when he was still alive), which is the main reason why he preferred 4:3 open matte with the films that were shown 1.66:1/1.85:1 in the theatres. Vitali is saying what Kubrick said back in the days - years ago. Probably the "anamorphic"-process in the DVD-releases was not that common back then, either (even if you would have that 16:9 TV-set). I believe some older Kubrick-releases are indeed non-Anamophic.

Let´s put it this way; If Kubrick would see the 16:9 TV-sets and generally the home theaters that "regular people" have in their homes now, he would definitely approve WS with his movies. In the end, WS is how the films were first shown in the big screen.

There are people who like to drag that old "4:3-argument" to every discussion, even when it was made years ago and in the totally different time frame. Sure, Kubrick was "old school" and usually did his own thing - no doubt, but IMO Warner is giving us the "original theatrical ratio". I´m 100% happy with that.

Let´s enjoy the movies, shall we?

 

[Marc Colella]

I wonder if Kubrick would approve of not including the original mono tracks.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

I'm hoping that we get brand new restored transfers on all the Kubrick discs, but this is WB we're talking about!

Like it or not, they have not been the most consistant studio of late for ultra quality.

It seems like Sony and WB traded places somewhere along the line. Even Sony seems to be willing to listen with greater bit depths or now even master quality tracks for their soundtrack recordings, no dial norm for their TrueHD encodings, improved cover art when prodded, an exchange program for a less than stellar release of Fifth Element, much improved video, etc.

WB has been inconsistant with audio (especially on Blu-ray and their classic catalog titles), sticks to 16 bit resolution audio no matter what, low --and I do mean low-- bitrates and banding showing up more than most studios, filtering, no separate encode for Blu-ray to take advantage of its extra bandwidth, etc.

 

[Vincent_P]

Yes, awful WB who is restoring classic movie after classic movie at 4K resolution, releasing 5 HD remastered versions of BLADE RUNNER, was the first studio to release quality product on Blu-ray after Sony's botched launch titles...

All of this anti-WB whining has to do with one thing only, bit rate worship. I'll give you that lossless sound should be a given on the HD formats, but WB has never been huge on high bit-rate sound, even on DVD they still encode at 384 KB/S for DD, so this isn't a change for them. It's a shame for sure, and they should stop this practice, but this crap about them putting out HD-DVDs and BDs with bad image quality is a load of bunk and has only to do with folks who are more interested in staring at their bit rate meters instead of watching the actual movies.

Vincent

 

[Dan Hitchman]

However, those problem titles of WB's have also had very low bitrates. I would not call 5 Megabits/sec on tough 1080p sequences something to crow about.

All it shows is that they still need to keep the bitrates up on average to be on the safe side rather than letting them slip. And WB is consistantly letting them because HD-DVD cannot handle the load on all material. They do not encode the video again for Blu-ray. They're about the only non-exclusive studio that does this. Exclusive BD studios, sans Fox (and who knows if they'll have learned anything after their hiatus), are putting up some fairly high bitrate numbers and getting great results across the board.

What Blu-ray brings to the table is the ability for high, consistant bitrates that can help insure that problems like macroblocking, loss of detail, and banding don't show up... and high resolution 24 bit lossless audio at the same time.

The audio situation also shows that WB doesn't listen to what we want whereas other studios are doing so on a consistant basis. My god, even Paramount is starting to release PCM tracks on Blu-ray and TrueHD on HD-DVD rather than DD or DTS lossy!

Dan

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Are these titles going to be released as as a Boxed set or just
individually?

I see Amazon has all the individual titles up for preorder, but
I was hoping for one big boxed set.

 

[Cees Alons]

No sign of a box set, Ron.


Cees

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Well, I guess I'll have to order all individually.

Now, to decide Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

 

[Cees Alons]

Yep.
Complicated times.

Choosing is of, uhm ... paramount importance now.
I didn't order all five of them, though.


Cees

 

[Raul Marquez]

I am being faced with the same dilemma as Ron....Box set or individual titles, and which HD format.... although this may have been decided for us already in light of todays announcements with the studios lining up exclusively behind a specific format (although Warners is not mentioned.....yet).

For those who don't know: Paramount and Dreamworks decided to join Universal in releasing titles exclusively in HD-DVD (except for Spielberg films), and MGM and Fox are joining Columbia, Sony and Disney for exclusive Blu-ray releases.

Back to Kubrick... 2001 is one of my favorite films of all time. I guess this has to do with the fact that this is the second film I saw in a movie theater as a kid (the first one was My Fair Lady...also a favorite), and I saw 2001 in full CINERAMA with the deep widely curved screen at a local theater called the Metro which seated 1000 and was rebuilt to exact CINERAMA specs (with 3 projectors running simultaneously), 2001 being the film used in reopening the theater. Man.... to this day I still recall in awe watching the Discovery spaceship going across the screen.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I ordered all the films thru Amazon on HD-DVD.
This Paramount news helped me decide which way to go.

Not only is there no boxed set listed anywhere, I thought
Full Metal Jacket was getting a new SE release, but
all I see is the original one listed. Am I wrong about Full
Metal Jacket?

PS: Heya Raul. Good to see you here.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Ron. FMJ is indeed getting a new release. It may not be up on some retailer sites, however. But don't buy the currently available release.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Brandon,

Gotcha!