A Few Words About A few words about...™ Casablanca -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

The original negative of Casablanca, one of the greatest and most beloved films ever created, was not always treated with respect.

Rather, it was treated harshly. How harshly? More harshly than I hope you can imagine.

With wear and tear, and pieces missing, WB gathered the surviving elements and created a digital representation of the film, and initially released it on SD and HD.

It was glorious.

Now, finally making its way to Blu-ray, Casablanca arrives in that same quality master, with the earlier extras still intact, and with a new documentary on Jack Warner, the most recognized of the Brothers, on a separate disc.

Casablanca is back, looking as it should, and while I give it and its beautiful packaging an Extremely Highly Recommended, I do so with a single caveat.

I'm aware that there are many collectors who love receiving postcard sized reproductions of stills, small books, and in this case, a small wallet suitable of holding one's Letters of Transit, and this is all well.

What I do not like is that once the aforementioned packaging is opened, and the contents dealt with, that I have no easy way of shelving the discs themselves in a protected environment. I have the same problem with the Dirty Harry Collection.

A small cardboard folder, open at the sides does not do it for me. Dust is the enemy. To that end, I would request that within whatever packaging is created in the future, that the actual discs reside in a normal, sealable plastic Blu-ray holder.

RAH

 

[PaulDA]

If the "souvenirs" and the Warner doc are not important (as they are not to me), is there any reason I should get this to replace my HD DVD?

 

[RobertR]

 

[dpippel]

Not to nit-pick, but "master" and "transfer" are two entirely different things. I too would interested in knowing if this is a direct port of the HD-DVD transfer or if Warner produced a new transfer for the BD release.

 

[ToEhrIsHuman]

Please forgive my possible ignorance, but my understanding is that a "transfer" is done in order to create a digital "master" which is subsequently "encoded" for delivery (in this case, via BD.) The only potential difference I could see in this scenario if it is indeed the same "master" as before is whether a new "encode" has increased the resolution and clarity on the BD.

 

[dpippel]

In the parlance of our time, transfer=compressed encode from the digital master, whether that be VC-1, AVC, MPEG-2, etc. If the BD "encode" is new then all sorts of new things could have been introduced that can affect its video quality, be they good or bad.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

I got yelled at by so many people because I gripped about how Criterion was packaging their Blu Rays. I don't need a standard Blu Ray case but when they release what is supposed to be a higher quality product why is it they choose to use a flimsy looking and OPEN top Bottom which wear faster looks worn and collects dust!

I would rather have a case that looks more appealing and has the best presentation then something rushed. The Criterion Cases are just not acceptable.

 

[Martin Teller]

I'm really annoyed that they're milking the market with this bloated beast full of silly tchotchkes and a lackluster documentary, without offering a more stripped-down alternative, comparable to the HD-DVD release or previous SD release. I'm sure it will come eventually, but it irks me that I have to wait when they could easily release it right now.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

Also the container containing those two items the luggage thingy etc the little box that houed them was EMPTY! so I got everythign else loppby cards etc ... but not those little trinkets.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I think it's the same as the HD DVD.

 

[dpippel]

I would assume so as well Robert, but you know what they say about assuming.

Does anyone know for sure?

 

[Keith Paynter]

I'm passing on the BD collector box until a more "standard" version comes available. My HD-DVD looks stunning on my PC, and I don't need the bloated packaging, despite the new documentary disc. I learned that lesson after the Blade Runner briefcase set (buying the DVD version, then the compact 5-disc BD version).

 

[Reagan]

I'm so glad this finally was released on BD. It's been literally two years since the HD-DVD came out. Between this and The Adventures of Robin Hood, I finally feel caught up on the really interesting Warners HD-DVD exclusives.

Also, I too don't want all of the crazy packaging and inserts. What a waste. Didn't like having to buy them.

-R

 

[Brandon Conway]

So, there's no smaller regular packaging within the bigger box?

Hmmm. I may pass on this until the packaging is more reasonable. I don't mind the Warner digibooks - I even like them, actually - but this packaging seems excessive.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Yeah, that package is quite excessive since there are no other BD alternative. I can wait for something slimmer.

And thanks, RAH for those "few words" (as usual)...

_Man_

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Gary Tooze did a comparison over at DVD Beaver, and reached the same conclusion as RAH. The movie file on the BD is the same size as on the HD DVD. Make of that what you will.

I have the HD DVD, and it's gorgeous.

 

[RobertR]

I'd say that's definitive proof for all but those people who are so worried about differences that they'd (just barely) accept it's the same only from the tech people at Warner.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Transfer = going from film to some raw uncompressed digital format IE 2k, 4k, 8k, ETC.

Master = The cleaned up, color timed version of the above transfer.

Encode = The conversion of the above master into showable format, IE JPEG2000 (for digital cinema) VC-1, AVC, MPEG2 (for home viewing) 35mm film (for standard theatrical viewing). The last could also be referred to as "recording out to film".

Doug

 

[dpippel]

You've been around long enough to know that "transfer" and "encode" are used interchangeably when applied to home video, hence my "in the parlance of our time" comment.

 

[ToEhrIsHuman]

Thanks, Doug. That was more or less my understanding as well. Either we're both right or both wrong.