Close Encounters of the Third Kind - November 13th (1 Viewer)

[Eric F]

I know that, but recent films are always a bigger draw, and I think Poltergeist is one of those films that's sort of been out of circulation for a while (at least I haven't seen it) and will be a bigger draw at its lower price.

Either way I think the Spidey set is really the killer app, and along with other such Blu exclusives as Encounters, Cars, Pirates 3, Narnia and others, I think HD-DVD is in serious trouble.

Now if Sony would only release Lawrence...

 

[Robert Crawford]

Poltegeist is only five years younger than Close Encounters, hardly a big enough difference in age to make a difference, plus those other two films are much better known and would be a bigger draw in my opinion.

As far as your other assertion, box office and popularity matters a great deal, but there are other factors such as pricing/marketing and in time we'll see if HD DVD is in trouble or not.

 

[Dave Mack]

I think CE3k would be a bigger draw than Poltergeist. BUT, Poltergeist will be released on both formats...

 

[Marc Colella]

You also have to take into account that there are many who think the older movies won't take advantage of HD, and that only the newer movies will offer HD-like quality.
Comments like "only films in the last few years are filmed in HD, older films won't look good" keep appearing in gaming forums (even in audio/video forums). I know a few people who think this way as well.

Plus there are many who just scoff at films that are either old, b&w, subtitled (or any combination of those) thinking that newer is always better.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Actually Poltergeist made a bit more at the boxoffice than 2001 did, but thats before adjusting for inflation. Poltergeist made $76,606,280 and 2001 made $56,715,371. Close Encounters made $132,088,635. When adjusted for inflation Close Encounters is number 67 on the top 100 list of all time boxoffice leaders. Poltergeist and 2001 aren't even on the list.

Doug

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'm talking worldwide not just domestic without any regard to inflation.

 

[Jari K]

Even Jerry Goldsmith sounds better via HD!

Seriously speaking, at this point it´s probably true that *some* people seek that "great PQ/SQ" over the films itself (however, this doesn´t mean that they don´t care about the film at all, or something). It´s true that many Hollywood blockbusters "look better" than some 1970s-1980s titles, if we seek that "reference material" and exploding audio (recent films are all mixed in 5.1. 6.1 etc to begin with, when that´s not the case with many "older" films). While it´s great that these "demo-films" like PotC, Matrix, etc are being released, I have to agree that eventually they´re not nearly enough for me. I want titles like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", Blade Runner, Kubrick, etc - generally more "classics". I also want "smaller films", horror etc. It seems that the tide is (slowly) turning at the moment and studios have a wider view on their HD release schedule (not only "big blockbusters", "catalogue titles", "comedy" and "CG animation").

Thanks to the Kubrick-titles, Blade Runner etc, there are many "SD DVD only"-fans out there, that seriously have to consider of getting that Blu-ray or HD DVD-player. More and more these type of titles = many more HD fans. IMO, "blockbusters" are doing a great job of showing the strengths of HD (both PQ/SQ) and many of them are solid entertainment, but we need those genuine classics if HD wants to go that "extra mile".

 

[Douglas Monce]

The top 100 list is world wide and adjusted for inflation.

Doug

 

[Robert Crawford]

Again, you're mixing up the domestic number while I'm talking world wide. Look at number 165.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime...genum=2&p=.htm

If you're interested in the inflation adjustment then look at number 67.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

 

[Douglas Monce]

Sorry Robert I thought the list I was looking at was world wide, but I guess it was domestic. Still 2001 and Poltergeist aren't even on that list (top 100). And again they aren't on the World Wide list you have the link for either (again top 100). Also I'm not sure that World Wide list is adjusted for inflation.

Doug

 

[BrettB]

From the sd dvd forum press release thread...


I almost never go to the sd dvd board and discovered this from another forum.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...d.php?t=259915

 

[Douglas Monce]

Cool then I won't worry too much about this one. Just enjoy it when it gets here.

Doug

 

[Dave Mack]

Yep, Douglas. Gonna be fab!

 

[Sam Davatchi]

This is good news because as far as I remember for the E.T. DVD release the real version wasn't remastered as well as the other version.

 

[Sam Davatchi]

I also saw another release date for this, has it been changed? something like oct 2!

 

[Edwin-S]

I'm curious. Could this be the project that Mr. Harris said he was involved with for six months?

 

[Douglas Monce]

Good question.....I would like to know what he was working on also.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

You know I just recently put e.t. on and looked at the two different version, and I thought they were pretty close if not identical. There was a rumor that the theatrical version wasn't going to have 5.1 audio and in fact it was labled as 2.0 on the box, but it does have full 5.1 sound.

Doug

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Hmmm..

 

[Ed St. Clair]

WoW
Did not expect this type of release in the first two years of HD Disc.
This is GREAT news for filmfans, hope the transfer is STUNNING!!!