SPIELBERG AND HI DEF DVD (1 Viewer)

[Bradley-E]

I have noticed that there is nothing that Steven Spielberg has had a hand n coming to HD DVD. With all the Universal titles being released you would think that "Jurrasic", "BTTF", "Munich" or even non-Amblin titles "Jaws" and "Duel" would be in the works. Dreamworks has not even commited. Are we going to go through the same thing as Standard DVD when he waited to sign-off on letting his product being released? Why does he drag his feet on new technology? I'd love to have "Jaws" and "Munich" in Hi Def DVD. Not to mention Dreamworks titles.

 

[Randy Korstick]

Spielberg and Lucas always drag their feet on new technology because their big titles always generate their biggest sales on release week and they want to wait until there are a large enough amount of people who own these machines to make those release weeks as big as possible.

 

[Bradley-E]

I can see your point. But what about Dreamworks titles and Amblin titles that are not as sought after? Titles like "Jaws" and "Duel" could be released at least. They are really part of the Universal library not Spielbergs.

 

[Jordan_E]

Spielberg carries enough weight to do whatever he wants with his titles, and I don't see him coming on board for a LONG time.

 

[Randy Korstick]

The 1st release of the original Jaws on HiDef disc will be bigger than you would think.

 

[Paul_Scott]

Jaws will be/is one of the most wanted titles for me. I can wait a few years for it though. But what kinda ticks me off is that, by default I also have to wait for Jaws 2, which is another film that is high up on my want list and unlikely to be released until the first movie is already available (I doubt Spielberg would consent to having any other Jaws titles released concurrently with his original classic).

It would be great if Universal kicked out the second film while we endure the long wait for Spielberg to 'bless us' with the original.

 

[dpippel]

Spielberg will probably play the same game he played with SD DVD - wait 2 years down the road before jumping on the wagon. It's really disappointing to me that history seems to be repeating itself with high-def DVD. You've got studios split over formats (ala DVD and Divx), those same studios pretty much releasing crap titles, and those with enough clout to call their own shots sitting it out. Let's all do the time warp back to 1997/98, shall we? :frowning:

Wouldn't it be refreshing to see someone like Spielberg, who certainly shouldn't be focused solely on money at this point in his life, actually embracing and advocating this new technology? Same goes for Lucas, who makes a lot of noise about pushing the technological envelope. It's really too bad that the players in Hollywood always need to be dragged kicking and screaming into anything that improves the home video experience for their audience.

 

[JediFonger]

i wouldn't hold dvd and circuit city's divx in the same light as HD-DVD vs. BluRay. there was really only 1 format. and even on a new format it took both of them 2-4 years later... with 2 formidable formats, that means 4-6 years later. 2010 before we see star wars, indy, spielberg films and the like.

 

[dpippel]

There are some slight differences, but comparing the Blu-ray/HD-DVD to DVD/Divx is perfectly valid and the parallels are astounding. Granted, Divx and DVD were basically the same technology, but then again so are Blu-ray and HD-DVD. The only real difference here, and it's an irrelevant one, is that even though you couldn't play a Divx disc in a standard DVD player a Divx player could play regular DVDs. Divx and DVD were effectively competing formats backed by different studios, some of which were releasing titles exclusive to Divx.

 

[Paul_Stachniak]

It's a shame too. Back to the Future, Jurrasic Park or Jaws would be MASSIVE for HD-DVD.

 

[BrettGallman]

Yeah, I kind of figured Jaws could be released soon, but then I remembered it took a while come out on SD-DVD. I mean, if they wanted to, Universal could theoretically release it without asking Spielberg first, right? I don't see why he'd complain, really. It's not like he'd have to do anything. In my opinion, the only thing that matters on HD (for catalogue titles) is the audio/visual presentation. Any extras are nice, but most movies have plenty of special features on SD-DVD.

 

[JediFonger]

it makes sense to compare SACD vs. DVD-Audio to HD-DVD vs. BluRay. it does not make logical sense to compare DVD to CC's DIVX. it's not just the slight difference, the model by which money is charged is competely different. with SD-DVD's you buy once and you can view it forever. with CC's DIVX you have to rent it for a few days, have your player call in/phone home to charge your credit card account for a few more days. it's media in hand but pay per view. why not view on demand or just plain pay per view from cable company because they are storing the media itself on a server?

if you look at HD-DVD and BluRay they are both pay once, watch forever.

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/structure.html
^premise+conclusion makes an argument.

 

[dpippel]

You're completely missing my point, perhaps deliberately. The details of the Divx business model (I know, I was an early adopter of SD DVD in 1997) that you're using to support your argument are irrelevant to our discussion. The fact that there were two different disc-based systems competing to deliver improved video content into the consumer's home, each backed by different groups of Hollywood studios, is what's germane. This is the same situation we have right now with Blu-ray and HD-DVD. Each product is designed to do exactly the same thing - deliver disc-based high definition video to the consumer. Blu-ray is backed by Fox, Disney, Sony, etc., who are NOT releasing any of their titles on the competing format. HD-DVD is mainly backed by Warner and Universal, and one studio (namely Warner) is releasing titles on BOTH formats. Sound familliar? It should. It's exactly the same kind of corporate politics we had to endure when Divx and DVD were duking it out.

 

[Bradley-E]

Paramount is also supporting both formats.

 

[Brian-W]

The irony here (and not totally apples vs. apples either) is some of Spielbergs biggest titles (Back to the Future, Close Encounters, E.T.) were launch titles for the Hi-Vision HD laserdisc format back in 1993. I don't know about the rights aspect (what he owns vs. studio controlled), but I think this is more of a studio rather than a director decision (Star Wars being the exception since Lucas controls the rights)

 

[JediFonger]

i believe spielberg produced BTTF. just FYI.

 

[Paul.S]

I think George is still smarting from all the VCRs that sold thanks to Star Wars.

And I understand your point in your last sentence above, Doug. But--setting aside for a moment their tarnished reputation as far as some are concerned--I don't think it's fair to level this charge equally at Lucas without mentioning all THX has done to improve cinema and home movie experiences.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Don't forget Pixar and ILM (and their alum). Both came from Lucas' many business endeavors, both successful and unsuccessful..

 

[Manus]

" I don't think it's fair to level this charge equally at Lucas without mentioning all THX has done to improve cinema and home movie experiences. "

Valid point. But I think George has not done his or Thx's reputations any good with the disgraceful treatment of the original movies that made his name ( and money )

~M~

 

[TravisR]

I don't know the specifics but I assume that Universal can release whatever they want. However, they won't because they don't want to piss off Speilberg.