Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › TV on DVD and Blu-ray › What TV Shows/Movies Should Be Scheduled for Blu-ray Release?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What TV Shows/Movies Should Be Scheduled for Blu-ray Release?

post #1 of 37
3/1/10 at 2:07pm
Thread Starter 
I actually think that "V: The Original Mini Series" and "V: The Final Battle" should be released almost immediately. Others include the Jesse Stone movie series.
Reply
post #2 of 37
3/1/10 at 4:20pm
Leaving out shows that were edited on video (like The X-Files, Millennium or Buffy), I'd love to see The Twilight Zone and Twin Peaks.
Reply
post #3 of 37
3/1/10 at 11:36pm
If Shout Factory wanted to get another cult fav in the 'one and done' category.. and their 1st BluRay... How about Jake 2.0?

(and before anyone says otherwise, yes is HD... as seen when it was shown on HDNet.

Reply
post #4 of 37
3/2/10 at 9:49am
Like Travis, I really want to see Twin Peaks and The Twilight Zone on blu. The Outer Limits, Space: 1999 and The Fugitive (with restored music, yeah right) would be great, but not likely to happen anytime soon.
Reply
post #5 of 37
3/2/10 at 1:27pm
Thread Starter 
I don't think I could ever watch an episode of the Twilight Zone ever again. The Sci-Fi Channel killed me on watching ti ever again. They have played that series to death and back again.
Reply
post #6 of 37
3/2/10 at 6:20pm
I Love Lucy
The Andy Griffith Show
Bewitched

... to name a few.
Reply
post #7 of 37
3/2/10 at 9:30pm
Honestly, I think only the cream of the crop of classic tv will make it to blu-ray.

Reply
post #8 of 37
3/2/10 at 9:50pm
V was done cheap.

 

I don't understand the opposition to "edited on video"

My reading of the bluray spec is that it could, if desired, hold simple 480P content.  So, my argument would be: give us basically the exact same thing as the DVDs.  Fine.  Improve the soundtrack, put it 480P, and give me 1 disc that has an entire season of a show.  I'll buy that for shows that fit into that mold.  Fair improvements could be made without re-inventing the wheel.

I want "Outer Limits" .. the new (SHO/SciFi) version on Blu.  I also want a great number of TV movies.  Give me Stephen King's "The Stand" and other miniseries.

Reply
post #9 of 37
3/3/10 at 12:57am


Quote:
Originally Posted by mattCR View Post

 

I don't understand the opposition to "edited on video"
 


It's a quality issue - direct transfers from a film masters to digital is better   -  but my feeling is - if it's broadcast quality,it's good enough for me!  A show shot on film,edited on video is no different then a sitcom shot and edited on tape.




Reply
post #10 of 37
3/3/10 at 6:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattCR View Post

I don't understand the opposition to "edited on video"
 



I wouldn't mind seeing SD material all on one Blu-ray disc if I don't have a show on DVD and the price was the same as the DVD. However, if I already have a show on DVD, I'm not going to re-buy the show with no upgrade other than it's now on one or two discs instead of six.
Reply
post #11 of 37
3/3/10 at 6:28am

One of the big problems with edited on video is not so much the editing, but the telecine transfer. All of those shows from the 80's and 90's are always going to look like a 20 year old telecine job. Not to mention they are all 480i NOT 480p. All you have to do is look at Star Trek: TNG to see what I mean. The colors of the titles are bleeding all over the place, There are interlace jaggies. The image is soft even by broadcast standards. Its just a very ugly looking final product, and most shows of that era suffer from the same issues.

Doug

Reply
post #12 of 37
3/3/10 at 6:53am
I do understand those issues.  I think almost everyone agrees that without a major rework most of these just "are what they are".  Minor re-work, however, is possible with minimal expense to some titles.. and, albeit, minimal improval.

But Bluray has always looked for a way to get adopters, to grow it's base.  You'd think the strategy I propose would be a no-brainer.  If you could put all of TNG S1 on 2 BD discs, rather then 9 DVDs, shipping and production cost would drop.  And for people who had never bought the series, if someone said "you can get S1 TNG on BlueRay for $40" which is about $25 less then the DVD set.  Studio makes more money, and gets some to double dip just for the content.

 

Studio saves money, the buyer gets basically the exact same quality as they had on DVD, except they don't need to flip discs nearly as often, and sure, you can integrate some BD Live! content or whatever to push out new features or something to still make it a collectible item.

 

Reply
post #13 of 37
3/3/10 at 9:28am

I don't see any advantage for the customer to re-buy these shows if there isn't a substantial improvement in the quality of the presentation. In addition blu-ray is more expensive to produce than standard DVD, which would probably eat up any cost savings in having fewer discs.

Doug

Reply
post #14 of 37
3/3/10 at 3:12pm
I like this discussion. I do think old TV shows, even the ones shot on 35mm film, were never really meant to be held up to the scrutiny of 1080P. The filmakers knew that the fake backdrops, wires (Flying Nun?) and such would not be noticed on the low-resolution TVs of the day. It makes sense to use the Blu-ray format for its capacity rather than its resolution specs and package full seasons in 480P on 1 or 2 discs.

While I certainly wouldn't re-buy anything I already own on DVD, I'd love to buy complete seasons of some of my favorite old TV shows on 480P Blu-ray disc that have never been released before.
Reply
post #15 of 37
3/3/10 at 5:24pm
Thread Starter 
Tell me about it. I'm preparing to purchase my first television show on Blu-ray, Firefly, but, only because I was able to get Overstock to price match Deep Discount at $35. I just think that, when it comes to Blu-ray, that studios are over-pricing their releases and they have gotten very out-of-control.

I don't how anyone else feels about it, but when I walk into Best Buy and see a complete season set priced at $90, I just turn and walk out of the store. As much as I want to upgrade my library of television shows to Blu-ray, the general pricing for television shows have been taken advantage of by the studios.

The problem is that the studios see the Blu-ray format as a premium format and an excuse to raise the SRP on their releases double that of the DVD format. I mean, take a look at Firefly on Blu-ray. Best Buy sells it in their stores for $70. When you can purchase the DVD version for arouond $40.

If the studios can't bring those price controls down to a reasonable level, television show fans aren't going to be looking at upgrading their library to the new format. Not only that, but, studios aren't doing their best to offer current DVD owners an upgrade offer.
Reply
post #16 of 37
3/3/10 at 7:02pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark-P View Post

I like this discussion. I do think old TV shows, even the ones shot on 35mm film, were never really meant to be held up to the scrutiny of 1080P. The filmakers knew that the fake backdrops, wires (Flying Nun?) and such would not be noticed on the low-resolution TVs of the day. It makes sense to use the Blu-ray format for its capacity rather than its resolution specs and package full seasons in 480P on 1 or 2 discs.

While I certainly wouldn't re-buy anything I already own on DVD, I'd love to buy complete seasons of some of my favorite old TV shows on 480P Blu-ray disc that have never been released before.

You could say the same of feature films of a particular age too. Look at all the discussion of the wire holding the tail of the Lion in The Wizard of Oz. (they removed it for the blu-ray) Audiences were much less aware of things like effects or even sets in the studio days. Only in the 70's when the many films started to shoot in real locations, and the level of effects were raised to a very high level did people start to look back and see the "seems" in older films and TV shows.

I think Star Trek on blu-ray clearly shows the advantage of the higher resolution format. It really is a beautifully photographed show, and I think other shows such as Perry Mason, The Untouchables, and The Man From U.N.C.L.E. would like wise benefit. After all the two part episodes of U.N.C.L.E. were shown as features theatrically in Europe.


Doug

Reply
post #17 of 37
3/4/10 at 3:56am
TV/DVD on BR is all well and good, but how many here would actually double-dip for BR releases?  I guess another way to put it woud be, how many here have the income to dd for Std sets that they already have on their shelves?  Not me.  The only factor that would get me to enter the BR mkt is to see numerous 50's-90's TV/DVD shows get released on BR as a first-time release (not prev available on Std releases).  That's what I've been watching and I don't see it happening yet.  I don't think it will happen but maybe some day.
Reply
post #18 of 37
3/4/10 at 9:28am
Thread Starter 
Well, I probably would, if the studios could bring the cost controls down to a more affordable level. If the Blu-ray sets were placed on a similar pricing structure as the DVD sets of the same release then I would purchase them. Best Buy sells most DVD season sets for around $39.99, on average, Now, if the studios could get the Blu-ray sets down to around the same price point as DVD's, I would double dip. I would also then give my DVD sets to my dad and the rest of my family as they would enjoy them.

The problem is that studios have viewed the Blu-ray format as an excuse to raise the profits they make from Blu-ray sales and they've managed to increase the retail SRP for their titles released on the new format. In my opinion, the studios pricing on Blu-ray season sets are deliberately holding back a lot of consumers who are thinking about jumping into the new format.

I know that I have to purchase one single television show on Blu-ray and the prices for television show sets are priced so high that I'm staying away from them. I've been able to find more affordable prices on Blu-ray movies than I have on television shows of the same format (BR). I'm just curious if everyone is buying more movies on BR or more TV shows, when shopping in B&M stores.
Reply
post #19 of 37
3/4/10 at 2:43pm
Some of the U.N.C.L.E. features were also shown domestically in theaters and not all were adapted from two part episodes, they had extra footage, often a bit racy, specifically filmed for the theatrical release in order to give viewers something they had not previously seen for free and to pad out a single episode's running time for a feature.

I don't think this particular series would benefit from a Blu release, however, as the bulk of it was filmed on the old MGM back lot, substituting for various worldwide locales, and usually dirty and debris filled stock footage was used for establishing shots, both aspects of production that now appear very archaic and cheap. As for what little location photography there was, it tended to be the same roads in Griffith Park over and over again. The black and white episodes are a little more forgiving, but the color ones really present the series as if it were meant to be seen on nothing bigger than a 25 inch CRT set.  It had a good cinematographer for most of the series, Fred Koenekamp, but he was hampered by the low budgets.  It's hardly a good candidate for the Blu look.

From that era, I SPY, which was filmed all over the world and had higher production values, is a much better choice.
Reply
post #20 of 37
3/4/10 at 5:04pm
I Spy though was shot on 16mm film and is never going to look sharp and clear in any kind of format.
Reply
post #21 of 37
3/4/10 at 8:28pm
I Spy was shot in 35mm just like virtually every other American TV show of the day.

As for it having higher production values, the location photography is really cool, but the lab work on the show is HORRIBLE. It has to be one of the dirtiest looking images I've ever seen from a 60s TV show. If they could go back to the original camera negative they might be able to improve that.

I don't think the back lot filming of U.N.C.L.E. is actually a drawback. Often they were using sets that were left over from big budget features that had been shot at MGM.

Doug
Reply
post #22 of 37
3/4/10 at 8:29pm
My understanding is that the foreign location shoots required using 16mm cameras similar to what NBC's news department utilized for foreign coverage and that is what accounts for the washed out dirty image the show has on the current DVD sets.
Reply
post #23 of 37
3/4/10 at 8:36pm
The foreign location shooting on I Spy was done primarily with Ariflex 35mm cameras. It was noted for being one of the first American TV shows to use the Ariflex as a primary camera. Studio shooting in LA was done with the standard Mitchell BNC. However I do believe that they used NBC's foreign news bureaus labs to process the negatives, and produce dailies, which could explain the rough look of the show.

Doug
Reply
post #24 of 37
3/4/10 at 11:03pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce View Post

I don't think the back lot filming of U.N.C.L.E. is actually a drawback. Often they were using sets that were left over from big budget features that had been shot at MGM.
 
I think it certainly is a drawback in terms of having any sort of Blu-Ray value, i.e. utilizing the technology for improved visual quality.  Such a transfer would only further illustrate just how anachronistic the show was even when it was contemporary, coming as it does from an era when film making was moving away from back lot and stage bound productions. No matter how big the budgets were for the features they hailed from, the sets hampered the series by their inherent phoniness, as was the case with more than a few MGM films from that same time, e.g. MARLOWE, which look ridiculously cheap and unnatural and appeared so when first released. Theatrical film audiences had become relatively sophisticated by then, but  television might still able to get away with the innate staginess simply because the size of the screen and reproduction technology were not as revealing as a theater screen or as the televisions of today.  But it was still something that most studios were striving to abandon as the decade progressed, both in feature film making and television. 

By comparison, shows such as ROUTE 66 and I SPY heralded a new direction for television production, in location work, cinematography, lighting and editing, and would be far better candidates for Blu releases than U.N.C.L.E., depending on what original elements could be found and their condition. 

I don't believe many decades old series will benefit from Blu quality, but STAR TREK and THE PRISONER are solid examples of two that did, so anything is possible. Regardless, very few vintage series will ever see the light of Blu, so it's all academic.


Edited by Professor Echo - 3/4/10 at 11:13pm
Reply
post #25 of 37
3/5/10 at 6:44am
     Quote:
Originally Posted by Point-Blank View Post

I think it certainly is a drawback in terms of having any sort of Blu-Ray value, i.e. utilizing the technology for improved visual quality.  Such a transfer would only further illustrate just how anachronistic the show was even when it was contemporary, coming as it does from an era when film making was moving away from back lot and stage bound productions. No matter how big the budgets were for the features they hailed from, the sets hampered the series by their inherent phoniness, as was the case with more than a few MGM films from that same time, e.g. MARLOWE, which look ridiculously cheap and unnatural and appeared so when first released. Theatrical film audiences had become relatively sophisticated by then, but  television might still able to get away with the innate staginess simply because the size of the screen and reproduction technology were not as revealing as a theater screen or as the televisions of today.  But it was still something that most studios were striving to abandon as the decade progressed, both in feature film making and television. 

By comparison, shows such as ROUTE 66 and I SPY heralded a new direction for television production, in location work, cinematography, lighting and editing, and would be far better candidates for Blu releases than U.N.C.L.E., depending on what original elements could be found and their condition. 

I don't believe many decades old series will benefit from Blu quality, but STAR TREK and THE PRISONER are solid examples of two that did, so anything is possible. Regardless, very few vintage series will ever see the light of Blu, so it's all academic.


Gotta agree with Walker on this one.  Studio back lot filming does nothing for me.  Give me on location shots every single time.  I've always found it amazing that back in the 40's Universal wasn't considered a huge player like MGM was, yet I vastly prefer the Universal Abbott & Costello films to the ones they did for MGM even though MGM was the "splashier" of the two companies.  Universal would use some nice on location shots, while MGM consistently built these elaborate sets that always felt fake and stuffy to me.  Any show, like many of the classic WB series (77 Sunset Strip, Cheyenne, Hawaiian Eye, etc), that primarily used back lot and indoor studio sets as opposed to beautiful outdoor, on location shots just wouldn't benefit as much from Blu-ray.  I believe this is one of the reasons I prefer a western like Rawhide to any of the WB westerns from the same era.  I guess YMMV on this point, but that's certainly how I see it.

Gary "I hate fake looking back drops, especially with westerns where I'm supposed to feel like I'm on the open range" O.

Reply
post #26 of 37
3/5/10 at 8:23am
Well I have to disagree with you guys. I happen to like the look of the stuff shot on the backlot and it doesn't take away from the show at all. That was the prevailing style of the time. Even I Spy has pretty cheesy looking sets in its studio work. You can often see the same walls of their hotel rooms just being moved around from episode to episode. Star Treks cheesy sets have been embraced as a stylistic choice. I feel the same way about studio bound films and TV. I like stuff shot on location too, but I just take each product for what it is. Having it in lower resolution doesn't help it look any better or worse.

In my opinion, anything shot in 35mm can benefit from a blu-ray presentation regardless of its production limitations.

Doug
Reply
post #27 of 37
3/5/10 at 12:21pm
For me there's a big difference between an indoor setting that has to use a studio set as opposed to a truly solid structure and outdoor settings that use studio sets/back lot shots.  The first I can live with.  The second often takes me out of the moment because it generally doesn't look real.  But to each his own.

Gary "I think this is basically a moot point since I doubt many 50's/60's shows will get the Blu-ray treatment" O.
Reply
post #28 of 37
3/5/10 at 2:56pm
Gary, I also find myself inordinately distracted by a television show that is too dependent on stages and the back lot when its dramatic aspirations require more and/or it comes from a time where the charm of a more make believe atmosphere was becoming outmoded.   Of course, I cherish those earlier eras of film making and wholeheartedly respect the amount of talent and skill of the classic art directors, who often transcended the limitations and instead created an entirely unique presentation of "reality."  

By the time of the 60's and beyond though, the artificiality, save for certain thematically appropriate settings such as science-fiction, starts to wear thin and can indeed interrupt the viewing experience in disconcerting ways.  A case in point is the 1950's series DANGEROUS ASSIGNMENT, which ostensibly took place all over the world, but was limited by the contemporary production constraints for early TV.  The series is a lot of fun, but even on SD DVD, one is constantly made aware of how cheesy it all looks.  Yes, that can be part of  both the historical and nostalgic value in terms of it being an artifact, but rendering it even sharper and with the clarity of a Blu transfer would add nothing to its dramatic context outside of seeing the sweat dripping from under Brian Donlevy's toupee.

But Gary said it best, if not first, haha: "To each his own."
Reply
post #29 of 37
3/5/10 at 3:03pm
I do agree with Gary on RAWHIDE for its expansive cinematic feel and with Doug on PERRY MASON, along my own choice of PETER GUNN, for good Blu candidates.    The neo-noir black and white lighting of MASON and the beautifully stylized night world of GUNN would be breathtaking in Blu.  
Reply
post #30 of 37
3/5/10 at 8:47pm
     Quote:
Originally Posted by Point-Blank View Post

I do agree with Gary on RAWHIDE for its expansive cinematic feel and with Doug on PERRY MASON, along my own choice of PETER GUNN, for good Blu candidates.    The neo-noir black and white lighting of MASON and the beautifully stylized night world of GUNN would be breathtaking in Blu.  


Those 3 would all be excellent candidates for Blu-ray.  I doubt we'll see any of them in that format, but I completely agree they'd all be great choices.


Gary "great minds think alike, Walker - LOL" O.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: TV on DVD and Blu-ray
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › TV on DVD and Blu-ray › What TV Shows/Movies Should Be Scheduled for Blu-ray Release?