AVATAR: Blu-ray takes the "Superbit" approach - Page 2

I agree, Doug. I am one of those people who have purchased a new large TV within the past 18 months -- along with a BD player and new HDMI 1.3 A/V receiver.  There is no way I plan on replacing this equipment, which cost approximately $3,800, just to buy into 3D. A substantial percentage of family, friends and co-workers (none of whom are HT enthusiasts) also have purchased new HDTV's for their prime viewing rooms in the past year, too. I do not see any of them doing another upgrade, either.

"We got rid of all the promotional stuff to take full advantage of disc space for optimal PQ" or some BS like that? Don't make me laugh. Does this mean when you pop the disc into the player a menu for the film will appear immediately with "play" the only option? No Interpol warnings, trailers for other films, disclaimers, fluff, logos, etc.? And they want thirty-five bucks for this? I'll wait for a price drop for the first release and call it a day - special editions these days aren't so special anymore - chances are all we'll get are a couple of 12 minute featurettes, a music video and a commentary track featuring 8 people talking at the same time, most of them spouting techno-babble. No, thanks

Yup, it's a joke. Just put the special features on a 2nd disc. If you are really that concerned with giving the public the best a/v presentation and don't want to jeopardize that by taking up disc space with bonus stuff, just put it all on disc 2. But no, they've got to milk the cow and wait on that stuff until an ultimate edition is released that will be timed around the holidays.
I will wait and by the time it comes out, I may be so over it I won't even care anymore.

Sony never pushed VC-1 as the "standard".  In fact, the earliest Sony Blu-rays were MPEG-2, and most since have been AVC.  There never was a "standard" being pushed, all three of those codecs were supported and used, and AVC and VC-1 continue to be used.

Vincent

As per the question in the OP's opening post, my reply is simple. I won't be buying Avatar at all, be it 2D, 3D or the next technology they decide to bung it out on. Can't polish a turd IMO. 

Actually, the mythbusters proved that you can, in fact, polish a turd.

hmm, that's interesting.

But can you put a candle in a turd and call it a birthday cake? 

I'll wait for the 3-D Blu-ray of Avatar to come out.

Fox is looking to re-release Avatar this summer with 10 minutes of addtional footage.

Cameron has about 40 minutes of additonal footage that could be on a special edition DVD/Blu-ray.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i474fda2d02866bfd711a3d89a21b17a7

For those of you who have bought HDTV's recently, I agree that you will probably not want to but another soon just for 3-D. But, for those of us that bought 720p or 1080i HDTV's years ago and are looking to upgrade to 1080p in a year or two, we will be interested in the new 3-D sets. I have a 720p Sanyo front projector that I bought in 2006. It came with two lamp bulbs. I have about 2000 hours left on the second bulb. When that goes, I'll start looking for a new 1080p projector. If the 3D projectors have a decent price, I'll get one.

If the edition in November was going to be 3D, and Fox was calling this the Superbit release of the 2D version not being hindered by the 50% bitrate/space overhead of 3D, I might buy that.  I'd still wander why, other than trying to create an artificial rental window and to bait some double dipping, they are not including the second disc with special features.  (Unless it hasn't been completed.)  As for extras that run along side the feature presantation, I don't think most of those are bandwidth or space hungry to the point where they make or break AV quality.  (Although there are counter examples such as Terminator 2: Skynet Edition.)

As for omitting promotional materials, don't do us any favors.  Compromising video quality for the sake of including advertising (and trying to shove it down the purchaser's throat each time the disc is loaded) is something that should not be happening on any release.  This should be a basic expectation consumers can have of something on which they spend their hard earned money (especially lack of the forcing aspect), not some special feature as Fox seems to be promoting it.

I'm really looking forward to the November release.  Hopefully, it will be the April release with a second disc of extras.  I'm not planning on upgrading to 3D anytime soon.  If that happens, replacing a few titles will be a drop in the bucket.  In general, I have found that what is gained in dimension is lost in image quality, especially on screens that don't fill your field of vision.  For theaters, I opt for it since it is something I don't get at home, but usually leave with the same overall satisfaction as a good quality 2D presentation.

They are NOT ready.  They haven't had enough time.  I asked Jon Landau about it:




No, it won't be.  It will have seamless branching with multiple versions, PIP, things you can't just put on a second disc, plus all of the other extras they are developing that you can.

BTW more videos from the interviews can be found here: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/299193/avatar-press-event-coverage-avatar-will-street-on-earth-day-april-22nd

I still don't understand how a studio who announces future plans for a more feature-rich release in the not-too-distant future before the initial, bare-bones release can in any way be accused of "baiting" consumers into double-dipping.

We're seeing the same argument over the LOTR Theatrical Editions that are soon coming out...

If anything, these studios are doing the exact OPPOSITE of baiting for a double dip.  It's the studios that don't alert consumers about future releases of "bonus" material that are the buggers in my mind.

Fox (and New Line) should be commended for their up-front approach to releasing these movies, not criticized.

I think even if Fox didn't announce a special edition, you could still predict a double dip would happen. Especially if the first release was just a completely bare bones disc. I'll probably be renting the first version, to see if the movie does more for me than it did in the theater. If that's the case, then I'll wait for the SE in November.

Well said.  I agree 100% 

Ok, if you visit blu-ray message boards you're read they announced a future special edition. But to the general public who'll come across the bare-bones edition on the stores, I doubt they are aware of Fox's announcement concerning the release of the special edition.

I don't think the 'general public' cares that much for bonus material, anyway.

Has anyone considered the possibility that this may be on a BD-25, and THAT'S why they have to leave everything else off in order to fit it? 


I'll admit it's unlikely, but it kinda makes sense....it's probably going to be a huge seller and they may not be able to get enough BD-50s yet for the first production run......and 50 gigs is alot for one movie, I'm not sure they could fill it all if they tried....

I for one and glad to know in advance about their plans for a special edition.  I'll probably rent the bare-bones disc, but plan on picking up the special edition especially if it has features about the technology and making of the film.

Special Editions tend to sell better than movie only releases. I don't know if the general public really wants the extra features, or they simply feel they are getting a better value.

Doug

No, its a BD-50.

Really? I thought the reason for a single disc release on big titles (at least with DVD) was because the SE only sold big to the enthusiasts. I also thought the general public would choose a lower price before bonus materials, but I guess I was wrong.

I don't think you're wrong. I can't believe that, say, the latest Harry Potter movie in a $15 or $20 movie-only version does not far outsell its $25 SE counterpart. I don't know about anyone else but I've never seen a store stock more copies of an SE over the movie-only disc.

It very well may have change in recent years, but one of the reasons they started putting out special editions in the first place was because the tended to sell better. But the economy may have changed that trend.

Doug

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce  


It very well may have change in recent years, but one of the reasons
they started putting out special editions in the first place was because
the tended to sell better. But the economy may have changed that trend.

Doug

-------------------------------

That and the market used to be heavier on enthusiasts before the avg DVD purchase shifted toward non-enthusiasts.

_Man_

Must be a regional thing, then. The case with DVDs here was that the single disc was available almost everywhere, while the special edition was sold only in a few stores. And even then, there were just a few copies of them. It made it a little more special when you finally found the SE of a movie you wanted, but it wasn't easy.

Edited by Brian Borst - 4/1/10 at 2:52am

When you have two versions side by side, people will tend to buy the cheaper one. It's when there is only one version available when having extra content influences the decision. A title is more likely to sell if there is added value (withought significant added cost), especially if it is a title that's not super popular.