The Answer Is...Blu-ray! - Page 2

Because when produced correctly it is the closest thing to film you can get in your own home.

Because when done "right" its look and sound is often better than your local cinema without all the extraneous crap.

Because it is a physical medium. It is something that you can hold in your hand and enjoy over and over. There is

pride in ownership.

 

Because right now at this moment in time there is nothing out there for the average consumer that they can realistically

purchase that comes close to the amount of pleasure that you can derive from it.

 

And that's one thing I like about the streams too. No junk to spend 5 minutes fast forwarding through or being forced to watch to get to the good stuff. On blu some studios are better that others at not making that 'what else' so in your face.

Of course the thing that excited me so much at the beginning of blu was the sheer volume each disk could hold. But it's a fine line in having lots of content vs. Lots of GOOD and easily navigable content.

The superduper new UI tricks on Blu rarely matter to me, often they are an impediment to getting to the good stuff, but as the tech matures this is getting better

Nailed it.

 

I mean, I'm sure we all want the same "favorite" extras on BD that we're used to seeing on DVD (deleted scenes/bloopers/lost footage if you prefer that, like I do; commentaries and behind-the-scenes featurettes for those that prefer that sort of thing). But the new-to-BD supplements have been junk, by and large.

 

Yesterday I kicked in a film on Blu-ray (most of you will know which one), and was horrified when the main menu came up and it had, generated via BD-Live, my local time and date, my local weather forecast (including an icon of a stormy cloud) and temperature, and scrolls across the bottom of upcoming just-announced BD titles from the studio.  What a horrible feeling that was of "being targeted"!  Geez, I felt like the studio exec was sitting on the couch next to me, trying to find out everything about me and personally get me to buy the rest of his studio's catalog. Uh, no thanks.  WAY too in-your-face.

 

The BEST use of BD-Live I've seen coming up is Universal's S6 release of The Office, promising to use the process in a Hulu-type manner to bring us - on the big HDTV screen! - the most recently aired 5 episodes of the show's 7th Season.  Sweet.  Nothing else compares to that, frankly.  Next-best use I've seen is the David Gerrold pieces on the ST:TOS S2 and S3 sets.  But then I've known Gerrold (albeit online only) longer than I've known my wife, so he's always a treat.  Still, I got good feedback about those pieces from fellow fans of the BDs.  Can't think of much else I've heard good feedback on, BD-Live wise, on any title (TV or film based).  Maybe the "group chat" stuff that includes the film makers, but that's few and far between...a single "event" that isn't a permanent feature for the owner of the disc to enjoy.

 

And THAT is one of the probs with BD-Live: as digital downloads themselves, there's not a sense of permanence about that material.  People (especially people who buy physical media in the first place) want their extras on-disc, not on a server somewhere.

As for bonus materials, I don't really care how they're done (HD, SD, PiP or Warner's Maximum Movie Mode) as long as it's informative, and it doesn't take too much space away from the movie itself. I really like the older supplements from earlier DVD and Laserdisc releases to be included as well. Some studios are so hung up on creating new features in HD, that they're forgetting that sometimes there are already perfectly fine documentaries that already exist. Creating new features is fine, but the older ones shouldn't be forgotten. And, as some of Warner's releases show, a lot of SD content can fit onto a single Blu-ray,

Yes.
 

Everyone has pretty much covered my feelings

on "Why Blu-ray?"  It's a great format, though not

perfect.  I still get very frustrated over the load times

on some of these discs.  It can take a good 5 minutes

from load to start of picture on even the newer

standalone players (unless you go with a top line Oppo).

 

Count me in as someone that has never been 

intrigued by BD LIVE content.  I never watch it.

Somehow I think most of the public out there

doesn't either.   I'm open to the concept, but most

of the stuff I have seen demo'd at studio functions

seem rather gimmicky.  Certainly, I don't need to 

chat online with other people while watching a film

and I would rather not have to log in online to access

additional content that could have easily been put on 

the disc itself.

 

Now branching?  That's a great idea that never gets

utilized.  Perfect example is Fox's upcoming release

of Last of The Mohicans.  Why couldn't the theatrical

and Director's versions be optionally branched?  Even

a title like Rocky Horror Picture Show which has an 

International ending could have been branched (and

perhaps it is) on this upcoming release.

 

The one thing that often bothers me is that we have

this great format with all this capacity and the studios

under utilize it.  Once in a while you'll get a release like

Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Alien Quadrilogy

that really takes advantage of multiple versions via

branching and full use of extra content -- done right the

first time.  But unfortunately, the rest of the time, it

seems the studios still want to milk consumers with multiple 

Blu-ray versions of the same title. such as the recent

MGM release of Escape From New York which could

have had benefited by having all the DVD supplements

rolled into it.

 

These are small nitpicks.  On the whole, I really enjoy

the Blu-ray experience -- so much so I still raise an

eyebrow when people say "DVD is good enough."  Well,

I always seem to enjoy watching a film on Blu-ray far

more than DVD.

Quality. I don't care about extras. Don't need BD-Live. I just want movies in great quality, something downloads or pay-per-view does not deliver.

I do have to admit that beyond the simple viewing of high quality images and sound, I despise the bluray format. I hate the fact that there are multiple sets of nested menus. I hate the startup loading time and fascist forcing you to watch trailers and logos. I hate having to update firmware just to watch a movie. I hate the inconsistency and vagueness of the menus. (James Bond). If I had the ability, I would rip all my blurays and strip them down to just the movies. I'll probably be able to do that in the not too distant future.

I agree with your list, though I think they are poor production choices rather than something inherently wrong with the format.

 

Video quality, audio quality, and quality extras are my priority. The rest tends to get in the way.

 

More. More of the same.

 

BD offers more storage, so more than just a whole feature film, or one or two episodes of a TV series can fit on a disc. I applaud that.

As far as feature films are concerned, I would like to see two different versions (if they exist) more often in 1 package (and possibly on the same disc).

 

Some extras are welcome, but generally not essential to me. In one case the extra almost destroyed my appreciation of the film (Rachel Getting Married - I took some of the hardly acceptable scenes to be a mild persiflage on American society, like the bullshit a speaker was saying at a 12-steps AA-meeting or the sincere but powerless position of the only man, the father, in the film amidst a further cast almost totally dominated by women, only to find out in the extras that they sincerely meant it all to be genuine, or at least said so).

 

When I start a BD, my player is disconnected from the Internet. I'm buying a physical storage medium to get exactly that. In fact, whenever I will receive a disc that cannot be played unless the player would have an active Internet connection, I will return the disc to the seller.

 

I still have to encounter the first BD-Live application that will cause me to visit the Internet site of that particular movie or TV-series (using the player). I often look for additional info about movies and the likes using my PC though, but hardly ever directly after seeing the film.

 

 

 

 

You want us to testify. 

I think that the problem with this approach is, that it's not reserved to BD. Movies I saw with my father or mother, movies I consider to be personally essential to me will always get a preference treatment. I bought more versions, as well as much more readily, of SDVD releases of movies I absolutely love than of movies I find so-so. The same goes for BD. Of some films I own 4 or 5 versions. And that certainly includes pre-60s movies as well (to counter a remark made in a previous post), they gain tremendously by - sorry for that  - premium sound and picture quality.

 

 

I will buy a BD of The Last of the Mohicans in a heartbeat. And I'm still hoping a version with the director's cut and the theatrical version together on the same disc or at least in the same package will be available.

 

 

Cees

 

The film inspires me. Great stories, great acting, great direction. Blu-ray inspires me to the extent -- and only to the extent -- that it delivers the film effectively.

 

Finn, since you've phrased it that way, I'll answer it that way. "What else?"

 

1. No introductory trailers, promos for Fox products, PSAs against piracy, advertisements or any other annoyances that have to be waded through before getting to the film.
2. No BD-Java code that takes forever to load and, IMO, has yet to deliver any feature worth the delay, the overhead and the loss of such basic functionality as resuming play from the same point where you stopped.*
3. No fluff PR materials passed off as "special features". EPKs may help promote the film prior to release, but they do little to inform anyone about the real work of filmmaking. Either get a serious producer like Van Ling, David Prior or Charlie de Lauzirika to put together genuine supplements, or don't bother.
4. Put copyright notices at the end of the film, not the beginning. If I'm a pirate, I won't be dissuaded by a notice. If I'm a legitimate purchaser, the only effect of having me sit through a lengthy notice that I can't skip is to annoy me -- and why would you want to do that to a good customer?
5. Menus should be simple, consistent and, above all, quiet.
6. The trailer (or trailers, if there were multiple versions) should always be included with every film. No exceptions, no excuses.

 

*BTW, if you want an excellent example of a totally ridiculous use of BD-Java code, take a look at Fox's recent release of Escape from New York. The Blu-ray disc has the film -- and nothing else. But still one has to sit and wait for the Java code to load. Why? What possible reason could there be to encode this disc with Java? It serves no purpose other than to impede access to the film and annoy the user.

 

Now, I admit that none of the above are cool or flashy. But I own over a thousand DVDs and at least 500 Blu-rays, most of which I bought. In short, I am (and have been for years) a major consumer of home video product. "Flashy" and "cool" ceased to impress me long ago.

Edited by Michael Reuben - 9/5/10 at 6:51am

Allow me to say this if I may....

 

One of your predecessors was greatly responsible for taking

your studio in a new direction, helping shape the future of DVD.

 

For the first two years after the birth of DVD the studios were

simply slapping movies onto the format with very little extras

attached.  Coming out of the age of feature-packed laserdisc

releases you would think they would have started off on the

right foot, but they didn't.

 

Fight Club changed all of that.  In 1999 the folks working at

Fox Home Entertainment put together an unprecedented 

Special Edition that was unheard of for the new DVD format.

 

Soon after, every studio started wanted their own Fight Club

DVD and the age Special Editions on that format was born.

 

Fox Home Entertainment was also the first to embrace the

Internet and the people of this forum. There were live chats,

there were multiple studio visits by large groups of members here.  

The input expressed by our membership helped shape many of the

releases that soon followed.  It was almost as if Fox was making

DVDs specifically for US.

 

Seems to me history may be repeating itself.  We are very

happy that you are here with us, Mr. Finn, taking an interest

in what we think of Blu-ray and how we would like to see it

continue to evolve.  I think the opportunity exists that Fox

can take Blu-ray into directions that the other studios will

want to follow.

 

Thank you for allowing us to express those thoughts...and

for listening.  

 

+1

 

Only have c. 60 blu-rays, but I agree with the above!

 

Warner does this right sometimes. You pop in the blu-ray, of, say, The Searchers, and the feature starts beautifully, right away, all by itself. There's no nonsense to wade through. It's very classy. And you feel like you're really being treated to something special. It's like you've got back to opening night in 1956 to see a pristine new VistaVision print...
 

The litmus test is: does the disc show an obvious respect for the movie or dominantly a fascination with the technology?

 

 

Cees

I for one like branching.  When it comes to BD live, there are some features I have used and liked: The ability to download new trailers, IMDB look up, and some games (primarily on the Disney DVDs).  While I haven't used the chat feature yet, someday I think it would be fun to try to have a HTF chat with other members during a film.

 

I don't mind having EPKs on the disc, but I don't watch them as they are just fluff pieces.  I like deleted scenes with commentary, I love "real" documentaries about the film.  As its been previously mentioned I find it annoying when there are trailers for every movie a studio has ever released on a disc EXCEPT for the movie I'm watching. 

 

While I don't mind more complex menus (especially if they fit into the theme of the movie), I can see based on feedback here where maybe you could be give a choice between fast start (minimal menus and java) or the full experience (complex menus and java) when you put in the disc.

I don't care at all for extras. I never get around to watching them. I just want great films in great quality. The films I buy on bluray fall into the category of classics. I don't buy contemporary movies at all. If I'm interested in those, I rent them.

The thing I want most of all is back catalog titles like the Warner Archive is releasing. Shorts. Cartoons. Musicals. Film noir.

Movies inspire me.  Nothing about blu-ray inspires me.

Why not?

Blu-Ray inspires me to roll my eyes everytime someone talks about the future of digital distribution and how it won't matter if the quality is inferior.

Good question.  The technology should serve the film, not vice versa.  I agree with Mike Reuben that BD Java (and BD Live) is useless, and that copyright notices, etc. should be put at the end, not the beginning.  Promo materials should be a menu selection, not a forced intro.

 

Because I love the superior technology.

 

DVD fascinated me by how films looked and sounded on my television and sound system,  and that I was able to own and collect.

 

Blu-ray improves this fascination, getting me closer to the original film viewed and heard in the theater via HD TV, HD Projector, & HD Monitor and making it an almost possible perception to actually NOW own the created art form.  (at least for the best authored discs)

 

Blu-ray Full HD 3D is now my ultimate media thrill and fascination, giving me the opportunity  to own and be able to reproduce-on-screen-for-the-first-time-"PROFESSIONAL  QUALITY 3D", of original 3D films of artistic talent for the same above reasons.

 

Paul

Edited by Paul Hillenbrand - 9/5/10 at 4:00pm

Amen, brother. You took all the words right out of my mouth. The first thing I think of when contemplating watching one of my Blu-Rays is that I'm in for some sort of ordeal.

Being a film junkie from way back, I never thought anything would look better than Laserdisc.  Dvd proved me wrong, and I feel Blu-Ray is the absolute last stop for the pinnacle of audio/video in a consumer based medium.  Home Theater hobbyists can finally breathe easy.

 

That being said Blu-Ray discs are certainly not constant in quality.  Some leave you speechless because of perfection, and others feel rushed and look worse than the s-dvd of the same title. Not just color timing, or DNR, but my biggest problem is the inconsistent patchwork look of some BD's I've seen.  Once studio films are released with the highest standard for each title, we may really have something with this Blu-Ray.

 

If Blu-Ray sales(catalog titles) aren't as high as Studios would hope for, I can only assume that is because s-dvd is still tops with the average consumer.  They have no need for Blu-Ray.

 

 

 

Poor quality Blu Rays with ramped up DNR, EE, etc. are inexcusable.  Fox and the other studios are perfectly capable of putting out superb quality product, and the ONLY reasons why they fail to do so is laziness or a willingness to allow the misguidedness of their Marketing Departments to overwhelm respect for the film.

I think now that the DVD generation gave us great documentaries on so many classic movies, the Blu-Ray generation would work much better for Superbit-type releases (like Avatar).

Amen brother Robert. 

 

While the PQ is awesome with Blu one of the BIG reasons I went with it was the lossless audio, so much improved over DD and DTS. 

 

I jumped right into HD-DVD and started buying discs right off, but they lost most of my sales when they started releasing product with DD tracks and no lossless. They only gave us 1/2 of the HD format when they started doing that. Lossless audio is equally important as a quality 1080p image.

These two quotes below are significant, Finn. I would LOVE to feel comfortable buying Patton on Blu-ray Disc. I can get it right now on BD for $15, shrink-wrapped to another BD movie (can't think of what it is this very second).  Fifteen dollars for two Blu movies, one of them a film that I love pretty badly...Patton.  But nope, I can't get past all the reviews telling me how hard this release sucks. How it's not worth it at any price.  How the DVD version I already own of Patton is just as good, A/V quality-wise, and in some respects it's said to be better than the Blu version. THAT'S a movie I watched with my dad. THAT's a film that speaks to me on a personal level, in a number of ways that I can't possibly describe here. But I can't own it on Blu-ray, not even for what amounts to $7.50, because the studio didn't show respect for the film when they put it on BD.

 

Quote:

Quote:

Fox had a fine release with South Pacific. The PQ on that Todd-AO production is amazing on blu-ray. It's not my favorite musical, but it's still an interesting and even fascinating film, with top notch production values and meaningful and even emotional themes. This blu-ray has a nice menu, a great documentary, etc.

 

I wonder how it has sold? Does anyone know.

 

One of the main things needed is to increase the number of releases of classic films from the 30s-70s on blu. Fox has hundreds of titles. The extras aren't essential for all titles. The main thing is to get the product out there with good PQ and AQ at a decent price, say $20 msrp.

 

I own many SDVD's titles and I see no need to replace all of them.  Though I will purchase the Blu-ray release of titles that mean something to me or that I enjoy, such as South Pacific & the Dirty Harry films.  I plan to purchase The Sound Of Music, White Christmas, and The Bridge on the River Kwai.  I see no need to up great Romeo + Juliet, Rocky Horror Picture Show, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Psycho, Mars Attacks, Forbidden Planet, THX ll36, but I did buy What's Up Doc, The Robe, How The West Was Won, Saving Private Ryan and other epic titles.  I do know that there are a lot of people that would not purchase what I like and would what I don't want so I do not want this construed that the titles should not be produced, because they should for the enjoyment of who wants them.

 

Buying Blu-ray to replace a SDVD is going to be a personal thing and I am not even sure a lower price point would make me purchase titles that I do not feel are worthy of replacing.

 

I was a laser fanatic also and thought nothing could be better but along came DVD and I was sold.  Not only was the picture and sound clearer, but you got the entire picture on one side and did not have to stop for a break or change discs.  There was certainly an ease in it's use.  Blu-ray has the some same ease and includes more information.  Sometimes the picture and sound is better (South Pacific), sometimes it is just the same or worse (Patton, Longest Day, Gladiator).  Also the draw back to the Blu-ray has been spoken about numerous times, I am just too impatient for the long load time and constantly upgrading the software.  Then after all that time, have to sit through a bunch of trailers that I do not wish to see.  BD Live does not mean a thing to me and I just scan right over it as an extra on the disc.  The important part is the title itself, then the documentaries and trailers of the film.  Also a digital copy or a SDVD copy is a waste.  If you are getting it in Blu-ray why do you want to watch it on your Ipod and most people buying the Blu-ray if it is a catalog title already have it on SDVD (Hear that Disney).