Patton Blu-Ray remaster in the works

I don't understand why they would waste their time and money with this re-issue. They should cancel the upcoming re-issue and opt for releasing it once the new HD transfer is completed.

Better late than never!

wonder if this will end up being like Gladiator, where you can get the Blu Book, and then exchange it for a correct disc?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powell&Pressburger 

I don't understand why they would waste their time and money with this re-issue. They should cancel the upcoming re-issue and opt for releasing it once the new HD transfer is completed.

Yes, it is very odd that they did not push back the Digibook version for this new master.  Did they really have to make that Memorial Day deadline?  Does there really have to be 3 separate bluray releases of Patton?

Regardless, I am very happy to hear a better version is coming along.  Maybe it will be packaged with a remaster of The Longest Day, which suffered a similar abomination of a release.

This is disappointing news. I do not understand why Fox would re-release such a poor transfer when the remaster is in the works.

In any case, I just canceled my order at Amazon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Merryfield 

This is disappointing news. I do not understand why Fox would re-release such a poor transfer when the remaster is in the works.

 

In any case, I just canceled my order at Amazon.

Same with me, not a good decision customer service-wise when it comes to producing a quality product.

Jeez, I wonder if Amazon just saw a ton of pre-orders get cancelled? It doesn't make sense to me why they would reissue the "bad" master again with full knowledge that they were going to correct it a few months later. Each release costs money to produce, why wouldn't they just cancel the May release and focus their efforts on the upcoming remaster? Unless of course they have a huge stockpile of discs from the first release that they are sticking into the Blu-ray book to use up the inventory. That would at least make sense.

Most on this forum (and the few others there) probably wouldn't have pre-ordered it until the reviews come out
 

Those not on these forums would propably have no idea in the first place 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark-P 

Jeez, I wonder if Amazon just saw a ton of pre-orders get cancelled? It doesn't make sense to me why they would reissue the "bad" master again with full knowledge that they were going to correct it a few months later. Each release costs money to produce, why wouldn't they just cancel the May release and focus their efforts on the upcoming remaster? Unless of course they have a huge stockpile of discs from the first release that they are sticking into the Blu-ray book to use up the inventory. That would at least make sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMpasqua 

 

Most on this forum (and the few others there) probably wouldn't have pre-ordered it until the reviews come out
 

Those not on these forums would propably have no idea in the first place 

 

That's at least in the neighborhood of 'predatory', no? Yes, those that don't know, don't care. But Fox knows, and they know they have a remaster coming down the pike. Sounds like an ethical issue (for as far as these things go).

I wouldn't say those that don't know wouldn't care. They may care, they just aren't informed.  How many Walmart shoppers actually read Disc reviews?

FOX does know, and yes, FOX is probably better off waiting for the remaster. It's sneaky when they know they're releasing a remaster, but remember "Let the buyer beware"

All this does at least suggest that Patton is selling well.  The only reason I can think of to rerelease the old version is to avoid losing sales from lack of stock or to take advantage of the anniversary prior to the remaster coming out.  Also, my thought on the whole issue of the extra-smooth, nongrain treatment of the original release is that I think Fox fell for the taste test fallacy.  That is, I have heard that focus groups were shown grain and nongrain versions of films and chose the nongrain version as the preferred one.  However, these types of tests often lead people to focus on some particulary obvious aspect of the sample and single it as their supposed preference even if, over time, they might not really prefer it.  Back in the 1970s when Pepsi had the Pepsi challenge, most people said they preferred Pepsi to Coke largely because they focused on the greater sugar in Pepsi.  However, over time, people really tend to prefer Coke and now both Coke and diet Coke lead Pepsi in sales (no offense to Pepsi fans).

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMpasqua 

I wouldn't say those that don't know wouldn't care. They may care, they just aren't informed.  How many Walmart shoppers actually read Disc reviews?

 

FOX does know, and yes, FOX is probably better off waiting for the remaster. It's sneaky when they know they're releasing a remaster, but remember "Let the buyer beware"

You are absolutely correct.  I first read of the May release not being re-mastered at Digital Bits, but I guarantee most people that live in Sullgent, AL don't read Digital Bits or HTF, but they do go to Wal-Mart.

In addition to the moral issue in releasing this again, it's just a damned stupid business act to deliberately and knowingly flood the market with another zillion copies of a known-to-be-shitty product.

Since we are going to now drag morality into this debate, it should be pointed out that not everyone thinks the current incarnation of Patton on Blu-ray is "shitty", even on these narrowly focused forums where the herd mentality is so prevalent.  Among more mainstream consumers, I would speculate the vast majority of those that have seen this disc think it looks terrific.

So, before we go accusing Fox of a lack of morals, perhaps we should step back and consider that, perhaps, Fox is simply marketing a product that has already been a good seller for them.

Agreed that on a <40" display, Patton looks pretty terrific. Over that, and the faults become evident even to the untrained eye. However, it's far from bad and for most, would certainly pass as adequate. I'm as displeased as the next person over Patton, but I still consider it a watchable hi def disc, even remarkable at times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert George 

Since we are going to now drag morality into this debate, it should be pointed out that not everyone thinks the current incarnation of Patton on Blu-ray is "shitty", even on these narrowly focused forums where the herd mentality is so prevalent.  Among more mainstream consumers, I would speculate the vast majority of those that have seen this disc think it looks terrific.

 

So, before we go accusing Fox of a lack of morals, perhaps we should step back and consider that, perhaps, Fox is simply marketing a product that has already been a good seller for them.

So it's OK to nuke any old film in the mastering suite as long as joe shmoe thinks it looks great?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Calvert 

So it's OK to nuke any old film in the mastering suite as long as joe shmoe thinks it looks great?
 

 

I have reread my post several time now and I can't seem to find anything that would/should lead one to this conclusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert George 

I have reread my post several time now and I can't seem to find anything that would/should lead one to this conclusion.

 

Agreed. I honestly believe Fox made a good faith effort on Patton and missed the mark. There's little doubt that transferring film to hi def is an art form and there will be stumbles from time to time. Those who care deeply about every nuance of a transfer can be heartened with the fact that a new transfer is on the way later in the year. For others, this disc will do just fine. Personally, I hope it sells very well. The more Fox makes on Blu, the more for everyone. 

Yes, Patton, The Longest Day, and the Predator rerelease were essentially missteps in the in the earlier days of Blu-ray remastering at Fox.  This announcement and the fact that subsequent Fox blu-rays avoided the mistake of complete grain removal is essentially an acknowledgment that those releases are now substandard with Fox's current standard of quality for Blu-ray releases (not including their MGM co-releases).

Its just sort of odd that this 5/10 re-release is a more expensive Digibook release compared to the first, which can still be found stocked in most department stores, yet still use the same subpar transfer when the new one is about 6 months off.  Makes me curious as to what exactly the Fall/Winter release is going to be (maybe Sound of Music style box with Patton action figures?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoHud 

Yes, Patton, The Longest Day, and the Predator rerelease were essentially missteps in the in the earlier days of Blu-ray remastering at Fox.  This announcement and the fact that subsequent Fox blu-rays avoided the mistake of complete grain removal is essentially an acknowledgment that those releases are now substandard with Fox's current standard of quality for Blu-ray releases (not including their MGM co-releases).

 

Its just sort of odd that this 5/10 re-release is a more expensive Digibook release compared to the first, which can still be found stocked in most department stores, yet still use the same subpar transfer when the new one is about 6 months off.  Makes me curious as to what exactly the Fall/Winter release is going to be (maybe Sound of Music style box with Patton action figures?)

"West Side Story" will be the big fall release from FOX/MGM probably along the same lines as "The Sound of Music".  The only other box sets are from WB "Ben Hur" and "Citizen Kane" (Though I wonder how CK will do on Blu-ray being a black and white film in an expensive box set that most fans of the film have probably purchased more than once and one that the kids don't have much interest in)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert George 

....

So, before we go accusing Fox of a lack of morals, perhaps we should step back and consider that, perhaps, Fox is simply marketing a product that has already been a good seller for them.

And then releasing a 'fixed' version of the product a few months later. No, you're right, that's cool. And the guy that buys a copy in May only to see a new version on the shelf around Christmas--as it suddenly occurs to him that Fox was obviously working on this new version at the same time they were releasing the one he bought--that guy? Buyer beware! Hey, buyer beware is a defense for the seller, of course, but it doesn't mean immunity from a little criticism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete York 

And then releasing a 'fixed' version of the product a few months later. No, you're right, that's cool. And the guy that buys a copy in May only to see a new version on the shelf around Christmas--as it suddenly occurs to him that Fox was obviously working on this new version at the same time they were releasing the one he bought--that guy? Buyer beware! Hey, buyer beware is a defense for the seller, of course, but it doesn't mean immunity from a little criticism.

 

Buyers may not even know that the fall version is remastered. It could have identical packaging and an altered bar code like Gladiator.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoHud 

Yes, Patton, The Longest Day, and the Predator rerelease were essentially missteps in the in the earlier days of Blu-ray remastering at Fox.  

"Predator" just came out last year!

CLEOPATRA Blu Ray.....(I hope this is not off topic) It has been restored to it's TODD AO brilliance.    Any news of a blu ray release?

The "old" Patton's being re-released right now because war films on video sell well in May. They did another run in a digibook with the existing disc so they could fill shelves. That simple. If there's demand, they'll put out whatever supply they can. I don't think it's an effort by anyone to rip anyone off. Most consumers will be happy with the existing disc. For those like us who frequent these boards, Fox has been good enough to correct their mastering mistake and make everyone happy. Fox will not make a big deal on the remaster packaging this fall, believe me. They'll do everything possible to make it look like the existing disc on the outside.

This is classic "trying to respond to the consumer" by Fox.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cinescott 

The "old" Patton's being re-released right now because war films on video sell well in May. They did another run in a digibook with the existing disc so they could fill shelves. That simple. If there's demand, they'll put out whatever supply they can. I don't think it's an effort by anyone to rip anyone off. Most consumers will be happy with the existing disc. For those like us who frequent these boards, Fox has been good enough to correct their mastering mistake and make everyone happy. Fox will not make a big deal on the remaster packaging this fall, believe me. They'll do everything possible to make it look like the existing disc on the outside.

 

This is classic "trying to respond to the consumer" by Fox.

Nope, your right it is not a rip off, but it is not the best for the consumer.  Do  they really want inferior transfers continued to be released to the un-knowing public that do not offer what the real blu-ray experience for these classic large format filmed movies can be.  To me it does not do any favors to the format.  While I applaud the Fox transfers of THE SOUND OF MUSIC, SOUTH PACIFIC, and CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG, Fox has made mistakes and used poor elements for transfers as recently as this past March.  Fox is also the studio that released two box sets to celebrate their 75th anniversary that had a few new to DVD films mixed in with a major number of re-issues, where you had to buy the re-issues again to get the ones that you want.  That has been over a year and they have not offered those titles as singles yet.  No these are not rip offs, it is entirely greed.  As you say they are re-issuing PATTON for war titles sell well in May and they know that the buyer will not care for they don't know.  Why not release other war titles to Blu-ray that are not out such as TORA, TORA, TORA along with the new ones they are such as 12 O'CLOCK HIGH and wait on PATTON.  The sales of the re-mastered disc would more than likely be better. 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cinescott 

The "old" Patton's being re-released right now because war films on video sell well in May. They did another run in a digibook with the existing disc so they could fill shelves. That simple. If there's demand, they'll put out whatever supply they can. I don't think it's an effort by anyone to rip anyone off. Most consumers will be happy with the existing disc. For those like us who frequent these boards, Fox has been good enough to correct their mastering mistake and make everyone happy. Fox will not make a big deal on the remaster packaging this fall, believe me. They'll do everything possible to make it look like the existing disc on the outside.

 

This is classic "trying to respond to the consumer" by Fox.

I still find it odd to print more copies and put 'em in a digibook with a remastered version planned down the road. I have never seen a store out of stock on Patton. It seems to be always available in its original case or in one of those 3-packs bundled with a couple of other war movies. Or maybe they recalled the old ones and are simply repackaaging them to clear them out? If they want to sell more copies of war movies on Memorial day weekend they can just run a sale on the title at a discount. I'm not accusing them of any shenanigans; I just find it odd.
 

The logical reasoning behind this seems to be having the disc in digibook format more prominently displayed as a "recent release."  Many of the buyers for multiple stores that carry Patton probably won't even realize that Patton has been released before, see it on their "new release" sheets and order it for stock. They may have a couple of the older discs still on the shelf, but the new digibook will be prominently displayed in places like Best Buy for Memorial Day as if it were any other new disc. Deceptive? Maybe. It is a new release. A new re-release in new packaging.

Most retail chains (and probably many online stores) didn't even realize when Gladiator had been remastered and restocked on the shelf. When I exchanged my copy at Best Buy, the customer service person didn't even know about the exchange or the fact that the discs they had in stock had been remastered from the ones they had only a week previously. Once the BB employee looked up the exchange program online, I was able to get the new disc. The same happened with the audio synch mastering error on Saving Private Ryan. The packaging was and is identical, except for the "yellowed" bar code, something the average buyer would never even know or care about.

Fox will likely handle Patton's fall remaster the same way, with the exception of probably not offering an exchange program. If you want the new disc, you'll likely have to buy it. With Gladiator, Paramount replaced the disc very quickly after the online firestorm about its transfer. I can't see Fox doing the same thing a couple years after the initial release.

I hope the eventual remastered release is packaged nicely.  I really like the digibook format as long as the book part contains some decent content.  But I wouldn't like to buy two Pattons just to get one, thank you very much.