Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

5 Kubricks coming to Blu-ray/HD-DVD 10/23


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
131 replies to this topic

#41 of 132 OFFLINE   Mark Zimmer

Mark Zimmer

    Producer



  • 4,269 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted August 07 2007 - 02:01 AM

I'm cautiously hopeful about 2001; the master used for HDNET airings has a boatload of edge enhancement, so I hope they've gone back to a clean source. And I definitely hope FMJ has received a new transfer because the original is one of the worst HD DVDs released from a PQ standpoint.

#42 of 132 OFFLINE   WillG

WillG

    Producer



  • 5,232 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2003

Posted August 15 2007 - 03:20 PM

Amazon has these up for pre-order for $19.99 apiece
STOP HIM! He's supposed to die!

#43 of 132 OFFLINE   Shawn_KE

Shawn_KE

    Screenwriter



  • 1,295 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 25 2003

Posted August 15 2007 - 03:57 PM

So The Shining will be 1.78:1 Widescreen and not Full Screen like the current DVD?

#44 of 132 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,227 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted August 15 2007 - 05:24 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn_KE
So The Shining will be 1.78:1 Widescreen and not Full Screen like the current DVD?

All of them will be in widescreen (1.66:1, 1.78:1 or 2.20:1). Did you read the specs a few posts earlier?

#45 of 132 OFFLINE   Shawn_KE

Shawn_KE

    Screenwriter



  • 1,295 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 25 2003

Posted August 16 2007 - 11:18 AM

I read the specs, but was curious since there was always a debate on the format The Shining was ment to be shown in.

#46 of 132 OFFLINE   Dave Mack

Dave Mack

    Producer



  • 4,665 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 28 2002

Posted August 16 2007 - 04:09 PM

Posted Image


Posted Image


For the theatrical release, Kubrick wanted and instructed the shots to be composed for 1:85-1. That's all I want, the OAR version...


Posted Image

#47 of 132 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 22,321 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted August 17 2007 - 04:59 AM

I know it's an issue that is still very hotly debated but my understanding is that Kubrick composed movies for the theater but he wanted a full frame presentation for home video (due to the lack of resolution of the various formats). Now that resolution is better, it would stand to reason that he would want the theatrical AR used for HD releases as well.

#48 of 132 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,227 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted August 17 2007 - 07:22 AM

To my understanding, Kubrick didn´t like the "black bars" on 4:3-TV (WS-TV was not very common back in the days when he was still alive), which is the main reason why he preferred 4:3 open matte with the films that were shown 1.66:1/1.85:1 in the theatres. Vitali is saying what Kubrick said back in the days - years ago. Probably the "anamorphic"-process in the DVD-releases was not that common back then, either (even if you would have that 16:9 TV-set). I believe some older Kubrick-releases are indeed non-Anamophic.

Let´s put it this way; If Kubrick would see the 16:9 TV-sets and generally the home theaters that "regular people" have in their homes now, he would definitely approve WS with his movies. In the end, WS is how the films were first shown in the big screen.

There are people who like to drag that old "4:3-argument" to every discussion, even when it was made years ago and in the totally different time frame. Sure, Kubrick was "old school" and usually did his own thing - no doubt, but IMO Warner is giving us the "original theatrical ratio". I´m 100% happy with that.

Let´s enjoy the movies, shall we? Posted Image

#49 of 132 OFFLINE   Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter



  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted August 17 2007 - 10:35 AM

I wonder if Kubrick would approve of not including the original mono tracks.

#50 of 132 OFFLINE   Dan Hitchman

Dan Hitchman

    Screenwriter



  • 2,714 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 11 1999

Posted August 18 2007 - 03:02 PM

I'm hoping that we get brand new restored transfers on all the Kubrick discs, but this is WB we're talking about!

Like it or not, they have not been the most consistant studio of late for ultra quality.

It seems like Sony and WB traded places somewhere along the line. Even Sony seems to be willing to listen with greater bit depths or now even master quality tracks for their soundtrack recordings, no dial norm for their TrueHD encodings, improved cover art when prodded, an exchange program for a less than stellar release of Fifth Element, much improved video, etc.

WB has been inconsistant with audio (especially on Blu-ray and their classic catalog titles), sticks to 16 bit resolution audio no matter what, low --and I do mean low-- bitrates and banding showing up more than most studios, filtering, no separate encode for Blu-ray to take advantage of its extra bandwidth, etc.

#51 of 132 OFFLINE   Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter



  • 1,748 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted August 19 2007 - 05:52 AM

Yes, awful WB who is restoring classic movie after classic movie at 4K resolution, releasing 5 HD remastered versions of BLADE RUNNER, was the first studio to release quality product on Blu-ray after Sony's botched launch titles...

All of this anti-WB whining has to do with one thing only, bit rate worship. I'll give you that lossless sound should be a given on the HD formats, but WB has never been huge on high bit-rate sound, even on DVD they still encode at 384 KB/S for DD, so this isn't a change for them. It's a shame for sure, and they should stop this practice, but this crap about them putting out HD-DVDs and BDs with bad image quality is a load of bunk and has only to do with folks who are more interested in staring at their bit rate meters instead of watching the actual movies.

Vincent

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman
I'm hoping that we get brand new restored transfers on all the Kubrick discs, but this is WB we're talking about!

Like it or not, they have not been the most consistant studio of late for ultra quality.

It seems like Sony and WB traded places somewhere along the line. Even Sony seems to be willing to listen with greater bit depths or now even master quality tracks for their soundtrack recordings, no dial norm for their TrueHD encodings, improved cover art when prodded, an exchange program for a less than stellar release of Fifth Element, much improved video, etc.

WB has been inconsistant with audio (especially on Blu-ray and their classic catalog titles), sticks to 16 bit resolution audio no matter what, low --and I do mean low-- bitrates and banding showing up more than most studios, filtering, no separate encode for Blu-ray to take advantage of its extra bandwidth, etc.


#52 of 132 OFFLINE   Dan Hitchman

Dan Hitchman

    Screenwriter



  • 2,714 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 11 1999

Posted August 19 2007 - 03:01 PM

However, those problem titles of WB's have also had very low bitrates. I would not call 5 Megabits/sec on tough 1080p sequences something to crow about.

All it shows is that they still need to keep the bitrates up on average to be on the safe side rather than letting them slip. And WB is consistantly letting them because HD-DVD cannot handle the load on all material. They do not encode the video again for Blu-ray. They're about the only non-exclusive studio that does this. Exclusive BD studios, sans Fox (and who knows if they'll have learned anything after their hiatus), are putting up some fairly high bitrate numbers and getting great results across the board.

What Blu-ray brings to the table is the ability for high, consistant bitrates that can help insure that problems like macroblocking, loss of detail, and banding don't show up... and high resolution 24 bit lossless audio at the same time.

The audio situation also shows that WB doesn't listen to what we want whereas other studios are doing so on a consistant basis. My god, even Paramount is starting to release PCM tracks on Blu-ray and TrueHD on HD-DVD rather than DD or DTS lossy!

Dan

#53 of 132 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,579 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted August 20 2007 - 12:40 AM

Are these titles going to be released as as a Boxed set or just
individually?

I see Amazon has all the individual titles up for preorder, but
I was hoping for one big boxed set.

 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#54 of 132 OFFLINE   Cees Alons

Cees Alons

    Executive Producer



  • 18,668 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 1997
  • Real Name:Cees Alons

Posted August 20 2007 - 12:53 AM

No sign of a box set, Ron.


Cees

#55 of 132 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,579 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted August 20 2007 - 09:56 AM

Well, I guess I'll have to order all individually.

Now, to decide Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#56 of 132 OFFLINE   Cees Alons

Cees Alons

    Executive Producer



  • 18,668 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 1997
  • Real Name:Cees Alons

Posted August 20 2007 - 10:04 AM

Posted Image

Yep.
Complicated times. Posted Image

Choosing is of, uhm ... paramount importance now.
I didn't order all five of them, though.


Cees

#57 of 132 OFFLINE   Raul Marquez,MD

Raul Marquez,MD

    Second Unit



  • 306 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 02 2002
  • Real Name:Raul H. Marquez, MD
  • LocationSan Juan, Puerto Rico (USA)

Posted August 20 2007 - 10:31 AM

I am being faced with the same dilemma as Ron....Box set or individual titles, and which HD format.... although this may have been decided for us already in light of todays announcements with the studios lining up exclusively behind a specific format (although Warners is not mentioned.....yet).

For those who don't know: Paramount and Dreamworks decided to join Universal in releasing titles exclusively in HD-DVD (except for Spielberg films), and MGM and Fox are joining Columbia, Sony and Disney for exclusive Blu-ray releases.

Back to Kubrick... 2001 is one of my favorite films of all time. I guess this has to do with the fact that this is the second film I saw in a movie theater as a kid (the first one was My Fair Lady...also a favorite), and I saw 2001 in full CINERAMA with the deep widely curved screen at a local theater called the Metro which seated 1000 and was rebuilt to exact CINERAMA specs (with 3 projectors running simultaneously), 2001 being the film used in reopening the theater. Man.... to this day I still recall in awe watching the Discovery spaceship going across the screen.

#58 of 132 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,579 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted August 20 2007 - 10:37 AM

I ordered all the films thru Amazon on HD-DVD.
This Paramount news helped me decide which way to go.

Not only is there no boxed set listed anywhere, I thought
Full Metal Jacket was getting a new SE release, but
all I see is the original one listed. Am I wrong about Full
Metal Jacket
?

PS: Heya Raul. Good to see you here.

 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#59 of 132 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor



  • 7,305 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted August 20 2007 - 10:48 AM

Ron. FMJ is indeed getting a new release. It may not be up on some retailer sites, however. But don't buy the currently available release.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#60 of 132 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,579 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted August 20 2007 - 10:54 AM

Brandon,

Gotcha!

 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations






Forum Nav Content I Follow