-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Blu-ray titles without features on the SD-DVD versions


This topic has been archived.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

#1 of 18 ONLINE   Mark Walker

Mark Walker

    Screenwriter

  • 2,570 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 1999

Posted May 02 2009 - 07:04 AM

This thread is in response to Adam Jahnke's excellent "Blu Thunder" article over at The Digital Bits that, amongst other things, criticized the studios for dropping special features that had been included on the standard definition DVDs.

The Bottom Shelf by Adam Jahnke

I am actually surprised to not see that there is a thread
already here about this topic (Jahnke's article has been up for several weeks.),
since, personally, I find it very frustrating and, in many cases,
it prevents me from purchasing Blu-rays of some films.


While I know some special features can get dated
(How many of us REALLY want to watch yet-another documentary on
how the CGI effects were created?),
but why would Fox, for example,
not included the two commentary tracks, at the very least,
on "The Usual Suspects" Blu-ray that were on the SE SD-DVD?

The SE SD-DVD bonus content included:
-Deleted Scenes with John Ottman introduction
-"Perusing the Suspects" featurette
-"Keyser Soze - Legend or Lie" featurette
-"Doing Time with The Suspects" featurette
-"Heisting Cannes..." featurette
-Gag Reel with introduction by Bryan Singer
-Audio Commentary with Bryan Singer and Christopher McQuarrie
-Audio Commentary with John Ottman
-Easter Eggs, Trailers, and TV spots

The Blu-ray bonus content?
-Original Theatrical Trailer

But Fox isn't alone. One would think Sony, wanting to push the Blu-ray format,
wouldn't diminish demand for their Spiderman films, but
the Blu-rays for "Spiderman" and "Spiderman 2" are missing almost all
of the bonus content from the SD-DVD releases. Only "Spiderman 3"
has all the bonus materials one would expect on the Blu-ray.
(Weakest film in series = need to include bonus content?)

I have to believe one of many things is happening:

-Studios want us to double-dip and repurchase later SE versions
of previous released "bonus content MIA" Blu-ray releases.
-Costs associated with porting over bonus materials that might
require more data storage on Blu-ray
-Concerns of audio/video quality suffering because of space needs
of bonus materials
-Legal reasons: commentary tracks/bonus features where contracted
to be used for DVD release only; possible additional fees and/or expenses
to "talent" involved in their bonus content should it be included
on any subsequent home video format, or, in the case of Criterion, bonus content
(i.e. Jodie Foster's "Silence of the Lambs" commentary)
is property of an entity not releasing the Blu-ray.

For naysayers, yes, I do understand it is "about the movie," ultimately.

Personally, I really love commentary tracks, especially when done well.
I watch "Alien" (the original DVD release) as often with Ridley Scott's commentary track on as not.
(I also know more than a few people who have held on to that
original DVD release because of the isolated musical score, only available on it.)

I want to upgrade to Blu-ray, but in many cases, I do not.
Barring reports of sub par audio or video on the Blu-ray release,
the absence of pre-existing bonus materials,
available on the DVDs but not the Blu-rays, is usually the reason why.

Thoughts?

Paramount, please release DRAGONSLAYER on Blu-ray

Dragonslayer_1981HTF_zps4e370848.jpg

 

 

Vermithrax Pejorative deserves to be seen in high-def.


#2 of 18 OFFLINE   Jeff Ulmer

Jeff Ulmer

    Producer

  • 5,593 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 23 1998

Posted May 02 2009 - 08:30 AM

While I don't have time these days to go through bonus material the way I used to, I would still prefer the BR edition have everything the best SD version has on it.

#3 of 18 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,048 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 02 2009 - 08:39 AM

I think that all the material from the DVD should be on the Blu-ray (assuming there isn't some weird legal reason that it can not be included).

That being said, if I love the movie, not porting over the features isn't a deal breaker for me. On the other hand, there's been times where I was on the fence about a title and the lack of the special features from the DVD made me decide to wait for the inevitable re-release. Predator comes to mind since it's not hard to imagine that Fox is just waiting to re-release it at some point.

#4 of 18 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer

  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted May 02 2009 - 09:40 AM

I hate to say, but i am less and less thrilled by the extras on DVD. They sure are not as good as what we got on SE LDs like Alien. Of course, Blade Runner being the example of doing it right on DVD and Blu-ray, if not even more!
I own a few bare bones Blu-rays, Usual Suspects, for example, and if an SE came out on Blu, i wouldnt care. I am mostly done, buying movies again, just for extras. Ask me if i bought the new Blu-ray SE of Casino Royal? Nope, the first Blu-ray release was good enough!
Sometimes i take the extras disc from my DVD, and put it with the Blu-ray, in a 2 disc Blu-ray case. Now i have a 2 disc Blu-ray SE. Half the time a Blu-rays extras are in standard definition, anyway.
Sometimes i even hang on to the old DVD, but not to often.
It seems to me, many studios are catching on that a DVDs extras DO need to be on the Blu-ray. Paramount, Universal, and of course Warner, take good care of us.

#5 of 18 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,048 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 02 2009 - 11:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickER
I own a few bare bones Blu-rays, Usual Suspects, for example, and if an SE came out on Blu, i wouldnt care. I am mostly done, buying movies again, just for extras. Ask me if i bought the new Blu-ray SE of Casino Royal? Nope, the first Blu-ray release was good enough!
Yeah, I bought the first release of No Country For Old Men and while I'd like to see the extras on the re-release, there's no chance that I'm spending $25 again to do it.

#6 of 18 OFFLINE   Jeff_HR

Jeff_HR

    Producer

  • 3,596 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 15 2001

Posted May 03 2009 - 01:53 AM

Quote:
I would still prefer the BR edition have everything the best SD version has on it

Likewise! Posted Image

Personally I'd love it if EVERY title released in ANY format had extras. More realistically, the inclusion of extras will be the tipping point for whether or not I buy a title of borderline interest. Posted Image
Cogito, Ergo Sum
My DVD Library / The BLOOD is the Life!
Pioneer Elite PRO PDP-111FD - 2/28/2009

#7 of 18 ONLINE   Mark Walker

Mark Walker

    Screenwriter

  • 2,570 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 1999

Posted May 15 2009 - 06:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR
Yeah, I bought the first release of No Country For Old Men and while I'd like to see the extras on the re-release, there's no chance that I'm spending $25 again to do it.

Fortunately for me, I was not into Blu-ray yet when Casino Royale was
first released...then earlier this week, on a trip to Wal-Mart to pick up some
things for my gran, there was the two disc, SE Blu-ray of Casino Royale for $15,
which made that one a no-brainer to pick up.

So, reading all your comments, it seems like some studios are better
than others, or more dependable as far as making the initial BD release
contain all the SE-DVD's features. Good to know.

Like some of you, too, I will hold on to disc 2 of a DVD set
(Peter Jackson's King Kong comes to mind.), but, sadly that doesn't help
when the DVD has a commentary track and the BD doesn't.


Thanks again for your comments! Most helpful as I turn Blu. Posted Image

Paramount, please release DRAGONSLAYER on Blu-ray

Dragonslayer_1981HTF_zps4e370848.jpg

 

 

Vermithrax Pejorative deserves to be seen in high-def.


#8 of 18 OFFLINE   Tim-H.

Tim-H.

    Second Unit

  • 427 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 27 2004

Posted May 15 2009 - 10:29 AM

Count me as a Blu-ray (nee HD-DVD) supporter who sometimes feels frustrated. Blu-ray can deliver deliver quality AND quantity, but with some releases there is only one...and occasionally neither! I don't envy the studios - especially in this economy - trying to make money with this format.

But pushing out inferior releases - or having better editions not long after the first release - are not ways to make Blu-ray thrive. I'm buying fewer titles now (even fewer than I can afford!) with the feeling that I might want to wait a while, or perhaps just rent.

If priority #1 is film presentation, let's have a director's or extended cut AND the theatrical cut. Let's have the best-looking (and complete, Magnolia) subtitles. Let's have a transfer that represents the film. Let's have that awesome HD sound mix AND the original track.

Then - because you can - how about including special features?
Commentaries, solid (if not lengthy) featurettes, and production galleries can all fit on one disc. I'm delighted with Bond on Blu, and am happily replacing my UE DVDs, every one.

Then go big on supplements for special editions of Casablanca, Blade Runner or even Sin City and Iron Man.

Must say I agree with Jahnke. "Better than DVD" is just not enough - it should be "As good as Blu-ray gets!"
Watch THE SNUGGIE KILLER on YouTube!

#9 of 18 OFFLINE   Jesse Blacklow

Jesse Blacklow

    Screenwriter

  • 2,049 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted May 16 2009 - 03:01 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Walker
So, reading all your comments, it seems like some studios are better
than others, or more dependable as far as making the initial BD release
contain all the SE-DVD's features. Good to know.
Well, your original article was dealing with releases from 2006 and 2007, which is pretty outdated when it comes to home video. It's a rare release now that doesn't have all or almost all of the extras (including commentaries) from the DVD, and when it does drop one, it's almost always due to a rights issue.
"Would I rather be feared or loved? Um...easy, both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me."
--Michael Scott, The Office

"When I get sad I just stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story."
--Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother

#10 of 18 OFFLINE   David Deeb

David Deeb

    Supporting Actor

  • 845 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 17 2005

Posted May 16 2009 - 04:06 AM

Studios can count on me buying one BD. I won't buy a special edition later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickER
Half the time a Blu-rays extras are in standard definition, anyway.

I have the new X-Men Trilogy on BD. (By the way - It has excellent picture & audio. It's an excellent value and loaded with special features. Posted Image)

Many of the special features of the first film are SD. (haven't checked out the other 2 films yet).

But it's unexcusable that they are SD 4x3 letterboxed. I realize it costs a little more to create an anamorphic source, but it's not that much - for a company like FOX, it should be easy.

We should be beyond have SD 4x3 letterboxed material on a BD. 4x3 SD is ok if that's the OAR, but no reason to put letterboxed material on any BD.

#11 of 18 OFFLINE   Steve Schaffer

Steve Schaffer

    Producer

  • 3,759 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 1999

Posted May 16 2009 - 09:26 AM

Something I've noticed of late regarding releases of new titles is an almost total lack of extras on the dvd version while the BD version is loaded with goodies. It's almost as if the dvd versions are now relegated to vhs status.
Steve S.
I prefer not to push the subwoofers until they're properly run in.

#12 of 18 OFFLINE   Brian Borst

Brian Borst

    Screenwriter

  • 1,137 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 2008

Posted May 16 2009 - 10:04 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim-H.
Count me as a Blu-ray (nee HD-DVD) supporter who sometimes feels frustrated. Blu-ray can deliver deliver quality AND quantity, but with some releases there is only one...and occasionally neither! I don't envy the studios - especially in this economy - trying to make money with this format.

But pushing out inferior releases - or having better editions not long after the first release - are not ways to make Blu-ray thrive. I'm buying fewer titles now (even fewer than I can afford!) with the feeling that I might want to wait a while, or perhaps just rent.

If priority #1 is film presentation, let's have a director's or extended cut AND the theatrical cut. Let's have the best-looking (and complete, Magnolia) subtitles. Let's have a transfer that represents the film. Let's have that awesome HD sound mix AND the original track.

Then - because you can - how about including special features?
Commentaries, solid (if not lengthy) featurettes, and production galleries can all fit on one disc. I'm delighted with Bond on Blu, and am happily replacing my UE DVDs, every one.

Then go big on supplements for special editions of Casablanca, Blade Runner or even Sin City and Iron Man.

Must say I agree with Jahnke. "Better than DVD" is just not enough - it should be "As good as Blu-ray gets!"

I would alter that to 'as good as the film can look'. There are people who think every film should look razor sharp and everything. But films like 28 Days Later will never look like that. So does that mean that film has a bad transfer? No, because it looks how it's supposed to look.
As for supplements, the quality of the feature should be the most important thing. Extras come after that, and should never compromise the main feature, I think.
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese

My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection

#13 of 18 OFFLINE   ATimson

ATimson

    Second Unit

  • 398 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 16 2008

Posted May 16 2009 - 04:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Deeb
But it's unexcusable that they are SD 4x3 letterboxed. I realize it costs a little more to create an anamorphic source, but it's not that much - for a company like FOX, it should be easy.

We should be beyond have SD 4x3 letterboxed material on a BD. 4x3 SD is ok if that's the OAR, but no reason to put letterboxed material on any BD.
If this were brand-new material, I'd agree. If this is material ported from the older DVDs, though, it's quite possible that either 4x3 is the OAR (due to credits or other captions outside the 16x9 area), or that the 16x9 material was shot on NTSC video and matted (so it wouldn't benefit from being converted to anamorphic anyways).
"Niceness is the greatest human flaw, except for all the others."
--Brendan Moody

#14 of 18 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Join Date: --

Posted August 24 2009 - 01:25 AM

I only ever watch a special feature once, and mostly none-ce, and sometimes I watch the movie like twenty times, so I wonder which is more important...



#15 of 18 OFFLINE   RDarrylR

RDarrylR

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 117 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 19 2009

Posted August 24 2009 - 06:02 AM

I agree the studios should at least port over old extras - there isn't much excuse not too unless they're adding new extras which are better.

That being said I personally care very, very little about extras. I just want the movie in all it's glory with great AQ and PQ. I would much rather spend the extra time watching another Blu-ray from my big collection or spending time with my family. And if I do watch extras I much prefer to watch those in HD. I'm an HD snob now and really can't handle SD even in small doses.


#16 of 18 OFFLINE   Mark Walker

Mark Walker

    Screenwriter

  • 2,570 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 1999

Posted August 27 2009 - 04:16 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by ATimson 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Deeb
But it's unexcusable that they are SD 4x3 letterboxed. I realize it costs a little more to create an anamorphic source, but it's not that much - for a company like FOX, it should be easy.

We should be beyond have SD 4x3 letterboxed material on a BD. 4x3 SD is ok if that's the OAR, but no reason to put letterboxed material on any BD.
If this were brand-new material, I'd agree. If this is material ported from the older DVDs, though, it's quite possible that either 4x3 is the OAR (due to credits or other captions outside the 16x9 area), or that the 16x9 material was shot on NTSC video and matted (so it wouldn't benefit from being converted to anamorphic anyways).
I agree with ATimson, and would take it further:  While I want all the extras from the SD-DVDs, I don't want them to compromise the quality of the main feature, the film.  They should be whatever their OAR was and look as good at least as good they did on DVD.  I do tend to revisit "making of" features and I can imagine it would be a storage eater to port over some in HD without putting them on a separate disc, which would then up the costs-per-unit to manufacture, making them have a higher price point.

Paramount, please release DRAGONSLAYER on Blu-ray

Dragonslayer_1981HTF_zps4e370848.jpg

 

 

Vermithrax Pejorative deserves to be seen in high-def.


#17 of 18 ONLINE   mgdvd0

mgdvd0

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 53 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2009

Posted December 12 2009 - 12:47 AM

 Sometimes it has to do with "rights" issues (like "Superman the Movie) and other and  most likely they do it so they can re issue and double dip the movie several times   as special - collector & ultimate editions JUST the way they did with SDVD 

#18 of 18 OFFLINE   Dick

Dick

    Producer

  • 4,170 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 1999
  • Real Name:Rick

Posted December 14 2009 - 04:46 AM

I've been doing something lately that many more of you probably also do: I remove the bonus features disc from DVD's and add them to the Blu-ray cases of the associated movies, and give away the DVD feature disc. Many extras ported from DVD to Blu are included only in 780p anyway, so I don't figure I'm losing much. That way, I can turn PREDATOR, MASTER AND COMMANDER, THE PATRIOT and a bunch of others into special editions all over again, with the main feature in high def.


Back to Blu-ray



Forum Nav Content I Follow