5-disc "Blade Runner"/"Harry Potter" sets (Blu-ray/HD DVD) coming (1 Viewer)

[Bleddyn Williams]

Oh - OK! I'd LOVE bonus material in HD - but I think it'll be a long time before its going to become widespread, I'm afraid.

 

[Will_B]

I want albums to be on CD but I want any bonus songs to be on an 8-track tape.

Of COURSE the extras should be in high-def.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Will,

are you a Blu, Red, or bi-boy?

dave

 

[Will_B]

I am...high-def celibate for the foreseeable future, as far as hardware is concerned. But I am buying the BluRay of this, one of my very favorite films, on the expectation that BluRay may be the victor -- if the economy can rise and stay up long enough to sustain a mass adoption. Which I feel is all too unlikely.

 

[Jari K]

Good point. If the companies just port the older extras from the SD DVD-release (which is often the case with some older titles and even with some not-so-old titles), I can live with them being in SD DVD. No problem. I´m not sure that is it such a good idea to start converting the original SD material to HD, since it takes time and money.. And do we gain that much from it?

But, if the studios make new interviews and documentaries, then I would prefer HD. The truth is, that some of the smaller HD-cams (usually 1080i) doesn´t cost that much (of course, professional HD-cams does), so I´m sure that is not a problem to these big studios.

I´m not sure that the "CD vs 8-track tape"-comparison applies here. SD and HD are both digital formats. If some extra-material is originally shot in e.g. 480 (NTSC) SD, converting it to HD won´t bring any real "extra resolution".

With some releases (e.g. "American Psycho") the extras like "Deleted scenes" are "in 1080i", but clearly just (slobbily?) upconverted to 1080i (=not taken from the original negatives). They looked kinda mediocre, to be frank. In those cases, just include then in SD - I would say. "1080i" on the screen doesn´t always mean that everything is dandy. In the end, it´s just a number. The original source material and technical issues like encoding etc do matter here.

 

[Neil Joseph]

I hardly ever watch extras but would want them there if it did not sacrifice a/v quality. Got a br player

 

[Jim_K]

HD extras would be gravy but not even close to a deal breaker. As long as all the films versions are in HD I'm content.

 

[PerryD]

I don't believe I favor one format over the other, but if I do, it's probably a little towards Blu-ray because the player has been more stable than my HD-A1.

But, your statement is completey opposite of what I pick up from reading the various forums. My impression is that Warner and Universal (HD-DVD's biggest backers), more often then not, port over all of the content of their DVD special edition features, whereas Fox and Sony have been putting out featureless bluray versions even though the DVD is a 2 disc special edition. Blu-ray fans then say that bonus features don't matter, etc.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Sony and Fox have indeed been offenders it regards to not providing the bonus material from their SD DVD sets on Blu-ray. However, Disney has been GREAT about not only making sure they get those bonus features on Blu-ray (Chicago), but also doing their best to provide them in full 1080 HD resolution when possible (Bridge to Terabithia).

 

[RickER]

Well, i think i answered it. But here it is in a nutshell. If the extras are no good who cares how we get them. If they are good, give them to me in the best form that i, and the content provider can afford.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I support HD-DVD and my answer is it depends. If it is for the IME or running commentary (which I have found to be quite good and watch it as opposed to DVD's commentary track, which I normallly don't), then SD is fine since it would have to be reduced to around SD anyway. If it is a stand alone extra I prefer HD but it isn't a deal breaker since extras as a whole aren't deal breakers. I generally pick the cheaper movie-only version over the mega collector's edition when there is a choice.

What I want is for all extras to be 16x9, which I guess isn't a problem for HD discs in either format, but for DVD it was annoying to have extras in 4x3.

 

[Will_B]

Bill Hunt just reported the bad news. At least he says "all five versions" of the film will be in high-def, which must include the Workprint.

I guess I won't cancel my order for the BluRay, but, it does seem like a waste of the production team's efforts, as Warner Bros will surely revisit this release with a proper, fully high-def release once it becomes too embarrassing for studios to mix older video formats in with the new.

 

[Paul Arnette]

^Are you being sarcastic? Anyway, I'm very excited that all five version will be in HD. That was my main concern.

 

[Mike Williams]

I am Blu and yes, I want HD extras.

 

[Paul_Scott]

Agreed. For the pre-order price, to be getting all 5 versions in HD is FANTASTIC news! I thought for sure it would only be the new final cut.

for the record, the only special features I would want in HD would be deleted or alternate scenes. Documentary footage, interspersed with re-hashed footage from the film, I couldn't care less about seeing in HD.
Production artwork galleries I might want in HD too- as I would trailers. So I guess my answer would be that it depends on a case by case basis. I could live with them all being in sd as long as they were 16:9 enhanced.

I own both formats.

 

[Chris S]

On the issue of the pricing appearing to be too good to be true, it seems that Warner is working very hard lately on getting their HD releases to virtually price match their SD releases. This appears to be the case given the price of Blade Runner and the individual prices for the new Stanley Kubrick releases.


Fox... are you paying attention??

 

[Vincent_P]

I do hope they can hussle and get that fascinating-sounding extended deleted scenes montage ready in HD. It'd be great to have everything in HD, but the deleted scenes are most important IMO since they're a "missing part" of the actual original film itself. Maybe if Charlie is reading this he can try and pull some strings at least on the deleted scenes front

To answer David's question, I'd prefer any extras PRODUCED IN HD (or on film*) to be presented as such, and if access to the film elements is possible, deleted scenes should also be in HD, and trailers too. But for "legacy" bonus materials that were shot/edited in SD anyway, I'd hope they stick with an SD encode rather than "upconverting" it to fake High-Def.

Vincent

* Re: older extras that may have been shot in 16mm- maybe going full 1080P would be a bit much for this stuff, but why not at least remaster it in 720P? That might be a good match for the rough, 16mm docu footage, and would take up a lot less space than 1080P while at the same time offering an improvement over the standard-def version.

 

[Mike.P]

As long as the cuts of the film themselves are in HD, I'm thrilled.

Next up I'd want trailers, "Dangerous Days", and the Deleted Scenes in HD if possible, but them not being in it wouldn't be a dealbreaker.

Featurettes can be in SD for all I care as I'll watch them once at most and never look again.

 

[Jim C]

Agreed, I can live with the all the other extras being in SD, but I was really hoping the deleted scenes would be in HD - especially given how much time, hard work and passion has gone into creating the montage. Perhaps Charlie could pull some strings, but I fear the disc specs would be locked-in at this stage. I'm sure if it were down to Charlie all the extras would be presented in HD, however, I can understand the need to get this amazing set out this year without any further delays. Fingers crossed that the deleted scenes will be in HD when this beauty streets in December.

 

[Jari K]

5 versions of the film in HD and you´re not happy? Oh well... Read some of the earlier posts. It´s not that simple just to include "every single extra in HD". They´re not all shot in HD in the first place.

Thank you Warner, at least I´m quite happy with the current set (even if some of the extras are in SD).