Mark B

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
876
Location
Saranac Lake, NY
Real Name
Mark
Well, which is it for God's sake. Normandie says it's different and fixed, most others are saying it's not. This isn't brain surgery and has nothing to do with kbps - it has to do with SOUND and the correct mono mix. Let's not have confusion here - it's either been fixed or it hasn't.
I would love to answer that, but the disc I received yesterday floating loose in a bubble mailer won't even load on my player.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: PMF

Britton

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 3, 2001
Messages
1,040
If throwing an unprotected, uncorrected disc, carelessly into a mailer isn’t a sign of the decline of physical media, I don’t know what is.
 

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
4,583
Real Name
Philip
[...]I got a message from FED EX mine should deliver Mon. Says Direct Signature required like wtf.
[...]
And so it goes, while Universal demands a “Direct Signature”, they couldn’t even be bothered to acknowledge receipt of our own emails and proof of purchases.

A general automated email of reply and updates would suffice; as had been done so properly during Twilight Time’s end in a bi-monthly fashion during their farewell sale, to which they worked exhaustively to fulfill thousands of orders.

It’s not the mistakes of the “Psycho” discs that bother me;nor any amount of waiting time needed for all to be rectified; but, rather, the absence of communication and the added confusions as to which disc is correct and which one is not.
 
Last edited:

Dave Jessup

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 5, 2003
Messages
201
Like some others, I did receive a replacement disc (regular blu-ray), tossed bare into a padded envelope.

The pressing numbers are different*, but the 2.0 "original mono track" does appear to be, again, the fold-down of the multichannel / added effects track, based on one shot very late in the film: Vera Miles' character throwing her hand in the air and hitting a hanging light bulb. The latter-day recreated track has clinks and jangles not originally heard, per a comparison video posted on YouTube.

Of several different points of comparison, that one seems the easiest to check.

* Originally-purchased double-layer disc: (1140797) 2129626R0 01E // (1140796) 2129626R0 02E
Just-received replacement double-layer disc: (1149968) 2129626R2 01E // (1149967) 2129626R2 01E

I've enjoyed being able to watch either version of the movie since purchasing it, but I do look forward, sometime soon, to being able to experience the picture and sound as accurately and as authentically as possible.
 
  • Like
  • Agreed
Reactions: nyguy2046 and PMF

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
4,829
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
I think the simple question here is has Universal completely lost their minds? How do you make the same mistake twice? Is there no one there who knows how to LISTEN to the track everyone complained about and the original mono, which appears on their own discs? I'm happy to drive over there and help them out.
 

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
4,583
Real Name
Philip
[...]I'm happy to drive over there and help them out.
If you do decide to go, Bruce, please check into the missing Entr’acte and Exit music of “Sweet Charity”, as well. Betcha the very same person was involved in that big blunder, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reed Grele

RickardL

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 30, 2000
Messages
501
Like some others, I did receive a replacement disc (regular blu-ray), tossed bare into a padded envelope.

The pressing numbers are different*, but the 2.0 "original mono track" does appear to be, again, the fold-down of the multichannel / added effects track, based on one shot very late in the film: Vera Miles' character throwing her hand in the air and hitting a hanging light bulb. The latter-day recreated track has clinks and jangles not originally heard, per a comparison video posted on YouTube.

Of several different points of comparison, that one seems the easiest to check.

* Originally-purchased double-layer disc: (1140797) 2129626R0 01E // (1140796) 2129626R0 02E
Just-received replacement double-layer disc: (1149968) 2129626R2 01E // (1149967) 2129626R2 01E

I've enjoyed being able to watch either version of the movie since purchasing it, but I do look forward, sometime soon, to being able to experience the picture and sound as accurately and as authentically as possible.
I think this one is a lot easier:
when Marion turns the knob/faucet to turn on the water in shower, there is a small squeak sound
If there is no squeak sound, it is the orignal sound mix. If there is a squeak, it is not the original. Simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMF and Dave Jessup

Reed Grele

Patron
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
1,909
Location
Beacon Falls, CT
Real Name
Reed Grele
I think this one is a lot easier:
when Marion turns the knob/faucet to turn on the water in shower, there is a small squeak sound
If there is no squeak sound, it is the orignal sound mix. If there is a squeak, it is not the original. Simple.
Perhaps they hired a plumber to do the 5.1 mix.

Unfortunately, it seems that the plumbers helper was involved in the disc replacement program.
 

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
4,583
Real Name
Philip
God help the person who buys this set; some five years down the road; as “New and Sealed” at an eBay auction. $473 wins the bid and damn, it arrives in all its 5.1 glory.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ManW_TheUncool

Dave MJ

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 26, 2001
Messages
290
I think the simple question here is has Universal completely lost their minds? How do you make the same mistake twice? Is there no one there who knows how to LISTEN to the track everyone complained about and the original mono, which appears on their own discs? I'm happy to drive over there and help them out.
Agreed. I want to be understanding, but this is sheer incompetence and/or complete apathy about one of the most important films ever made. These people are supposed to be the experts on their own films.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyguy2046

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
4,583
Real Name
Philip
Agreed. I want to be understanding, but this is sheer incompetence and/or complete apathy about one of the most important films ever made. These people are supposed to be the experts on their own films.
This particular experience will become someone’s learning curve; but thereafter, and once resolved, they may very well ascend to the status of “expert”. Yup, it’s irritating; but the larger headache is theirs, to which I do not envy.
 
Last edited:

Malcolm R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2002
Messages
19,077
Real Name
Malcolm
I'm happy to drive over there and help them out.
This.

It would be so freaking simple for them to have a fan of these movies take a look and provide some input to head off things like this. Most often they'd likely do it for free, too, or maybe for a free copy of the disc/set.

They use test audiences and focus groups for everything else. Why not have a test audience to view the content of discs before they're replicated?
 
Last edited:

nyguy2046

Agent
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
32
Real Name
Chris
This.

It would be so freaking simple for them to have a fan of these movies take a look and provide some input to head off things like this. Most often they'd likely do it for free, too, or maybe for a free copy of the disc/set.

They use test audiences and focus groups for everything else. Why not have a test audience to view the content of discs before they're replicated?
I'm reminded of the Fall 2012 brouhaha when they released the Hitchcock titles on blu for the first time and several of the titles had issues with the credits. Does everyone remember that? I'd lean to being understanding given the pandemic but Universal just has a history of being sloppy with their Hitchcocks.

My "replacement" discs also arrived in the mail today, unprotected (and already scratched) in a bubble mailer just like other people have received. They're the same faulty discs as in the collection.
 

Worth

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
4,041
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
I'm reminded of the Fall 2012 brouhaha when they released the Hitchcock titles on blu for the first time and several of the titles had issues with the credits. Does everyone remember that? I'd lean to being understanding given the pandemic but Universal just has a history of being sloppy with their Hitchcocks...
It's not in their self-interest, either. All these replacements are eating into, and possibly wiping out, their profits.
 

PMF

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
4,583
Real Name
Philip
It's not in their self-interest, either. All these replacements are eating into, and possibly wiping out, their profits.
Not to mention the replacements...of the replacements...of the replacement discs; which will be at risk of being returned if more scratches occur, again. Those careless mailers may very well incur additional losses.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nyguy2046

ManW_TheUncool

His Own Fool
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
7,179
Location
The BK
Real Name
ManW
I'd like to show support to their physical media bizz, but they're really not endearing us to them w/ such shoddy efforts (on top of the already somewhat controversial, original packaging).

I already own 3 of these in 4K digital (on top of the old BDs), so it's not like these 4K discs will be some huge leap in quality for me...

They really need to get their act together post-haste...

_Man_
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyguy2046

Stu Rosen

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 27, 1999
Messages
297
Like some others, I did receive a replacement disc (regular blu-ray), tossed bare into a padded envelope.

The pressing numbers are different*, but the 2.0 "original mono track" does appear to be, again, the fold-down of the multichannel / added effects track, based on one shot very late in the film: Vera Miles' character throwing her hand in the air and hitting a hanging light bulb. The latter-day recreated track has clinks and jangles not originally heard, per a comparison video posted on YouTube.

Of several different points of comparison, that one seems the easiest to check.

* Originally-purchased double-layer disc: (1140797) 2129626R0 01E // (1140796) 2129626R0 02E
Just-received replacement double-layer disc: (1149968) 2129626R2 01E // (1149967) 2129626R2 01E

I've enjoyed being able to watch either version of the movie since purchasing it, but I do look forward, sometime soon, to being able to experience the picture and sound as accurately and as authentically as possible.
My just-received replacement disc (also knocking around an envelope without any protection) has a series of similar but not the same numbers as you've listed. There are about 3 such numbers following similar number sequences but not identical. Given my old eyes I haven't yet tried to write them all down but I can confirm they're different!
 
  • Insightful
Reactions: PMF

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
345,542
Messages
4,745,169
Members
141,475
Latest member
Macoco