Bits now confirms - Warner drops lossless audio for Speed Racer BD (1 Viewer)

[TheBat]

I have some limited contact with warner bros. if you want to pm me, I can give you my e-mail address so I can forward it to warner bros.

Jacob

 

[Brandon Conway]

As Bill says, this has everything to do with the film being a tremendous money loss for the studio. Frankly speaking, they want to forget it exists.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

But it does exist and it's fans want lossless audio, not unreasonable IMO.

And exactly how much is Warner worth right now? They're just being cheap, surely they can afford a few extra pennies for a proper BD release, shit the success of The Dark Knight alone shows that they're rakin' in more cash then they know what to do with!

 

[TheBat]

you would think they would do a special edition for speed racer.. didn't they do a special edition for wild wild west.. and that movie was terrible.. I never saw speedracer.. I know that it has its fans.

Jacob

 

[CraigF]

I find it hard to believe it's just that. The list of movies that did poor BO but went on to a very successful life in home video is lengthy. But I agree it looks like they're cheaping out. I'm sure the BD release was in the movie contract, and it's bound to make *some* $$$, so I'm thinking there's another reason for the short shrift. Testing the waters before committing a penny more than necessary? IMO it's the wrong way to do it for a movie like this.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Wild Wild West actually made money. Speed Racer lost a LOT of money. Not a good comparison.

 

[Jari K]

DVD/Blu-ray is kinda "last chance" for the studios to make some money, so I don´t see any connection of the "lack of lossless audio" and "box office bomb" with this film...

 

[Paul Arnette]

I have to agree with others when they say that they don't completely understand how the two correlate. After all, if Warner Bros. was looking to write off the loss and somehow home video sales negatively impacted the amount of that write off, why not just scrub a BD release altogether? If they just don't 'care' about this movie and consequently about the release's quality, how much more effort would it have really taken to put a Dolby Digital TrueHD track on there, and is it worth the ill will they've engendered?

 

[Brandon Conway]

A TrueHD track would probably necessitate a move to a BD50 due to the film's color scheme being tough on compression, which would then increase the budget of the BD release, which was obviously slashed down to be as low as possible after the film tanked. If they're shelving a bunch of bonus content that was already produced that means that they basically told the home video department to bring the title in under X dollar amount or scrap it altogether.

It's business. Warner's theory is a pretty normal one for home video - release it just to get it out. We're talking about a film that is, after advertising and the like, around $155 Million in the red (going by the standard idea that you have to get back twice the budget to make a profit. The film's budget was $120 M and it made $85 M world wide). If it somehow makes money on video without having done so in the theater they can revisit it for a SE.

 

[Nick Graham]

I will gladly buy a barebones BD25 with just has the movie and a TrueHD track. Otherwise I don't even plan on renting it - it's just a giant waste of the film's technical prowess to have a lossy Dolby 5.1 track. And for those of us that both genuinely liked the film AND want the BD to take advantage of the advantages of Blu-Ray, it's even more salt in the wound.

Even an unpopular movie can move a lot of units if it gets the reputation of being a reference/demo disc. How many of us poor saps bought Roland Emmerich's Godzilla in the early days of DVD for that very reason? Ton of people who don't even like The Fifth Element owned the Superbit DVD and now own the redone BD.

 

[Brandon Conway]

I think Warner will look at DVD sales to see if it deserves a future SE re-release, not BD sales. So, in that sense, the lossy 5.1 track only method doesn't really hurt them.

 

[Sam Posten]

Call me a barbarian if you will but quite frankly I don't get bent out of shape over this. Would it be nice to have? Sure. Is it the end of the world? Naw.

 

[Felix Martinez]

If WB want to cut costs, give me a barebones Blu with lossless audio and uncompromised video - whether or not it fits on a BD-50 or not - and I'll buy it.

Or, at the very, very, very least - from my mouth to Blu's ears - scrap the Dolby Digital track and include full bitrate lossy DTS if need be.

This should have been *the* A/V reference new release of the year, and now it's maybe a rental...

 

[Paul Arnette]

This title, by itself, doesn't get me 'bent out of shape'. The fact that the studios can't seem to standardize around, what are in my opinion, the essentials: 1080p video and lossless audio does however.

 

[David Wilkins]

Perhaps, just maybe...the person or persons that Bill Hunt talked to at WB, are high enough up the food chain to see to it that TrueHD is included on this release, and the artwork that's referred to reflects the original, early tech spec. It wouldn't be the first time that specs are revised between the press release and the street date.

If not, I wonder how this "re-change" effects 'L.A. Confidential' and other titles (?), that were referred to during that exchange between Bill Hunt and WB.


EDIT: Never mind...sort of. I re-read Hunt's column from 7/17, and it does ring truer, as for an unconfirmed status for 'Speed Racer', and a verbal confirmation for 'L.A. Confidential' and 'Blow'. Oh well, I was looking for that elusive Silver Lining.

 

[Edwin-S]

Read B. Hunt's column for today. Confusion still reigns over the status of the soundtrack for SR. Mr. Hunt states the box details show DD 5.1 while the sell sheet shows Dolby TrueHD. He goes on to state that he has finally been able to contact someone at Warner that can confirm the details for the disc.

He expects to be able to provide an update tomorrow.

 

[Michael Reuben]

And that, folks, is why I didn't rush to change the thread title. Bill is pretty careful in his phrasing. When something is confirmed, he says so -- and yesterday he didn't say so. This one's still unanswered.

M.

 

[Shaun]

According to Bill's latest update, it's confirmed that the disc is BD-25 and NO Dolby TrueHD.

I bet if HD-DVD was still around, Warner would have given it the full HD treatment with lossless audio and the works. What's the deal with them?

Should we all start worrying now about The Dark Knight?

 

[Edwin-S]

Whoops. Sorry about that. The column I was reading was his 7/29 column.

He has posted his 7/30 column now and he does confirm that Speed Racer is DD 5.1 only....no TrueHD. Sux.

Edit: Also that it is a BD25. Also sux. Guess this one has gone from sale to no sale. Warner.

 

[Bryan Beckman]

I don't see anything that warrants that kind of conclusion. Warner has been pretty good about providing lossless sound on their BD releases since the exclusivity announcement. That they would go lossy on such a high-profile day-and-date release (albeit a theatrical failure) should be regarded as an aberration at this point. A frustratingly maddening one (I loved this movie), but one nonetheless.

This release epitomizes a broken promise from Warner that they would provide lossless audio on all forthcoming BD releases. The loss of goodwill from consumers is hardly worth the pennies saved by going with lossy DD5.1 over TrueHD.