Blu-ray suffering from "Holier than Thou" syndrome (1 Viewer)

[McCrutchy]

This is something that I have seen quite a bit of around here and on other forums.

It absolutely amazes me when people come out against a Blu-ray release of anything--ever--yet it happens, a lot.

I get that people want their movies done properly for HD, and I get that that means that you don't want SD stuff on Blu-ray. But there is a huge misconception about what will benefit from Blu-ray, and what won't.

To put it bluntly, for all intents and purposes, all material shot on any kind of film (from 8mm to 70mm, and everything in between) will benefit from Blu-ray.

Yet routinely, I see whining about "[Studio] put this on Blu-ray, WHY THIS?" or, "I buy lots of Blu-rays, but I think I will stick with DVD on this one."

As if somebody's film is "not good enough" for Blu-ray, when, categorically, all films shot on film are more than "good enough".

I don't recall anyone not a complete moron ever saying this about a DVD, seven years into that format. There was never an aghast "You put this on DVD! You have ruined the majesty of DVD forever!" or "People who want this film can just buy the VHS."

But DVD was a mainstream format. And yet...

All my life, I never, ever heard anyone say "You put this on LaserDisc? Why?" "Your obnoxious taste has sullied our beloved enthusiast format...I must get my smelling salts!".

Flash forward to 2014, and it seems Blu-ray is the only video format ever to be "too good" for some films (and TV programs shot on film).

Even on enthusiast forums, people will complain, and even mount defenses in favor of not releasing on Blu-ray, often trying to rationalize without knowing facts and figures. I can't count the number of times, for instance, that someone has said that "[Studio] probably couldn't afford to release [title] on Blu-ray because it didn't sell well on DVD" How do you know? Do you have that studio's financial information to hand? I don't. I'm willing to bet that just as many Blu-ray titles have not materialized because studios have few people making decisions, and these people are often out-of-touch, and looking at information that does not accurately reveal demand for a given Blu-ray release.

But far more than that will I see the "Anything but that movie" routine, as if you are all going to die before your favorite films get released on Blu-ray, or as if the studios have some magic limited number of Blu-rays they can make, after which, they will have to stop releasing on Blu-ray forever.

Call me crazy, but on Blu-ray enthusiast forums, I don't think anyone should be against the release of any film on Blu-ray. Can you complain if the Blu-ray release seems lacking? Yes. Can you complain if you get the Blu-ray and it's bad? Absolutely. Can you ask a studio to put other titles on Blu-ray? Of course. But making negative comments before a Blu-ray release of a film is even out, about how you will not be buying it, or how it doesn't deserve to be on Blu-ray, can only hurt the chances of you getting your favorite films on Blu-ray. Not only does it foster negativity in general, but I'm sure that studio personnel read these forums, and I can't imagine what they think other than "It was a lot better when it was only DVDs."

I think everyone here (and I include myself, since I have probably done it) needs to step off of their soapbox to decry a Blu-ray release because of the film it comes from. There are lots of other things to cry about with this format, but more films, whatever they are, should not be one of them.

 

[Robert Crawford]

If I had my way, every single title in which it's viable to release on BD would be released on BD. Also, what I meant by "viable" is an HD source is available for a BD to be derived from. Unfortunately, such decisions aren't made based on my wishes.

 

[David_B_K]

I am not against anything coming out on Blu-ray. However, there are titles that are not terribly important to me that I am content to have on DVD without upgrading to Blu-Ray. As it is, I have upgraded quite a lot of my collection. I think the people who appear to complain are more along the lines of 'how can they release that POS on Blu-ray instead of one of MY favorites?'

 

[jcroy]

One person's "holier than thou" attitude is another person's "spoiled brat syndrome".

If I can't be a spoiled brat in my offline life, then at most I can indulge in my "inner spoiled brat" by ranting away on some online forums.

 

[Ejanss]

People assuming BR is "too good" compared to DVD? Uh, what year did this post come out? And what's this "DVD" thing, anyway?

Read the headline, and assumed "Holier-than-thou" Syndrome among Blu-ray users was referring to resentment from pro-streaming fans about why digital movies are "evil" vs. hard-disks getting a "snooty" reputation among core UV fans."What's wrong with having my movies portable, you just want to pay money and show off your fancy collections, because you don't want to admit the end is near!", etc.

Which class war may also be becoming a possibility; might want to update your posts accordingly.

 

[JoeDoakes]

I haven't seen anyone complain that a film has been put on blu-ray, although I have seen people say that it's not worth the upgrade for them. Personally, I have been "guilty" of criticizing the choices some studios have made regarding what to put on blu, but I think that it's valid to wonder why Warner can release a relatively minor 50s musical like Hit the Deck on blu, but not release Yankee Doodle Dandy (with WA's release of Out of the Past, WB's approach to these releases may be changing). Still, I don't think anyone ever said, please don't release Hit the Deck on blu.

 

[Thomas T]

but I think that it's valid to wonder why Warner can release a relatively minor 50s musical like Hit the Deck on blu, but not release Yankee Doodle Dandy

I just assumed that the available elements for Hit The Deck were in decent shape and ready to go whereas the elements for Yankee Doodle Dandy aren't.

 

[Persianimmortal]

I have a general rule that no matter how much I hate a particular movie, I won't enter a thread for the sole purpose of rubbishing that movie or belittling its fans. I'm not suggesting I'm a saint, and sure, it's very tempting to sometimes scream "Why the bloody hell did that movie get a BD release, when much better movies are languishing in SD hell!". But the reality is that one man's trash is another man's treasure, and it really doesn't pay to make others feel bad about something they enjoy.

As for those who choose not to upgrade from the DVD to the BD of a movie, that's entirely a personal choice. As long as they don't state that the "DVD looks better" if objectively it doesn't, then there's no need to pay them any heed.

 

[Thomas T]

and it really doesn't pay to make others feel bad about something they enjoy.

Don't worry about me in that respect. I don't care what others think of my film choices and the term "guilty" pleasure doesn't really have any relevance for me as I've never felt guilty about the pleasure any film has given me. If I prefer the joys of the 1973 musical Lost Horizon or any Bob Hope or Danny Kaye flick from the 40s over the badly made pretentiousness of, say, Apocalypse Now or 12 Angry Men, that's my business and someone saying I've got bad taste or "Shame on you!" has no effect on me whatsoever. Why should I cater to someone else's opinion of what I should and should not enjoy?

 

[Walter Kittel]

as if you are all going to die before your favorite films get released on Blu-ray

For some of us that is a distinct possibility. Sad, but true.

as if the studios have some magic limited number of Blu-rays they can make

[color=rgb(40,40,40);font-family:'Merriweather Sans', sans-serif;background-color:rgb(242,242,242);]Well, there are a finite number of releases ever year. That is a mathematical fact. So while I try to avoid criticism of releases that I find of little value I can still express a preference for titles that I find desirable and yes, there can be some consternation when titles you would like to see seemingly never appear on Blu-Ray. I don't feel guilty about having and stating a preference. I'm still waiting and waiting for Bedazzled (1967) from Fox, something I would much rather see than the John Wayne title that won the '60s polling a while back. I'm not going to crap on the Wayne Blu-Ray but yeah, I wish that MY film had won the 1960s polling.[/color]

Finally there is another thread on the forum asking if the Studios still listen to us (the HT enthusiasts) whereas you posit that negativity on the forums discourages the Studios. I have no idea what the truth of the matter might be; but I suspect that it is more the former vs. the latter.

- Walter.

 

[lukejosephchung]

I posted today at another forum that "The Full Monty", a 1997 Best Picture Oscar nominee, was coming out on blu-ray in 3 weeks...one of the respondents asked if it needed release on the format...reverse snobbery of the worst kind, IMO...

 

[Ethan Riley]

It's their way of saying, "I have no personal interest in this title. WHY did you put THIS on blu-ray when ALL OF MY FAVORITES ARE LANGUISHING IN A VAULT SOMEWHERE?? Whaaaaawhaaawhaaaa!!"

And how I laugh.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I think the only time I really questioned a studio's release was
when Sony announced Ishtar a few years back.

Of all the titles they could have released, I am sure quite a few
of us muttered under our breath, "why that one?!"

However, I am really happy to read comments like these...

I have a general rule that no matter how much I hate a particular movie, I won't enter a thread for the sole purpose of rubbishing that movie or belittling its fans.

But the reality is that one man's trash is another man's treasure, and it really doesn't pay to make others feel bad about something they enjoy.

Why should I cater to someone else's opinion of what I should and should not enjoy?

It's very true that no matter what any one of us might think about a
studio putting one title's release over another, there are always going to
be individuals who favor that movie.

Going into threads in order to "thread crap" your negative opinions is
something that often happens here and it does reflect a "holier than thou"
attitude. Do we really need to belittle others for liking films that perhaps
we don't?

As far as the films still not available on Blu-ray...

I think the first problem is always concerning the condition of the elements.
Warner, Fox and Sony seem to be the primary studios most concerned about
getting their "prime" classic releases right the first time (then some re-releasing it
many times over again).

As for the second...

I will always remember a conversation with a studio exec about 14 years ago
who used the old "Don't put all your eggs in one basket" saying to talk about how
his/her studio releases their titles. In other words, when looking at the long-term
viability of a particular format, you want to space out the good stuff.

 

[jcroy]

As long as they don't state that the "DVD looks better" if objectively it doesn't, then there's no need to pay them any heed.

In practice, I come across this more often in casual offline chatter, largely as a way of getting under the skin of "videophile" types.

For the offline individuals I know who do this frequently, it an easy way to deliberately get a "videophile" all riled up and foaming at the mouth. The reply to every objection the videophile makes is typically met with "In Your Opinion", which frequently gets the videophile even more riled up and angry.
This is the main reason why i don't bother wasting time convincing or correcting anybody offline on issues of bluray vs. dvd vs. streaming/downloading. It's largely an exercise in futility.

 

[Alan Tully]

I can't say I've noticed it much. I'm certainly not guilty, as half of my collection are what you would call guilty pleasures (Assault On A Queen anyone?), & a lot of famous classics do nothing for me. A mix of stuff being released is about right.

 

[Kevin EK]

There are certainly cases where I've scratched my head about choices, but not in terms of saying that I would refuse to buy a Blu-ray over that. I've tended to try to celebrate the outlets that are working to make more catalogue titles available on Blu-ray, like Twilight Time, Shout! and of course Criterion.

The only times where I've preferred the DVD to the Blu-ray release have been for specific deficiencies in the Blu-ray presentation. For example, I stayed with the Legacy Edition DVD of The Sting due to the PQ issues on the Blu that I saw while reviewing it. Same thing went for Spartacus - the Criterion DVD was actually a better experience than the Blu-ray both for the PQ and for multiple extra features that would have been included had Universal allowed Criterion to do that release. I stayed with the DVD SE of Escape From New York because I understand that the extensive bonus features were not carried over to the Blu. But that wasn't a matter of saying that I didn't want to see those movies on Blu - it was a question of presentation.

That said, I've also noticed many threads where people are announcing "No sale!" on various Blu-rays based on screencaps or on slagging that's been heard on various forums. I recall multiple people posting their cancelled pre-purchases of the Star Wars movies on Blu, among other things. As a reviewer of Universal product here, I'm fairly used to people slamming their catalogue releases on reflex. At a certain point, there isn't much I can do other than to review the discs as best I can and hope people will make up their own minds about them.

What's really blown my mind at times has been the actual phrase of people saying that they would refuse to buy either the Blu or even the DVD but instead stay with the laserdisc release as preferable for PQ on an HDTV. That's the one where I have to read the statement twice to make sure I'm not hallucinating.

 

[Persianimmortal]

In practice, I come across this more often in casual offline chatter, largely as a way of getting under the skin of "videophile" types. For the offline individuals I know who do this frequently, it an easy way to deliberately get a "videophile" all riled up and foaming at the mouth. The reply to every objection the videophile makes is typically met with "In Your Opinion", which frequently gets the videophile even more riled up and angry. This is the main reason why i don't bother wasting time convincing or correcting anybody offline on issues of bluray vs. dvd vs. streaming/downloading. It's largely an exercise in futility.

Blu-ray is, objectively, top dog in video quality at the moment (with the exception of those titles released via 4K digital download), so there's no real argument to be had. As you say, people who argue that the DVD is "just as good" or "looks better" are probably doing it to get a reaction rather than make any rational point. But I keep reminding myself that the ultimate goal is to enjoy the movie, and if someone gets that enjoyment from a DVD, or streaming, or heck, even by watching it on an iPhone screen, then it's hard to argue that they're enjoying themselves in the wrong manner. Let them have their fun. Of course that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to gently steer people towards the potential for even greater enjoyment that a proper high def presentation of a movie on a calibrated display device can bring

 

[cineMANIAC]

Unfortunately, such decisions aren't made based on my wishes.

I'm sure there are others but I can think of ONE film that everybody here knows you had a big hand in helping to get released: It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

My 2 cents on the subject of the thread: I don't see too many people decrying the release of specific films to Blu-ray. What I DO see are opinionated reviewers asking themselves why people enjoy certain films. I don't want to read a review of a Blu-ray that is peppered with one critic's opinions of the film itself. Leave that up to us. Just tell us how good (or bad) the picture quality is. Everybody likes what they like.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'm sure there are others but I can think of ONE film that everybody here knows you had a big hand in helping to get released: It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

Credit should go to Ron Epstein as that was his baby.

 

[Will Krupp]

The only times where I've preferred the DVD to the Blu-ray release have been for specific deficiencies in the Blu-ray presentation.

It's rare but it does happen. In addition to the glaring examples you gave, Kevin, I think it also happens mostly when the source material (most often with public domain titles) used for blu-ray mastering is sub-par. I can say without a doubt that the DVD presentation of STRANGE LOVE OF MARTHA IVERS is superior to that on the blu-ray and, although there is some difference of opinion, I far more enjoy the Image DVD of AND THEN THERE WERE NONE to the VCI blu-ray (in fact, I hated the VCI disc so much I gave it away to a fellow HTFer.)

The bottom line, as we know, is that there's no good reason for a DVD presentation to be superior and, if it is, it's because something went wrong somewhere.