Schindler's List announcement soon. (1 Viewer)

[Rain]

The constant flipping is one of the main reasons I skipped LD altogether and waited for the next format.

 

[Joel Vardy]

Movie will be spread across 2 discs

This is still an unsubstantiated rumor and already everyone is up in arms. I for one would be thrilled to have this movie finally arrive on DVD (with a Spielberg treatment)and not be compromised by past VHS/LD releases. I'm sure whatever approach is taken will be far superior to those. I only have the WS VHS copy and would be more than happy to finally retire it. Since a movie this long is frequently interrupted by an intermission, what is the harm of getting out of our seats/couches and actually putting in another disk? I, like many out there, have a mutli-disk player and will be 'inconvenienced' (if it comes to pass) by the need to press the 'next disk' button and delaying the flow by 2-5 seconds (perish the thought). I might just want to take a deep breath and take a break, take care of biological needs, pet the pet, get a drink (alcoholic might be in order), reflect for a couple of seconds, thank God that I am on this planet because my mother survived what I am seeing on the screen, wonder if my 'warped' outlook of life may be due to being a firstborn of the most horrific brutalization of a people since recorded human history..., wonder if my ability to relate to the diversity on this earth is a gift from the rebirth of a new generation...

I think I will 'live' with the 'inconvenience' of the movie being spread over 2 disks for the sake of quality .

Joel

 

[Robin Warren]

Yep nothing like perspective Joel. Thanks.

 

[Brent Bridgeman]

I would buy this movie if it was spread out over 4 or 5 discs. It just wouldn't matter at all in this case. This film is one that had the most impact on me in a theater. Ever. Not even close. It's hard to say that it's my "favorite" film because it's so harrowing, but it truly is. I may watch "Casablanca" and "Blazing Saddles" more often, but in the end, I would rather have "Schindler's List" in my collection.

I wouldn't even care if was a bare-bones release, I just appreciate it being released. The rest is just gravy. (mmmm....grraaaavyyyy...). Thank you Mr. Spielberg and Universal.

 

[Dave Anderson]

I bow to your superior... um... ownership of laserdiscs. But how is that relevent to whether or not Universal can fit Schindler's List on a single DVD?

The relevance is to point out how DVD owners - much like yourself - bitch about every little detail, including the possibilty of having to get up off their ass after 2+ hours.

 

[Brendan Brown]

Between this and complaints about the title 'Ringu' I'm starting to think that this forum is seriously trivializing its outrage against REAL problems like Pan and Scan.

If getting the best picture and sound for one of my favourite films of all times means getting up to change the disc ONCE. And this decision is fully approved by the filmmaker, who incidentally never took a DIME for this picture, then so be it.

 

[Chad R]

Someone earlier brought up 'The Godfather Part II' as an example of a similar length movie that had to be broken up over two discs to preserve picture quality. Well, that only has a DD track, so whay are we assuming (if this news pans out) that it's the inclusion of the DTS track casuing this? Perhaps since it had to be broken up anyway they decided to forgo seperate DD and DTS releases and just do one with both.

 

[Jason Seaver]

The relevance is to point out how DVD owners - much like yourself - bitch about every little detail, including the possibilty of having to get up off their ass after 2+ hours.

I get it - but just because people had to put up with something on Laserdisc doesn't mean we should smile at having to put up with it on DVD, as well. And I'd argue that breaking a movie which was meant to play continuously into two parts is less of a "little detail" than a redundant audio track.

 

[Jan H]

This strikes me as quibbling. The Lord of the Rings:FOTR did not have an intermission, and you have to switch discs, but nobody is complaining about that fact because the EE is such an amazing sonic and visual achievement. If "List" is done right, it will be a full bit-rate DTS 2-DVD (or more) set, and the "intermission" will come when Goeth sees Schindler trying to spray more water on the Jews heading to Auschwitz. This is the point where the 2-VHS set was divided, and would again make sense here, with very little continuity lost.

 

[Josh Simpson]

Sorry, I know this has been brought up before, but what WAS the first movie in 5.1? I thought I heard the first 5.1 DVD remix was Apocalypse Now, but I'm not sure..

 

[ChrisLee]

I gotta go with wanting SL on a single Dual-Layered Disc without DTS. I don't like getting up and switching discs. To mean switching discs it like putting a commercial about DVD players in the middle of a movie. And for those of you guys who are convinced that a 209min movie compressed onto a DVD would absolutely ruin the quality of the video then I suggest you start a letter-writing campaign to the studios demanding movies be spread over 20-discs from now on...

 

[Aaron Garman]

Hello all. I really don't get why people are so upset about the film being on 2 platters. So what? If it means better picture, sound, and extras, I wholeheartedly welcome two discs for the film. Those complaining about 2 discs just need to be thankful that this masterpiece is even going to make it to DVD and in OAR. C'mon guys, why complain when there is no need to. No wonder not as many people in the industry listen to us anymore!

AJ Garman

 

[Chris Farmer]

And if the rumors (which are unlikely, but possible) abotu commentaries prove true, then what? Fellowship of the Ring was 178 minutes, with a single 5.1 track and a single 2.0 track. While it looked great, it was definitely pushing the capabilities of a single disc to its absolute limites. SL is half an hour longer, it's black and white, and if there are commentaries also, you're looking at seriously compromised image quality. If you really care so much about changing discs, then get a multi-disc player. Let's complain about things like pan and scan, colorization, and the Star Wars OOT, splitting a movie over two discs is the least of our worries.

 

[Aaron Garman]

AMEN!

 

[Damin J Toell]

This strikes me as quibbling. The Lord of the Rings:FOTR did not have an intermission, and you have to switch discs, but nobody is complaining about that fact because the EE is such an amazing sonic and visual achievement.

You're right, FOTR did not have an intermission in the theatres. Except that the Extended Edition didn't play theatrically to begin with. Whether or not the EE is an "amazing sonic and visual achievement," it's not the same film that played theatrically, anyway. The presence of an intermission on the EE is just one in a long list of changes already made to the theatrical cut, so that's why nobody's complaining about it. Such a complaint would be just a tad ironic, given how modified the film is from its theatrical counterpart.

DJ

 

[Dave H]

And for those of you guys who are convinced that a 209min movie compressed onto a DVD would absolutely ruin the quality of the video then I suggest you start a letter-writing campaign to the studios demanding movies be spread over 20-discs from now on...

Having a movie split over two discs instead of 20 is quite a bit different now, wouldn't you say? You are taking the point people are making out of context. Furthermore, how many movies are actually split over two discs? Not very many considering how 99% of all movies are on one disc. So what if we make an exception here for a 209 minute movie.

I say have two versions. One version where the entire movie is on one side of the disc for those who don't care about optimal picture quality, nor excessive artifacts, but don't want to get up in the middle of the 209 minute movie. And, have another version with DTS and the movie split over two discs for those who want optimal picture quality. Fair enough?

 

[Tom Ryan]

Guys, could we maybe put off squabbling over this until there's a real announcement? We don't even have any credible proof that Schindler's List will be coming to DVD soon. So let's just wait until that happens, hmm?

 

[Adam Brandner]

I say have two versions. One version where the entire movie is on one side of the disc for those who don't care about optimal picture quality, nor excessive artifacts, but don't want to get up in the middle of the 209 minute movie. And, have another version with DTS and the movie split over two discs for those who want optimal picture quality. Fair enough?

No one is saying compromise picture quality for this. All we are saying is that if this turns out to be true, and if the only thing making it a 2-disc set is the dts track, then lose the dts track and put it back onto one disc. No one wants to see artifacts. And to address other posts, none of us are just too lazy to get up off the couch once every 2 hours. We understand that compromises have to be made for home theater, but having a disc break is a pretty major compromise. If it can't be avoided, that's one thing. There are always going to be movies too long for one tape or disc or whatever. But I see dts almost as a special feature, and I don't want special features to interfere with the presentation of the film itself. Of course, this might not be the case. If the movie won't fit on one disc without dts, go ahead and add the track. Then again, this whole release may not come off, so this might not matter anyway.

 

[Glenn_Jn]

This is interesting...you see when I was living in the UK I had the widescreen version of SL on VHS and it was on 1 tape. So why was the US version spread over 2 tapes? I think this is true of Titanic too (US 2 tapes, UK 1 tape)

Personally I'd prefer the film on one disc w/o DTS. The film has a mostly "talkie" soundtrack anyway, not much in the way of sound effects and most music scores sound good in DD5.1.

Low bitrates is not what bothers me about PQ on most discs anyway. Scratches and other anamolies will be just as bad no matter how high the bitrate is. I'd take a restored print with a decent bitrate over a non-restored print with high bitrate any day.

Anyway we'll see when the time comes.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

This is interesting...you see when I was living in the UK I had the widescreen version of SL on VHS and it was on 1 tape. So why was the US version spread over 2 tapes? I think this is true of Titanic too (US 2 tapes, UK 1 tape)

Bet it was EP, or at least LP, OR they were using T-180 or T-200s. The problem being with those tapes is that they are VERY expensive compared to T-120 or T-160 to replicate, and it's actually cheaper to make 2 T-120s