What is the problem w/ Warner and Blu-Ray?? (1 Viewer)

[Douglas Monce]

I think you may have hit the nail on the head here.

Doug

 

[Hartwig Hanser]

When I look at this list, I believe most of those titles (the older catalogue titles) sold very low numbers (re Casablance and Forbidden Planet I even read something about extremely low numbers, around 1000 IIRC. Sorry, I don´t know where to look up the exact numbers). Therefore I speculate that WB is losing money with those titles on HDDVD and will only release them on BD when there is a much larger customer base. Of course, only speculation, as almost everything in this thread

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Doug,

so we're just "guessing" when many of us have studio contacts telling us about FOX waiting for BD+, but we're "hitting the nail on the head" when we conjecture about BD50 replication being the problem?



naturally only the guys in the boardroom at FOX know the real/actual reasons their studio has taken a "pause" approach with HD media. However, in unofficial channels there's been a lot of conversation from FOX, and the BD+ issue is always what's discussed.

I know on this forum it's common behavior to rib those of us sharing inside information as we can't disclose our sources. But go just about anywhere else where others are in communication with studio contacts and you'll see the message about BD+ is consistent despite the popular tendancy to discount these disclosures over here. Naturally the real "proof" (meaning that those FOX sources have told the truth) will be once BD+ gets a chance to demonstrate its usefulness, whether FOX then alters their pattern and ramps up their release schedule. Supposedly there is already a title with BD+ that's been taken through production and is now ready for release: the first "test case" if you will to demonstrate interoperability with current hardware etc. If I find out more, I'll certainly share.

BD50 replication has indeed been slow to ramp up and may be behind the dealy for certain titles. However, aren't some of the delayed titles (Willy Wonka?) capable of being put on BD25?

 

[Paul Arnette]

Exactly. I find it hard to beleive that so many of the aforementioned titles are maxing out an HD DVD 30 GB disc that they could not fit on a BD 25 GB one.

 

[Dave H]

I too believe Warner has an HD DVD bias.

Reasons:

1. Why are there still almost 20-something (non-IME) HD DVD titles not released on Blu-ray yet - even after a year in some cases? Warner promised to release each title on both formats - a year in waiting for many of these on Blu-ray is excessive especially when there is not even an announcement.

2. Why did Warner withhold lossless audio tracks on some Blu-ray movies (Happy Feet, Superman Returns, etc.) but not on the HD DVD side?

3. Why would Warner release the Matrix on HD DVD on the same day as Disney released Pirates I and II on Blu-ray? (and Disney announced first)

4. Why does Warner have an HD DVD promotional ad on all of their HD DVDs, but not on their Blu-ray discs?

5. As someone else pointed out, HD DVD was Warner's initial choice and Blu-ray was a late decision for them. I have to suspect their is some sort of business reason for their pro-Warner support which we've seen.

 

[Paul Arnette]

So here is a funny BD-related story, albeit only slightly so, that I wanted to share from our Transformers viewing yesterday. Afterwards I asked my son, who's about to turn five, if we should buy Transformers on Blu-ray when it comes out. He, of course, says yes, and then he asks me, completely deadpan, "Is Blu-ray Spanish for DVD"?

 

[Paul Arnette]

Of the points you mentioned, I actually see this one as a bonus for BD. A promotional ad for a product I already bought has got to be the epitome of dumb.

 

[Douglas Monce]

David,

Of course I did say that BD+ is the most likely and most logical possible reason for the delay at Fox. But there could be other reasons that we just don't know about. Even inside sources frequently depend on rumors with in the company and often don't know all the details. Ever worked for a large corporation? Rumors run rampant and often they are only about half true. Just because you work for a company doesn't mean you have the inside track on what that company is doing. Rumors are particularly bad at Hollywood studios.

Honestly I don't know what the file size of Willy Wonka is and at the moment I have no way of checking. Even if it could fit on a BD25, then what would be the reason for NOT releasing it on BD? I can really only think of 3.

1. They just sold badly on HD DVD. Thats possible but why didn't they release them at the same time as HD DVD in the first place? If it could fit on a BD25, what was the hold up?

2. The movie couldn't fit on a BD25 and there is some hold up with the production of BD50.

3. Warner is just half heartedly supporting BD and maybe someday they will get around to releasing these titles on Blu-ray.

I'm not sure which of these is correct if any at all. Again this is completely speculation.

Doug

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Doug,

excellent points.

 

[Cees Alons]

One does not exclude the other (and again: it was mainly about Warner), or wait... don't tell me you're merely being jealous...


Cees

 

[DaViD Boulet]

not jealous. Just want to make sure we all extend the same courtesies and applied logic unilaterally. Doug expressed himself very well in a followup post and I concured with his reasoning.

 

[Sanjay Gupta]

Warner has a vested interest in the HD-DVD format and their late entry in the Blu-Ray camp as what seems like an after thought, is seemingly quite a well planned move. Warner is Hd-DVD's Trojan horse and it is quite evident from the way they have managed the whole 'supposed' neutral stance. There is absolutely no excuse for the same titles to be released with inferior sound on the Blu-Ray versions, specially considering that Blu-Ray actually has far more space to present multiple sound formats if needed. Also, if people would simply put aside their personal interests and feelings for a moment and think, Warner had absolutely no good reason to release the Matrix trilogy at this early stage of the format's life cycle. Assuming that they are genuinely neutral and that due to BD-J reasons they could not release to Blu-Ray yet, what was the great hurry to release Matrix? It's not like there is a whole lot of profit to be made from Matrix or any other title right now. Considering that Matrix is probably one of the highest profile titles that Warner has in their kitty, it is actully a very bad business decision for them to release Matrix so early in the HD format life cycle. Can you imagine any other studio releasing any of their top 5 titles on HD at this stage? Even Sony, with it's direct vested interests in Blu-Ray, have not released any of their big guns yet. Releasing Matrix to HD-DVD right now, is quite clearly for only one reason, to help the faltering HD-DVD format. I specially like the timing of the release co-inciding with the release of POTC to Blu-Ray. Anyone here thinks that was just a co-incidence?

 

[Walter Kittel]

Warner released high profile titles early in DVD's life cycle to promote that format while other studios were holding back on bigger titles. It seems reasonable to assume that the same policies would apply to HD media.

Warner has stated that IME was the reason that some titles have not been released. Isn't it easier to simply believe them vs. inventing conspiracies against Bd? This question should be resolved this fall. For the non-IME titles I have no answer, but I believe that earlier speculation in this thread regarding sales figures is a reasonable consideration. Question: How many units has the largest selling non-IME HD DVD exclusive title from Warner Bros. sold?

Regarding sound formats, I believe that player standards for the two formats were a factor in some decisions regarding the inclusion or absence of lossless audio; although I may be mis-remembering.

- Walter.

 

[Shane Martin]

My guess is Sony would rather that go away. The 25gig to 30 gig comparisons have not fared well and I would bet BR would want them to look the same(not worse). They don't want another fiasco on their hands.

 

[ppltd]

Yea. Sony with Casino Royale, Disney with both POC films, Universal with King Kong. Would you like more? BTW, I disagree with you that Matrix in one of the highest profile films in Warner's kitty. There are so many, it would be hard to count them all.

 

[Cees Alons]

Ha, ha, ha, ha. Why are the conspiracy and hidden agenda reasons so much more attractive to some people than plain physical explanations?
Must be terribly psychological.

Not just "5 dirty reasons why some party did something that's really evil", but also "why something that's different than I personally would like, or different from what some party expected to be able to do, is really, really evil and 20 reasons - all devilish - why they do it", followed by: "they are evil, because they do those evil things" (question: "are those actions really evil?", reply: "yes, of course, look who's doing it!"). "But how do you know this?" Reply: "Oh, I suddenly figured it out during a sleepless night." Or other reply: "Someone in the know told me." "Do you trust that someone then?" "Yes, of course! (S)he explains all this interesting background information to me. Must be true, I gladly believe it!"




Cees

 

[Dave H]

Hi Cees,

I'm not saying Warner is evil or bad. But, I have yet to hear a strong rebuttal to each of my five points. Also, I believe Ron Epstein in a fairly recent post stated to the effect one particular studio told him they favor HD DVD. I'll take a guess.

 

[Jason Roer]

May I ask exactly what is wrong with Warners being in favor of HD-DVD if that is in fact the case? Bluray has tons of supporters. Fox, Disney Sony, MGM, Stars (no Halloween for HD-DVD :frowning, and others. So Universal is HD-DVD exclusive and Warners may or may not support HD-DVD even though they've released product on Bluray.

Let's say Fox released Commando and Predator on HD-DVD but the sound wasn't as good as the Bluray release. Well - if you weren't satisfied, then you don't have to buy the disc. It's the same here. I realize it can be frustrating if a company says it's going to release on a particular format and then they don't do so, but that doesn't make it wrong. Both Fox and Disney will tell you that.

Cheers,

Jason

 

[ppltd]

Good for Warner. . They started as an HD exclusive studio and there does seem to be favoritism for HD DVD and I find nothing at all wrong with that.

 

[Paul Arnette]

Shocking.