When will Apple give us a Blu-ray of last year's Oscar-winning CODA? (1 Viewer)

[24fpsNinja]

For anyone in the US interested in picking up the Italian UHD without ordering thru Amazon.it you can get at DiabolikDVD right now. Jesse has 5 copies left.

Coda (4k UHD) – DiabolikDVD

www.diabolikdvd.com

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Apple doesn't seem to be releasing much of anything to disc. I'm still waiting for a video release of "Greyhound", the Tom Hanks film from 2 years ago. It was a co production of Sony and Apple.

If memory serves, Apple signed a contract giving them exclusive rights to that film for ten years. It’ll be a long while before it’s seen on another platform or format.

 

[24fpsNinja]

Well, there is a 4K UHD + blu-ray in Italy, which looks as though it has both an English soundtrack and English subtitles.

See on Amazon

I have this release and it has both, as you mention.
I’m very happy with this purchase.
The only non English friendly, are several hearing impaired actor interviews on the extras don’t have subs.

 

[James Luckard]

This is an interesting situation because Hamilton was originally sold to Disney and scheduled as a wide theatrical release. Everyone involved decided to move it to Disney+ in the early days of the pandemic.

I have to assume that there would have been a disc release of it following a traditional theatrical release.

There was a similar situation with Disney's Artemis Fowl. That movie was only two months out from its May 2020 theatrical release date when the pandemic hit. There almost certainly were masters created for a BD and a UHD by that point. I've always wondered if they had actually pressed the discs by March 2020, and just shredded them all when they sent it to streaming. It's not a great film, but I collect Kenneth Branagh's films, and it's the one annoying gap in my collection.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I've always wondered if they had actually pressed the discs by March 2020, and just shredded them all when they sent it to streaming.

Hamilton was on the schedule for October 2021, so I'm fairly certain there weren't discs pressed for it yet. It was moved up when the live show was shut down due to the virus. The original deal specified that it would have a theatrical release, so Disney had to renegotiate to move it to Disney+. I'm don't know the language of the contract but am guessing that the renegotiation included a lengthy exclusivity window for Disney+ to compensate for being unable to monetize the movie theatrically.

Disney sent Pixar titles Soul, Luca and Turning Red to Disney+ as a result of Covid, plus the live-action remake of Mulan. Those were all greenlit for theatrical release and all received subsequent physical disc releases. On the other hand, the films that Disney makes specifically for Disney+ have thus far not come out on physical media. Artemis Fowl is the only title that Disney greenlit for theatrical release and moved to Disney+ that has not been put out physically. Therefore, I think this has less to do with a desire to keep it exclusive and more to do with the film itself. Given its extremely negative reception, I bet Disney just doesn't think it would sell enough copies to make a disc worthwhile. I understand why you want it and I'm not saying this to be mean. But I'm guessing that's what's going on there. I want to be very clear that I don't actually have any inside information, so I don't know this for a fact or anything. But that is what makes sense to me.

 

[James Luckard]

Hamilton was on the schedule for October 2021, so I'm fairly certain there weren't discs pressed for it yet. It was moved up when the live show was shut down due to the virus. The original deal specified that it would have a theatrical release, so Disney had to renegotiate to move it to Disney+. I'm don't know the language of the contract but am guessing that the renegotiation included a lengthy exclusivity window for Disney+ to compensate for being unable to monetize the movie theatrically.

Disney sent Pixar titles Soul, Luca and Turning Red to Disney+ as a result of Covid, plus the live-action remake of Mulan. Those were all greenlit for theatrical release and all received subsequent physical disc releases. On the other hand, the films that Disney makes specifically for Disney+ have thus far not come out on physical media. Artemis Fowl is the only title that Disney greenlit for theatrical release and moved to Disney+ that has not been put out physically. Therefore, I think this has less to do with a desire to keep it exclusive and more to do with the film itself. Given its extremely negative reception, I bet Disney just doesn't think it would sell enough copies to make a disc worthwhile. I understand why you want it and I'm not saying this to be mean. But I'm guessing that's what's going on there. I want to be very clear that I don't actually have any inside information, so I don't know this for a fact or anything. But that is what makes sense to me.

I agree, that all makes sense.

However, Fowl would likely have been the easiest to press discs for, even though it got scathing reviews, because I would think the home video masters must have existed, since it was only 9 weeks out from its theatrical release, and I believe they create those masters pretty far in advance.

But at this point, we'll never see it.

It's disappointing how many films are streaming-only that I'd love to have in my collection: The Life Ahead, Artemis Fowl, Mank, 22 July, High Flying Bird, The Laundromat. I have FYC discs of a few of them, but it's not the same. At least HBO Max has recently issued DVDs of the films Soderbergh did for them - Let Them All Talk, No Sudden Move, Kimi.

 

[Jake Lipson]

It was a co production of Sony and Apple.

Actually, it was produced wholly by Sony with the intention of being a theatrical release. They just sold it to Apple because of COVID-19. I think Apple's deal for it included exclusivity.

It's disappointing how many films are streaming-only that I'd love to have in my collection

I agree with the desire to own some films that are made at streamers. However, if the choice is between a streamer making a movie and having it live there or the movie not being made at all, then I still think the option where the movie gets made is preferable. And the big streaming services often do make films that wouldn't have a home at more traditional studios.

 

[John Dirk]

I agree with the desire to own some films that are made at streamers. However, if the choice is between a streamer making a movie and having it live there or the movie not being made at all, then I still think the option where the movie gets made is preferable. And the big streaming services often do make films that wouldn't have a home at more traditional studios.

One thing about getting older is you start to recognize cycles. I believe this is one of them. It will run it's course but eventually the next cycle will take over. I'll go on record right now stating, "I do not believe the streaming only paradigm will stand the test of time."

 

[Ross Gowland]

One thing about getting older is you start to recognize cycles. I believe this is one of them. It will run it's course but eventually the next cycle will take over. I'll go on record right now stating, "I do not believe the streaming only paradigm will stand the test of time."

Agreed. They all rushed to copy Netflix without wondering if Netflix was actually going to make any money.

I think for a while people were wary of questioning this paradigm as no one wants to be like the people who said that TV wouldn’t catch on or that there’d never be more than 100 computers in the world.

But spending $200m on streaming only films like The Gray Man just doesn’t make sense.

Warner’s last regime put all their Covid year releases day and date onto HBO Max. The new regime says that they’re going back to the old theatrical and secondary market model. Now that one of them has done this, I wouldn’t be surprised if others did the same.

Streaming won’t die. It’s a great place for the back catalogue to live on as on-demand reruns. But as the first stop for mega budget films? I can’t see that lasting.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'll go on record right now stating, "I do not believe the streaming only paradigm will stand the test of time."

It has always been my belief that digital and physical media shouldn't be viewed as exclusive from each other. To me, both home video formats can co-exist as it does in my household. I have the best of both worlds and I'm more happy with my home video hobby today because I can enjoy more movies then I ever did beforehand. I just wish more people would accept this home video concept and have the same level of enjoyment as I'm currently having every day.

 

[John Dirk]

It has always been my belief that digital and physical media shouldn't be viewed as exclusive from each other. To me, both home video formats can co-exist as it does in my household. I have the best of both worlds and I'm more happy with my home video hobby today because I can enjoy more movies then I ever did beforehand. I just wish more people would accept this home video concept and have the same level of enjoyment as I'm currently having every day.

Agreed. I too enjoy streaming and partake of it daily. I just don't believe exclusive ownership of titles (especially feature films) will prove capable of drawing enough new subscriptions to sustain the platform. Ultimately, after a reasonable exclusive window, I'd hope to see physical releases. That would be the best of both worlds as I see it, and I'd be happy to wait for the titles that interest me. As an example, I'd love to see The Orville but am willing to wait until I can do so on my terms.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Agreed. I too enjoy streaming and partake of it daily. I just don't believe exclusive ownership of titles (especially feature films) will prove capable of drawing enough new subscriptions to sustain the platform. Ultimately, after a reasonable exclusive window, I'd hope to see physical releases. That would be the best of both worlds as I see it, and I'd be happy to wait for the titles that interest me. As an example, I'd love to see The Orville but am willing to wait until I can do so on my terms.

I think those days are long gone as there isn't enough retailer and consumer infrastructure to support such releases for all titles. Retailers don't have enough storage space and neither do consumers at home for that matter.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Agreed. I too enjoy streaming and partake of it daily. I just don't believe exclusive ownership of titles (especially feature films) will prove capable of drawing enough new subscriptions to sustain the platform. Ultimately, after a reasonable exclusive window, I'd hope to see physical releases. That would be the best of both worlds as I see it, and I'd be happy to wait for the titles that interest me. As an example, I'd love to see The Orville but am willing to wait until I can do so on my terms.

Somethings not getting released on physical media is nothing new though. Been that way forever now. But now, there's at least another option via streaming (that big corporate finds viable).

Hopefully, the two do coexist well for a long time to come and we get most, if not quite all, of what we want on whichever format suits us best...

_Man_

 

[David Weicker]

I have no problem using Streaming for (onetime) viewing, but for ownership (multiple viewings), I prefer physical.

I do have a question about versions, when it comes to streaming.

For example, If I were to purchase To Catch A Thief, would I get a version that corresponds to the 2012 Blu-Ray, or the 2020 (Paramount Presents) Blu-Ray? Or could I choose which version I wanted? And if I had purchased it prior to 2020, would it have 'updated' to the 2020 version automatically (whether I wanted to update or not)?

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I have no problem using Streaming for (onetime) viewing, but for ownership (multiple viewings), I prefer physical.

I do have a question about versions, when it comes to streaming.

For example, If I were to purchase To Catch A Thief, would I get a version that corresponds to the 2012 Blu-Ray, or the 2020 (Paramount Presents) Blu-Ray? Or could I choose which version I wanted? And if I had purchased it prior to 2020, would it have 'updated' to the 2020 version automatically (whether I wanted to update or not)?

Unfortunately, streaming (as they currently have it) is really only for those who aren't particularly picky about such issues. There's basically no choice other than to try a different provider/storefront and hope they have what you want (and doesn't change it on you) -- titles eligible for Movies Anywhere make that easier to do, but still often enough won't get you what you want. In the case of TCAT, which is not MA-eligible, if you want the 2012 version/transfer, stick w/ the old BD.

So yes, I only rely on streaming/digital for cases where I'm not particular about such issues (for foreseeable future) or maybe there's no reasonably viable (or convenient enough) access to a BD (or I feel I can't spare the storage space perhaps) -- and I almost never pay more than $5 for a title on digital.

_Man_

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Also, I'd add that $5 on iTunes/Vudu nets out to be more like $4 for physical media... at least for me here in NY (otherwise paying NY sales tax that's excluded for iTunes/Vudu digitals) and factoring all the 10-15%-off deals (or even 20% for Vudu) on GCs I use for them nowadays.

Plus iTunes digitals from Arrow are often on sale for just $3 to boot... though they don't usually include the most popular titles -- for those, I'd probably want the discs anyway...

Great way to explore blindbuys me thinks before spending $$$ on disc releases...

There are other sporadic perks like rewards programs that actually amount to anything (however infrequent that might be). Just picked up the 4K digital of Belfast practically for free from rewards points earned from prior Universal purchases -- it only took 2 purchases of Universal digitals for that reward (or probably just 1 BD purchase w/ whatever code redemption AFAIK). I will probably eventually get Belfast on disc, but there's no 4K disc for that so far (while the digital is already in 4K) -- that was the main reason I held off getting the BD.

Thing is most of us probably (can) already have a wealth of digitals from BD/4K disc DCs if we bother to redeem them. I only buy those that I don't necessarily care to own the discs (and my disc collection ain't exactly that small... and it's still growing)...

_Man_

 

[John Dirk]

I think those days are long gone as there isn't enough retailer and consumer infrastructure to support such releases for all titles. Retailers don't have enough storage space and neither do consumers at home for that matter.

That's a fair point, so perhaps after an exclusive window, license to other streaming platforms?

 

[battlebeast]

Well, there is a 4K UHD + blu-ray in Italy, which looks as though it has both an English soundtrack and English subtitles.

See on Amazon

Is it region free?

 

[Josh Dial]

Is it region free?

The UHD is region free (close to 100% of UHD releases are region free). The blu-ray is not.

 

[Mark Booth]

I called 'CODA' as Best Picture of 2021 right after streaming the film via Apple TV+ the day it was released. No film I saw the rest of the year measured up to CODA. I was thrilled when it won BP.

Yet, I would not buy a Blu-ray nor 4K Blu-ray of the film. Why? Because I subscribe to Apple TV+ and I will continue to subscribe. There's some terrific content on Apple TV+. Heck fire, just Ted Lasso alone is worth the $50 annual subscription.

Mark