HD-DVD versus Blu-Ray

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PurdueRy

Lifer
Nov 12, 2004
13,837
4
0
Originally posted by: cubby1223
I don't like to see that BD+ is possibly fully cracked, just because there is nothing that says the studios have to support either of these new formats, and with the format war possibly approaching a niche stalemate...

It's nice to know the breakers of copy protection whole-heartily endorse HD DVD.

Every copy protection scheme can and will be broken. I would much rather have less copy protection standing in my way than more. Copy protection only causes more headaches for people trying to use the product legally while hackers will always find a way around it.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: cubby1223
I don't like to see that BD+ is possibly fully cracked, just because there is nothing that says the studios have to support either of these new formats, and with the format war possibly approaching a niche stalemate...

It's nice to know the breakers of copy protection whole-heartily endorse HD DVD.

Every copy protection scheme can and will be broken. I would much rather have less copy protection standing in my way than more. Copy protection only causes more headaches for people trying to use the product legally while hackers will always find a way around it.
It's going to be pretty difficult to break HD-VMD's copy protection. Just don't make a computer drive capable of reading the discs, then no one can extract the information off of them.

I don't believe we are ever going to see content available without any roadblocks. And every time one's broken, they will just work towards creating a new scheme. I don't think the restrictions BD+ puts on consumers is unreasonable, but just think what they might try next time around. If they even try. Move everything over to closed cable/satellite boxes that guard the information even tighter than BD+. Hell, cable & satellite are far more profitable than either HD DVD or Blu-ray are. Just shut out the PC as a media device. Only a very select few people will complain. Everyone else will not care.
 

PurdueRy

Lifer
Nov 12, 2004
13,837
4
0
Originally posted by: cubby1223
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: cubby1223
I don't like to see that BD+ is possibly fully cracked, just because there is nothing that says the studios have to support either of these new formats, and with the format war possibly approaching a niche stalemate...

It's nice to know the breakers of copy protection whole-heartily endorse HD DVD.

Every copy protection scheme can and will be broken. I would much rather have less copy protection standing in my way than more. Copy protection only causes more headaches for people trying to use the product legally while hackers will always find a way around it.
It's going to be pretty difficult to break HD-VMD's copy protection. Just don't make a computer drive capable of reading the discs, then no one can extract the information off of them.

I don't believe we are ever going to see content available without any roadblocks. And every time one's broken, they will just work towards creating a new scheme. I don't think the restrictions BD+ puts on consumers is unreasonable, but just think what they might try next time around. If they even try. Move everything over to closed cable/satellite boxes that guard the information even tighter than BD+. Hell, cable & satellite are far more profitable than either HD DVD or Blu-ray are. Just shut out the PC as a media device. Only a very select few people will complain. Everyone else will not care.

You'll piss off more than just a "very select few" if you make it impossible to play a new format on a computer.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
You'll piss off more than just a "very select few" if you make it impossible to play a new format on a computer.
Perhaps.

What percentage of people would you guess bought Transformers on dvd to play only on a standalone player? 50%? Extremely low percentage for illustration, and that would be 4+million satisfied customers. Compared to how many people bought the HD DVD for any viewing option? Even laserdisc was profitable.

Closed systems can be profitable, while Blu-ray & HD DVD are financial losses at the moment. That's all I'm saying. To me, anything that can encourage studios to release more titles on an acceptable format, is good. BD+ being cracked so easily, we'll have to see what effect it has.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,184
1,825
126
Originally posted by: cubby1223
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
You'll piss off more than just a "very select few" if you make it impossible to play a new format on a computer.
Perhaps.

What percentage of people would you guess bought Transformers on dvd to play only on a standalone player? 50%? Extremely low percentage for illustration, and that would be 4+million satisfied customers. Compared to how many people bought the HD DVD for any viewing option? Even laserdisc was profitable.

Closed systems can be profitable, while Blu-ray & HD DVD are financial losses at the moment. That's all I'm saying. To me, anything that can encourage studios to release more titles on an acceptable format, is good. BD+ being cracked so easily, we'll have to see what effect it has.
If you prevent its use on a computer, you'll guarantee the format's failure, especially in Asia, in 2007 and going forward for an optical format.

BTW, while laserdisc may have been profitable, it was an utter failure in terms of actual adoption in North America.


Originally posted by: abaez
The A3 also downsamples to 640k Dolby instead of 1.5k DTS? Something like that. They didn't want to pay the fee for the DTS.
Yes that is true. However, the A2 does not downsample to DD, so they potentially saved the fee there.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,997
31,564
146
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: ricochet
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

IMO the entire spiderman series was "so so" and none of the films deserved the hype they received. Same with Transformers. Neither of these films were groundbreaking in anyway.

I don't think most blockbuster movies are great movies by any stretch. Armaggedon and ID4 are examples that come to mind. They serve the purpose of entertainment by providing huge explosions, loud music, juvenile humor, and hot babes. Audiences don't need deep plots, originality, or oscar worthy acting. Why do think Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer are so successful in this business?

That said, I think Spiderman 3 was a letdown for a lot of movie goers who enjoyed the 1st two installments. Most Spiderman fans will get it anyway just to complete the series.

I never saw Spiderman 3 in the theater, but I got it with the Blu Ray pack last week. Yeah, it's garbage. Really disappointing, as I think SM2 was the overall best superhero movie to date. I never owned a copy of SM1 either, so I figured I'd up my collection of "Joe Six pack movies" to balance out my predominantly "elitist" collection that most people wouldn't want to see when they come over.

I wish someone would just put Bay/Bruckheimer out of our misery :(

Aww, why? Bruckheimer brings greats out, like PotC. And Bay, well.. you either like or hate his movies. I personally love Transformers, The Island, and The Rock. The Rock kicks a lot of ass. :D

the rock is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I can easily do w/o PoTC. I picked up the 2nd one of those during the Disney BOGO two weeks ago. watched it...and was wondering what happened to...plot? 2.5 hours of a bunch of stuff happening.

Anything Bruckheimer and Bay have done for film has been nothing but bad. I think blockbusters can be done well, and there's something to be said for it...but the writing in these movies is pretty damn vapid. Aside from Megan Fox, Transformers made me want to blind myself. :)

to clarify: Bay doesn't know a thing about editing when it comes to dialogue-driven scenes--those crucial points in a movie when you expect the plot to progress, characters to develop, etc. He hides his ineptitude behind more and more explosions. If he were mearly an effects or action coordinator, he'd be great. whoever allowed him to be in charge of an entire production, however, should be savagely beaten.

re-watch the scene in Transformers where bumblebee takes them to the junkyard, and they're running from the police car Decepticon. there are about 5 shots in that sequence that are so poorly edited that it jarred me out of the film. the dude and the chick were talking, running, then talking again, all the while the conversation was supposed to be continuous. This isn't a simple snafu, it's so poorly conceived that it's clearly intentional, and indicative of someone who didn't know how to put it together, but figured "what the hey? i'll just blow some shit up in 2 seconds and no one will ever notice!" Bay directs and edits as if he were Bi-polar, or just a complete idiot.

Sure, it looks pretty though :)
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,900
63
91
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

Spiderman sold around 130k. Not really so-so sales.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: ricochet
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

IMO the entire spiderman series was "so so" and none of the films deserved the hype they received. Same with Transformers. Neither of these films were groundbreaking in anyway.

I don't think most blockbuster movies are great movies by any stretch. Armaggedon and ID4 are examples that come to mind. They serve the purpose of entertainment by providing huge explosions, loud music, juvenile humor, and hot babes. Audiences don't need deep plots, originality, or oscar worthy acting. Why do think Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer are so successful in this business?

That said, I think Spiderman 3 was a letdown for a lot of movie goers who enjoyed the 1st two installments. Most Spiderman fans will get it anyway just to complete the series.

I never saw Spiderman 3 in the theater, but I got it with the Blu Ray pack last week. Yeah, it's garbage. Really disappointing, as I think SM2 was the overall best superhero movie to date. I never owned a copy of SM1 either, so I figured I'd up my collection of "Joe Six pack movies" to balance out my predominantly "elitist" collection that most people wouldn't want to see when they come over.

I wish someone would just put Bay/Bruckheimer out of our misery :(

Aww, why? Bruckheimer brings greats out, like PotC. And Bay, well.. you either like or hate his movies. I personally love Transformers, The Island, and The Rock. The Rock kicks a lot of ass. :D

the rock is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I can easily do w/o PoTC. I picked up the 2nd one of those during the Disney BOGO two weeks ago. watched it...and was wondering what happened to...plot? 2.5 hours of a bunch of stuff happening.

Anything Bruckheimer and Bay have done for film has been nothing but bad. I think blockbusters can be done well, and there's something to be said for it...but the writing in these movies is pretty damn vapid. Aside from Megan Fox, Transformers made me want to blind myself. :)

to clarify: Bay doesn't know a thing about editing when it comes to dialogue-driven scenes--those crucial points in a movie when you expect the plot to progress, characters to develop, etc. He hides his ineptitude behind more and more explosions. If he were mearly an effects or action coordinator, he'd be great. whoever allowed him to be in charge of an entire production, however, should be savagely beaten.

re-watch the scene in Transformers where bumblebee takes them to the junkyard, and they're running from the police car Decepticon. there are about 5 shots in that sequence that are so poorly edited that it jarred me out of the film. the dude and the chick were talking, running, then talking again, all the while the conversation was supposed to be continuous. This isn't a simple snafu, it's so poorly conceived that it's clearly intentional, and indicative of someone who didn't know how to put it together, but figured "what the hey? i'll just blow some shit up in 2 seconds and no one will ever notice!" Bay directs and edits as if he were Bi-polar, or just a complete idiot.

Sure, it looks pretty though :)

You are elitist...plain and simple.

Not every movie has to win best picture to be good :roll:

Most of the audience likes action and doesn't really need a storyline to be wowed by it. Not every single movie has to be done like Braveheart, Gladiator, or LotR.

Take the movie for what it is. A Sci-Fi action movie. Stop criticizing every little detail...you won't enjoy anything that way.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,997
31,564
146
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: ricochet
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

IMO the entire spiderman series was "so so" and none of the films deserved the hype they received. Same with Transformers. Neither of these films were groundbreaking in anyway.

I don't think most blockbuster movies are great movies by any stretch. Armaggedon and ID4 are examples that come to mind. They serve the purpose of entertainment by providing huge explosions, loud music, juvenile humor, and hot babes. Audiences don't need deep plots, originality, or oscar worthy acting. Why do think Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer are so successful in this business?

That said, I think Spiderman 3 was a letdown for a lot of movie goers who enjoyed the 1st two installments. Most Spiderman fans will get it anyway just to complete the series.

I never saw Spiderman 3 in the theater, but I got it with the Blu Ray pack last week. Yeah, it's garbage. Really disappointing, as I think SM2 was the overall best superhero movie to date. I never owned a copy of SM1 either, so I figured I'd up my collection of "Joe Six pack movies" to balance out my predominantly "elitist" collection that most people wouldn't want to see when they come over.

I wish someone would just put Bay/Bruckheimer out of our misery :(

Aww, why? Bruckheimer brings greats out, like PotC. And Bay, well.. you either like or hate his movies. I personally love Transformers, The Island, and The Rock. The Rock kicks a lot of ass. :D

the rock is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I can easily do w/o PoTC. I picked up the 2nd one of those during the Disney BOGO two weeks ago. watched it...and was wondering what happened to...plot? 2.5 hours of a bunch of stuff happening.

Anything Bruckheimer and Bay have done for film has been nothing but bad. I think blockbusters can be done well, and there's something to be said for it...but the writing in these movies is pretty damn vapid. Aside from Megan Fox, Transformers made me want to blind myself. :)

to clarify: Bay doesn't know a thing about editing when it comes to dialogue-driven scenes--those crucial points in a movie when you expect the plot to progress, characters to develop, etc. He hides his ineptitude behind more and more explosions. If he were mearly an effects or action coordinator, he'd be great. whoever allowed him to be in charge of an entire production, however, should be savagely beaten.

re-watch the scene in Transformers where bumblebee takes them to the junkyard, and they're running from the police car Decepticon. there are about 5 shots in that sequence that are so poorly edited that it jarred me out of the film. the dude and the chick were talking, running, then talking again, all the while the conversation was supposed to be continuous. This isn't a simple snafu, it's so poorly conceived that it's clearly intentional, and indicative of someone who didn't know how to put it together, but figured "what the hey? i'll just blow some shit up in 2 seconds and no one will ever notice!" Bay directs and edits as if he were Bi-polar, or just a complete idiot.

Sure, it looks pretty though :)

You are elitist...plain and simple.

Not every movie has to win best picture to be good :roll:

Most of the audience likes action and doesn't really need a storyline to be wowed by it. Not every single movie has to be done like Braveheart, Gladiator, or LotR.

Take the movie for what it is. A Sci-Fi action movie. Stop criticizing every little detail...you won't enjoy anything that way.

I wouldn't call it elitist, but an inability to enjoy a simple action movie (when it should be simple), when dialogue and piss-poor editing is vomiting from the screen. If anything--an action movie should be well edited. These aren't minor details--this is the backbone of the movie.

Example: True Lies--simple, stupid, action movie. well-done in the hands of a very capable director (James Cameron). You don't have to think about it, you can simply enjoy it.

--snipped rant--eh, don't want to get too off topic here. Simply--these guys make tons of money to put this crap together. whether or not it's simple, or supposed to be stupid, we shouldn't expect glaring errors in the form--it's lazy, and it's insulting to the audience's intelligence (clearly, there are many who have little to insult, hehe).

Action movies used to be made well, with good (simple) story and character. You didn't have to think then, either; but now story is replaced by boom boom....does it not make you feel any dumber watching some of this crap?
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: ricochet
Originally posted by: PurdueRy
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

IMO the entire spiderman series was "so so" and none of the films deserved the hype they received. Same with Transformers. Neither of these films were groundbreaking in anyway.

I don't think most blockbuster movies are great movies by any stretch. Armaggedon and ID4 are examples that come to mind. They serve the purpose of entertainment by providing huge explosions, loud music, juvenile humor, and hot babes. Audiences don't need deep plots, originality, or oscar worthy acting. Why do think Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer are so successful in this business?

That said, I think Spiderman 3 was a letdown for a lot of movie goers who enjoyed the 1st two installments. Most Spiderman fans will get it anyway just to complete the series.

I never saw Spiderman 3 in the theater, but I got it with the Blu Ray pack last week. Yeah, it's garbage. Really disappointing, as I think SM2 was the overall best superhero movie to date. I never owned a copy of SM1 either, so I figured I'd up my collection of "Joe Six pack movies" to balance out my predominantly "elitist" collection that most people wouldn't want to see when they come over.

I wish someone would just put Bay/Bruckheimer out of our misery :(

Aww, why? Bruckheimer brings greats out, like PotC. And Bay, well.. you either like or hate his movies. I personally love Transformers, The Island, and The Rock. The Rock kicks a lot of ass. :D

the rock is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I can easily do w/o PoTC. I picked up the 2nd one of those during the Disney BOGO two weeks ago. watched it...and was wondering what happened to...plot? 2.5 hours of a bunch of stuff happening.

Anything Bruckheimer and Bay have done for film has been nothing but bad. I think blockbusters can be done well, and there's something to be said for it...but the writing in these movies is pretty damn vapid. Aside from Megan Fox, Transformers made me want to blind myself. :)

to clarify: Bay doesn't know a thing about editing when it comes to dialogue-driven scenes--those crucial points in a movie when you expect the plot to progress, characters to develop, etc. He hides his ineptitude behind more and more explosions. If he were mearly an effects or action coordinator, he'd be great. whoever allowed him to be in charge of an entire production, however, should be savagely beaten.

re-watch the scene in Transformers where bumblebee takes them to the junkyard, and they're running from the police car Decepticon. there are about 5 shots in that sequence that are so poorly edited that it jarred me out of the film. the dude and the chick were talking, running, then talking again, all the while the conversation was supposed to be continuous. This isn't a simple snafu, it's so poorly conceived that it's clearly intentional, and indicative of someone who didn't know how to put it together, but figured "what the hey? i'll just blow some shit up in 2 seconds and no one will ever notice!" Bay directs and edits as if he were Bi-polar, or just a complete idiot.

Sure, it looks pretty though :)

You are elitist...plain and simple.

Not every movie has to win best picture to be good :roll:

Most of the audience likes action and doesn't really need a storyline to be wowed by it. Not every single movie has to be done like Braveheart, Gladiator, or LotR.

Take the movie for what it is. A Sci-Fi action movie. Stop criticizing every little detail...you won't enjoy anything that way.

I wouldn't call it elitist, but an inability to enjoy a simple action movie (when it should be simple), when dialogue and piss-poor editing is vomiting from the screen. If anything--an action movie should be well edited. These aren't minor details--this is the backbone of the movie.

Example: True Lies--simple, stupid, action movie. well-done in the hands of a very capable director (James Cameron). You don't have to think about it, you can simply enjoy it.

--snipped rant--eh, don't want to get too off topic here. Simply--these guys make tons of money to put this crap together. whether or not it's simple, or supposed to be stupid, we shouldn't expect glaring errors in the form--it's lazy, and it's insulting to the audience's intelligence (clearly, there are many who have little to insult, hehe).

Action movies used to be made well, with good (simple) story and character. You didn't have to think then, either; but now story is replaced by boom boom....does it not make you feel any dumber watching some of this crap?

Well, The Terminator series made you sorta stop and think for a sec in some ways. That was an action movie too ;)

and no I don't feel dumb and I don't call it crap.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,997
31,564
146
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: zinfamous


I wouldn't call it elitist, but an inability to enjoy a simple action movie (when it should be simple), when dialogue and piss-poor editing is vomiting from the screen. If anything--an action movie should be well edited. These aren't minor details--this is the backbone of the movie.

Example: True Lies--simple, stupid, action movie. well-done in the hands of a very capable director (James Cameron). You don't have to think about it, you can simply enjoy it.

--snipped rant--eh, don't want to get too off topic here. Simply--these guys make tons of money to put this crap together. whether or not it's simple, or supposed to be stupid, we shouldn't expect glaring errors in the form--it's lazy, and it's insulting to the audience's intelligence (clearly, there are many who have little to insult, hehe).

Action movies used to be made well, with good (simple) story and character. You didn't have to think then, either; but now story is replaced by boom boom....does it not make you feel any dumber watching some of this crap?

Well, The Terminator series made you sorta stop and think for a sec in some ways. That was an action movie too ;)

and no I don't feel dumb and I don't call it crap.

To each his own.

Terminator series was great, IMO. T2 is a great example of what a sci-fi/action movie should be. you didn't have to think--but you could if you wanted b/c there was enough there to work with.

Transformers: there's a box. it makes more robots, and all the robots want it. therefore, we fight...eh, who cares, as long as i can see more robots spinning in the air as they shoot at each other (seriously--robots spinning in the air every time they leap--have we not gotten sick of John Woo yet? I half expect robot pigeons all over the place in Transformers 2 :))

great example of a pure Sci-Fi movie: Children of Men...you have to think, and it's success depends heavily on plot and character development. It used to be that to get a studio to even approach you, you had to be able to tell a solid story with motivated and oftentimes complex characters. clearly, that is no longer the case :(

And for the record, I wanted to enjoy Transformers. I wanted to have fun watching giant robots kick each others' asses. Just too much BS and Bay-ness to contend with. An impossible feat... (hell, just edit out all of the shots that don't contain Megan Fox stretching over a car, and I'd say it's a pretty decent flick ;))
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
24,184
1,825
126
Well, we all have our own personal preferences. I thought T2 was a sell out, with action over content. Yeah, the effects were super cool, but the story left me wanting.

And while I loved Children of Men, I also loved Transformers. Transformers had nonsense for a plot, but nonetheless the rest of the movie was just damn fun. :p
 

montypythizzle

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 2006
3,698
0
71
The decision is sort of hard, especially with the A2s for sale for <100$.
I will probably just buy a combo PC drive and save myself money and time.
 

PurdueRy

Lifer
Nov 12, 2004
13,837
4
0
Well I officially through my support behind HD-DVD. Not only with buying the A3(sub from the BBB deal on the A2 that sold out) but I just purchased 5 HDDVD's from Deep discount's sale
 

PurdueRy

Lifer
Nov 12, 2004
13,837
4
0
Originally posted by: vulcanman
"It's a difficult fight," he said. "We were trying to win on the merits, which we were doing for a while, until Paramount changed sides."

Link:Sony CEO on Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD battle

Well I find his last statement about the excitement over the PS3's increased sales interesting.

If you look at the numbers the price cut definitely helped...it DID double sales. However, its sales have been decreasing as the holiday season gets closer while its competitors have been INCREASING.

EDIT: I also don't see the PS3 being the highest selling console in Europe based on the weekly sales websites...
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Nielson numbers have Blu-ray 71:29 last week. If going by Sony's numbers, perhaps 75k Spider-man 3, 55k Spider-man box set. Then who knows how many freebies with player purchases.


Amazon has Night at the Museum Blu-ray on sale for $15, this was a movie I've been wanting, but not enough to pay FOX prices. It's on order for me now, along with Pixar's short film collection. The shorts included with Ratatouille reminded me how much I really need to get the collection. :D
 

T9D

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2001
5,320
6
0
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

Spiderman sold around 130k. Not really so-so sales.

Actually it sold "Spider-Man 3 ---------- 78,511"

The rest were from Box sets that included the other 2 movies also. But Sony likes to give the illusion that things are better than they are.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: v1001
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Genx87
The level of sillyness was kicked up a bit in the last couple of days when it was apparent HD-DVD had quite a successful weekend and SpiderMan 3 only did so so.

Spiderman sold around 130k. Not really so-so sales.

Actually it sold "Spider-Man 3 ---------- 78,511"

The rest were from Box sets that included the other 2 movies also. But Sony likes to give the illusion that things are better than they are.
Which means 130k people purchased the movie Spider-man 3 in some form.