-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why are some old movies taking so long to come out in HD?
- Thread starter jtvang125
- Start date
techwanabe
Diamond Member
Someone told me Peter Jackson is working on The Hobbit and is too busy to work on a Blu Ray LOTR. Supposedly it won't be out until 2011.
biggestmuff
Diamond Member
I'm not sure if Spielberg has released anything from his catalog in HD yet. I think he's still waiting. Same with Lucas and Star Wars.
techwanabe
Diamond Member
Looks at store shelves, see's no HD-DVD players. Knows it's a dead end technology like Betamax tapes. Is glad he didn't buy in to a dead end technology.
If you look here, there are quite a few classic movies that have been announced. I think, especially with older films, a lot of care has to be taken to get a transfer right, as HD will show flaws much more clearly. A lot of these older films weren't necessarily preserved that well and thus it takes a lot of work to get them ready--let alone taking an old mono soundtrack and remixing it for 5.1 or 7.1 surround. Still, when the effort is made, the results can be striking. Casablanca, which was on HD DVD and thus could easily be put out on BD, looked great, as was the HD DVD release of the old Errol Flynn Robin Hood. Patton's BD release is head and shoulders above the DVD, and the entire series of Dirty Harry movies had a lot of care put into them--the first one is the weakest of the bunch in terms of picture quality, but it still is very nice. The main flaw with these older films is that even with new surround mixes, the sound lacks punch to it.
So I don't think it's totally just a market related thing, although certainly as BD adoption develops more marginally successful films will see releases, just as they did on DVD. I think it just takes time to do these remasters. However, I'd rather see them take their time and get the transfers right.
So I don't think it's totally just a market related thing, although certainly as BD adoption develops more marginally successful films will see releases, just as they did on DVD. I think it just takes time to do these remasters. However, I'd rather see them take their time and get the transfers right.
sivart
Golden Member
I'm with you guys...I paid $380 for a Blu-ray player by LG (Profile 1.1) that also plays DVD and HD DVD. I picked up about 10 movies from Universal that I liked for $50 shipped....hmmm.....
I also picked up a xBOX 360 HD DVD drive for future ripping (oh and 5 free movies with it) for $50.
Let's do the quick math $480 for Dual Format Player and 15 movies. -- PS3 80GB $500 ...hmmm....
(BTW, I have PS3, also 🙂)
I also picked up a xBOX 360 HD DVD drive for future ripping (oh and 5 free movies with it) for $50.
Let's do the quick math $480 for Dual Format Player and 15 movies. -- PS3 80GB $500 ...hmmm....
(BTW, I have PS3, also 🙂)
It is "nice" to think that the reason classics are not forthcoming is due to the special care required and deserved. However, I fear it is more likely for bidness reasons. That is, a desire to maximize profits of current projects especially by way of marketing follow through from theater to home formats.
There are also more people with both financial and personal/career interests in same, as opposed to ye olde existing library. That is why tripe is pushed out on HD formats that otherwise has no reason to be (and verily should not have been made in the first place!).
Also, despite the relatively high cost of players and discs, the core audience is prolly not those who appreciate classics but more likely a much younger demo enfatuated with the new, even if they are not the primary buyers themselves.
There are also more people with both financial and personal/career interests in same, as opposed to ye olde existing library. That is why tripe is pushed out on HD formats that otherwise has no reason to be (and verily should not have been made in the first place!).
Also, despite the relatively high cost of players and discs, the core audience is prolly not those who appreciate classics but more likely a much younger demo enfatuated with the new, even if they are not the primary buyers themselves.
RandomFool
Diamond Member
As long as I can buy Witless Protection Program in HD I'm happy.
DaveSimmons
Elite Member
Lucas waited years to put the original SW trilogy on regular DVD as well.
His ego requires the intial sales to be the size of a moon and blu-ray has only reached (peak) 12% of the total shiny disc market so far according to Nielsen/Videoscan via TheDigitalBits.com
The format wars have only been over ~6 months and the studios move slowly. The Matrix set is coming to blu-ray soonish, as are a bunch of James Bond movies. Visit the Bits site if you want to know about confirmed / rumored titles.
His ego requires the intial sales to be the size of a moon and blu-ray has only reached (peak) 12% of the total shiny disc market so far according to Nielsen/Videoscan via TheDigitalBits.com
The format wars have only been over ~6 months and the studios move slowly. The Matrix set is coming to blu-ray soonish, as are a bunch of James Bond movies. Visit the Bits site if you want to know about confirmed / rumored titles.
It may be better business in fact to get older, classic films out early. A hypothesis: early adopters of these formats are either film lovers, videophiles, or both. Early discs are sold with higher profit margins. A lot of older films only appeal to the film lovers crowd, so the time to get them to buy is when margins are high. Indeed, the ideal time to sell those titles might be when that particular niche audience has embraced blu ray enough to have fairly large numbers, but not before the market is mature and profit margins are low like DVD. They can get away with $35 Blu Ray discs right now; I'd gladly plunk that much down for something like a high definition, remastered Lawrence of Arabia. But in a couple of years, when the average price of a Blu Ray movie has dropped and I've gotten accustomed to paying about $10-15, I may not. Furthermore, I think exciting that crowd of people has a cheerleader effect--when they are pleased and excited with a new product, they convey that to their less motivated friends, who may become more inclined to finally move to HD. It's a just a thought, and maybe has a little connection to real circumstances, but I think it's plausible. And I do think there is greater care being put into these films--witness the embarrassing transfers of some of the early Blu Ray films, notably Full Metal Jacket and The Fifth Element, both of which are already in their second high definition versions that corrected the original flaws. Likewise, some films that Universal released with lackluster plain Dolby Digital 5.1 mixes on HD DVD are getting lossless audio mixes for their Blu Ray debut (The Mummy comes to mind, although that's hardly a classic.) Regardless, a greater concern for quality is a win for everybody for whatever reason it may happen.
The problem with that hypothesis is that the studios are not quite as dim as they would seem. Or at least the accountants are not. To wit: they know what moves in volume and that is what matters -not margins, per se. Sadly, there was likely exponentially more demand and sales of poop such as Transformers than there would be for Lawrence of Arabia. Plus, the former is a simple and low-cost matter of working from a pristine source most likely in the digital domain already. And, as said the home format release can ride the wave of existing marketing such that when Timmy has seen the matinee and stuffed his piehole with the co-branded Happy Meal, he can hold his breath until mommy buys him the disc for his console.
They're plenty dim though--how else to explain The Love Guru? Seriously, though, I don't disagree in the least with your analysis that Transformers will make more money than Lawrence of Arabia. But if you're going to do a "prestige" title, it might be better to do it along the lines I said rather than wait. Still, I am heartened with the steady pace and generally increasing quality of catalog releases, which means the studios feel, currently at least, that taking the trouble to properly release truly good films is profitable. This is one situation where I wonder if the victory of one format has actually benefited consumers in terms of titles if not price, as studios don't feel like they have to gamble on backing the the potentially failing format (e.g., Universal Studios).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
