Can anyone explain to me why they are porting so many unpopular/non-visual films

[HV77]

but not big hits with heavy emphasis on visuals like Lord of the Rings and Jurassic Park? I seriously don't get it, it is infuriating and illogical. Why are they just unloading crap that is not nearly as well-selling as giant blockbusters? I'm honestly not trying to be cynical, but this is getting ridiculous. It is clearly related to politics in the industry between studios and Sony, etc.

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by HV77

but not big hits with heavy emphasis on visuals like Lord of the Rings and Jurassic Park? I seriously don't get it, it is infuriating and illogical. Why are they just unloading crap that is not nearly as well-selling as giant blockbusters? I'm honestly not trying to be cynical, but this is getting ridiculous. It is clearly related to politics in the industry between studios and Sony, etc.

It have nothing to do with this. Most studio wait to unleash theirs gun big with crosspromotion or when it obtain mass. Right now Bluray can't even pass 10% of DVD sold. If doing a disc cost a lot of money (by adding new extras etc). Most studio and big directors (Lucas for example) wait to the perfect moment knowing that even if they wait 10 years, you'll still buy their products... but only 100x more people will get access to it. Why release a catalog title that will sell good but nothing to yell about when you can wait 2 more years and have 10x more people. A lot of people do not buy movies that they saw, but mostly new titles..

[doctorsteve]

Originally Posted by ryoohki

It have nothing to do with this. Most studio wait to unleash theirs gun big with crosspromotion or when it obtain mass. Right now Bluray can't even pass 10% of DVD sold. If doing a disc cost a lot of money (by adding new extras etc). Most studio and big directors (Lucas for example) wait to the perfect moment knowing that even if they wait 10 years, you'll still buy their products... but only 100x more people will get access to it. Why release a catalog title that will sell good but nothing to yell about when you can wait 2 more years and have 10x more people. A lot of people do not buy movies that they saw, but mostly new titles..

But how do you grow and succeed with drek? I've been crabbing about this for EVER!

Listen, Hi-Def markets are growing - Hell, I see 60-something year old grandmothers asking about hi-def... IT'S Growing. Sadly for every blockbuster, it seems like there's 15-20 half-assed releases. Stuff that's just weeks away from appearing in Wal*Mart bargain bins on DVD.

This idea that companies make more money by releasing these old catalog trudgers just doesn't fly with me. Looking at my Blu's, I don't see anything that would score less than 4 out of 5 stars. Now maybe there IS a market for anything and every thing. Seeing the collections of other members here, I'm stunned by how many movies you own. Even if I could print money and stuff it up my arse, I could still never be convinced to buy 99.5% of movies that have been released.

My SINCERE hope is that as we encounter the holiday season, and the digital switch proceeds (and hi def TV's come even lower in price), and more average homes start making active moves to keep up with the Joneses and go hi def, I'm hopeful a greater percentage of releases are really ones that knock your socks off.

Think of this... Crappy little release - $10 on DVD, or $25 on Blu-ray. J6P and Moms everywhere will gladly stick with DVD. Cheaper, no new player needed. Why are we so surprised that Blu hasn't stayed double digits yet?

you know I could go on for so much longer, but it's not going to change anything... The only thing that I can do is avoid the crummy releases, and stick with the good stuff. Unfortunately, the signal that 'we are not going to buy the crappy ones you put out' will not get sent to the studios because some of us will buy anything we can get. (and that may be part of the evil studio plot, this is why their strategy works)

Sorry for the rant, I'm just going to shut up now... [/rant]

[Blu-Ron]

Originally Posted by HV77

but not big hits with heavy emphasis on visuals like Lord of the Rings and Jurassic Park? I seriously don't get it, it is infuriating and illogical. Why are they just unloading crap that is not nearly as well-selling as giant blockbusters? I'm honestly not trying to be cynical, but this is getting ridiculous. It is clearly related to politics in the industry between studios and Sony, etc.

I'm frustrated over this every friggin day. I hear ya buddy!

[CheapChildren]

Originally Posted by HV77

but not big hits with heavy emphasis on visuals like Lord of the Rings and Jurassic Park? I seriously don't get it, it is infuriating and illogical. Why are they just unloading crap that is not nearly as well-selling as giant blockbusters? I'm honestly not trying to be cynical, but this is getting ridiculous. It is clearly related to politics in the industry between studios and Sony, etc.

Lord of the Rings was just announced, and if you can't find decent titles you're not trying.
Also some of us don't just want eye candy.

[Blaumann]

I am personally very pleased with the current line-up. I concurr, that it's studio politcs to hold back with some of the "big" catalog franchises, until the market is bigger and promises more profits from these titles.

IMO it wouldn't make much (financial) sense to sell e.g., 500,000 Star Wars BD copies at full price now, when they could maybe sell 5,000,000 SW BD copies at full price later on.

It's starting though, if WB will indeed release LOTR FOTR as expected. And Godfather is also one of the big-ones.

[#Darren]

Same as DVD, been there, done that

[Blu Titan]

Last year the release schedule was week. There were some weeks with only a cuple or no releases in Blu-ray. The release schedule for Q4 is fantastic. Obviously, there are titles we want now. However, most titles will be available in the next year or so.

[richieb1971]

Schedules are important. If Braveheart, Gladiator, Star Wars, Godfather, LOTR, Alien boxset and Titanic all came out in a 2 month spree some of them would be bargain basement before some people could afford them all.

Also, your assuming they just take a HD transfer and put it on the disc. There is tons of coding/artwork that needs to be done and sometimes the directors want hands on, which means they need a clear schedule to fit in some old movie that needs a work over.

We just had Kill bill, this month is Matrix, next month is WALL-E. I see triple A titles coming out the kazoo that I have to pick the oldies carefully because of budget. I honestly can't see a problem.

And finally, just because you don't like something, doesn't mean everyone else agree's with you.

[MillerTimeNCSU]

Originally Posted by HV77

It is clearly related to politics in the industry between studios and Sony, etc.

Are you 13 years old or do you simply have zero knowledge of business?

Studios have to make profit to appease shareholders and whether that profit comes from catalog titles or "hits" that you're talking about, they are going to release whatever movies make the most money AT THIS TIME. Will Fox make more off of Predator or Star Wars.....obviously SW, but right now, there aren't enough Blu players to justify releasing the films. So, the smart move is to release a ton of other movies to help advance mass adoption of Blu by boosting the number of overall titles available. It has nothing to do with any vendetta against Sony....that's just a retarded statement. NO STUDIO is giving up profit to to "stick it" to Sony.

Like everyone has said - not just in this thread but OVER AND OVER - whenever Blu has a larger marketshare and more mass adoption, more of the "big" titles will be released.

IMO, people aren't going to adopt a new format b/c of 1 or 2 (or 10) "big" titles....the only people might "covert" are the folks who are already VERY interested in Blu.

[Lucy Diamond]

C'mon maaaaaaaaaaaaan...you don't like Zombie Strippers?!?!!?

What about Step up.....2!!?!??

I know....I KNOW....how's about the direct to Blu-ray release of The Lost Boys Sequel THAT NOBODY SAAAAAAAAAAAW!?!?!?


Yeah...he's (op) totally right.

[Teabaggins]

Jurassic Park not being on blu ray is a crime.

[Crim122]

I think its because they just want to make money off all the dumb shit that comes out today, I mean why would anyone want "baby mama" on blu ray is beside me...even though Tina Fey is SO hot.

[X-Ninja]

Im kind of amazed that everyone seems to want Jurassic Park now. Seems to be a new movie that everyone drastically wants every few weeks. The Matrix, then Cloverfield, then Transformers, then Iron Man, and now Jurassic Park. It'll come when it comes people.
Not like it matters, every single movie i just listed (in the order that people have begged for them) have been complained about repeatidly after release. Aside from the Matrix of course.

Well anyway... Ill be buying Jurassic Park when it comes out - but i can wait. I totally forgot about the movie's existence for a looong time.

[stockstar1138]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=56191

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=55517

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=55511 (note, this is a different thread from above)

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=40080

http://www.highdefforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55

clearly a troll, ive asked for him to be banned before. he has asked similar questions before, he knows the answers.

[Teabaggins]

you want him banned? don't worry bro I'm on it

*thumps chest twice with right palm*

[Bobby Henderson]

The release situation for catalog hit movies on Blu-ray is absolutely no different than it was for DVD, or even VHS for that matter. Hollywood is simply not going to change its model, a model that has been working very well, even if a lot of Blu-ray customers are frustrated by it.

There's a thread asking why Saving Private Ryan isn't on Blu-ray yet. Take a look back when that movie was actually a new release. It appeared on VHS around the end of 1998 or early 1999. But it took another year after that before it arrived on DVD when Spielberg felt the market was big enough to justify it.

Look how long George Lucas held up the original Star Wars trilogy movies from DVD. The constant refrain of griping on that subject flared for years and years across the Internet.

The DiVX pay per view disc format did a lot to delay many movies from arriving on DVD earlier. The situation isn't all that much different from how the format war between HD-DVD and Blu-ray slowed player sales.

It's going to be quite a while before certain classic movies arrive on Blu-ray -particularly some of those hits from Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. I'll just look forward to new movies arriving on Blu-ray, such as The Dark Knight. There's no guarantee that I'll run out and buy some classic hit as soon as it is released on Blu-ray either. These BD releases often require the equivalent of a digital restoration job in order to deliver great image quality. If the studios simply churn out a BD from an old HD telecine source I'm going to be reluctant to buy.

[Sephiroth0000]

I agree with the crap line up of BluRays they are releasing (there are some decent titles coming but not many) but oblivously it does come to what you all say here about how BluRay only appeals for so much of the market and that looking at it from a finicial point of view its not worth it with many people still buying DVDs. I have also noticed that some newer titles are not being released due to 2 studios being involved in the film (ie) Gladiator will not be on BR for awhile as it was a double production effort from Dreamworks and Universal apparently.

EDIT: And even with the recent release titles like The Matrix, V For Vendetta, Troy and what not to name afew are the exact same audio/video from HD DVD which is quite annoying as there is no improvement. Interview With The Vampire is another title im disappointed with as the video transfer is poor and with audio they have actually went backwards as the original DVD came with DTS but not on BluRay (apologises for my little rant lol.....breath in and out lol) But then on saying that I am looking forward to the Kill Bill's (The Dark Knight so so as I wanted more then TruHD audio)

[kefrank]

what's a "non-visual film"? i don't think such a thing exists.

personally, i think there's a pretty good mix of genres among the current blu-ray releases. if anything, i wish there were less of the empty eye candy flicks and more substantive classics.

[Crim122]

What I hate is going to rent blu rays from the new release section and having to pick out of a bunch of shit that has just come out.