Studios and double dipping

[Maggot]

I must say as a relative newcomer, for the most part, my Blu Ray experience has been a good one with regard to titles. However, I have recently come across two classic titles that clearly the studio went el-cheapo on the transfer and it's too bad. Grease, while looking much better than the DVD, clearly could have had a much better transfer if the studio gave it the full treatment. Also, Superman, which again while looking better than the DVD, like Grease, crys out for a better transfer. Superman is a little worse than Grease and I'm appalled that such well thought of classics have not been restored and remastered properly. Maybe these came out during the format war and it was a rush job? I hope they are given some sort of super treament, like what Lowry did with the Bond stuff, because these are every bit classic movies and they deserve better. Do it right the first time. I read a lot of reviews on this site, both the official review and the users and it's more than apparent there are classics out there that need a proper job and not the one they got. Titles like The Fugative, Robin Hood: Prince of Theives, and many others. Heck, even the popular Schwartzenager movies seems to get nothing but bad reviews on PQ. All fine movies that apperently have abbysmal PQ. Hopefully, this will change. the public is really starting to buy screens and Blu Rays now.

[Jeff Kleist]

Grease doesn't look good on the negative, just like virtually all of Arnold's catalog.

Superman suffers from too much noise reduction in the mastering process, and such a long movie squished down to fit (with extras) on an HD DVD.

[iam1bearcat]

Actually, with people buying BD players and HDTV's more than before, it will probably make studios skimp out even more, sadly. Studios will be in such a rush to bring out some big name titles that haven't been released yet just to catch these new buyers they won't bother with extra features or making sure it looks great. Alot of people don't know all the details about film so if they see a movie in a blu-ray case, it must be the best it can be - and that's what most of the population will think.

Another big problem is the lack of bringing over special features. I've heard (I don't own the BD yet) that Independence Day and Predator are big losses because they have no special features - unlike their DVD counterparts. What causes that? Laziness? Thinking people don't watch them? Who knows, but I'm sure people still gobbled them up because they're on blu. And that's all the studio cares about.

[RiseDarthVader]

I also heard the Director and DOP of Superman: The Movie wanted to shoot the movie to look soft intentionally. So all the shots are just slightly out of focus.

[Clark Kent]

Sure, a few movies will get better editions down the road. But the changing economics of the situation is going to make double-dips on Blu-ray more rare than was the case with dvd. We are seeing less releases in general.

[steve_dave]

Lowry seems to have become a "legend" among people. They are not always the best when it comes to digital restorations and will remove film grain unless they are instructed to leave it in.

Digital restorations can also result in poor jobs like Citizen Kane. The first digital restoration actually removed rain drops on windows because the software thought those were anamolies. So Warner had to re-do the restoration again.

Lowry does not always do the best job either with the biggest surprise being that Martin Scorsese hated the work they did on Once Upon A Time in The West for Paramount's special edition DVD.

Margaret Bodde, executive director of the US-based Film Foundation set up by Scorsese and others, says the American director, who knew Leone, had the idea of getting the movie restored after watching the DVD released in the US. "The colour was really not correct and the quality not up to what it should be," she says.

Source

Scorsese's Film Foundation, The Rome Film Festival, Sergio Leone Productions, and Paramount Pictures did a new restoration that debuted in Beverly Hills on June 20th, 2008.

[Maggot]

Sometimes, I think the community as a whole should form an open letter to the studios asking for them to take their time and do it right. What concerns me is the studios not putting their best foot forward on EACH release and with the sales numbers of HD screens and Blu Ray hardware/software skyrocketing in 2009 and for sure in 2010, along with DVD sales slumping, I worry that they are shooting themselves in the foot by not getting it right. Especially when they charge the prices they charge for Blu Ray. I feel the general public is ok with the higher price per title as long as the quality is there. The sales numbers seem to support that Blu Ray has caught on. With the format war behind, studios need to focus on delivering quality transfers and not quantity. To me, with the kind of resolution that's on tap with your average 1080p screen and a Blu Ray disc, there should never be a PQ review, say from this site, that's under 4.0. The technology is just too good and easily exploits a bad transfer. I mean really, when you watch a bad transfer, it's a simple question of "what were they thinking"? It's not like you can hide a bad transfer, especially at this level. I mean, what a waste of money and energy to put forth and distribute bad versions of movies. You could get away with it more on DVD. The lower resolution of the format and in general the screens(many still with 4:3). But with more and more people buying 1080p plasma's and LCD's along with Blu Ray players, I really think the studios are doing a complete disservice to the very product they are trying to sell.

[Jeff Kleist]

ctually, with people buying BD players and HDTV's more than before, it will probably make studios skimp out even more, sadly. Studios will be in such a rush to bring out some big name titles that haven't been released yet just to catch these new buyers they won't bother with extra features or making sure it looks great. Alot of people don't know all the details about film so if they see a movie in a blu-ray case, it must be the best it can be - and that's what most of the population will think.

That's definately not the case. If anything the trend is toward MORE work to make sure it looks different enough that even JoeSixPack's wife will notice the difference. Otherwise "the DVD is good enough"

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by Maggot

Especially when they charge the prices they charge for Blu Ray.

What prices are you paying?

Me?

2 for $25 - Australia and Max Payne

$12.99 each - Pushing Daisies Season 1 & 2

$4.99 - Fast & Furious

$17 - Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince

$11.99 - Drag Me to Hell

$12.99 - The Devil Wears Prada

and that's just a sample of what I paid. In fact, the 2 for $25 deal also come with 2 MovieCash certificates for Watchmen worth $24 total. So I basically paid $1 for 2 Blu-ray Discs.

So for the prices I paid, I feel my got my money's worth especialy with these prices:

$32 each - Almost Famous HK BD, Kung Fu Hustle HK BD, P Thai BD.

I can't watch all of the extras on the P Blu-ray Disc because they are 576i/p nor can I watch all of the extras on my BD of I'm A Cyborg BD because they are also 576i/p formatted.

Am I upset about this? Nope.

I know when I go to Japan in March, I'll be spending at least $40 for a single BD and it will mosre than likely have a Japanese menu or no extras.

As for the "no movie should score under a 4." Each reviewer is different so not everyone is going to share the same opinion about picture quality. Of course, ratings are just guidelines and really don't affect the "buy or buy not" recommendations.

G4' Attack of the Show has a scale that goes to 5 but nothing has ever earned a 5. For their 2009 Christmas reviews, products that got a three out of five still earned a recommendation for purchase.

[Maggot]

I'm paying anywhere from 18 to 25 bucks going to my local Best Buy or Fry's out here in Southern California. The price doesn't bother me, ONLY when you get a transfer that doesn't cut it. When the transfer isn't that much better than the DVD, that's a problem. A big one. It's the same thing for those of us who have decent stereo systems. You put a crappy recording in and that's what you'll hear. A lot of people didn't and still don't have stereo systems that can make the most out of Blu Ray's audio formats, let alone the old SACD/DVD-A........BUT many are now buying those 1080p screens and Blu Ray players. So they now have a means of at least watching something at a much greater level, but if the studios come out with crappy transfers, that's defeating the whole reason. I'm not saying all titles are bad, hardly, but there are enough questionable transfers out there and they are on movies that deserve better. I mean, REALLY.....when you have reviews stating "not much better then the dvd" or "hold on to you dvd".......that's a huge problem. It's like saying the cat's out of the bag now. As an industry, you have this nice increase in resolution between the hardware and the software, yet they don't want to follow through on the transfers and spend the money to do it right every time as required by the very hardware/software being pushed. That's called half-assed.

[BarkingGhost]

Maggot, it is not the studios double-dipping, but cowsumers. If you think the initial release is done with little worth compared to what it may be offered in later on, don't buy it. Some of us are not looking for fluff in our purchases and are after the dang movie.

And I would think have the option is better than not. Imagine if they offered no options and forced everyone to buy a SKU where there was a flipper inside with a DVD and a digital copy and charged $50 for even the lamest title? No thank you, I'll take the options.