Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

Wow, a 50 GB encode would only make you feel somewhat comfortable? I mean no offense by this, but sometimes I can't help but get the feeling that all your posts are part of some elaborate joke.

You really mean no offense?

As I recall, "Wow" was a word the HD DVD partisans were really fond of.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by patrick99

You really mean no offense?

As I recall, "Wow" was a word the HD DVD partisans were really fond of.

WOW! - implications that someone is somehow attached to HD DVD after they question, well, let's call them 'high standards.'

[TheLion]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

That Zodiac disc was likely finished a long time ago and bumped. Seriously. The message has been sent and received and accepted, things just need to shake out from the production chain.

Jeff,

about this "production chain"... The recently announced "Get Smart" ""Special Edition"" Blu-Ray is going to be released with another infamous DD 5.1 @ 640kbps track only. This is a pretty recent summer movie with a release date in December - can we expect this to be one of the very last Warner releases before "the big change towards lossless audio" will finally happen or does it take (much) longer for them to exclusively use this nice little DD-THD setting with the Dolby encoder?

May I ask you to confirm that "Get Smart" will indeed be released without lossless audio!?

Thank you very much!

[Jeff Kleist]

I can't say the status of Get Smart. Essentially every time one of these pops up, you have to go through the bureauocracy at WB, which is probably the most convoluted in my experience of all the studios, so it usually takes 2 days- 2 weeks to get a response.

If it is indeed DD, then the reasoning is probably in the same general camp as Speed Racer.

There are titles releasing here as late at February that were actually authored during the format war and might have DD. Obviously we've been suggesting that they use the window for upgrades, but who knows what fruit that will bear.

[Slec]

Hey Jeff/Bill,
Any chance you know what audio is on the Foo Fighters: Live at Wembley blu-ray release? If you don't know off hand, I can wait until it arrives mid next week. Just thought I'd ask

Thanks in Advance

[Jeff Kleist]

No clue

Music titles tend to at least carry a PCM stereo track though, even on DVD (yes I have a few that don't, Simon and Garfunkle in Central Park for one)

[Slec]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

No clue

Music titles tend to at least carry a PCM stereo track though, even on DVD (yes I have a few that don't, Simon and Garfunkle in Central Park for one)

Stab in the dark... Thanks!

[Seretur]

Bill -- why did you have to compromise your enthusiasm for KOTCS?

When you write things like the opening four paragraphs of your review, you're letting vastly less educated, less insightful and less kind people on the internet get to you. You know better than that. You have an inkling of an idea of how many facets of popular mythology Indy IV combines into a coherent whole. You are able to appreciate the effort and enjoy the result. So why compromise yourself by pandering to the very vocal internet outrage?

The middle parts of this film are "slow" because they actually engage the brain, and the resolution is strange because it's actually based on something other than other movies. Please don't turn into another Peter Bracke or Devin Faraci of this embittered world. You're better than them.

Once TLC arrives on BD, you'll hopefully rewatch it and see that apart from Connery's performance, it's actually the least of the Indy films. Until then, please, don't shower unnecessary doubt onto what is actually a perfectly commendable film -- just because your initial reaction to it differed so much from that of a bunch of people who type before they think.

I wouldn't otherwise comment on the work of a fellow film critic, but you're one of the few good guys in this business, and I remember what you wrote back in May. It hurt me to see you willingly become a part of this smear campaign, man.

[coolmilo]

Hi Jeff,

I am wondering about the possibility of a Blu-ray release of Vicky Cristina Barcelona. I really enjoyed this movie and would enjoy owning it on Blu-ray because it is an excellent movie with lots of eye candy (scenery and starlets).

Do you think this movie will be released on Blu-ray or will it be forgotten like In Bruges was forgotten (another great movie).

I did a little research about distribution and I believe that MGM is the distributer. If this movie is released on Blu-ray, which studio will do the honors? I am worried that Warner will get their paws on this title and ruin the BD release like so many of their other releases.

[Jeff Kleist]

Weinstein owns it, so that would be Genius who they're allied to

They distributed through MGM theatrically (but that appears to be at an end)

I wouldn't hold my breath for a US release on Blu, but you never know. Europe is much more likely, and hopefully it'll be region free. I keep meaning to order Death at a Funeral from Germany myself.

Originally Posted by coolmilo

Hi Jeff,

I am wondering about the possibility of a Blu-ray release of Vicky Cristina Barcelona. I really enjoyed this movie and would enjoy owning it on Blu-ray because it is an excellent movie with lots of eye candy (scenery and starlets).

Do you think this movie will be released on Blu-ray or will it be forgotten like In Bruges was forgotten (another great movie).

I did a little research about distribution and I believe that MGM is the distributer. If this movie is released on Blu-ray, which studio will do the honors? I am worried that Warner will get their paws on this title and ruin the BD release like so many of their other releases.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Seretur

Bill -- why did you have to compromise your enthusiasm for KOTCS?

When you write things like the opening four paragraphs of your review, you're letting vastly less educated, less insightful and less kind people on the internet get to you. You know better than that. You have an inkling of an idea of how many facets of popular mythology Indy IV combines into a coherent whole. You are able to appreciate the effort and enjoy the result. So why compromise yourself by pandering to the very vocal internet outrage?

The middle parts of this film are "slow" because they actually engage the brain, and the resolution is strange because it's actually based on something other than other movies. Please don't turn into another Peter Bracke or Devin Faraci of this embittered world. You're better than them.

Once TLC arrives on BD, you'll hopefully rewatch it and see that apart from Connery's performance, it's actually the least of the Indy films. Until then, please, don't shower unnecessary doubt onto what is actually a perfectly commendable film -- just because your initial reaction to it differed so much from that of a bunch of people who type before they think.

I wouldn't otherwise comment on the work of a fellow film critic, but you're one of the few good guys in this business, and I remember what you wrote back in May. It hurt me to see you willingly become a part of this smear campaign, man.

I cant speak for Bills reaction, but that was a pretty blatant attempt to "handle" someone. The condescention and efforts to control gave me shivers.

[Rob Tomlin]

..

[Verbal]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I cant speak for Bills reaction, but that was a pretty blatant attempt to "handle" someone. The condescention and efforts to control gave me shivers.

Agreed...terrible, terrible post. Even before I read Bill's review, which contains not even a hint of what Seretur is suggesting.

The fact is, I experienced the exact same reaction to this latest Indy romp that Bill did...I left the theatre satisfied, but as time wore on I realized that I wasn't nearly as excited by it as I should have been. I did not go see it a second time during its theatrical run.

Having now seen it in the comfort of my home theatre, I'm glad I didn't pay to see it again. It was a tedious experience. One I probably won't subject myself to any time in the near future. This is one of those movies I'll watch 10 years from now just to remind myself how much better the original movies were.

Perhaps I'm being too harsh in the previous paragraph. It's not a bad film, per se, but it's not a good film either. With the pedigree of talent that was behind it, it should have at least been good, if not great.

Keep up the good work, Bill...I've been reading The Bits for about 8 years now, and have always respected your opinions.

[micks_address]

hi Bill et al,

i wonder if you have contacts at Warner - could you ask them that when they are using a Dolby TrueHD track - why dont they make it the default track like Paramount do? If your equipment cant handle the TrueHD it would just be output as Dolby Digital anyway... just a hassle to always have to remember to change to the Dolby TrueHD track each time you put a disc in

Cheers,
Mick

[Jeff Kleist]

Because they always assume (this is not without experience and justification) that the people on the other end won't know to change it. I remember someone told me that their parents borrowed the Sopranos and told him they found it very confusing. It took him awhile but he found out that they were putting it in, hitting play (no "play all") and when it kicked back to the menu they put in disc 2, so they were watching episodes 1,5,9 etc

Players are in the works that will contain preference files that discs will be able to read that will automatically default to your preferred audio.

Originally Posted by micks_address

hi Bill et al,

i wonder if you have contacts at Warner - could you ask them that when they are using a Dolby TrueHD track - why dont they make it the default track like Paramount do? If your equipment cant handle the TrueHD it would just be output as Dolby Digital anyway... just a hassle to always have to remember to change to the Dolby TrueHD track each time you put a disc in

Cheers,
Mick

[4K2K]

What would happen if a major studio was to release a title on Blu-ray where the aspect ratio of the picture content was incorrect (a bit like the effect you would get if you watched a 16:9 anamorphic widescreen broadcast on a 4:3 TV and told your set top box that your TV was widescreen instead of 4:3)?

Would the studio recall the Blu-ray/DVD or would it be grounds for a recall?

[Jeff Kleist]

It's highly unlikely to happen

Everything these days is mastered for 16:9 widescreen. Essentially Blu is taken from the top of the food chain, so there's a heck of a lot of people who would have to screw up for that tape to even make it to compression.

The only time I recall something like that happening was when during the authoring stage someone accidently enabled the center zoom pan&scan feature on Last Temptation of Christ Criterion. It's just a flag, and the discs were recalled and corrected. All the data was fine, just this one thing needed to be set to off.

I assume the same thing would apply to another title, but the likelyhood of it happening is so small it's not even worth worrying about

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by micks_address

hi Bill et al,

i wonder if you have contacts at Warner - could you ask them that when they are using a Dolby TrueHD track - why dont they make it the default track like Paramount do? If your equipment cant handle the TrueHD it would just be output as Dolby Digital anyway... just a hassle to always have to remember to change to the Dolby TrueHD track each time you put a disc in

Cheers,
Mick

Mick,

I think your question should be - could you ask them to first include lossless audio track and then flag it as the default track or load top menu instead of directly jumping into the movie ?

[micks_address]

I not sure if you understood my question.... if they used Dobly True HD as the standard track.. then you wouldnt need to change it at all... the player would just output the core dolby digital track if your equipment doest support the truehd track... no user intervention required

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Because they always assume (this is not without experience and justification) that the people on the other end won't know to change it. I remember someone told me that their parents borrowed the Sopranos and told him they found it very confusing. It took him awhile but he found out that they were putting it in, hitting play (no "play all") and when it kicked back to the menu they put in disc 2, so they were watching episodes 1,5,9 etc

Players are in the works that will contain preference files that discs will be able to read that will automatically default to your preferred audio.

[Jeff Kleist]

I not sure if you understood my question.... if they used Dobly True HD as the standard track.. then you wouldnt need to change it at all... the player would just output the core dolby digital track if your equipment doest support the truehd track... no user intervention required

Well, technically there isn't so much of a "core" track as there is a "rider" that travels along side of it.

If your player is capable of decoding THD to PCM and then passing that (like say PS3), then the end user will get stereo and not 5.1 over optical. Given how many people are running DVD players in 16:9 mode on 4:3 TVs, I'd say that a bit of idiot proofing isn't exactly unwarranted.

Personally I wish they'd include a setup menu before it starts so you aren't frantically flipping audio during the logo until the autodetect schemes are in place

Think of it mostly as idiot proofing