Gladiator (2000)

[42041]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I said it before and I'll say it again, it's absolutely disturbing that people are AGAINST an exchange program. It wouldn't have any effect on them one way or another so why be against it?

Maybe I overestimate the power of the internet community in influencing corporate decision-making but I think it does affect me. If people are so happy with the studios offering up incremental upgrades, then i don't see why they should be unhappy about another one

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by atexp80

...especially given the fact that Blu-ray is for video and audiophiles and that the Sapphire Series is meant to represent quality.

This doesn't mean I disagree with everything you said, but that part... not really...

Blu-ray is or should be the standard in home-video.
Is it great for "qualityphiles"? Of course, except for a bunch of releases...
But it's a format for everyone and the compressed DVD has been around for too long and is still sold too much today.
The point of this format is to "bring the film-print into our homes" as it were,
and it's only starting to being representative with Blu-ray,
so it should have been a standard way earlier if you ask me.
But that's just a matter of how it fits into the market and everything...

The 'Sapphire Series'-label is definitely laughable for having this average quality release on its line.
Especially considering this title is like the second or whatever in the series.
Definitely a big mistake, cause now, why would we believe the next "Sapphire" BD would be any better...

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I said it before and I'll say it again, it's absolutely disturbing that people are AGAINST an exchange program. It wouldn't have any effect on them one way or another so why be against it?

If you're referring to my post (and you may or may not be, pardon me if you were not), then I stated "I sincerely hope they do offer up a replacement program for everyone, but in this case, all I'm saying is I don't think they're obligated to. "

I'm not against them offering a replacement program. Once again it's how people take the meaning of words. Just because I'm saying I don't think they have to doesn't mean that I'm against it, just as saying that I think it would be nice if they did doesn't mean that I will be pulling my pitchfork out of retirement and joining the mob to beat down Paramount's doors demanding one.

Basically my view boils down to this for the Gladiator release:

A replacement program would be a good gesture and show of faith on the part of the studio. It would also cement the view that the Sapphire Series offers the best possible picture and audio quality using newly minted transfers. If they choose not to though, then yes, it will have tarnished the name of the Sapphire Series label and burned some consumers, but I don't think the studio is at fault. It's a questionable business decision for sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was wrong.

I can't see how my view is disturbing as it's pretty matter of fact. The fact that I chose not to purchase this edition means I'm not emotionally invested one way or another because I haven't paid for an item that isn't as good as it could be. I'm just looking at the situation from all sides. This argument has been pretty heated from day one and often times anyone who's said they don't think the studio must have a replacement program has been branded with the "if you're not with us, you're with them" tag. I am most certainly not with the studio on this as I think that the PQ could be greatly improved, but just because of that I'm not going hammer the studio demanding a new transfer.

If in case you were referring to others, apologies.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by Damage Inc.

This doesn't mean I disagree with everything you said, but that part... not really...

Blu-ray is or should be the standard in home-video.
Is it great for "qualityphiles"? Of course, except for a bunch of releases...
But it's a format for everyone and the compressed DVD has been around for too long and is still sold too much today.
The point of this format is to "bring the film-print into our homes" as it were,
and it's only starting to being representative with Blu-ray,
so it should have been a standard way earlier if you ask me.
But that's just a matter of how it fits into the market and everything...

The 'Sapphire Series'-label is definitely laughable for having this average quality release on its line.
Especially considering this title is like the second or whatever in the series.
Definitely a big mistake, cause now, why would we believe the next "Sapphire" BD would be any better...

I completely agree with what you've said and I've clarified it a bit more in my post above actually. I think for the sake of the Sapphire Series aspiring to be the best of the best there should be a replacement program in order to maintain that aspiration to basically be Paramount's "Criterion Collection". If they do not, then as I've said before it will certainly hurt their reputation and I would like to think many of us will be more considerate of caveat emptor in the future.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by atexp80

If you're referring to my post (and you may or may not be, pardon me if you were not), then I stated "I sincerely hope they do offer up a replacement program for everyone, but in this case, all I'm saying is I don't think they're obligated to. "

No worries, I wasn't refering to you. And I agree, they're technically not obligated to. However, it would be the right thing to do to make the customers who supported the original release happy. And like you said (and also Damage Inc.), they should have a replacement program just to save the Sapphire Series name. I for one don't see Sapphire Series and think "quality" anymore.

But I was more refering to some of the posts in the news comments section. People there are saying things like "they shouldn't offer a replacement program and people need to be responsible for their choices." I simply cannot understand the "logic" in that.

[STARSCREAM]

Only reason I bought it was I got it for $10 and figured it would be atleast 2 years or more before they re-released it with a better transfer. WRONG, it's gonna be 8 months! That's the problem I have. They KNEW it was fubar'd from the get go.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by atexp80

I agree that saying that can lead people to think one thing, however even saying that's subjective. "Best picture" can mean that it's the best period, or the best picture quality released for consumers thus far. Now if he had said "best possible picture", well then he would have been flat out lying. Rob Moore should choose words more carefully and we shouldn't assume anything when it comes to a product just because of a catchy title like "Sapphire Series". We've found special editions that aren't that special before and other releases pumped up to be fantastic when they are simply average.

I used to be a regular visitor to The HD Room back around the time the Sapphire Series was announced and the initial report on the press release is where I remember the optimum statement from. I found the link here. You'll notice in the article that it states that "In Paramount's words: Each film in the collection will have optimum audio and video and extensive extras in two-disc sets." Both the statement above and Rob Moore's statement indicate a great release, but neither state that it's perfect. While that's what we were hoping for (or as close as is possible) there's nothing that states outright that's what they were going to provide. I imagine when the re-release is announced it will be populated with statements such as "best possible picture quality", "highest achievable quality" or "brand new optimal transfer" etc to indicate the difference between the new release and the old.

As with any product, words can always have some many different interpretations so I choose to always let the product speak for itself.

You are correct. I am wrong.

"Best Picture" is too vague. It could mean "best currently available" (which was true) or it could mean "Best Achievable" which would have been false.

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

And like you said (and also Damage Inc.), they should have a replacement program just to save the Sapphire Series name. I for one don't see Sapphire Series and think "quality" anymore.

To be honest, the very first time I saw they were going to put out this typical "quality series"
I already found it pretty dodgy.
First of all I kind of hate them, cause again isn't the point of the Blu-ray-format
to release everything in the best quality?
And sure, nice to have a label which would guarantee the top quality.
But once I saw the forums here burst about 'Gladiator' I just burst out laughing
cause I just knew that something like this would happen.

[steve_dave]

So far we have had five Sapphire Series releases...

Braveheart and Forrest Gump featured beautiful high-definition widescreen transfers.

The Godfather and The Godfather Part II also had beautiful high-defintion widescreen transfers.

So the only odd one out was Gladiator which has an inconsistent transfer and let's just focus here on the details.

Braveheart, Forrest Gump, The Godfather and The Godfather Part II had their elements in Paramount's possession. Thus Paramount could produce the Blu-ray Disc themselves and focus on the high quality presentaiton we all want.

Gladiator, on the other hand, is different. Since Dreamworks used to be under the Universal house, Paramount did not have the elements available to them. This means that Paramount was not able to produce the Blu-ray Disc that we are pissing all over. Universal produced the Blu-ray Disc for the EU, UK, Aus, HK, Japan, Kor, Can, AND US releases.. Universal used a subpar transfer and unfortunately, people are associating the Sapphire Series with sht releases when the most of the world shares the exact same presentation. The Universal International releases are not labeled "Sapphire Series" but its still the same poor release. So what happens to Korea, Japan, UK, Australia, and the EU when the remastered release comes out? Would Universal be willing to eat crow and also offer a replacement program?

Its Universal's fault that this occurred and a lot of people in this thread should be aware of this since we've mentioned it numorous times. The problem is that everyone wants to just overgeneralize and say the Sapphire Series is "crap" or is "poor quality" or "subpar" but the exact same transfer is used nearly worldwide and international releases are not "Sapphire Series" branded so shouldn't we overgeneralize and say that all Universal International releases are "crap," "poor quality," or "subpar too?"

[42041]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

Its Universal's fault that this occurred and a lot of people in this thread should be aware of this since we've mentioned it numorous times. The problem is that everyone wants to just overgeneralize and say the Sapphire Series is "crap" or is "poor quality" or "subpar" but the exact same transfer is used nearly worldwide and international releases are not "Sapphire Series" branded so shouldn't we overgeneralize and say that all Universal International releases are "crap," "poor quality," or "subpar too?"

I am aware of this, but Paramount still presumably knew what they were putting out.

It was kind of odd to see Universal getting so many kudos in the studio report card thread a week or two ago, considering I can't think of a single catalog title they've given stellar treatment to.

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

So far we have had five Sapphire Series releases...

Braveheart and Forrest Gump featured beautiful high-definition widescreen transfers.

The Godfather and The Godfather Part II also had beautiful high-defintion widescreen transfers.

So the only odd one out was Gladiator which has an inconsistent transfer and let's just focus here on the details.

Braveheart, Forrest Gump, The Godfather and The Godfather Part II had their elements in Paramount's possession. Thus Paramount could produce the Blu-ray Disc themselves and focus on the high quality presentaiton we all want.

Gladiator, on the other hand, is different. Since Dreamworks used to be under the Universal house, Paramount did not have the elements available to them. This means that Paramount was not able to produce the Blu-ray Disc that we are pissing all over. Universal produced the Blu-ray Disc for the EU, UK, Aus, HK, Japan, Kor, Can, AND US releases.. Universal used a subpar transfer and unfortunately, people are associating the Sapphire Series with sht releases when the most of the world shares the exact same presentation. The Universal International releases are not labeled "Sapphire Series" but its still the same poor release. So what happens to Korea, Japan, UK, Australia, and the EU when the remastered release comes out? Would Universal be willing to eat crow and also offer a replacement program?

Its Universal's fault that this occurred and a lot of people in this thread should be aware of this since we've mentioned it numorous times. The problem is that everyone wants to just overgeneralize and say the Sapphire Series is "crap" or is "poor quality" or "subpar" but the exact same transfer is used nearly worldwide and international releases are not "Sapphire Series" branded so shouldn't we overgeneralize and say that all Universal International releases are "crap," "poor quality," or "subpar too?"

I could not agree more!!!

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

Gladiator, on the other hand, is different. Since Dreamworks used to be under the Universal house, Paramount did not have the elements available to them. This means that Paramount was not able to produce the Blu-ray Disc that we are pissing all over. Universal produced the Blu-ray Disc ?"

We/I know that, but, is it not Paramounts fault for allowing it? Yes.

They are putting their foot down now, as opposed to back in August when they should have.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

We/I know that, but, is it not Paramounts fault for allowing it? Yes.

They are putting their foot down now, as opposed to back in August when they should have.

Exactly. I don't just blame Paramount, I also blame Universal. And also Ridley Scott somewhat for not checking his own movie. He bragged about how Kingdom of Heaven on Blu-ray matched the master perfectly. And he also put all that work into Blade Runner. Why didn't he check Gladiator a little more closely? If someone has any insight into this, I'd be happy to hear it actually. We all hear about how Michael Bay checks his movies to see how closely the HD formats match his vision, and we also hear about Steven Spielberg. Since Ridley Scott commented on KOH, I'd expect him to be like the other director's mentioned.

Either way, Paramount's name is on the product here along with their "Sapphire Series" label making them responsible for what happened with this past release reguardless of who originally gave them the source. They should've checked it back then. And since they didn't (or did, but not in time), the right thing to do would be to offer an exchange.

[lDlisturb3d]

Its about time, i wonder if they will be giving a discount or replacement program deal. If not im just going to either give mine away or sell it.

[Blu-ray Fanatic]

If I were you, I would sell it right away. Don't wait til the remastered version comes out because the current edition might not sell well by then.

[TylerDurden]

Sold mine on Ebay for $16.50.

[rteer88]

Has this been confirmed?

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by rteer88

Has this been confirmed?

No, not officially. Although with the continued sources reporting about it, I'd say it's close to inevitable.

[spcamaj]

I hope it does get the remaster, I was holding out for this one.

[Travis]

I'm waiting for the disc to be released officially before I get rid of mine. I held of on Goodfellas hoping for a HD-audio edition just to see the same BD with and old DVD packaged with a book. If Warner can do that, Paramount, Universal and others can pull that too. Maybe it will be a collector's edition or a new box. Remember the Terminator with the Lenticular cover?

Rumors may say new transfer, but I'm not holding my breath, especially since it has only been half a year or so.