Commentary: Year-End Studio Report Cards

[sj001]

Note how he gives WB an A grade, but Disney and Sony are an A-...

I won't post it here, it is very long, but it definitely shows his bias as well as his ignorance. Have a read...

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...ort_Cards/1276

[JJ]

::watches Harry Potter 5's bitrates, notes lows in the single digits::

::watches Pirates 3 bitrates, notes highs in the 47s::

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by sj001

Note how he gives WB an A grade, but Disney and Sony are an A-...

I won't post it here, it is very long, but it definitely shows his bias as well as his ignorance. Have a read...

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...ort_Cards/1276

I don't think he's ignorant, just deeply biased.

[quetzalcoatl]

I like how Foxs mistakes are flustrating yet those by Warner is trying to correct its problems.
To call yourself a movie buff and not mark down a studio for uning lossly tracks on almost all of the movie they mad for the year. Give me a break.

[stockstar1138]

wb released a lot. really, i mean they are big guns really pushing HDM. The jobs they have done with HP5, 2001, The Shining, 300, Blazing Saddles, etc. are fantastic, maybe not up their with Disney quality, but at the same time WB released a lot more movies too. Keep in mind he is trying to not get a bunch flaiming over his article too. Keeping WB at the top keeps things more calm.

WB def. beats Sony, Sony did not release nearly as many movies, not even close to as many quality movies, and some of Sony had some not-so-awesome transfers too.

He got Universal and Paramount right, if he was red biased he would have had those two ranked higher.

Starz and Lions Gate both got A-, if this guy was red biased, no way those two would have gotten A-.

Fox deserves a D+. I frankly partially blame them for the Paramount fiasco, if they had not taken that huge hiatus, the blu-ray numbers would have been too strong for paramount to have left. When they did come back they couldn't get stuff released on time either

MGM didn't do anything great either.

I think he did a very nice job. I might have switched Disney and WB, maybe, but I could argue it both ways. It is a good, fair article.

[L or S of Perfect?]

Warner does not deserve an A.

Quality over quantity.

A small studio that releases 5 movies in a year that's has superb picture & audio quality deserves an A more than a large studio that releases 50 movies in a year with subpar quality all around with a few above average flicks sprinkled in.

The quality of disney & sony releases have been outstanding. Fox has been good, but plagued with player compatability issues.

Paramount, warner, and universal have subpar quality. Subpar in picture, audio, or both.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by JJxiv1215

::watches Harry Potter 5's bitrates, notes lows in the single digits::

::watches Pirates 3 bitrates, notes highs in the 47s::

i do think bitrates matter. however, if a transfer looks good, a transfer looks good and while i don't think potter deserves transfer of the year. it still looks better than 95% of the stuff out there. could it have looked better with higher bitrates. yes. does warner still deserve praises for how good Potter 5 looks. yes. its still a very nice transfer, wb obviously took their time with this one.

[JadedRaverLA]

Well, he does give higher grades to Sony and Disney than he does Universal and Paramount... so it's not THAT bad.

And I love Warner's catalog of titles... now if could put the right discs in the right cases and get them onto store shelves. If that isn't enough reason to drop them to an A- (or B+) I don't know what is.

But giving Fox a FAR lower grade than Universal is a joke. Fox went MIA for awhile, and deserves to be docked for it, but Universal has put out some absolutely abysmal transfers -- not to mention some oddly chosen films.

Whatever. You can bet that HD DVD fans are saying he's biased against them. To them, Paramount should have been graded higher than Sony/Disney... possibly Universal too.

If everyone thinks you're biased... then you're probably doing your job.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by L or S of Perfect?

Warner does not deserve an A.

Quality over quantity.

A small studio that releases 5 movies in a year that's has superb picture & audio quality deserves an A more than a large studio that releases 50 movies in a year with subpar quality all around.

while wb had some hiccups earlier in the year, they did start releasing some very nice pcm tracks on titles near the end. they also had many very nice video transfers (listed in my post above). sony did some not so great transfers too, keep in mind, and we want to elevate them. wb released many great, quality transfers and movies this year. like i said its either them or disney. WB worked their butts off getting HDM off the ground, they deserve some praise. obviously it wasn't about quantity either, othewise uni would have done better.

[Seretur]

I stopped reading this attentively about the time he said that New Line's usage of region coding was "nonsense".

That entire article is so full of typical HD DVD half-truths and obfuscations and FUD, all cloaked under the aura of impartiality and competence.

Zyber is DANGEROUS, way more dangerous than the run of the mill fanboys. He seems competent and objective, and yet he is anything but. He's someone I'll never forgive for the damage he has done to the development of high-end HD media. Ever.

[stockstar1138]

if i was an hd dvd fanboy. i would be saying this is blu biased. lionsgate and starz get ranked higher for what? lions gate doesn't produce excellent trasnfers and they don't have any interactive features, same with starz, yet they get higher than universal or paramount! same with sony. what did sony put out that was so great. spiderman 1-2 had no extras and the transfer wasn't as good as transformers or hot fuzz, and those all had tons of bonuses. why do they get 2 letter grades higher? not fair, blu biased is what id say.

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

If everyone thinks you're biased... then you're probably doing your job.

This piece is not quite as biased as most of what he writes, but he IS biased.

[Clark Kent]

HDD has an infatuation with all things Warner. They consistently overrate Warner titles for technical qualifications in their reviews. I was not impressed with their end of the year best list either. Highly biased for HD DVD.

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

HDD has an infatuation with all things Warner. They consistently overrate Warner titles for technical qualifications in their reviews. I was not impressed with their end of the year best list either. Highly biased for HD DVD.

I agree. Normally Brown is less biased than Bracke and Zyber, but he seems to be catching the red disease now too.

[Blu-heaven]

I think it was fair article especially by Zyber(Big time HD DUD fanboy)- Warner should of got B+ or A- and Disney should of got A+

[zombie]

Universal gets a B+ - WTF is Josh smoking??!! Good Lord, this guy is delusional! Give them a friggin' D and be done with it.

Numerous combo playback problems and their summer catalog titles in particular look mediocre at best. Many of them were films that were only a few years old. I fear what the real classics in their catalog like Dracula (1931) will look like.

I think his bias went into hyperdrive there and while some could claim we have a similar bias for Blu-ray, let's not forget how many here have said they don't even want Universal to support Blu-ray if their releases are going to look like their current HD DVD lineup does.

[Thundercrash07]

Should be more like:

Fox, Disney, Sony: A
Warner: B
.
.
.
.
Universal, Paramount: F (you know why )

[sj001]

I just cannot fathom, other than the bias, how you can possibly give Universal a high rating, most of their releases have been terrible. Plus the combo discs have been a disaster as well. You can dock Universal even more because Ken Graffeo is on board too.

Well, at least he gave Weinstein an F, since they basically disappeared. He's asking where they went, probably going neutral, so they can actually make some money.

I cannot fathom how you would give Disney lower than anyone else, they were top notch in my opinion, and released a solid number of titles, they are the leader in high-quality Hi-Def movies this year IMHO.

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by patrick99

This piece is not quite as biased as most of what he writes, but he IS biased.

Sure he is. And so are we. But it certainly appears he was attempting to be fair. No HD DVD exclusive studio got an A or an A-, but two Blu-ray exclusive studios did. Sometimes we just need to be thankful when others make the effort at truth -- it doesn't happen often.

[Rustmonsteru]

Warner doesn't deserve to be anywhere near that high. Putting out tons of movies in a half-ass way does not qualify as top of the line to me...and to rank Disney as anything less than the top deserves a shovel the face.