Gladiator (2000)

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Have you purchased a Paramount title since Gladiator, I think customer confidence is probably ok. Toyota, maybe more of a consumer confidence issue.

Sure have, Godfather I and II, both of which were identical to the previous releases which were universally acclaimed by the reviewers and members of this site.

Nothing else though.

[J.Cornelius]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Isnt the studios remastering within 4-5 months an admission of defect?

If the studio believes it to be satisfactory, they should not remaster it.

Not defective, does the disk work? The quality of the product is the issue, it is not defective, it was an abomination, I agree, but I simply do not believe an exchange is warranted. Do you actually think there will be an exchange program?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

Yes, it unequivocally is.

Thats what I thought. Especially when we go back to the Saphire tagline... the BEST picture and audio quality. If it was the best, it couldnt be improved, right?

Oh... I see Mr. Paramount/Uni, technology has evolved tremendously since the original release and you are now able to improve the picture.

[Chordata]

I don't really care about it that much. I bought this knowing it had problems (of course, I didn't think they'd be re-making it 4 months later), and I don't expect an exchange/refund/rebate, etc.

But I hope they do it -- that would impress me greatly.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Not defective, does the disk work? The quality of the product is the issue, it is not defective, it was an abomination, I agree, but I simply do not believe an exchange is warranted. Do you actually think there will be an exchange program?

Defect - a shortcoming, fault, or imperfection.

And yes, Paramount remastering it is a sign that they know there's something wrong with the video quality. Which is why many people here are upset and rightfully so. They didn't get what they paid for which is a good presentation of the film. Now a better presentation (one that should've happened in the first place given the whole "Sapphire Series" label) might be coming out less than a year later.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Not defective, does the disk work? The quality of the product is the issue, it is not defective, it was an abomination, I agree, but I simply do not believe an exchange is warranted. Do you actually think there will be an exchange program?

I agree "defective" is a subjective/gray word in this case, and probably wrong.

I can only say this about an exchange program, based on how I conduct my own personal business, I would have announced a remaster and exchange program right when the poop hit the fan. I feel too strongly about doing the right thing to let politics get in the way.

If I were Toyota, I would have been all over that a LONG time ago as well. I dont like tarnish... especially on my name.

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by squidpuppet

isnt the studios remastering within 4-5 months an admission of defect?

If the studio believes it to be satisfactory, they should not remaster it.

+1,000,000.00

[J.Cornelius]

I am in the same boat, I knew what I was buying but for 10 bucks I said what the hell. And to tell you the truth I will more than likely buy the next iteration of this fantastic movie.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

I am in the same boat, I knew what I was buying but for 10 bucks I said what the hell. And to tell you the truth I will more than likely buy the next iteration of this fantastic movie.

Thats what I did. $10.00 after months of waiting for news.

Bait and switch? Is that too strong? We were basically told that there was nothing in the works for a redo and we should suck it up and buy it.

More than one industry insider told us that the studios had no intention of a redo.

Feels a bit tainted to me.

[JBL4645]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I agree "defective" is a subjective/gray word in this case, and probably wrong.

I can only say this about an exchange program, based on how I conduct my own personal business, I would have announced a remaster and exchange program right when the poop hit the fan. I feel too strongly about doing the right thing to let politics get in the way.

If I were Toyota, I would have been all over that a LONG time ago as well. I dont like tarnish... especially on my name.

Defect my foot! They have trained monkeys working for them. This is BS they rushed it and thought no one would notice.

Originally Posted by Darkhawk9587

This trend of putting out blus with questionable PQ (referring to this and Gangs of New York) is really getting annoying. Why do you have to release a film on blu only to rerelease it a few months down the road because people didn't like the first one?

They where impatient and quite frankly plain GREEDY! I haven’t touched that dodgy UK Bluray Gladiator after reading it was sticker for picture.

Its most likely the same used for other DVD transfers from the dodgy digital master tape.

And where is the Dolby digital-EX track! I’m sick and tired of Universal forcing dtsHDMA down my mouth! I heard in the cinema in Dolby stereo SR-D and I want Dolby!

Universal doesn’t know the meaning of the world Universal. “A whole” and they should give the consumer fair individual choice rather than thinking about themselves!

[blu_sharpy]

JBL - Whats wrong with DTS HD-MA? You must be in the minority of people who dont want a lossless track but rather a lossy track. Times change and you have to move on.

[J.Cornelius]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Thats what I did. $10.00 after months of waiting for news.

Bait and switch? Is that too strong? We were basically told that there was nothing in the works for a redo and we should suck it up and buy it.

More than one industry insider told us that the studios had no intention of a redo.

Feels a bit tainted to me.

Just a thought and pure speculation, but with the disk going to print maybe there had to be a certain amount sold before they would announce a "redo", if not for a better word. I actually like that, do over sort of speak. Anyway, I am sure some financial wiz did the math, market research, etc....to figure out the point in time to issue the redo. Cost/benefit analysis of the ideal time to re-issue.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by JBL4645

Defect my foot! They have trained monkeys working for them. This is BS they rushed it and thought no one would notice.



They where impatient and quite frankly plain GREEDY! I haven’t touched that dodgy UK Bluray Gladiator after reading it was sticker for picture.

Its most likely the same used for other DVD transfers from the dodgy digital master tape.

And where is the Dolby digital-EX track! I’m sick and tired of Universal forcing dtsHDMA down my mouth! I heard in the cinema in Dolby stereo SR-D and I want Dolby!

Universal doesn’t know the meaning of the world Universal. “A whole” and they should give the consumer fair individual choice rather than thinking about themselves!

You heard a Dolby stereo track in the cinema and now you want Dolby? I'm sorry but I can't get behind that. Lossless is lossless. Be glad that they're including a lossless track in general.

There is nothing wrong with the sound on Gladiator, only the picture.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by J.Cornelius

Just a thought and pure speculation, but with the disk going to print maybe there had to be a certain amount sold before they would announce a "redo", if not for a better word. I actually like that, do over sort of speak. Anyway, I am sure some financial wiz did the math, market research, etc....to figure out the point in time to issue the redo. Cost/benefit analysis of the ideal time to re-issue.

Magic question. Does that certain quantity sold, cover the costs of an exchange?

Will they be honorable? We'll see.

[PrivatePixel]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

But the problem is that Paramount realized that there's a problem with the transfer, and less than a year later, they may release a new version correcting the issue. That is why people believe there should be an exchange program, because Paramount is basically admitting there's an issue with the previous disc by remastering it for a rerelease.

I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: I will take the position that the execs at Paramount were not fully aware that anything was wrong with the initial release, that they were confident in the abilities of whomever was entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing the transfer and/or encoding of the material. One could argue that, from a quality control standpoint, greater attention to detail should have been paid by these individuals during the entire process, but hindsight is 20/20 and the resulting product has been out on the shelves for a while now; all we can address is the present.

I think replacement programs should be reserved for discs that are either defective in workmanship (does not apply to this situation) and/or a specific issue(s) related to the source material was identified post-production (which we find ourselves in); this is where things get tricky. There are screen caps posted online which show a loss of information in certain frames (probably due to the overuse of DNR), but this is not an issue that can be replicated on every commercial player during playback. I think the main contention(s) regarding this release stems from the application of considerable DNR and EE, but these issues plague quite a few Blu-ray releases, and perhaps not reason enough for them to be withdrawn from the marketplace. Substandard transfers/encodes will occur time-to-time from studios hoping to capitalize on a given occasion (e.g. tie-in to a sequel, to commemorate an anniversary, for a shopping holiday), but regardless of the occasion, the responsibility falls on the shoulders of the consumer to ensure that the product s/he plans to purchase meet his/her expectations, and that involves a bit of homework on their part. The information is out there; it's up to you to become educated so that you can make an informed decision.

Here's where my gripe comes in: too many people on this forum purchased this title willingly despite advice to the contrary. Why? For two reasons mainly: i) price, and/or ii) the rebate for the upgrade from DVD. Regardless of the reason, a purchase is a confirmation and endorsement of said product to the studio that you accept the product as is, faults (if any) and all. Time and time again, the word had gotten out that this was a subpar release, but some were either too stubborn or too foolhardy to heed the warning, convinced that either i) the value of the lower-quality product, relative to its price point, made it acceptable, and/or ii) remained unconvinced by the opinions of professional reviewers, as well as their peers, that the quality could not possibly be as appalling as suggested, and therefore, had to witness it personally to satisfy their curiosity. People will concoct any number of excuses to validate a bad purchase, but by doing this repeatedly, they are endorsing what the studios are doing; after all, if they're willing to tolerate what they're offering, where is the incentive for them to go the extra mile, to offer the best product they can to begin with?

A replacement program in this instance is the equivalent of a pardon for a poor, illogical decision. If someone has to pay to learn from their mistake(s), then so be it.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: I will take the position that the execs at Paramount were not fully aware that anything was wrong with the initial release, that they were confident in the abilities of whomever was entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing the transfer and/or encoding of the material.

Yep, I think it's a given that the execs do not get involved in the QA/QC of titles and they have the proverbial 30,000 ft view of their company's operations.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by PrivatePixel

I think replacement programs should be reserved for discs that are either defective in workmanship (does not apply to this situation) and/or a specific issue(s) related to the source material was identified post-production (which we find ourselves in); this is where things get tricky. .

I'll play Devils Devils advocate Having fun now.

This is a case of defective workmanship and failed QC. The subcontracted third party failed to make a disc that pleased the studio. The studios QC department failed to catch the defective "level of quality".

By remastering, the studio is acknowledging that the workers involved in the production of the first disc made a mistake.

The Studio is acknowledging that the subcontracted third party did not deliver a product worthy of a Saphire label.

The studio is acknowledging that the first disc was a mistake and should never have been released.

No?

[RedIsNotBlue]

If Universal has an exchange program then Lionsgate should offer one too for their early releases no?

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by RedIsNotBlue

If Universal has an exchange program then Lionsgate should offer one too for their early releases no?

Um, extremely doubtful. Gladiator might be getting a re-release because it was an extremely high-profile release (launch of the new "Sapphire Series," and a Best Picture winner), and there was much talk about the BD's defects (both on the internet, and behind closed doors according to things Penton has posted). And even then, an exchange program is not a sure thing.

None of the early Lionsgate discs had even a quarter of the exposure as Gladiator, and there was much less of an expectation for them considering how early in Blu-ray's lifetime they were released. The chance of any exchange program on these is about zero in my opinion. Some will get re-released years down the road in anniversary editions or as tie-ins to new movies, and some will probably never be re-released. And there really aren't many that are terrible - just obviously not up to the standards we expect today.

As happy as I am that Gangs of New York and Gladiator are getting fixed, I dread having people expect a re-release and exchange program for every stupid disc they have a problem with... These are the EXCEPTIONS, they will NEVER be the rule.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by RedIsNotBlue

If Universal has an exchange program then Lionsgate should offer one too for their early releases no?

The early Lionsgate titles weren't marketed as the "Sapphire Series" or something similar, which Paramount claims is a title receiving the top level of treatment.