Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

[metal134]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

The more I think about it, the more I am sure that Lawrence Of Arabia can fit on only one disc and have amazing picture quality, because it's widescreen. I've never seen it, but Troy has received 5 out of 5 for picture quality here and it only has a video bit rate of 11.78 mbps! That's insane, not even half of an average video bit rate for a DVD. Plus Troy was on an inferior VC-1 codec. I think that LoA can just manage to squeeze a 22 mbps video bit rate.

The more I think about it, the more I think that the notion of 4 hours of film on one 50GB disc looking compressed is a total placebo and in people's mind's.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by metal134

Don't see why compression should be needed to fit 200 minutes on 50 GB. That's a HUGE amount of space. Honestly, I don't really care about having to get up and change the disc, I get up enough times during the course of a movie to go to the bathroom, get a soda, put the dog out, whatever. But I still like to have the movie altogether, in one disc and in one piece. I honestly feel that there would be no discernible difference, save by placebo effect, between having it on one disc and spreading it over two.

It's ironic since when it's shown theatrically, it's typically on 2 platters, with an intermission break. So even in theaters (on film, anyway), it's not even on "one disc".

[metal134]

Firstly, that's not irony. Secondly, I don't give a damn how many pieces it's in in the theater because, last I checked, the theater's reels aren't part of my personal collection.

[KubrickFan]

If it can be put on one disc, I'm all for it. But, since this is one of the biggest titles (or the biggest?) that Sony owns, I don't want it looking any less than it could. There's an Intermission, which would be the obvious break. It'd be insane not to do it, if the quality were to suffer from it.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by metal134

Firstly, that's not irony. Secondly, I don't give a damn how many pieces it's in in the theater because, last I checked, the theater's reels aren't part of my personal collection.

That's just the placebo effect.

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by paper tiger

I may just pick this single-disc UK version up. I would love the US collector's set, however even after shipping the import the price is just right.

Yeah, I have the UK version pre-ordered. I haven't made up my mind for certain if I'm going to get it or the US collector's boxset, but pre-ordering it locks in the price, I'm thinking the £11.20 price is kind of cheap and may go up. And actually it works out to only £9.33 (under US$15)- the UK has a VAT (Value Added Tax) of around 17%, kinda like a sales tax except that it's included in the price, not added on like our sales tax. And when you order for delivery outside the UK, Amazon deducts the VAT from the price.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by metal134

Firstly, that's not irony. Secondly, I don't give a damn how many pieces it's in in the theater because, last I checked, the theater's reels aren't part of my personal collection.

Right. Because either way, it doesn't matter, you still get the film in 2 pieces, since it has an intermission. That's what makes it ironic though, sorry bud.

Glad you don't give a "damn" though.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by retablo

It's ironic since when it's shown theatrically, it's typically on 2 platters, with an intermission break. So even in theaters (on film, anyway), it's not even on "one disc".

Film. Not a 50gig Blu. No comparison at all. The issue is not spreading it over two discs the issue is WHY if it will look no better (and it won't) if it's spread over two discs?

That said, no one knows anything at this point. All I know is that Sony will do whatever is best for this film. They've got an A+ already so they're not going to do anything to endanger that.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

If it can be put on one disc, I'm all for it. But, since this is one of the biggest titles (or the biggest?) that Sony owns, I don't want it looking any less than it could. There's an Intermission, which would be the obvious break. It'd be insane not to do it, if the quality were to suffer from it.

The quality would not suffer on a Blu-50. Plenty of room.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by retablo

Glad you don't give a "damn" though.

Why should he (or anybody else for that matter) care how many reels a film is on when shown theatrically?

[metal134]

Originally Posted by rickah88

That's just the placebo effect.

Non sequitur.

I'm sorry, but there would be no difference. You'll THINK you can see one, but you can't.

[metal134]

Originally Posted by retablo

That's what makes it ironic though, sorry bud.

That is not the definition of irony,

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by metal134

Non sequitur.

I'm sorry, but there would be no difference. You'll THINK you can see one, but you can't.

No, I'll wait and see what the technical disc specs say. You're trying to overthink the room, and failing miserably.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by metal134

That is not the definition of irony,

Actually, it's a textbook definition in this case. Again, stop trying to overthink...you may strain something.

[metal134]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Actually, it's a textbook definition in this case. Again, stop trying to overthink...you may strain something.

Wow.

irony
Noun:
The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.



In no way does that fit the conversation. It would be irony if you get your definition of the term from Alanis Morisette, but you see, I get mine from the dictionary.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by metal134

Wow.

irony
Noun:
The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.



In no way does that fit the conversation. It would be irony if you get your definition of the term from Alanis Morisette, but you see, I get mine from the dictionary.

Oh boy...
Quick recap: You are championing the idea LoA will fit, cleanly, on 1 disc...others are stating their desire for 2 discs...it was mentioned that LoA has an intermission, and comes on(at least) 2 reels...therefore one can, safely, say that 2 is the opposite of 1, suggesting irony was involved.

Again, you are trying way to hard for a message board.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by metal134

Wow.

irony
Noun:
The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.



In no way does that fit the conversation. It would be irony if you get your definition of the term from Alanis Morisette, but you see, I get mine from the dictionary.

Yeah, you wanted the movie on 1 disc, and I was pointing out that even when shown theatrically, it's on 2 discs (platters). That's irony.

Sorry that needs extensive explaining...

[retablo]

Originally Posted by octagon

Why should he (or anybody else for that matter) care how many reels a film is on when shown theatrically?

I guess humor is lost on all of you, lol.

Originally Posted by whitesheik

The quality would not suffer on a Blu-50. Plenty of room.

Tell that to the Gettysburg and Gods & Generals discs...

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by retablo

I guess humor is lost on all of you, lol.

Now I'm hoping the movie is spread over 3 discs...what would that be called?

[retablo]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Now I'm hoping the movie is spread over 3 discs...what would that be called?

Haha... I hope they split it, no reason not to, at the intermission anyway. Why do an 8K scan if it's going to be so compressed that a 2K scan wold suffice?