Bill Hunt strikes back: American Gangster

[WickyWoo]

[quote]1. I hope you mean 30gb

I mean the video portion of the disc is 20GB. Check the Blu-ray bitrates thread, the exact same video file is used on all Warner titles.

2. Sure, it wasn't ready...sure it wasn't...

You can be cynical and complain all you want, that doesn't change the facts one bit though. It's been confirmed by multiple sources, including people who author discs for a living as to the lead times necessary, especially at Christmas for HighDef.

If they really cared about double dipping, there would be no unrated DVD, it's that simple. They would have saved that for the same marketing push. Why not get the DVD people that will easily sell 10x the units right now to buy twice as well?

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by workshed108

I know it's horrible. I was hoping during the High Defintion era we wouldn't have to go through this. You would think studios would just get it right the first time.

That's big business my man. We'll never be rid of that. Sometimes they double dip for legit reasons and sometimes it's for more cash. While it is bothersome, it's not like these Blu's cost an arm and a leg.

[saprano]

i cant believe you guys are still arguing over this, since when was it bad to make fun of he who should not be named?

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by saprano

i cant you guys are still arguing over this, since when was it bad to make fun of he who should not be named?

Yes you can

Who's that?

[DepTii]

I don't see what the big deal with director's cuts or unrated cuts are, just give me the damn movie. Director's Cut edition screwed my favorite movie, Payback, and I was so close to buying it until I read all the reviews that said not to.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Blu-Beard

Yes you can

Who's that?

i ment to say believe, and that line came from harry potter. its what they call voldermort because their afraid to say his name.

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by saprano

i ment to say believe, and that line came from harry potter its what they call voldermort because their afraid to say his name.

I know, I was just trying to trick you into saying his name. And you did neener neener neener

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Blu-Beard

I know, I was just trying to trick you into saying his name. And you did neener neener neener

LOL good one

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by saprano

LOL good one

Now Tom Marvolo Riddle's gonna getcha

[saprano]

help me please!

[Blu-Beard]

Originally Posted by saprano

help me please!

I can't. I'm not supposed to practise magic outside of school, you know that

[owa]

The thread definitely got side-tracked but at least it's very telling.

As for the article and movie, I was really surprised to see that it has PQ-issues and doesn't include lossless audio. Especially when HD DVD is in dire need of some positive news (i.e. so it is a big deal). Not sure what they were thinking on that one and I'm sure the HD DVD fans can't be too happy about it.

As for some of the other topics in this thread, it's pretty simple for me. PQ/AQ are the top priority. Anything else is just an added bonus and is unnecessary. Like someone else already said, I buy a movie for the movie. If I do check out the extras, imo, they should be in hi-def. You can search the forums and find people new to hi-def asking why the extras are frequently in SD or thinking something is wrong because they're in SD. Just on that alone, I think they should try to include hi-def extras if at all possible. IMO, makes more sense that way and would make it more worthwhile.

But, 18 hours of SD content? I guess that was supposed to be a good thing but as I was trying to picture watching 18 hours of SD content (even split over a few days) I couldn't help but think of how many hi-def movies I could watch during that same timespan. Sorry, just can't relate to that one.

As far as rated/unrated, frequently I don't think the unrated version is any better and sometimes I think it's worse. Occasionaly, I don't even notice what's different. So, if they're releasing the unrated version, I'd prefer that they include the rated version as well or at least make it available for purchase. Ideally, it would be great if they could use seamless branching and include both on the disc.

Originally Posted by workshed108

Yes, it is a big deal that FOX studios are still releasing titles using MPEG2!

Sorry, can't agree. I think I may have posted this recently but oh well. Kingdom of Heaven (one of the first Fox titles), A Few Good Men and Pathfinder are good examples of highly rated movies PQ-wise and they're using MPEG-2.

Quote by RBFilms...

Originally Posted by RBFilms

Let's put it this way. A lot of this depends on the CODEC being used and the technician using it.

I can say this for sure, MPEG-2 just keep looking better and better as you feed it more bandwidth to use.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...6&postcount=96

[WickyWoo]

There's plenty of reference MPEG-2 titles like Black Hawk Down, KOH etc

Predator is only 107 minutes for example, which fits comfortably on a BD-25 with 25 or so mbps CBR with lossless audio. Given that only about 10-15min of that 107 is actually action, it should fit very nicely even after cranking the bitrate for those scenes.

[blindcat87]

Let's see, the OP posted a legitimate thread in the general discussion area about a legitimate article on a legitimate website, an article written by one of our own well respected insiders. The article was making a legitimate point that the title discussed could easily be an excellent Blu-Ray title instead of the less than stellar HD DVD title it is. So, this is an on topic thread discussing an article with bearing on both Blu-Ray and HD DVD.

If a topic that is legitimate and on topic for the forum it was posted in doesn't interest you or bothers you, nothing forces you to click on the thread and read it. To be absolutely blunt, I think you should think twice about posting in someone's thread reproving them for starting it and derailing it from its legitimate topic because you personally do not like it and would rather discuss something else.

If you would rather discuss something else, there is nothing stopping you from ignoring the tread you dislike, letting those that want to discuss the topic discuss it, and starting your own thread to discuss your topic.

If you really feel the thread is off topic or inappropriate, there is a button to report a thread, then the mods can deal with it if it is in violation, and if it is not in violation, those interested in the topic do not have to deal with being lectured about their interest in the topic and having it derailed into a discussion about how the Blu-Ray studios are ripping all of us off and should all be chastised. If I wanted to read a thread about that, I would have clicked on a thread with that topic instead of this one.

Perhaps I am still a little cranky from a rough week, but this little lecture and derailing seems rude and inappropriate to me. There was no bad language, there was no rude, insulting, or childish behavior, just a discussion about an article that was immediately derailed into a rant against Blu-Ray studios. Maybe the OP's editing removed some inappropriate content that I missed that justified derailing the thread, I don't know. If that is the case, I apologize. Otherwise, how about this thread being allowed to return to the original topic and those who are disinterested can start another thread?

On the topic. I am glad to see Bill pointing out a concrete example of what a lot of us have known for a long time. A certain ultra radical portion of the HD DVD community has been extolling at length since the dawn of the formats that there was no solid, real world proof of the capacity and bandwidth differences between the formats being of importance. Well, now there is.

Chris

Originally Posted by lgans316

For the moment neither Universal will turn BLU nor American Gangster will be see a Blu release. Then why in the BLU hell do we need posts like this ? Let's stick on to Blu-ray only in this forum. Why hunt for anti- HD DVD links and post it for reaping sadistic fun. Am I right ?

[MatrixS2000]

Originally Posted by workshed108

So you are basically saying you want downloads then? Why pay for extra disc space and never use it?

LOL - no. Downloads are even worse for quality and I am not going to wait hours for a movie to download in 720p with DD audio.

Show me where you pay extra for the disc space. I bet you can't since BDs and HD DVDs usually cost the same and BD are cheaper than HD DVDs combo which still have less space. So much for paying extra.....

BTW, who said not to use that space? You are assuming. I want a high bit rate video encode AND a lossless audio track (PCM 24/48 preferred). That is what I want to use up the disc space not useless extras....

[workshed108]

Originally Posted by MatrixS2000

LOL - no. Downloads are even worse for quality and I am not going to wait hours for a movie to download in 720p with DD audio.

Show me where you pay extra for the disc space. I bet you can't since BDs and HD DVDs usually cost the same and BD are cheaper than HD DVDs combo which still have less space. So much for paying extra.....

BTW, who said not to use that space? You are assuming. I want a high bit rate video encode AND a lossless audio track (PCM 24/48 preferred). That is what I want to use up the disc space not useless extras....

If you want only the movie then you are paying for features you don't need. You don't 50gb of space for what you are asking for.

[MatrixS2000]

Originally Posted by workshed108

If you want only the movie then you are paying for features you don't need. You don't 50gb of space for what you are asking for.

You don't pay for extras...you pay for the movie.

[miked924]

Watched this last night and the pq and aq were terrible on the hd dvd, I've seen catalog titles that look better! It looked like at the time this disc was being made they were in the final stages of giving up, no effort whatsoever on this one. Hopefully they get it right when it becomes available on blu ray