The Avatar Blu-ray Release Thread

[MATT90]

I will probably buy this release, because it's the one that will most likely have a steelbook edition.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by DRS

Ive seen the film 7 times, and its never lost its luster. Ill gladly pick up this release just so I can rewatch the film whenever I want, 3d or no 3d.

I've only seen it three... but each of those times it was "just as new" and just as emotionally impactful. I can't wait to watch it again, and again, and again...

I'll get the bare-bones Blu-ray. But my *next* purchase will be the 3D version... I'll skip whatever interium editions FOX tries to throw our way.

[Frozenpinky]

Originally Posted by SillyMammo

I also think that the bare-bones release is coming so soon is because this movie is getting massively pirated.

It is being pirated, but that hasnt hurt ticket sales too much. The reason its coming to home video so soon (meaning, while it is still technically doing great in theaters) is because they had to pull it from many of the screens it was showing on to make room for Alice In Wonderland.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by 42041

Bitrate is not a *meaningless* statistic, it directly represents the amount of data the codec has to work with, it's just an incomplete one and the one most readily available for misinterpretation, since there are many ways to utilize or waste that data (compressing noise in deep shadow regions, for instance). I think it's a good thing that Avatar has no extras on the disc. With these 9+ figure box office movies, it won't kill the studios to offer these as multi-disc releases. I think it's a bad thing that they're delaying the other disc until November, but their decision to double dip would probably not change even if they fit Avatar on a BD25 with transparent quality.

You realize you just provided great support for my arguement. A high bitrate does not equal a better transfer. Usually all it means is that the studio failed to filter out useless and unessesary data in order to save money. A filtered transfer with bitrates in the low 20s would look 100% identical to a so called Superbit transfer that utilizes bitrates in the upper 30s. There are limitations to low bit rates obviously. There is a point where the image can no longer be filtered without compromising quality which is something I don't want. I want these discs to look as good as they can. What I don't want is anyone thinking that the lack of extras on this release has anything to do with quality when in reality there is no reason whatsoever for the lack of extras other then Fox wanting you to buy the movie twice.

If Avatar is not coming in 3D in November as the bits indicates that means I can wait longer. I won't buy a 2D version of Avatar and I don't care if I have to wait ten ****ing years no 2D only Blu-Ray will ever be in my collection. Same reason Im not buying the Lord of the Rings or the Toy Story releases because I don't like buying a movie twice. GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

I mean I guess it's wasteful, but honestly the discs themselves are super cheap and I personally don't care if the studio is willing to spend a little extra to increase the bitrate a bit. Like I said before, I'm not AGAINST higher bitrates. I just don't feel it's necessary past a certain point (based on the huge number of discs I've seen, and the reasons why PQ varies from title to title). I'm just against higher bitrates as an EXCUSE for featureless discs, and as a point of contention with people who have no real understanding of the technology.

Funny you mention Terminator Salvation since that was one where people were zooming in on pictures to find tiny macroblocks on the international Sony release. The two were identical in motion.

Im not really strongly against it but I just believe if a release can be fit on a single disc then using two is wasteful and I just wish studios would stop being wasteful. There are people on this site who seriously believe that using lots of data is "ensure the highest quality possilbe" when in reality its anything but. Most of the time studios only release two disc sets to give there set more percieved value to fool gulible consumers into believing there buying more then there actually buying and high bitrates are not done to give a release the best quality but to save money on filtration and compression costs. Its brilliant really. There cutting costs while convincing gullible number crunchers that they are giving them more when in reality they are giving them less. It boggles my mind.

[Frozenpinky]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

If Avatar is not coming in 3D in November as the bits indicates that means I can wait longer. I won't buy a 2D version of Avatar and I don't care if I have to wait ten ****ing years no 2D only Blu-Ray will ever be in my collection. Same reason Im not buying the Lord of the Rings or the Toy Story releases because I don't like buying a movie twice. GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

I was wondering why the studios want 3D to be a "home video thing"? Last I checked, the studios have always wanted to make "going to the movies" a "special experience". The last thing the studios want to do is keep us from going out.

When we at home viewed things on TV in 4:3, the theaters implemented widescreen films to get us to come out to have a different experience.

When we at home were able to watch movies in widescreen, the theaters implemented surround sound to get us to come out and have a different and special submerging experience.

I think the studios are purposelly going to hold off on giving us the same RealD 3D in the home just so they have something over home video. Otherwise, what would be the point in going to the movies? For the stadium seating?

[toddly6666]

I would be happy with just a barebones Blu-ray of Avatar. The only extra that I would be interested in is the training that Stephen Lang went through to get buff.

[Shanester]

Originally Posted by lhslancers

The wow factor has to wear off. From my understanding and I have not seen it the movie itself is not all that.

Watch the movie first preferably in 3D on a big screen then decide for yourself
what the "wow" factor is

[Diesel]

Just put the special features on a second disc
-gasp-
What a mind blowing idea right?!





Oh well, I'll pick this one up when I can grab it for $19.99 (which I think it'll go for that on release day before the price goes up).
I would love to see all the behind the scenes stuff, but I would only watch them once, so I'll still pass on the November release.

[Shanester]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Just put the special features on a second disc
-gasp-
What a mind blowing idea right?!

Probably not enough time to put together the features since Cameron was still tweaking some of the effects up until the film's releas date Dec 18th.

[Ureh]

If the one that's coming in April has the deleted scenes, then it'll be the one I get. Otherwise I'm waiting for the one that has them.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by demoni

This movie looks SO lame!!! The trailer looks like the movie is a Phantom Menace clone with tons of Jar Jar Bings aliens flying around. This is kids stuff and I will not spend my money on this...

I wouldnt call it lame but there definitely is NOT anything new story-wise. Its very traditional and not very deep. Very glitzy and visual. Again though, the movie itself is nothing special.

This film is all about the visuals and the presentation. Thats fine with me.

Worth a buy for just that reason alone.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Shanester

Probably not enough time to put together the features since Cameron was still tweaking some of the effects up until the film's releas date Dec 18th.

No one at Fox had time in 4 months from release to release to put together the long since filmed special features?

They just want to add more value to the re-release so that more people will buy it. All the re-release will be is the exact disc we are getting in April plus some extra features on other disc(s). Its just a tactic to sell more copies and make more money. Which, doesn't bother someone like me who will be perfectly happy with just the movie, but at least fess up to what you are doing Fox

[DRS]

There is going to possibly be an Extended theatrical re-release in late summer

So that is why they are saving everything for the later editon. Not all materials are ready for an April release.

[Shanester]

Originally Posted by Diesel

No one at Fox had time in 4 months from release to release to put together the long since filmed special features?

They just want to add more value to the re-release so that more people will buy it. All the re-release will be is the exact disc we are getting in April plus some extra features on other disc(s). Its just a tactic to sell more copies and make more money. Which, doesn't bother someone like me who will be perfectly happy with just the movie, but at least fess up to what you are doing Fox

They are telling the world there will be another release around Xmas so no one should get upset about having to possible buy both versions.

All I really care about is a Cameron commentary in the November release

[SquidPuppet]

This is a slap in the face for those folks who enjoy extra features.

High bitrate? Neato! Put the extra features on a second disc.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by DRS

There is going to possibly be an Extended theatrical re-release in late summer.

Yah, rumored to have a Navi sex scene.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Diesel

No one at Fox had time in 4 months from release to release to put together the long since filmed special features?

They just want to add more value to the re-release so that more people will buy it. All the re-release will be is the exact disc we are getting in April plus some extra features on other disc(s). Its just a tactic to sell more copies and make more money. Which, doesn't bother someone like me who will be perfectly happy with just the movie, but at least fess up to what you are doing Fox

And they are backing themselves into a corner with the high bitrate "perfect PQ/AQ" release as the first release.

If it takes all 50 gigs and a high bitrate to get the PQ/AQ right, what does that tell you about the 3D PQ? According to their logic, its either going to suck, or you will have to spread it over three discs. LOL at them.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Shanester

They are telling the world there will be another release around Xmas so no one should get upset about having to possible buy both versions.

All I really care about is a Cameron commentary in the November release

I'm not talking about people getting mad because they have to wait or buy both, I'm talking about FOX acting like they are making it 100% bare bones just for it to look its absolute best and sound its absolute best and that there would be no room for features (which that itself is total bull****), so they "have" to re-release it later on with the features instead of just including a second disc this time around

They want more money, plain and simple.
Which isn't a problem, but at least own up to your own plan and don't act like the bare bones edition is to maximize the PQ/AQ like they claim.

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

And they are backing themselves into a corner with the high bitrate "perfect PQ/AQ" release as the first release.

If it takes all 50 gigs and a high bitrate to get the PQ/AQ right, what does that tell you about the 3D PQ? According to their logic, its either going to suck, or you will have to spread it over three discs. LOL at them.

LOL at them if it turns out to only be a 4.0/5 quality blu-ray

[DRS]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

And they are backing themselves into a corner with the high bitrate "perfect PQ/AQ" release as the first release.

If it takes all 50 gigs and a high bitrate to get the PQ/AQ right, what does that tell you about the 3D PQ? According to their logic, its either going to suck, or you will have to spread it over three discs. LOL at them.

Considering how many layers a BR disc can have, I dont think its a problem at all