Spider-Man: No Way Home 4K UHD (2021)

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by TheHighRoller

100%

I would say that to Andrew Garfield too who still looks super fit and actually could go well alongside Miles Morales

There are some issues in the first half but second half was really good. Think this is the darkest Spidey in the Holland trilogy till date.

I am very eager to watch Doctor Strange 2. It has the potential to another MCU blockbuster if done right

[MisterKorman]

I'd love to see this properly (MCU fans are absolutely obnoxious at the movies, and my viewing of No Way Home was absolutely ruined by them this time), but with the insane crowds that are still turning up for NWH (I live with immunocompromised folks, so I usually seek out early-afternoon weekday screenings of films that aren't very populated, but the showings near me have only become more packed after all the kids in my area have been on Christmas break), I don't see that realistically happening for me. I'll definitely be paying the premium for the digital rental whenever that pops up in a few weeks (probably), though. Pretty fun film. Can't wait to actually watch it, this time without all the yelling.

[unberechenbar]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I would say that to Andrew Garfield too who still looks super fit and actually could go well alongside Miles Morales

Could they fit a live-action character into Into the Spider-Verse? That would be pretty cool. Or are you talking about them casting a live-action Miles Morales?

[RBBrittain]

Someone just put DV in the database, so I updated my spreadsheet. Probably will be DV since it's Sony & the first two MCU Spider-Man films were DV.

[DuaneB]

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

Kevin Smith talks about how they had to wait about a year for Batman (1989) to come to VHS as well. That's too distant from its theatrical release and people would forget about it at that time. Six months is also pushing it, but having a little 4-5 month delay is pretty nice. Like before Tenet and outside of Interstellar, Nolan films release in July and then come to home video before Christmas. That is good build-up and anticipation.

I'm also not a fan of it releasing digitally before physical, but that's me being a stubborn BD/UHD owner/collector.

Batman was released on VHS by Christmas in '89.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Originally Posted by DuaneB

Batman was released on VHS by Christmas in '89.

Then I take it back, maybe he stated it was the first one not to take a year to release?

I need to listen to that part of the podcast again. Hold please.

EDIT: So this podcast episode isn't available online anymore, but I have it saved on my computer. Here is a transcript between him and Marc Bernardin.

Kevin: I saw it so many times in theaters. When the video came out, I ****in' [was] first in line, pre-ordered it and shit, got the VHS...

Marc: ... Wore it out. So that would've been... because it wasn't as quick as it is now.

Kevin: No, **** no.

Marc: The interim between was like two years out.

Kevin: Yeah, it was at least a year. Well, if it came out in the summer, June 23rd, '89... it was not... or was it??

Marc: I don't think it was at Christmas. It wasn't like a six-month window.

Kevin: It was Christmas though, and normally it wasn't a six-month window, but this might have been one of the earliest they went with because I remember they also sold it, like... wasn't that one of the $20 titles?

And so on. You can tell how I misremembered that, heh. I think they talk about it more later, as they talk about the rental process and late fees and such.

[unberechenbar]

I wonder why Sony moved away from doing 4K DIs for its Spider-Man movies when it still puts out native 4K stuff like Monster Hunter and Bloodshot.

[JosieWales]

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

Iron Man 3 packed too much into it?

That's the first time I've heard that criticism.

I just meant that they took the iron man suit and replicated it for multiple foes to battle. It was just too much. I prefer one hero and not a rediculous amount of villains. Because of this stance, I am also not a fan of the Avengers movies.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Originally Posted by JosieWales

I just meant that they took the iron man suit and replicated it for multiple foes to battle. It was just too much. I prefer one hero and not a rediculous amount of villains. Because of this stance, I am also not a fan of the Avengers movies.

Well, then these things all occurred before IM3 ever came out.

I will say that there was a time in 2008 when I knew nothing about comic book lore, the Avengers, or anything like that... and when the first IM film ended with Tony saying: "I am Iron Man," I didn't really understand why he was revealing his identity. I also couldn't accept the fact that Norse mythology was going to play a role in the same universe as the one Tony Stark existed in.

I've accepted more things down the line, but things have definitely been diluted. MCU movies admittedly aren't my favorite either, but I don't see how IM3 is to blame for anything regarding that.

[MikeH5856]

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

Then I take it back, maybe he stated it was the first one not to take a year to release?

I need to listen to that part of the podcast again. Hold please.

EDIT: So this podcast episode isn't available online anymore, but I have it saved on my computer. Here is a transcript between him and Marc Bernardin.



And so on. You can tell how I misremembered that, heh. I think they talk about it more later, as they talk about the rental process and late fees and such.

I think it was even before Christmas, maybe in time for Halloween? Before Thanksgiving at least. I remember pre-ordering it (or at least having my mom pre-order it for me since I would have been 10...lol) at Suncoast video not too long after seeing it in the theater a few couple times.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by DuaneB

Batman was released on VHS by Christmas in '89.

This. It was well documented at the time that it was the shortest theatrical -> home video window up until then, and particularly notable because the film was still doing theatrical business when it came out on VHS. It changed the home video game in that respect - as well as the fact that it went straight to sell-through, instead of rental pricing (though it was not the first, there - Roger Rabbit, Dirty Dancing, and ET also did so - though their windows were much longer).

[Zombo]

This conversation reminded me of the fact that if you wanted the VHS tape the same time as when the video stores would get it or before the tape came out to actually own, it would cost you $100.

I forget the windows for Theater to VHS for rent...versus VHS rental to VHS to own.

I do remember sometimes at Blockbuster the used VHS tapes would go on sale before the VHS was available to purchase in stores.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Originally Posted by Zombo

This conversation reminded me of the fact that if you wanted the VHS tape the same time as when the video stores would get it or before the tape came out to actually own, it would cost you $100.

I forget the windows for Theater to VHS for rent...versus VHS rental to VHS to own.

I do remember sometimes at Blockbuster the used VHS tapes would go on sale before the VHS was available to purchase in stores.

This is kind of what Kevin and Marc were saying in the podcast, only it was more about like: if you lost the rental and owed the amount for the VHS, it would cost you over $100 for it.

That's crazy to think about!

[DuaneB]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

This. It was well documented at the time that it was the shortest theatrical -> home video window up until then, and particularly notable because the film was still doing theatrical business when it came out on VHS. It changed the home video game in that respect - as well as the fact that it went straight to sell-through, instead of rental pricing (though it was not the first, there - Roger Rabbit, Dirty Dancing, and ET also did so - though their windows were much longer).

If I remember correctly, Top Gun was the first new release to be priced to sell.

[spaceball-one]

Wasn't the original 1982 VHS of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan priced to sell?
I believe it was priced at $39.99 USD.

[Cinematt]

iTunes UK has the release as 1st March 2022.
note - to see this you first have to pre order it and then go into the 'manage pre orders' section in settings. Whilst these can change I have in the past found them to be pretty accurate.

[AdmiralNoodles]

Originally Posted by Cinematt

iTunes UK has the release as 1st March 2022.
note - to see this you first have to pre order it and then go into the 'manage pre orders' section in settings. Whilst these can change I have in the past found them to be pretty accurate.

Why should the majority of us care about digital when this thread and sub-forum is literally about physical releases? This didn't need to be posted here.

[Cinematt]

Originally Posted by AdmiralNoodles

Why should the majority of us care about digital when this thread and sub-forum is literally about physical releases? This didn't need to be posted here.

Because it's indicative for the physical release date, which hasn't been announced yet.

[MisterKorman]

Originally Posted by AdmiralNoodles

Why should the majority of us care about digital when this thread and sub-forum is literally about physical releases? This didn't need to be posted here.

I'm glad to know about it.

[Telemachus]

Copped the regular 4K with the slip, all the Steelbooks are ugly imo. Now I have a Frankenstein set, Target Mediabook for Homecoming, Steelbook for Far From Home (yep, it's ugly, too), Slipcover for No Way Home.