One of my top 5 faves of all time is getting the red carpet treatment from Warner. I thought I would have to wait years for this on BD.:eek:
More proof that Warner has the best films. I'm so hyped for this.
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=9930
http://highdefdiscnews.com/images/fallingdown.jpg

Man I love this movie, most surprising BD news of '08.
Heat is the second most gangster movie ever, I thought that would get a BD release before Falling Down. Hopefully that will be released soon too.

I love this movie.

It's definitely being released at a relevant time, which is a time when many of us are no longer "economically viable." :D

One of my top 5 faves of all time is getting the red carpet treatment from Warner. I thought I would have to wait years for this on BD.:eek:
More proof that Warner has the best films. I'm so hyped for this.
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=9930
http://highdefdiscnews.com/images/fallingdown.jpg

Man I love this movie, most surprising BD news of '08.
Heat is the second most gangster movie ever, I thought that would get a BD release before Falling Down. Hopefully that will be released soon too.

I LOVE Falling Down, and sorry to (mildly) threadjack, but what OTHER movies make up your list of "most gangster" movies? I can't say I agree with Heat, it was great until the end DeNiro should have killed Pacino for it to be a better story/more realistic although it seems to be a habit of Michael Mann's to ruin very interesting, engrossing movies with the ending...Collateral anyone where he did the same thing with heat and had a freakin wet behind the ears cabbie kill a seasoned professional killer, it just took me out of the movie completely.

So yes, Falling Down is a great flick and it's awesome to see it come to Blu but what else is gangster (in the way you're describing it)?

My Tops:
Goodfellas
Scarface
Kill Bill Vol. 1
Arlington Road (now there's a movie with a GREAT ending)
and some more i can't think of right now.

One of my top 5 faves of all time is getting the red carpet treatment from Warner. I thought I would have to wait years for this on BD.:eek:
More proof that Warner has the best films. I'm so hyped for this.
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=9930
http://highdefdiscnews.com/images/fallingdown.jpg

Man I love this movie, most surprising BD news of '08.
Heat is the second most gangster movie ever, I thought that would get a BD release before Falling Down. Hopefully that will be released soon too.

Red carpet? It's getting a book. And probably a BD-25. That's it. Where's the red carpet?

That's more like a welcome mat.

Red carpet? It's getting a book. And probably a BD-25. That's it. Where's the red carpet?

That's more like a welcome mat.

The book releases are their "premium titles." And no info whatsoever has been announced besides that, so way to be negative.

Red carpet? It's getting a book. And probably a BD-25. That's it. Where's the red carpet?

That's more like a welcome mat.

Stop spreading FUD. You have no clue whether its BD-25 or BD-50.

Tomorrow will probably be sunny on the East Coast.

Neither statement means squat.

The book releases are their "premium titles." And no info whatsoever has been announced besides that, so way to be negative.
The books are more for their older or "classic" titles. Nothing about getting a digibook release says it won't be a typical filtered Warner transfer on a 25gb disc with only standard DD audio.

If any studio has earned skepticism over their releases, it's Warner.

The books are more for their older or "classic" titles. Nothing about getting a digibook release says it won't be a typical filtered Warner transfer on a 25gb disc with only standard DD audio.

If any studio has earned skepticism over their releases, it's Warner.

Exactly my thinking. This 'red carpet' comment by the thread-starter was pulled from no where. I'm looking forward to this release, but I'm keeping my expectations low. Just a few weeks ago I saw this movie for the first time, and was completely blown away. If Warner doesn't screw up the blu-ray, I'll buy it day one.

The books are more for their older or "classic" titles. Nothing about getting a digibook release says it won't be a typical filtered Warner transfer on a 25gb disc with only standard DD audio.

If any studio has earned skepticism over their releases, it's Warner.

Warner doesnt seem to filter their movies on regular basis, a older anamorphic movie will usually not look like modern Bruckheimer production movie.

And since Falling down is an Anamorphic production from 93, you shoulnt have to high hopes that this movie will look reference, even without filtering.

Warner doesnt seem to filter their movies on regular basis[...]I disagree. Strongly.

I disagree. Strongly.

So how do you see that a movie is filtered?

RE: "digibooks" being premium titles.

Insider posting on the subject - http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=1448209&postcount=2945

Also, just from my experience, the digibook titles are all extremely well done and have significant extra features. I don't think I've seen a "barebones" digibook yet.

and RE: Warner filtering

Yes, there is some evidence of potential light filtering going on with WB titles, so I'm not going to come here and say "every WB title is unfiltered perfection!" But the filtering is very mild, and nowhere near the obvious heavy DNR cases like Patton and Pan's Labyrinth or whatever. The older WB titles, especially, have been wonderful. I can't see someone watching Bonnie & Clyde or Dirty Harry and thinking those are heavily filtered.

So basically, let's wait for the freakin title before the complaints start.

$35 catalog titles = fail. I would love to double dip this (if it's a good transfer) because I hate double sided DVDs and snap cases and the DVD I own happens to be both, but I don't care how nice the BD packaging is or how great it looks or sounds, I'm not paying $35 for any movie, but espeically not such an old one.

My red carpet comment was made because Warner reserves the books for their classic titles that have generally affected cinema in some way... at least from what's been released so far.

Falling Down has never been a big title, nor has it ever received a "_____ edition" of any sort. At least to my knowledge.

So the fact that Warner is giving it that special treatment is just icing on the cake, beside the fact that Falling Down is being released.

And Warner doesn't seem to filter their titles anymore(TDK is mostly a IMAX master issue). Every book release and most Warner catalogs(LA Confidential) look fantastic.

They seem to have more issues with new releases like TDK, Speed Racer and Kit Kittredge.
$35 catalog titles = fail. I would love to double dip this (if it's a good transfer) because I hate double sided DVDs and snap cases and the DVD I own happens to be both, but I don't care how nice the BD packaging is or how great it looks or sounds, I'm not paying $35 for any movie, but espeically not such an old one.
That's SRP. You can most likely get it for just over $20 when it comes out. And $14 or so when it goes on sale. Why do you guys always post complaining about a price that you only have to pay at Circuit City or Barnes/Noble?

I'm not talking about egregious DNR like what was on the two contracted Fox titles, most of New Line's releases or the early Universal HD-DVD ports. What I am talking about is a light filter that mucks with the grain structure (you still see grain on every title but it often looks almost as if it was clumped together) and removes some high frequency detail to make for lighter encodes. Most Warner encodes, whether they end up on a 25 or 50 gb disc, tend to be designed for 25gb discs.

Warner specializes in low bit-rate, filtered encodes - and most of their problem titles are the new(er) releases, not older films. Dirty Harry, for example, looks great. I'm not saying all of their titles are like that... but I am saying that a large number of them are.

As for the $35 catalog title comment from SlaughterX... it's going to street for $20 to $25, so that comment seems a bit strange.

$35 catalog titles = fail. I would love to double dip this (if it's a good transfer) because I hate double sided DVDs and snap cases and the DVD I own happens to be both, but I don't care how nice the BD packaging is or how great it looks or sounds, I'm not paying $35 for any movie, but espeically not such an old one.

Who in their right mind pays SRP? That $35 disc will be $19-$24.

The books are more for their older or "classic" titles. Nothing about getting a digibook release says it won't be a typical filtered Warner transfer on a 25gb disc with only standard DD audio.
Agreed, the only thing making these special is the book packaging, which might as well be a booklet. No guarantee for lossless, no new extras, no new transfers (any more than the non-digibook releases)

Had a double take when I saw this on HDD. I was like, "Wtf? No way! I love this movie! Awesome!"

Definitely going to keep my expectations low. If there is anything extra over a bare bones release with DD 640k then I will be much happier. Hoping it gets at least a TrueHD track along with some supplements.

What I am talking about is a light filter that mucks with the grain structure (you still see grain on every title but it often looks almost as if it was clumped together) and removes some high frequency detail to make for lighter encodes.

Why should they remove high frequency detail to make lighter encodes? If an encoding program doesnt have enough bits, it better that the program itself decides what area it shouldnt waste bits on, then removing all high frequency detail before the encode. It doesnt make sense to remove it before, just in case.

And what movie lacks high frequency detail?

Why should they remove high frequency detail to make lighter encodes? If an encoding program doesnt have enough bits, it better that the program itself decides what area it shouldnt waste bits on, then removing all high frequency detail before the encode. It doesnt make sense to remove it before, just in case.

And what movie lacks high frequency detail?
I'm really not getting any further into this than I already have. This thread is far enough off track already and you can find PLENTY of discussion regarding this issue throughout the Blu-ray Software forum.

I'm looking forward to seeing Falling Down on Blu-ray. Here's hoping that it comes packaged with HD audio.

Falling Down is a fantastic film. I sold my R1 DVD aaaaages ago, and I haven't watched the movie since. Can't wait for May.

Stop spreading FUD. You have no clue whether its BD-25 or BD-50.

Tomorrow will probably be sunny on the East Coast.

Neither statement means squat.

I said "probably." If it's the same release as the DVD, there will be no extras. Therefore, it's going to be a BD-25. WB seems hell-bent on releasing all of their feature-less movies on BD-25 to get them out asap. Look at their most recent list of discs.

If this movie has a bunch of extras, GREAT. I'm going to pick it up either way. However, don't call it red-carpet for a book. For me, I'd rather have a normal case and will search it out if I can get it from another region (a la Shawshank Redemption).

So back it down there, kiddo. It ain't that serious. Or maybe you've just watched this movie far too much. ;)

I said "probably." If it's the same release as the DVD, there will be no extras. Therefore, it's going to be a BD-25. WB seems hell-bent on releasing all of their feature-less movies on BD-25 to get them out asap. Look at their most recent list of discs.

If this movie has a bunch of extras, GREAT. I'm going to pick it up either way. However, don't call it red-carpet for a book. For me, I'd rather have a normal case and will search it out if I can get it from another region (a la Shawshank Redemption).

So back it down there, kiddo. It ain't that serious. Or maybe you've just watched this movie far too much. ;)

"I am just disagreeing with you! In America, we have the freedom of speech! The right to disagree!"

One of my top 5 faves of all time is getting the red carpet treatment from Warner. I thought I would have to wait years for this on BD.:eek:
More proof that Warner has the best films. I'm so hyped for this.
http://www.highdefdiscnews.com/?p=9930
http://highdefdiscnews.com/images/fallingdown.jpg

Man I love this movie, most surprising BD news of '08.
Heat is the second most gangster movie ever, I thought that would get a BD release before Falling Down. Hopefully that will be released soon too.

Quote from that link .. "Worst case scenario we’ll receive the original Dolby Digital 5.1 and bonus materials from the previous DVD release."

What bonus material? Mine has none.

Falling Down a gangster movie? Did I miss something?

The only book Blu Ray I own is Bonnie & Clyde which is a stellar release.

most gangster movie ever
:confused:

I assumed this was about the Michael Douglas Falling Down movie (which I agree, is great)....but remember nothing about gangsters.

:confused:

I assumed this was about the Michael Douglas Falling Down movie (which I agree, is great)....but remember nothing about gangsters.

I assume he is using the word "gangster" to mean awesome or something like that. Even I had problems figuring it out. I guess am getting too old. I still love the flexibility of the english language though.

Now to be on topic this blu-ray better have some form of lossless audio and be significantly better than what has been shown on the movie channels otherwise I am keeping the version on my DVR.

Who in their right mind pays SRP? That $35 disc will be $19-$24.

Even at MSRP, it should be less than $35. I shouldn't have to wait for a sale to get the movie at a decent price, it should be $15-$20 tops like so many other catalog releases.

We're here to talk about the Falling Down BD. Thanks. (I, too, thought it was the Michael Douglas movie at first.. rats :) ).

I'm looking forward to seeing Falling Down on Blu-ray. Here's hoping that it comes packaged with HD audio.

+1 agree!

Even at MSRP, it should be less than $35. I shouldn't have to wait for a sale to get the movie at a decent price, it should be $15-$20 tops like so many other catalog releases.

Well, it's not less than $35 MSRP. So, I guess this movie that you'd "love to double dip" isn't worth the difference of the price of a cup of coffee.

This is a niche title, at best. It never even got a decent release on DVD, did it?

So, I don't understand this nickel-and-dime philosophy some people have. This disc is not going to sell like a new release. Heck, it isn't even going to sell like a catalog disc like Young Frankenstein. I understand why it's priced a little higher.

Some details:

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Warner/DigiBook/Warner_Details_Falling_Down_Blu-ray/2445

We're here to talk about the Falling Down BD. Thanks. (I, too, thought it was the Michael Douglas movie at first.. rats :) ).

I'm confused at your last statement, or maybe I'm missing some sort of pun/joke: it is the Michael Douglas movie Falling Down, as far as the links provided have shown.

The only other film with that name is a 2007 short film (7 min long).

I really look forward to it. I always joke with my boss that it his autobiography, he just needs to catch up with the film... ;)

shinksma

This is a terrific movie, with tons of black comedy.
Easy buy.

Hmm. Not much in the way of extras, but at least there's some new bits in there. I don't dig the 'big face' cover art though.

Still, as long as it looks and sounds as it should I won't be complaining come May.

Stop spreading FUD. You have no clue whether its BD-25 or BD-50.

Tomorrow will probably be sunny on the East Coast.

Neither statement means squat.

Warner is listing it as a BD25.

That is kinda sad - certainly I think Pride and Glory suffered from bit starvation.

I guess it depends on how careful they are with the encode...

The movie runs significantly less time than Pride and Glory, so I guess there is hope...

I think this is one of Joel Schumacher's best efforts... so cross your fingers and hope!

Stop spreading FUD. You have no clue whether its BD-25 or BD-50.

Tomorrow will probably be sunny on the East Coast.

Neither statement means squat.
LOL!!!!!!!!!! That's so 2008... :cool:

dvdbeaver has their review posted:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews45/falling_down_blu-ray.htm

It doesn't look like it was DNR'd but is definitely lacking in detail. But what I find most ridiculous is the audio. The review states that the 2.o TrueHD track is encoded at 659 kbps, basically the same as DD and half of DD+.

dvdbeaver has their review posted:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews45/falling_down_blu-ray.htm

It doesn't look like it was DNR'd but is definitely lacking in detail. But what I find most ridiculous is the audio. The review states that the 2.o TrueHD track is encoded at 659 kbps, basically the same as DD and half of DD+.

Ahh, another one that doesn't understand how lossless audio works. It's been a really long time since I've seen this film, but IIRC, it was pretty much dialogue-driven (and not even a lot of that at times--oh, and gunshots). So when there's a whole lot of not-much happening audio-wise, it can be compressed down to almost nothing (still lossless, remember). So basing the audio quality on the bitrate of a lossless track means absolutely nothing. Not to mention it's only 2.0, so there's only two channels to deal with. 659kbps for two channels seems more than adequate (again, losslessly compressed).

EDIT: BTW, I'm assuming you'd have absolutely no problem with around a 2Mbps average for a 5.1 mix, right? How's that any different?

Wow.... I see grain.... Though I also see a bit of blocking in the grain..... The average bit-rate, however is 25.8, so it must have been an encoding issue. ..
the more pics I look at, the more blocking I see... I dont understand it.... I may still pick it up though...

dvdbeaver has their review posted:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews45/falling_down_blu-ray.htm

It doesn't look like it was DNR'd but is definitely lacking in detail. But what I find most ridiculous is the audio. The review states that the 2.o TrueHD track is encoded at 659 kbps, basically the same as DD and half of DD+.

659kbps is approx the same size as a 5.1 DD mix... this is 2.0. If this were LPCM, it would be around 1.5 mbps, so losslessly compressing it to 659 makes sense.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up for me stumlad. I wrote that maybe 10 minutes after getting up so my brain wasn't working. That and I am indeed used to films with 5.1 tracks so I'm used to much higher numbers. And thanks for not being as condescending as others might be.

Whenever I see road construction my mind immediately recalls the scene in Falling Down!

Those shots actually look pretty good, I don't know how much better the film can look. I'm just impressed Warner put a lossless 2.0 track on there.:eek: That's new for them, but a 2.0PCM track would have probably been easier to do.

That damn blockiness. Warner titles seem to do this a lot more now, Domino does (it even exhibits similar noise) and a few spots in Body of Lies does it too.

What is it almost year 4 and Warner still can't fix their VC-1 machine?:mad: Can't they just use the one New Line had? Warner Catalog treatment + New Line Encodes = Awesome.

That damn blockiness. Warner titles seem to do this a lot more now, Domino does (it even exhibits similar noise) and a few spots in Body of Lies does it too. 20 bucks says Warner encoded almost all of their archive to HD DVD spec a few years ago and are slowly letting it trickle out.

Whenever I see road construction my mind immediately recalls the scene in Falling Down!

I think of this movie whenever I arrive at McDonald's to order breakfast at 10:31 and get turned away.

Just read the review over at High Def Digest.

It looks like the video quality is very good, with a nice consistent grain and no DNR.

And the original 2.0 track in Lossless is AWESOME.

I'm glad a studio is following, Criterion's lead, and releasing the original track in a lossless state, rather than remix some fake surround track.

20 bucks says Warner encoded almost all of their archive to HD DVD spec a few years ago and are slowly letting it trickle out.

Or perhaps they encoded them to fit single layer blu-ray and hd dvd spec, so we get the worst of both.

Even so, 25.8 mbps average should not have this kinda blockiness IMO.

Even so, 25.8 mbps average should not have this kinda blockiness IMO. DVDBeaver reports the total bitrate, not video bitrate for some reason. The total includes all the dubs and subs.

20 bucks says Warner encoded almost all of their archive to HD DVD spec a few years ago and are slowly letting it trickle out.
They might be encoding so the movies can play nice with the new China HD-DVD format they are supporting.

20 bucks says Warner encoded almost all of their archive to HD DVD spec a few years ago and are slowly letting it trickle out.

I've got $200 says that is exactly correct...;)

The screenshots look pretty film-like at DVD Beaver although it appears some filtering took place. This is the kind of "gangster film" that I'll pick up on sale.

Full specs are now up: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16545534#post16545534

Falling Down (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16545534#post16545534)
Warner Bros. | 1993 | 112 mins | Rated R | May 26, 2009 (New Release)
UPC: 085391156888
Region: Free (A+B+C)
Disc Size: 25GB Dual Layer (BD25)


Total Video
Title Codec Length Movie Size Disc Size Bitrate Bitrate Main Audio Track Secondary Audio Track
----- ------ ------- -------------- -------------- ------- ------- ------------------ ---------------------
00000.MPLS VC-1 1:52:36 21,785,567,232 23,023,352,785 25.80 20.10 Dolby TrueHD 2.0 659Kbps (48kHz/16-bit)


http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/2728/fallingdownbd0100000bit.png

I just watched this the other night, I'm glad I picked this up. I find it interesting that the economic downturn of the early 90's in which it's set is so similar to the conditions which exist now. This is certainly one of Douglas' better performances, and the audio isn't bad now that I've heard it (I will now swear off of codec/bitrate biased comments).

I think I will go ahead and purchase. Besides, I'm just standing up for my rights, as a consumer! :D

I think I will go ahead and purchase. Besides, I'm just standing up for my rights, as a consumer! :D

Cool.

Just don't go around swinging bats on Korean heads like Michael did. :D

Anyone else having trouble finding this at brick and mortar stores? My local BB, which usually gets everything, doesn't have it anywhere locally according to their store finder thing (as well as according to my eyeballs the times I end up shopping there).

i just watched this last night, and woo buddy, this was DNR CITY. It's like they took the movie and slathered it in mud. People's faces were cartoony to the point it was distracting.

great movie though..just saw it for the first time. it's just disappointing that these studios can't give us a grainy, detailed presentation the first time around.

Really? Those dvdbeaver shots looked pretty natural to me.

Really? Those dvdbeaver shots looked pretty natural to me.

That's what I was thinking.

I own this and haven't had a chance to watch it yet. Those screenies got me all excited and I was planning on viewing it tomorrow. :D

When I watched it recently, I got the impression that the smoothness/softness was a result of being shot anamorphically. Possibly some light DNR applied, but no more than is typical for Warner.

The entire film has a fairly muted palette and hazy look that I suspect is director's intent.

I saw this while it was in its original theatrical run. Loved the movie.
This has NEVER been a razor sharp film visually. Muddy was the term used previously and I think that is a fairly accurate description of how it's always looked.
.02

When I watched it recently, I got the impression that the smoothness/softness was a result of being shot anamorphically. Possibly some light DNR applied, but no more than is typical for Warner.

The entire film has a fairly muted palette and hazy look that I suspect is director's intent.

Yeah, considering what Warner was releasing at the time this came out , the movie looks really good. Higher bit-rate would probably help some, but whatever DNR is in this, it is not as bad as BTTF 2 for example.. which even BTTF2 isn't bad compared to other movies like Dark City....

I'm waiting for this to hit $6.99 territory.

When I watched it recently, I got the impression that the smoothness/softness was a result of being shot anamorphically. Possibly some light DNR applied, but no more than is typical for Warner.

The entire film has a fairly muted palette and hazy look that I suspect is director's intent.
Bingo. Softness doesn't equal DNR, not least when talking about an anamorphic show of this vintage. Falling Down looks fine to me. Shame the sound didn't get an upgrade to 5.1, but the 2.0 is lossless anyways and does as good a job as can be expected.

Bingo. Softness doesn't equal DNR, not least when talking about an anamorphic show of this vintage. Falling Down looks fine to me. Shame the sound didn't get an upgrade to 5.1, but the 2.0 is lossless anyways and does as good a job as can be expected.

Exactly, people see DNR in there sleep sometimes

in the dvdbeaver link, look at picture 9, michael douglas' right cheek....if that is what is considered natural to you guys, then i am at a loss.

most parts of the movie had that smoothed/cartoony look to it, and it was distracting..especially in scenes where the camera stayed up close and the actor moved his/her head around.

in the dvdbeaver link, look at picture 9, michael douglas' right cheek....if that is what is considered natural to you guys, then i am at a loss.

I don't see what you're talking about.