From the Digital Bits:Our industry sources have informed us that Braveheart is due to arrive on Blu-ray Disc on 8/11 from Paramount. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Brugundy, Gladiator and Galaxy Quest are all tentatively planned for Blu-ray release in September, followed by South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut likely in October and Forrest Gump in November. And with a little luck, a Star Trek: Next Generation Motion Picture Collection will arrive sometime before the end of the year (likely around the same time as J.J. Abrams' new Star Trek and Star Trek: The Original Series - Season 2 & 3), containing Star Trek: Generations, Star Trek: First Contact, Star Trek: Insurrection and Star Trek: Nemesis. http://www.thedigitalbits.com/rumormill.html#042709

There's also a bunch of rumored Warner releases at that link, but almost all of them are old news or TBD.

Gladiator BR is actually advertised via insert in the WANTED Blu Ray here in Europe.

Gladiator is released via Universal here in Region B world....

hmmmmm Universal means DTS MA .... right ?

Looking forward to Braveheart in August.

Braveheart, Gladiator, and the under-rated Galaxy Quest are all mine.

Thanks for the link/news...these are some big guns they're releasing, bout friggin' time! Braveheart & Gladiator = instant buys the day they hit shelves.

...and the under-rated Galaxy Quest are all mine.
I see you managed to get your shirt off...

I wonder if it will have Sigourney Weaver drop the F-Bomb during the climax, it's distracting to see her mouth the word, but hear something else...

VERY fun movie, the cast is great.

From the Digital Bits:http://www.thedigitalbits.com/rumormill.html#042709

There's also a bunch of rumored Warner releases at that link, but almost all of them are old news or TBD.

Nice....Boogie Nights is mentioned!

I hope that Gladiator is the longer cut. I already have the shorter cut on DVD. While I upgrade most of my stuff I dont loose minutes or buy short cuts.

Except for Star Trek.

I hope that Gladiator is the longer cut.

I would be upset if it's anything other than both cuts.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b212/iamjackspictures/bluegirl.gif

I wonder if we're ever going to get Team America: World Police? I remember seeing it advertised (well not specifically, as clips with other Paramount movies) back in the HD DVD days. I'd take it over South Park, personally.

I wonder if we're ever going to get Team America: World Police? I remember seeing it advertised (well not specifically, as clips with other Paramount movies) back in the HD DVD days. I'd take it over South Park, personally.

Me too! I was anxiously waiting for Team America to come out on HD DVD back in the day because of the commercials advertising it. The South Park movie isn't half as good.

Also I can't wait to see Gladiator and Braveheart on BD! I will buy both.

Great new! Braveheart, Gladiator, Galaxy Quest AND the TNG movies? Oh, yes. I'm buying. :)

Nice....Boogie Nights is mentioned!And Magnolia. One of my favorites.

Just a note: It's not that I don't like Boogie Nights or Magnolia (I own both), but the Paramount announcements had more specific date ranges, whereas the Warner stuff was mainly "sometime this year".

Braveheart, Gladiator, and the under-rated Galaxy Quest are all mine.
Same here.:)

Forrest Gump and Braveheart need new transfers badly for a disc release. Gladiator is pretty good but has tons of dirt specs over it throughout the movie. Either way Paramount will probably DNR them all to hell and call them remastered.

And Magnolia. One of my favorites.

woah! "Logan's Run"...! sweeeeet....

Forrest Gump and Braveheart need new transfers badly for a disc release

I thought Braveheart was very recently cleaned up/remastered, like late '07 in fact...

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/31725/braveheart-two-disc-special-collectors-edition/

"This Braveheart: Special Collector's Edition remastered image is an exceedingly solid step forward. Presented in the same theatrical aspect ratio, this image accomplishes a lot with a much cleaner presentation and only a few qualms. First off, there are several visual differences when compared to the original disc:

The first that will stand out is the color replication, as the new disc really screams with a new, full palette. Screenshots don't do the new print justice; saturation is dominant here. Most importantly are greens and blues. The grassy hills and forested areas pack a punch with a wide range of greens, olive and jade alike. At a few points across the film, however, the greens seem like they might pop a little "too" much, seeming a shade unnatural even though they looks striking. Blue shades really pop as well, from the colors in the sky and water to the bold facepaint William Wallace wears. Furthermore, the range of colors is widely expanded across all palettes, lending further ranges in small things like the colors in clouds to brown shades in Wallace's hair.

Secondly, it seems like the new image has been squeezed at the top and bottom, lending more of a natural face shape for all parties instead of the somewhat stretched look from the original. In turn, there seems to be a hair-line amount of material on the sides that may be clipped off through slight reframing, but it's to such an incredibly minuscule amount that it's only noticeable when under extreme scrutiny. Blended with newly invigorated flesh tones, each character's presentation feels much more natural.

Third, the print is, in general, much cleaner. The digitization seems pretty close to a mute point, looking quite solid for a modern disc with a three hour film and several language tracks included. Dust and scratches are almost completely void, though I spied a few speckles here and there. When watching the film on-screen, this new transfer looks splendid. It feels like it might be a shade on the darker side of things and, at times, the colors seem a little overboard with saturation, but overall it's a pretty impressive visual presentation and undoubtedly one of the stronger selling points of this disc."


I'm not suggesting they won't work on that ^ some more before they dump it onto a BD50 at a much higher bitrate using an even better codec, but even if not, I'm betting it'll look MILES beyond the old early DVD I have, lol, can't wait!

I hope that Gladiator is the longer cut. I already have the shorter cut on DVD. While I upgrade most of my stuff I dont loose minutes or buy short cuts.
You mean the longer cut that just inserts a bunch of deleted scenes that were removed for a reason? No thanks. It's funny to watch Ridley Scott's introduction to the extended version. Paraphrasing, it goes something like:

"Hi, I'm Ridley Scott. So this is, erm, not in any way the director's cut, but it's got some deleted stuff put back in that you, um, er, might, uh, find interesting."(Scowls. Fade to black.)

Of everything rumored, I'm actually most excited about Willy Wonka!

You mean the longer cut that just inserts a bunch of deleted scenes that were removed for a reason? No thanks. It's funny to watch Ridley Scott's introduction to the extended version. Paraphrasing, it goes something like:

"Hi, I'm Ridley Scott. So this is, erm, not in any way the director's cut, but it's got some deleted stuff put back in that you, um, er, might, uh, find interesting."(Scowls. Fade to black.)

There were a couple scenes in the extended version that were pretty awesome (IMHO). Be nice to have both versions (via seamless branching) :)

gladiator will be mine on day one

Braveheart, Gladiator, and Anchorman are must haves for me.

Braveheart and Gladiator=



SOLD!

Braveheart and Gladiator, yes.

South Park IF it is the uncut version and ONLY IF. Same goes for Team America, if it ever gets released.

Boogie Nights, cool, but bring on Magnolia. That's the best of the best.

South Park IF it is the uncut version and ONLY IF.

The full title of the theatrical release was South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut. I don't think there's an alternate version ;)

I know the movie had problems with the MPAA, but Stone and Parker have always credited that process with making the movie better and funnier.

There were a couple scenes in the extended version that were pretty awesome (IMHO). Be nice to have both versions (via seamless branching) :)

agreed, And it made Phoenix's character more twisted. :)

oh man, between the laundry list of 360 games and blu rays coming this year, I'm gonna be brizzoke!

Braveheart and Gladiator are in my 10 movies of all time...and there aren't many modern movies in that list.

I'm not suggesting they won't work on that ^ some more before they dump it onto a BD50 at a much higher bitrate using an even better codec, but even if not, I'm betting it'll look MILES beyond the old early DVD I have, lol, can't wait!

One of the major selling points of the original DVD of Braveheart was that it had not suffered any edge enhancement at all. It was one of the best discs out there for detail but some people jumped on the it's got dirt and dust on the print that they need to clean off bandwagon. It was a fabulous disc and i always worry when i read they have "cleaned" up a disc as it usually means less detail not more especially with the "we're so cheap" execs at Paramount who don't seem that interested in giving their older movies new transfers.

Here's a link to a good site that mentions Braveheart.

Scroll down to the middle of the page and you will see the original edition of Braveheart gets a very good write up.

http://www.videophile.info/Guide_EE/Page_01.htm

Incidentally a review of the excellent Fargo mentions bad haloing. The above site mentions an old and new transfer of Fargo and that the old transfer had bad edge enhancement so did they use that old transfer as the basis for the new Blu Ray and if not then why does it have so much haloing in it ?

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content/id/70573/fargo.html

^^^ I agree with all that. I have that version on DVD and other than the specs, it looks awesome for dvd, especially upconverted on a properly calibrated rig! Crossing my fingers for the Blu Ray. I also have the first versoin of Gladiator on DVD, the one with the more gold colored case, DTSes logo and the Ridley Scott sig on the cover...had MUCH less EE then the later release, another favorite upconverted, can't believe these are finally coming! (=

Heat is the only film mentioned in that piece that requires an immediate upgrade for me.

Heat is the only film mentioned in that piece that requires an immediate upgrade for me.

Actually, North By Northwest is the only film mentioned in that piece that requires an immediate upgrade for you- you just don't realize it yet. ;)

Paramount + old catalogue movies = :(
Why can't they spend some money like they did with Godfather ?
So far Trek, Truman, Zulu all DNR'ed and with lackluster extras

Paramount + old catalogue movies = :(
Why can't they spend some money like they did with Godfather ?
So far Trek, Truman, Zulu all DNR'ed and with lackluster extras

This is pure ungrounded speculation, but if you look at the pattern of their DVD history, you will see that they dumped everything on the market from existing (usually laserdisc) transfers over the first few years of the format and then they went back and made a second pass, producing new 16:9 transfers. I suspect they will follow the same pattern with BD because they just finished making that generation of transfers and probably can't justify the cost of new ones to the bean-counters for another few years. Meanwhile, the bean-counters are probably happy as clams to look forward to selling each title on BD twice instead of once, anyway.

Braveheart, Gladiator, and the under-rated Galaxy Quest are all mine.

Ditto! Plus TNG films are something to look forward to.

This is pure ungrounded speculation, but if you look at the pattern of their DVD history, you will see that they dumped everything on the market from existing (usually laserdisc) transfers over the first few years of the format and then they went back and made a second pass, producing new 16:9 transfers. I suspect they will follow the same pattern with BD because they just finished making that generation of transfers and probably can't justify the cost of new ones to the bean-counters for another few years. Meanwhile, the bean-counters are probably happy as clams to look forward to selling each title on BD twice instead of once, anyway.

Ungrounded ? or based on their past output in HD ? including the new Trek boxset ?

The full title of the theatrical release was South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut. I don't think there's an alternate version ;)

I know the movie had problems with the MPAA, but Stone and Parker have always credited that process with making the movie better and funnier.

Unfortunately, there IS a longer version. But if Stone and Parker are happy with it, I guess I'll bite.

With TEAM AMERICA the longer version is vastly superior and has been released on DVD so it MUST happen for BD.

Ungrounded ? or based on their past output in HD ? including the new Trek boxset ?

Well, obviously, my speculation is a product of the evidence I'm seeing in their releasing. I just wanted to clearly indicate that I don't have any inside information on their mastering/releasing strategy. It's only my speculation, based on the evidence in the marketplace, that their BD release pattern may follow their DVD release pattern.

Paramount + old catalogue movies = :(
Why can't they spend some money like they did with Godfather ?
So far Trek, Truman, Zulu all DNR'ed and with lackluster extras

Regarding Godfather, I think Spielberg provided the money for the restoration. If I recall, Paramount didn't want to spend a penny to preserve the original negatives and basically let them deteriorate. Rumor is the original Indiana Jones is coming this year too, but fortunately Lucas will make sure these are done right.

I hope he does, the BBC-HD transfers were great (Indy) and the HD clips on crystal skull of the old moves looked good too

I believe the Indiana Jones trilogy was restored by Lowry a while ago, and the DVD releases are indicative of a job very well done. Once Upon a Time in the West (another eventual Paramount release) was also restored by Lowry, so I'm confident that it will also look spectacular on Blu-ray.

Lets hope they put more cash into their releases going forward then

Unfortunately, there IS a longer version. But if Stone and Parker are happy with it, I guess I'll bite.

With TEAM AMERICA the longer version is vastly superior and has been released on DVD so it MUST happen for BD.


I'm pretty sure Trey Parker has stated several times, that there is no longer cut of South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut because the theatrical release was the extended cut.

Apparently, to mess with the MPAA after it was initially given an "NC-17" rating, they resubmitted it with an additional 30 seconds or so of profanity and it, somehow, was approved for an "R" rating.

Braveheart, Gladiator, and the under-rated Galaxy Quest are all mine.Same here....Anchorman wasn't even worth the cost of Netflix rental imo.

I'm pretty sure Trey Parker has stated several times, that there is no longer cut of South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut because the theatrical release was the extended cut.

Apparently, to mess with the MPAA after it was initially given an "NC-17" rating, they resubmitted it with an additional 30 seconds or so of profanity and it, somehow, was approved for an "R" rating.

:p Now, that is just classic.

I remember Valenti saying he regretted "allowing" South Park to be released with an R.

I believe the Indiana Jones trilogy was restored by Lowry a while ago, and the DVD releases are indicative of a job very well done. Once Upon a Time in the West (another eventual Paramount release) was also restored by Lowry, so I'm confident that it will also look spectacular on Blu-ray.

According to an insider at the Blu-ray site, they almost released the trilogy last year, however, Lucasfilm put a hold on it wanting to improve the PQ further as the initial work was really for DVD. So, yes, these should look quite good when finally released.

^unless, of course, "additional work" means gobs of EE + DNR. You have to remember, they have a different perception of what "needs" to be done to video before it can come out on Blu-Ray.

^unless, of course, "additional work" means gobs of EE + DNR. You have to remember, they have a different perception of what "needs" to be done to video before it can come out on Blu-Ray.Perhaps I'm missing out on something, but it seems that the point of the post he was replying to was pointing out Lowry was that their definition of "additional work" doesn't mean that.

Can't wait to get Braveheart and Gladiator.

.

You mean the longer cut that just inserts a bunch of deleted scenes that were removed for a reason? No thanks. It's funny to watch Ridley Scott's introduction to the extended version. Paraphrasing, it goes something like:

"Hi, I'm Ridley Scott. So this is, erm, not in any way the director's cut, but it's got some deleted stuff put back in that you, um, er, might, uh, find interesting."(Scowls. Fade to black.)
Ridley has a well-documented dislike for "Director's" cuts.
I strongly disagree with this especially in his best movies.
IMNSHO, the Gladiator extended cut is akin to the LOTR extended cuts.
Essential especially to the Commodus character.

There were a couple scenes in the extended version that were pretty awesome (IMHO). Be nice to have both versions (via seamless branching) :)
+1

agreed, And it made Phoenix's character more twisted. :)
+1

Gladiator has a reference quality HDTV broadcast (though open matte) to live up to. If they even match this for the BD, this will be an amazing disc.

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/1289/glad1.png

http://img2.pict.com/84/cd/1c/fdd0c3deaa04589b75ca9643a0/oRkuY/glad2.png

Ridley has a well-documented dislike for "Director's" cuts.
I strongly disagree with this especially in his best movies.
IMNSHO, the Gladiator extended cut is akin to the LOTR extended cuts.
Essential especially to the Commodus character.


+1



Yep. There's a great scene where Commodus is overseeing the execution, (by arrow firing squad) of some soldiers who didn't prevent Crowe's escape and he makes the archers hold the arrows until there arms are spasming to delay the moment. Twisted. Really adds to his character IMHO...

Gladiator has a reference quality HDTV broadcast (though open matte) to live up to.

I don't think I could ever call a transfer in the wrong aspect-ratio "reference quality".

Ridley has a well-documented dislike for "Director's" cuts.
I strongly disagree with this especially in his best movies.Wait, what? Is today opposite day? Ridley Scott is considered one of, if not the driving forces behind popularizing director's cuts and special editions. Blade Runner practically created the trend, and he stated publicly that his version of Kingdom of Heaven was pretty much cut by the studio against his wishes for theatrical release, and most of his collaborators as well as film critics seem to agree with his versions for both. In fact, Gladiator is the only one of his films that I recall he refers to the theatrical version only as his director's cut (although he considers both Alien cuts to be "director's" versions).

If you've got proof of his "well-documented dislike" for director's cuts, I'd be shocked.
IMNSHO, the Gladiator extended cut is akin to the LOTR extended cuts.
Essential especially to the Commodus character.To each his own, I guess. I considered Commodus (both the character and Phoenix's poor acting relative to his other films) so simplistic as to make the extended material useless. And as big a fan of gore as I am, I didn't think the additional battle and execution footage really added anything.

That's why both cuts would be ideal. I like the extended version better.
And Phoenix was nominated for an oscar for it so many did like his acting in it...

:)

Indeed, not sure what version of Gladiator others were watching, but Phoenix damn near stole the show here, excellent performance IMO and obviously MANY others, lol.

I don't think I could ever call a transfer in the wrong aspect-ratio "reference quality".

Where masks are placed doesn't affect picture quality. :rolleyes:

Where masks are placed doesn't affect picture quality. :rolleyes:

Yes, it does. :rolleyes:

Yes, it does. :rolleyes:

DNR and EE have nothing to do with aspect ratio.

DNR and EE have nothing to do with aspect ratio.

I don't think anyone said they do.

I don't think anyone said they do.

So what aspects of picture quality in the 2.35 area are affected by open matte?

So what aspects of picture quality in the 2.35 area are affected by open matte?

Less cinematic and you might see things like the boom come into shot.

Less cinematic and you might see things like the boom come into shot.

I'm not arguing the look of open matte vs OAR.

Neither thing you mentioned has to do with picture quality.

I'm not arguing the look of open matte vs OAR.


You're arguing my statement that I wouldn't consider any incorrect ratio transfer to be "reference quality". The picture on that transfer is utterly wrong, so I don't care if it has the most beautiful detail and color gradation I've ever seen- it's not the movie I'm trying to watch.

Braveheart!
Braveheart!
Braveheart!

and Gladiator for me :)

You're arguing my statement that I wouldn't consider any incorrect ratio transfer to be "reference quality". The picture on that transfer is utterly wrong, so I don't care if it has the most beautiful detail and color gradation I've ever seen- it's not the movie I'm trying to watch.

That is all irrelevant in regards to the actual picture quality, which I referred to as "reference", not the presentation.

That is all irrelevant in regards to the actual picture quality, which I referred to as "reference", not the presentation.

No. It's not irrelevant and it's not "reference quality". Would you consider it a "reference quality" picture if the color were removed? If it were missing every tenth frame? If an actor was carefully digitally removed? If it had a large watermark in the corner?

The first priority of picture quality is storytelling.

Just like:

the first priority of sound design is storytelling

the first priority of editing is storytelling

the first priority of costume design is storytelling

etc.

Do you understand the operational definition of the term "reference"? How could any transfer of a movie be "reference quality" if the intended framing- one of the most powerful and meaningful tools at filmmakers' disposal- is completely destroyed?

No. It's not irrelevant and it's not "reference quality". Would you consider it a "reference quality" picture if the color were removed? If it were missing every tenth frame? If an actor was carefully digitally removed? If it had a large watermark in the corner?

The first priority of picture quality is storytelling.

Just like:

the first priority of sound design is storytelling

the first priority of editing is storytelling

the first priority of costume design is storytelling

etc.

Do you understand the operational definition of the term "reference"? How could any transfer of a movie be "reference quality" if the intended framing- one of the most powerful and meaningful tools at filmmakers' disposal- is completely destroyed?

Did I say it was reference storytelling?

Did I say it was reference framing?

No, I said it had reference picture quality. Nothing more.

If it was masked to 2.35, it would still have reference picture quality, only you would have never known it was from an open-matte release, and would not have made any comments. :D

Still reference picture quality, but now 2.35:

http://img2.pict.com/d4/b2/98/9ac4c6a0798371cfeeb0613b18/14Zqg/glad1.png

http://img2.pict.com/ef/2b/75/e8fa8ac07fe9e29bb4cf5eca16/QEl6W/glad2.png

Did I say it was reference storytelling?

Did I say it was reference framing?

No, I said it had reference picture quality. Nothing more.

Is framing not an important aspect of picture quality in your universe?!

If it was masked to 2.35, it would still have reference picture quality, only you would have never known it was from an open-matte release, and would not have made any comments. :D

So, if it were correct, it would be correct? Gee, how profound.

Sorry, buddy- it's not correct. Furthermore, just because it's "open matte", doesn't mean that it's the correct image in the center of the frame, surrounded by matteable extra picture. Very often, shots are vertically reframed in post, leaving the accurate image somewhere outside of dead-center.

And, even if every shot is dead center on the display, are you really telling me that you can consider an image that has to be matted to be displayed properly "reference"?

If I played you an otherwise fantastic-sounding soundtrack that featured an extraneous band of loud white noise in the upper register, would you call that a "reference quality" soundtrack because you could probably manage to set an equalizer to remove the noise?

Most of the vfx in GLADIATOR were done at 1.78:1. In fact, there are a vfew vfx shots that are 2.35:1 with black bars at the bottom of the 1.78:1 transfer. It's subtle and you can miss it. Simply put, a great deal of care went into that Super35 transfer. I'm an OAR nut but I have viewed GLADIATOR on my DVHS recording of the old HBO airing (before their bitrate was lowered by DISH Network) numerous times and not once have I viewed the DVD since owning the HD transfer.

The BD will have to BETTER that open matted transfer if they want my money. Period. End of story.

But seeing how many catalogue titles are getting raped in the @ss (TREK films being the latest) I am not holding my breath.

New Line owning MAGNOLIA terrifies me. :mad:

Looking forward to all these movies - especially Braveheart, Gladiator, and Galaxy Quest.

Is framing not an important aspect of picture quality in your universe?!

So, if it were correct, it would be correct? Gee, how profound.

Sorry, buddy- it's not correct. Furthermore, just because it's "open matte", doesn't mean that it's the correct image in the center of the frame, surrounded by matteable extra picture. Very often, shots are vertically reframed in post, leaving the accurate image somewhere outside of dead-center.

And, even if every shot is dead center on the display, are you really telling me that you can consider an image that has to be matted to be displayed properly "reference"?

If I played you an otherwise fantastic-sounding soundtrack that featured an extraneous band of loud white noise in the upper register, would you call that a "reference quality" soundtrack because you could probably manage to set an equalizer to remove the noise?

Framing is important, but it has nothing to do with picture quality of the image that is there. I'm strictly referring to the quality of the picture there, not the amount of the picture there. You can't seem to comprehend this difference.

Your last analogy is quite faulty.

Most of the vfx in GLADIATOR were done at 1.78:1. In fact, there are a vfew vfx shots that are 2.35:1 with black bars at the bottom of the 1.78:1 transfer. It's subtle and you can miss it. Simply put, a great deal of care went into that Super35 transfer. I'm an OAR nut but I have viewed GLADIATOR on my DVHS recording of the old HBO airing (before their bitrate was lowered by DISH Network) numerous times and not once have I viewed the DVD since owning the HD transfer.

The BD will have to BETTER that open matted transfer if they want my money. Period. End of story.

But seeing how many catalogue titles are getting raped in the @ss (TREK films being the latest) I am not holding my breath.

New Line owning MAGNOLIA terrifies me. :mad:

Agree completely. Let's hope they do it justice.

I'm strictly referring to the quality of the picture there, not the amount of the picture there. You can't seem to comprehend this difference.

Of course I can comprehend it. You can't seem to comprehend that a video which shows you a completely inaccurate picture is not a good video, let alone a "reference quality" one.

I get your point about the technical quality of the transfer of the piece of film run through the gate and I don't argue it at all. However, the film run through the gate does not, without accurate matting, produce a reasonable picture for this movie, no matter how nice a telecine job is performed otherwise and, thus, it is not a "reference quality" result.

Your last analogy is quite faulty.

And your response is quite empty. Care to elucidate?

Of course I can comprehend it. You can't seem to comprehend that a video which shows you a completely inaccurate picture is not a good video, let alone a "reference quality" one.

I didn't say it was a "good video", or that it had "completely accurate picture".

I simply said it was a reference quality HDTV broadcast.


I get your point about the technical quality of the transfer...

That's the only point I made. The technical quality of the HDTV broadcast was reference.

Everything else is irrelevant to my comment, but you can feel free to go on and on.


And your response is quite empty. Care to elucidate?

Loud white noise is not the equivalent of open matte on a Super 35 transfer.

You're reaching.

If you want a closer analogy (still not perfect, but at least ballpark unlike yours) you say a 3.1 soundtrack (director's vision) had surrounds added to the mix to make it 5.1.

Now, suppose the audio quality in those 3.1 channels is reference quality. Let's assume the audio quality of the added 5.1 channels was also reference quality.

Does having additional surround info in the mix take away from the technical reference quality of the audio even though the director's intent was 3.1?

No.

I didn't say it was a "good video", or that it had "completely accurate picture".

I simply said it was a reference quality HDTV broadcast.

And I simply said it was not. To be a "reference quality HDTV broadcast", said broadcast, IMO, should necessarily involve both "good video" and a "completely accurate picture". For those things, in practical terms, are exactly what "reference quality" means. Apparently, you disagree. I'm done defending my entirely reasonable comment.

I'm not sure how your audio analogy is any better than mine. Both involve unintended material added, in a way that the user can somewhat clumsily defeat, to an otherwise high-quality soundtrack. Both present the material incorrectly unless preventative/corrective steps are taken by the user- just like the video we're discussing.

Wait, what? Is today opposite day?
Maybe
Ridley Scott is considered one of, if not the driving forces behind popularizing director's cuts and special editions. Blade Runner practically created the trend, and he stated publicly that his version of Kingdom of Heaven was pretty much cut by the studio against his wishes for theatrical release, and most of his collaborators as well as film critics seem to agree with his versions for both. In fact, Gladiator is the only one of his films that I recall he refers to the theatrical version only as his director's cut (although he considers both Alien cuts to be "director's" versions). Ok so which Alien cut is "the" Director's cut?
I err'd in typing Director's cut and extended cut although I did put them in quotes to signify a slight difference.
Having the studio hack your film into near meaninglessness like KoH against your wishes and then re-releasing it as originally intended is the directors cut of the movie but in the general sense Director's cuts are "special editions" movies that weren't futzed in the first place but have been re-released with extra scenes etc. But let us not quibble about minutia

If you've got proof of his "well-documented dislike" for director's cuts, I'd be shocked. No hard proof Sir.

To each his own, I guess. I considered Commodus (both the character and Phoenix's poor acting relative to his other films) so simplistic as to make the extended material useless. And as big a fan of gore as I am, I didn't think the additional battle and execution footage really added anything.
The restored scenes add loads of character development especially for dear Commodus, poor chap. You see he really did love his father but the Maximus thing was so unfair it sent him over the edge that he liked to keep so near.
Really it's not about the gore for me. One scene in particular stands out.
Commodus is visiting Marcus' mausoleum and vents his frustration\regret by hacking at his dear father's bust with his sword. He then embraces his father, sobbing and talking to him. Really a riveting scene.
Anyway, they better release the extended version of Gladiator or it will vex me. I'll be terribly vexed

And I simply said it was not. To be a "reference quality HDTV broadcast", said broadcast, IMO, should necessarily involve both "good video" and a "completely accurate picture". For those things, in practical terms, are exactly what "reference quality" means. Apparently, you disagree. I'm done defending my entirely reasonable comment.

I'm not sure how your audio analogy is any better than mine. Both involve unintended material added, in a way that the user can somewhat clumsily defeat, to an otherwise high-quality soundtrack. Both present the material incorrectly unless preventative/corrective steps are taken by the user- just like the video we're discussing.

Too many words for such a small, meaningless point you're desperately trying to make.

You're an OAR diehard, you've made that clear. My post had nothing to do with AR.

The PQ of the Gladiator HDTV broadcast is reference. Why? When I see this Blu-ray release, I will refer to my HDTV copy to gauge PQ in comparison. When I watch HDTV movies, I compare them to this release, because I haven't seen much better PQ- it is a reference.

I simply pointed out the fact that the PQ on the HDTV broadcast is reference, and the Blu-ray has a lot to live up to. Hopefully it will.

Compare the OAR DVD to the shots I posted. Does the DVD have better picture quality because it has masks in place? Not a chance.

Xylon did a comparison in an older thread when this movie was anticipated long ago.

If the Next Gen Star Trek films look like the first six films, I won't be buying any.

I err'd in typing Director's cut and extended cut although I did put them in quotes to signify a slight difference.Well then, that kinda changes the whole meaning of what you said, don't you think?
Having the studio hack your film into near meaninglessness like KoH against your wishes and then re-releasing it as originally intended is the directors cut of the movie but in the general sense Director's cuts are "special editions" movies that weren't futzed in the first place but have been re-released with extra scenes etc. But let us not quibble about minutia:confused:

That's not minutia, that's the entire difference between what was meant and what was said.
No hard proof Sir.I have to admit that I'm puzzled why someone who claims something is "well-documented" would then say he has nothing documenting said claims. So, I guess we'll toss that along with the director vs. extended "minutia".
The restored scenes add loads of character development especially for dear Commodus, poor chap. You see he really did love his father but the Maximus thing was so unfair it sent him over the edge that he liked to keep so near.Like I said, to each his own. I found that quite obvious from the theatrical cut (just look at his speech that ends with "What is it in me that you hate so much?"), especially in his dialogue with his sister, and the added scenes felt like they were trying too hard to bludgeon us with the whole "OMG he's totally crazy because he LOVES TOO MUCH" lines.
Really it's not about the gore for me. One scene in particular stands out.
Commodus is visiting Marcus' mausoleum and vents his frustration\regret by hacking at his dear father's bust with his sword. He then embraces his father, sobbing and talking to him. Really a riveting scene.Again, I got a lot of the Oedipal love/hate characterization from the theatrical cut. It was pretty clear in his interactions with either his sister or Maximus, and even his nephew, exactly how he felt.

You mean the longer cut that just inserts a bunch of deleted scenes that were removed for a reason? No thanks. It's funny to watch Ridley Scott's introduction to the extended version. Paraphrasing, it goes something like:

"Hi, I'm Ridley Scott. So this is, erm, not in any way the director's cut, but it's got some deleted stuff put back in that you, um, er, might, uh, find interesting."(Scowls. Fade to black.)

Haha, that actually makes me more curious to see it. ...I don't think I've seen the "extended cut."

Ok so which Alien cut is "the" Director's cut?


Scott wrote a little note which is included in the Alien Quadrilogy where he makes it very clear that the theatrical cut is his preferred cut, and the "director's cut," while technically cut by the director, was labeled such mainly for marketing reasons.

Also, I think it's in the liner notes for HANNIBAL where he talks about how for some of his movies, such as BLADE RUNNER and LEGEND, he's glad that he was able to revisit the editing process and create director's cuts after the fact. But for other movies, like HANNIBAL and GLADIATOR, the theatrical cuts are the director's cuts. Hope this clears stuff up.

I just wish they would hurry up and sort the legal issues with 1492:Conquest of Paradise.

That is a film which could look stunning in high definition and i love the music score. It's not everyone's cup of tea but i like that movie and i understand Scott did revisit it and there is a possible directors cut ready to go if the legal issues are ever sorted.

At least thats what i remember reading somewhere. Might be wrong and if i am then so be it but i'd still like that movie out on Blu Ray along with my fav pirate flick Cutthroat Island.

As for Scott movies i want on Blu....Alien is coming this year and i also want the european cut of Legend and Thelma and Louise and of course Gladiator.

Cannot wait for Braveheart about time!!

Any word on the Ten Commandments? Bill Hunt said last November it was in the pipeline.

i'd still like that movie out on Blu Ray along with my fav pirate flick Cutthroat Island.

My favorite, too. It's the best cheese movie ever made and Geena Davis is one hot pirate. I love this movie.

Those "reference quality" screenshots of the broadcast HD version ofGladiator don't hold a candle to reference quality BDs of today.

Those "reference quality" screenshots of the broadcast HD version ofGladiator don't hold a candle to reference quality BDs of today.
Agreed. They look positively mediocre.

Was thinking the same thing allllll along, just bit my tounge, hardly anything to boast about, HOPE the Blu Ray version smokes those....soon enough we'll know.

Cannot wait for Braveheart about time!!
The problem is that this is Paramount and this is a catalog title. It seems all too likely to me that they'll re-use the DNRed (but still full of dirt and scratches) transfer they use for HD broadcast.

I hope I'm wrong.

The problem is that this is Paramount and this is a catalog title. It seems all too likely to me that they'll re-use the DNRed (but still full of dirt and scratches) transfer they use for HD broadcast.

I hope I'm wrong.

I really hope that is not the case, it has taken far too long to come out as it is I hope with that time they spent it actually cleaning it up for a proper HD release...fingers crossed!

Blu-ray.com is now reporting a September 1 release date (http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=2822) for Braveheart.

Pushing it to September gives Paramount more time to "Digitally Master" this ;)

Seriously, I hope this one comes out right. Paramount's new releases are incredibly well done, but the catalog stuff is just totally unpredictable. I don't pre-order or blind buy any catalog releases from them anymore.

In for Galaxy Quest. Will let someone else test the waters on the rest of the titles. I'm not in the mood for WAX.

The problem is that this is Paramount and this is a catalog title. It seems all too likely to me that they'll re-use the DNRed (but still full of dirt and scratches) transfer they use for HD broadcast.

I hope I'm wrong.

It's definitely a possibility with this studio.

Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator. Please do not F* up Gladiator.

Paramount remastered Braveheart in late '07 for the new DVD release, it got EXCELLENT reviews for PQ, there is no real reason to expect them to now suddenly not use THAT new slice (but with obviously a transfer/encode over to Blu that takes advantage of the disc space) and use the previous existing spec and scratch filled version, heh.

So as long as they don't get cute with any altering tools to "enhance" (DNR, EE) the image (which they didn't on the recent dvd as far as reviews say), I'm sure the Blu Ray of Braveheart is gonna be great - they've already done the hard part. (=

please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator.

+1

please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator. Please do not f* up gladiator.

+2 ;)

Can we expect the longer cut of The Gladiator ?

Can we expect the longer cut of The Gladiator ?

Hopefully we'll get both.

Hopefully we'll get both.

That is the only way to make everyone happy I guess. I have never seen the longer cut so I am interested in it. I hear that there is some more hairlip in it. :D

We've got some updated street dates for more forthcoming Paramount and DreamWorks catalog Blu-ray titles, and it looks like it's going to be a great line-up. Among those BD releases due later this year are Braveheart (9/1), Deep Impact, Escape from L.A. and 48 Hours (9/15), Star Trek: The Original Series - Season 2, Gladiator: Extended Edition and Galaxy Quest (9/22), and Forrest Gump and It's a Wonderful Life (11/3). What's more, the Star Trek: The Next Generation - Original Motion Picture Collection (which will include Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis) is planned for release sometime in November or December, timed to coincide with the DVD/Blu-ray release of J.J. Abrams' new Star Trek (still TBA). Some of the classic Trek films (released on Blu-ray last month as part of the box set) will be available as single-film BD releases at that time as well. We'll post more details as they come in. http://www.thedigitalbits.com/rumormill.html

Great news! Count me in for Gladiator, Forrest Gump and Galaxy Quest!

Gladiator Extended Edition on 9/22 = "Hey boss, need Sep 22 OFF!" ;):D

Cant understand why they would release the extended edition over the directors cut?

^ Dunno, the only version I've ever seen is the original dvd release, its the more rare and better dvd transfer (less EE) of the two here, has the Ridley Scott Sig on the cover. So anyway, for me, I'm sure I'd enjoy either the DC or EE just the same...I'm getting the Gladiator I'm familiar with and then some extra Gladiator, lol, I'll take it! (=

Cant understand why they would release the extended edition over the directors cut?

By "director's cut" you mean the "theatrical cut" right? I'm assuming both will be there since the DVD had both as well.

Just got a bizarre e-mail:

Hello from Amazon.com.

We now have delivery date(s) for the order you placed on June 03 2009:

Russell Crowe, et al "Gladiator [Blu-ray]" [Blu-ray]
Estimated arrival date: July 07 2009 - July 14 2009

I'll believe that when I see it, lol.

According to blu-ray.com, we now have official dates for Gladiator, Braveheart, and Forrest Gump:

"After weeks of intense speculation, Paramount Home Entertainment has finally disclosed the Blu-ray release dates and edition details for three of its most-awaited catalog releases, all Best Picture Oscar winners: 'Gladiator' and 'Braveheart' will both street on September 1, whereas 'Forrest Gump' will hit store shelves on November 3.

These will be the first three titles in Paramount's new "Sapphire Series". The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality for the first time in two-disc, high definition sets."

Details are here: http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=2944

Nice info! I hope this "Sapphire Series" really delivers the goods here. I've already pre-ordered Gladiator, Braveheart and Forrest Gump from this set. I also pre-ordered the LOTR trillogy (something to do on THanksgiving weekend :), I just hope that those receive as much care as these "Saphire Series" appear to be getting.
-Evangelo2

OOOOOOOOOOOHHHH!!!!
http://dvdtimes.co.uk/content/id/70925/gladiator-uk-bd-in-september.html
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php?image=CoverArt/gladiator_UK_Bd.jpg_22062009&width=183

Damn, that disc art is incred, so naturally we won't get that here in the states, heh.

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php?image=CoverArt/gladiator_UK_Bd.jpg_22062009

Such an awesome art. Why is my DVD 6.1 DTS but the Blu-ray will be 5.1 True HD? Why not 6.1 or 7.1? If these are supposed to be the pinnacle of blu-ray, use the format well.

Damn, that disc art is incred, so naturally we won't get that here in the states, heh.
No, you guys get this sh*t:
http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/gladiator.html?page=1#post166005

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php?image=CoverArt/gladiator_UK_Bd.jpg_22062009

Such an awesome art. Why is my DVD 6.1 DTS but the Blu-ray will be 5.1 True HD? Why not 6.1 or 7.1? If these are supposed to be the pinnacle of blu-ray, use the format well.

I know. It's weird since the recent Trek releases were 7.1 TrueHD, also from Paramount.

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php?image=CoverArt/gladiator_UK_Bd.jpg_22062009

Such an awesome art. Why is my DVD 6.1 DTS but the Blu-ray will be 5.1 True HD? Why not 6.1 or 7.1? If these are supposed to be the pinnacle of blu-ray, use the format well.

Looks really nice but for the usual certification spoiling the artwork.

Good point regarding the sound formats. Why isn't it 6.1 ?

Another point would be that i read the latest Panasonic players have dropped support for dts 6.1 ES and now support another dts format whose name i forget. I would assume 6.1 is possible but maybe someone on these boards can say for sure ?

Do we get 6.1 with Blu Ray as i see a lot of 5.1 and i see 7.1 but i don't really see much in the way of 6.1 sound so whats happening there ?

Since I didn't see anyone post actual pics of the U.S. release, here they are from Project: Blu.com (http://project-blu.com/index.html).

http://project-blu.com/images/covers/braveheart_cover.jpg

In English Dolby TrueHD.


http://project-blu.com/images/covers/gladiator_cover.jpg

In English DTS-HD Master Audio


.

I don't quite understand the "Sapphire" label.

"The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality..."

Shouldn't they be doing that with all their releases? I shouldn't have to buy from a special "Sapphire" line to be assured a high quality release.

I don't quite understand the "Sapphire" label.

"The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality..."

Shouldn't they be doing that with all their releases? I shouldn't have to buy from a special "Sapphire" line to be assured a high quality release.

It's "superbit" all over again... (sigh...)

"The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality..."

Shouldn't they be doing that with all their releases? I shouldn't have to buy from a special "Sapphire" line to be assured a high quality release.

They didn't say that their other (non-Sapphire) releases won't also be doing that.

I wonder why they aren't including the audio commentary on Braveheart.

I wonder why they aren't including the audio commentary on Braveheart.

Probably because it's one of the worst. During the three hour movie, Mel talks for maybe a half hour to an hour.

They didn't say that their other (non-Sapphire) releases won't also be doing that.

Then what is the point of the 'Sapphire Series' ? I think 'giantchicken' makes a great point in the irony that is the Sapphire Series....after all, aren't the attributes that the Sapphire Series aspires to the one and same goal(s) alluded to with the Bluray moniker, 'Beyond High Definition' ?? I rest my case.

one word= gimmick

Exactly--the reason I upgraded to Blu-ray from DVD is to get the very highest quality picture and sound EVERY TIME, not just when I pay for a title in the "Sapphire" series. Their definition of a "Sapphire" title ought to be the definition of every single film they release on Blu-ray (and already charge a premium for), making the very concept of an elite high quality Sapphire line redundant.

This just sounds like they are giving themselves an excuse to be sloppy with the non-Sapphire catalog titles and lazily recycle old transfers and legacy audio. Now they can respond to criticism of the Star Trek movie transfers (for example) by pointing out that they weren't in the Sapphire collection, after all...

They need to understand that their expectations regarding the quality of the Sapphire line = our expectations of EVERY title released.

It's OK for a fast food restaurant to have both a 99 cent menu and a line of "Six Dollar Burgers" with Angus beef--but at a nice restaurant, everything on the menu should be of high quality. DVD is fast food, and Blu-ray is the nice restaurant--when it comes to the approach and intentions and approach of the studio and the reputation and perception of Blu-ray as a superior technology and format, there should be no room for distinction between "highest quality" Blu-ray releases and anything else.

Then what is the point of the 'Sapphire Series' ?

The point is to appear prestigious and thus be able to command a higher perceived retail value.

The real question is: What is the point of a marketing press release?

And the answer is: To blather on about the obvious, filling a page with text to suggest a wealth of features meriting the hefty price-tag.*

In other words, don't look to a product presser to be the authority on a studio's disc production philosophy- all it's an authority on is hyping whatever product it describes.


*see also "Full-color artwork on disc" and "Interactive menus"

Unfortunately, I think you are right. "Sapphire" means catalog titles at new release pricing. That is what it boils down to--$30 MSRP on Enemy at the Gates VS. $40 MSRP on "Sapphire" Gladiator.

I wonder why they aren't including the audio commentary on Braveheart.

I hope that the specs are a mistake and that the audio commentary is included because although he doesn't talk for the entire length of the film it is a good insightful commentary.

Exactly--the reason I upgraded to Blu-ray from DVD is to get the very highest quality picture and sound EVERY TIME, not just when I pay for a title in the "Sapphire" series. Their definition of a "Sapphire" title ought to be the definition of every single film they release on Blu-ray (and already charge a premium for), making the very concept of an elite high quality Sapphire line redundant.

This just sounds like they are giving themselves an excuse to be sloppy with the non-Sapphire catalog titles and lazily recycle old transfers and legacy audio. Now they can respond to criticism of the Star Trek movie transfers (for example) by pointing out that they weren't in the Sapphire collection, after all...

They need to understand that their expectations regarding the quality of the Sapphire line = our expectations of EVERY title released.

It's OK for a fast food restaurant to have both a 99 cent menu and a line of "Six Dollar Burgers" with Angus beef--but at a nice restaurant, everything on the menu should be of high quality. DVD is fast food, and Blu-ray is the nice restaurant--when it comes to the approach and intentions and approach of the studio and the reputation and perception of Blu-ray as a superior technology and format, there should be no room for distinction between "highest quality" Blu-ray releases and anything else.

Here, here! We have our post of the week! I salute you, Sir.

Come on, people! Somehow, I don't think they're going to say...

"Despite the amazing capabilities of the Blu-ray format, The Sapphire Series will be presenting the finest of modern motion pictures in a slap-dash manner, with little attention paid to the presentation of each film and no care taken to ensure the best possible performance!"

No. Obviously, on the press-release for the Sapphire Series, they're going to talk up how awesome the Sapphire Series is.

Now go read a press-release for a non-Sapphire Series title and I think you'll find that it, too, has something to say about "the finest picture and sound presentation available".

Come on, people! Somehow, I don't think they're going to say...

"Despite the amazing capabilities of the Blu-ray format, The Sapphire Series will be presenting the finest of modern motion pictures in a slap-dash manner, with little attention paid to the presentation of each film and no care taken to ensure the best possible performance!"

No. Obviously, on the press-release for the Sapphire Series, they're going to talk up how awesome the Sapphire Series is.

Now go read a press-release for a non-Sapphire Series title and I think you'll find that it, too, has something to say about "the finest picture and sound presentation available".

Ha! http://www.entertainment-place.info/smile/img/2658/************************* Very good point.

Maybe Paramount should rename it as 'The Cubic Zirconia Series' to keep the price point reasonable :D

"The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality..."

Maybe they're just suggesting the "Saphire Series" on BR will basically be the finest of the catalog titles, the award winners only, the cream of de crop titles, etc, not really anything different PQ/AQ wise. Dunno though, still seems like a ploy to help perk up interest regardless.

That little moniker sounds too feminine to be on the cover of Braveheart IMO.

Well if that's what it takes for them to offer branching cuts and better quality transfers I guess it's OK.

Come on guys, does it really deserve such thoughtful discussion?

It's one of basics of marketing and capitalism itself. Not only the studios, but every other brand likes to create special labels to increase the perceived value of a product and boost sales. There's nothing new or remarkable about it. I bet not even the marketing guys that came up with it thought so much about what it actually meant, they were just implementing what's commom knowledge for them.

I'm suprised people are actually surprised by this move.

I'm not sure what the debate is all about. According to press release,

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. – Paramount Home Entertainment (PHE) announced today that it will release some of the greatest films ever made for the first time in high definition as part of its exclusive new “Sapphire Series”. The Sapphire Series will capitalize on the pristine picture and sound of the Blu-ray format to present each cinematic gem in the highest quality for the first time in two-disc, high definition sets*. The series will kick off on September 1 with two of the most requested Blu-ray releases, Braveheart and Gladiator—both winners of five Academy Awards® including Best Picture—followed later in the year by six-time Academy Award® winner Forrest Gump. Each release will include extensive, never-before-seen special features for the ultimate presentation.

The "Sapphire Series" label only refers to Academy Award-winning films being released on Blu-ray for the first time. It's simple marketing to sell what they view as the best films ever made because they won Best Picture or any other award granted by the Academy. Nothing more, nothing less. As Schils already mentioned, it's whatever they deem the cream of de crop, the best of the best in their catalogue.

And yes, other press releases also contain similar language to this one, touting best picture and sound.

The Saphire series are all 2 disc blu-rays. The 1st 50gb disc is for movie ONLY! So the full 50gb is dedicated to the movie and the menu. All extras are on the 2nd disc.

I don't think it's going to be anywhere close to the kind of improvement Superbit had. But we'll see.

Probably old news, but Amazon has both Braveheart and Gladiator for pre-order at $27.99 each.

Probably old news, but Amazon has both Braveheart and Gladiator for pre-order at $27.99 each.Marketing gimmick confirmed. It's just an excuse to sell catalog titles at new release prices.

Still, if Paramount treats these discs like their new releases (absolutely excellent) instead of like their catalog titles (often wretched, smeared with DNR, EE, framing/zooming/stretching issues or even all three), I'll be more than happy to pay the prices as I grumble about them.

Sapphire is the new blue.... lol

If the release is with good quality, I dont care even if they call it "The pink bunny collection"

Still, if Paramount treats these discs like their new releases (absolutely excellent) instead of like their catalog titles (often wretched, smeared with DNR, EE, framing/zooming/stretching issues or even all three), I'll be more than happy to pay the prices as I grumble about them.
Yea, we'll just wait and see if they are free of DNR and EE.
J

Sapphire is the new blue.... lolhttp://***************/9/P/i.jpg

Loll made my day :D I think you're right though.. :eek:

I wish Terminator 2 was a Sapphire release. There would've been less complaining had they shipped the movie alone on one disc and all the extras on another one.

Maybe Sapphire is code name for no DNR or EE? No wonder there's only two releases.

on 100gb discs....

Probably old news, but Amazon has both Braveheart and Gladiator for pre-order at $27.99 each.

Sapphire= Gouging for catalog.

Warner wants $30 for the 1989 Batman at Walmart.

This trend has to stop.

Its a shame that the Sapphire Series is simply a slip cover over a 2 disc Bluray case.

For that much dough, these should have a Digibook packaging.

If not Digibook, like Warner's and Sony's, then Paramount should have came up with some kind of unique packaging, instead of just a slipcover.

Its a shame that the Sapphire Series is simply a slip cover over a 2 disc Bluray case.

For that much dough, these should have a Digibook packaging.

If not Digibook, like Warner's and Sony's, then Paramount should have came up with some kind of unique packaging, instead of just a slipcover.

Unless you don't care for stunt packaging, in which case (no pun intended), it is not a shame, but a relief.

This is marketing.

They obviously intend to release 2 disc Blu Ray releases of some of their well known films and their 2 disc releases will be under the Sapphire banner.

It doesn't guarantee great image or sound quality but one can hope these releases will have great image and sound quality.

This is just a marketing thing to tell you if it falls under the Sapphire label abd if you see Sapphire label releases from Paramount you can expect it will be a collectors 2 disc edition.

Highdefdigest mentioned Gladiator will be released with DTS-MA. BraveHeart is in Dolby TrueHD. I thought Paramount was only releasing in TrueHD. Have things changed?
John

Yes, Gladiator will be released with DTS-HD Master Audio.

And no, things have not changed. As with Benjamin Button, Paramount and DreamWorks uses the DTS codec whenever they feel the film warrants it.




*EDIT: Just realized, I made it sound like DreamWorks released Benjamin Button, when it was Paramount and Criterion.

Yes, Gladiator will be released with DTS-HD Master Audio.

And no, things have not changed. As with Benjamin Button, DreamWorks uses the DTS codec whenever they feel the film warrants it.

Thanks, the standard DVD has DTS-ES and it is a great soundtrack, can't wait.
John

Unless you don't care for stunt packaging, in which case (no pun intended), it is not a shame, but a relief.

+11111111111111111111111111111

I HATE Digibooks! They don't fit on the shelf with my other blu-rays because they are too tall. No thanks, I hope Saphire means plain packaging gauranteed :)

-Evangelo2

Sigh, more digibook haters.

I wouldn't mind the digibooks if they were the same height as the rest of my Blu-ray cases.

For that much dough, these should have a Digibook packaging.

i'm glad it's not a digibook, i hate those. i just want them to be in the regular blu ray case so they all stack nicely together. i had to do a custom cover for the shawshank redemption. i also didn't like the cases WB use with their DVDs either.

Well, I love the Digibooks, they are distinctive, and I enjoy reading the literature inside of them.

As for the size, they are pretty darn close to the height of a regular Bluray, maybe a half centimeter taller. Certainly shorter than a DVD case by far.

Unless you have some kind of rack specifically designed to barely squeeze in a standard bluray case, I don't see how it could be a problem.

As a matter of fact, my storage space does contribute to my dislike of the Digibook packaging. My little movie cabinet is getting full, and I have to stack some discs horizontally on top of each filled row. A slightly taller Digibook means that I have room for one less disc on top of each row.

Since I would rather stick Unforgiven in there with The Wild Bunch and The Searchers, it should be obvious which of these I prefer:

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/7334/comparisonm.gif

kool..foxy

People are gonna complain no matter what. As long as the percieved value of the new Saphire releases is there I'll have no trouble purchasing them. Same with digibooks and any other special edition releases.

Well, I love the Digibooks, they are distinctive, and I enjoy reading the literature inside of them.

As for the size, they are pretty darn close to the height of a regular Bluray, maybe a half centimeter taller. Certainly shorter than a DVD case by far.

Unless you have some kind of rack specifically designed to barely squeeze in a standard bluray case, I don't see how it could be a problem.

Most people will skim through the books once, and there is no reason they could have just been inserts. Criterion does inserts with loads of info. Their prices aren't jacked up because of some sham packaging, it's because they're a niche of a niche. In addition some of the books, like The Matrix's, are really flimsy. Plus the whole shelf ruining.

I just think it's sad people fall for such a transparent attempt to make people pay more for catalog titles. I waited on The Matrix, and it paid off. I paid $15 for it this week, the same amount I paid for Ghostbusters and Casino Royale.

That said, it's ironic we're discussing this because Paramount is just jacking up the price because they can. They don't even try and make it look like you're getting more for your money. Shameless, even more so if they end up like the typical Paramount catalog DNR mess.

w00t! Braveheart is finally coming on BD!!!
I'll pick up on Gladiator too :)

Gladiator will be a Universal release here in the UK in Sept. I guess they'll be using the same encode as the Paramount US release?

So Saphire series is simply code for "more expensive"?

No guaranteed video remaster

No guaranteed audio remaster

No upgrade in packaging

Just the Blu Ray with Lossless audio and some extras like every other catalog tittle from every other studio?

Correct?

I've never seen so much belly-aching over a marketing slogan...

The "Sapphire Series" is just like Disney's Platinum/Diamond series - a cutesy marketing name to distinguish their evergreen, super-popular catalogue titles from the rest of them. Movies like Gladiator and Braveheart were going to have a higher-than-normal catalogue MSRP no matter what - it was inevitable. They could have foregone the little slogan and the slipcover and whatever, and they'd still be priced the same.

As for quality, please let's wait to see the discs before the complaining begins. Paramount has had some pretty bad titles, yes, but they've also had some wonderful ones - not just new titles, but some great catalogue titles too. I'd like to think they're going to be careful with a trio of Best Picture winners, and I'll at least give them the benefit of the doubt. 2-Disc releases are unusual for catalogue Paramount titles, so that's something too, in regards to both general quality and the merit-to-dollar ratio.

Jeez, Neo, what are you doing, coming in here all rational and sane?

Fly off the handle, for cripes' sake! This is AVS!

No kidding. Waiting to see the disc before complaining about PQ? Yeah, right. What are you, on dope? :D

So Saphire series is simply code for "more expensive"?

No guaranteed video remaster

No guaranteed audio remaster

No upgrade in packaging

Just the Blu Ray with Lossless audio and some extras like every other catalog tittle from every other studio?

Correct?

Wait till DIAMOND series lol:DLet them do whatever market ploy they use but I do not think, by no means they would be able to sell these exuberant price! They have to come down to land of being reasonable!

On the other end look at Warner's prices for Casa Blanca, Gone with the Wind, Wizard of OZ are through the sky, just because they put a lot of Made in China toys in there for just 2 disc editions and no simple packaging. They did the same for Matrix. I am not including LOTR series in there, just because of 3 films being in there!

:mad:

Wait till DIAMOND series lol:DLet them do whatever market ploy they use but I do not think, by no means they would be able to sell these exuberant price! They have to come down to land of being reasonable!


:mad:

Diamond is old and out of style.

Sapphire is young and hip. It's so hip it's frequently misspelled "Saphire".

The only problem is that you can get jewelry with real sapphires on amazon for less than they are charging for these catalog movies that have been run over and over again in hi-def on cable.

Diamond is old and out of style.

Sapphire is young and hip. It's so hip it's frequently misspelled "Saphire".

The only problem is that you can get jewelry with real sapphires on amazon for less than they are charging for these catalog movies that have been run over and over again in hi-def on cable.

LOL made my day reading this...Sapphire is where it's at ;]

Could be that Gladiator is using the 6.1 discrete mix created for the theatrical DVD. It was developed, just like Paramount's Top Gun and Titanic 6.1 mixes, with the support of DTS.

The Blu-ray release of Top Gun had a 24 bit, DTS-MA 6.1 discrete track from the re-mixed 6.1 master along with a 5.1 Dolby TrueHD track (and the Special Edition DVD had a DTS-ES 6.1 track and a Dolby Digital 5.1 track). It could be that Gladiator on Blu will be the same way: use the DTS lossless codec because DTS helped with the new mix (well, not exactly new anymore).

The 6.1 track had such stand out moments as one of the arena gladiators attacking Russell Crowe's character whipping a weapon around his head and it sounded like it was swishing around the room in a circular panning effect, using the back channel too.

It's also a cheap way to promote that Gladiator has an "extra channel" without going to the expense of creating an entirely new 7.1 mix, though it would be much better than a 6.1 mix (stereo back surrounds rather than mono).

Of course, this is all speculation on my part, and it could simply be that Ridley Scott insisted on them using DTS rather than Dolby and it's just a DTS-MA 5.1 track from the original theatrical mix.

Its a shame that the Sapphire Series is simply a slip cover over a 2 disc Bluray case.

For that much dough, these should have a Digibook packaging.

If not Digibook, like Warner's and Sony's, then Paramount should have came up with some kind of unique packaging, instead of just a slipcover.

UGH... please...

I will gladly pay $5 MORE for standard packaging. It'd be worth it to not have to buy a replacement case, HOPE someone makes a replacement cover, and pay to print it just to get a movie that fits in with the rest of the Blu-ray shelf like it should have in the first place. If they want to make special packaging, put it around a standard case so I can throw it away.

OK, "gladly" is not really the word for it... but I would pay more if I had to. I had to draw the line at the Planet of the Apes collection, because I did want the book and the set was literally half the price of the individual releases. But they are still left in my collection in naked Blu cases because I haven't found any replacement cover art.

For the love of all that's holy, I wish people would STOP encouraging bullsh*t packaging choices!

If Gladiator is A+ in the sound and visuals department, and has all the announced extras plus branching for both cuts, I am more than happy with the pricing. Sometimes it takes a little more to get things done right!

OTOH, if they screw it up I will be more than peeved.

We will wait and see, all you sapphire lovers out there!

I see that TNG films are gonna be coming out, but when's the TNG *Series* supposed to be starting to roll out? I know that the TOS Series was gonna be completely rolled out by the holidays, but if anyone knows when TNG will start getting its spotlight in Blu, lemme know and I'll pre-order the first couple of seasons to get my start in the Patrick Stewart era of Trek.

We're getting the original series because all the effects were recently redone and the show was shot on film and lends itself to a new high def transfer. TNG was shot on video and will never have the quality of film. All effects for all episodes of all seven seasons would have to be redone. The time and expense required won't likely be seen as a worthwhile investment by the studio any time soon. Don't hold your breath waiting for remastered TNG on Blu-ray in the near future.

Actually all the live action stuff was shot on film but all effects shots were shot on video. Additionally the show was composited and edited at 480i, however one of my friends claims to have heard rumor that Paramount maybe redoing some of the best episodes for a special BR set, ala TOS.

Let me stress it is a rumor and do not know from what source he heard it from.

Best Regards
KvE

Saw the cover art of Braveheart,FG,they looked great,can't wait.

High-Def Digest has some news on the disc features for both Braveheart and Gladiator

Braveheart: The 2-disc set will feature 1080p video, a Dolby TrueHD 5.1 soundtrack, and over two hours of new content.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2470/braveheart.html

Gladiator: The 2-disc set will feature 1080p video, a DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 soundtrack, and over two hours of new content.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2524/gladiator.html

Oh man, Braveheart and Gladiator, both this year. I can't wait.

Oh man, Braveheart and Gladiator, both this year. I can't wait.
Especially,from Paramount studio can't be wrong for great PQ and SQ.:)

I'll pass on the us editions. OMG what are those covers butt ugly!!.. :eek:

The uk edition of Gladiator has style and class........;)

I'll pass on the us editions. OMG what are those covers butt ugly!!.. :eek:

The uk edition of Gladiator has style and class........;)

I agree, though I will get the US version due to the ease of it - but yes, without question, the UK cover is pure class (same thing happend with Shawshank).

That's what custom covers are for :)

We're getting the original series because all the effects were recently redone and the show was shot on film and lends itself to a new high def transfer. TNG was shot on video and will never have the quality of film. All effects for all episodes of all seven seasons would have to be redone. The time and expense required won't likely be seen as a worthwhile investment by the studio any time soon. Don't hold your breath waiting for remastered TNG on Blu-ray in the near future.

I find that interesting... A series from the 1960s had it on film and could be easily remastered, but a series made 20 years later with better technology available to make for a better, more modern series, can't? Something's fishy there, in the 80s and 90s, you had far better production and studio technology than you had in the 60s. That doesn't add up to me...

EDIT: Of course, then again, if you remember Enterprise (Scott Bakula, Jolene Blalock, Connor Trinneer, et al), just shot a few years back, a couple of those seasons were shot natively for high-definition broadcasting for UPN, so there's no doubt that'll be redone in Blu-ray very soon. I mean, even tho Sci-Fi Channel is airing Enterprise, they're only airing them in the 4:3 letterboxed modes, even on Sci-Fi HD. So owning Enterprise on Blu-ray would be that much better.

I find that interesting... A series from the 1960s had it on film and could be easily remastered, but a series made 20 years later with better technology available to make for a better, more modern series, can't? Something's fishy there, in the 80s and 90s, you had far better production and studio technology than you had in the 60s. That doesn't add up to me...

EDIT: Of course, then again, if you remember Enterprise (Scott Bakula, Jolene Blalock, Connor Trinneer, et al), just shot a few years back, a couple of those seasons were shot natively for high-definition broadcasting for UPN, so there's no doubt that'll be redone in Blu-ray very soon. I mean, even tho Sci-Fi Channel is airing Enterprise, they're only airing them in the 4:3 letterboxed modes, even on Sci-Fi HD. So owning Enterprise on Blu-ray would be that much better.

Star Trek the original series was shot and edited on film. They were able to go back to those film masters and work from there. For The Next Generation, the show was shot on film, but edited entirely in 480. So to get HD masters from that, they'd have to go back to the original film (if it's even still around) and then completely re-edit the show and re-do every single special effect. Essentially, besides principal photography, they'd be redoing each episode.

I find that interesting... A series from the 1960s had it on film and could be easily remastered, but a series made 20 years later with better technology available to make for a better, more modern series, can't? Something's fishy there, in the 80s and 90s, you had far better production and studio technology than you had in the 60s. That doesn't add up to me...



No it's called being cheap. It was quicker and cheaper to edit on SD video than film and to composite the FX that way. 480SD video is far INFERIOR technology than film. That's why TOS looks amazing even on SD dvd and TNG looks godawful. Soft, blurry, full of jaggies, washed out....

Don't forget rainbows and dot-crawl...

TNG really does suck on DVD.

yep, those too.... and unfortunately many of our fave TV shows, TNG, DS9, Buffy, X-files were done just this way and now all will be HUGE undertakings if they ever want to release them in HD.... shame.

Yeah, but as stated in my edit, Enterprise, on the other hand was filmed for HD broadcasts, at least the last couple of seasons of it. However, the whole series could even be upscaled, since it's already widescreen. Just a shame that Sci-Fi Channel doesn't have the high-def rights to the series. Owning a Blu-ray set will more than make up for that one.

Anyways, back on topic now... Paramount is certainly one of the newcomers to the Blu-ray scene, make no mistake. I was there when Paramount was still on that other format, and being a format-independent viewer like me, I took the plunge and followed the Blu crowd about a year ago. I'm just glad that Paramount's bringing out their best films right about now. Can't wait to see what's due out around the holidays.

High-Def Digest has some news on the disc features for both Braveheart and Gladiator

Gladiator: The 2-disc set will feature 1080p video, a DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 soundtrack, and over two hours of new content.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/2524/gladiator.html

That doesn't make sense. I saw the listing of what's on the discs and there's almost nothing that wasn't on either of the two DVD editions.

Hmm... Wonder if the TNG *films* are gonna be released as a collection like the TOS movies were, or if they're gonna only release them one-by-one, or both. I mean, I did watch Nemesis on DVD, but if they're releasing the ones they made back in the '90s as well, then I guess we may as well see what Insurrection, First Contact, and Generations will wind up being like, and maybe I'll upgrade Nemesis DVD to Blu, and hope that all four'll shine.

The TNG films are going to be released as a collection. I believe at this time there will be a movies 7-11 boxed set which includes the recent JJ Abrams film, they'll release a complete film collection of movies 1-11, and the movies I think will eventually be sold separately, but perhaps not right away. So, think of the boxed set to come as 'TNG films + 1'.

Also, this thread title needs an edit as Braveheart is scheduled on 9/1 with Gladiator. The August date is no longer correct.

All I'm waiting for now is a date announcement for the South Park movie!

That doesn't make sense. I saw the listing of what's on the discs and there's almost nothing that wasn't on either of the two DVD editions.Over on HTF, Charlie de Lauzirika said he's produced 5 hours worth of new material for Gladiator. I don't know if that includes the movie's runtime in a sort of new viewing mode or what.

Over on HTF, Charlie de Lauzirika said he's produced 5 hours worth of new material for Gladiator. I don't know if that includes the movie's runtime in a sort of new viewing mode or what.

Yeah that must be what it is. It's all the enhanced viewing mode.

The TNG films are going to be released as a collection. I believe at this time there will be a movies 7-11 boxed set which includes the recent JJ Abrams film, they'll release a complete film collection of movies 1-11, and the movies I think will eventually be sold separately, but perhaps not right away. So, think of the boxed set to come as 'TNG films + 1'.

Also, this thread title needs an edit as Braveheart is scheduled on 9/1 with Gladiator. The August date is no longer correct.

All I'm waiting for now is a date announcement for the South Park movie!

All right, good... I already own the TOS Movie collection (1-6), so I guess that 7-11 will probably complete that package. When are Seasons Two and Three from TOS confirmed? I already own Season One, and I'm probably gonna upgrade my Season Two and Three DVDs to Blu-rays once they hit shelves. Assuming that F.Y.E. will allow you to upgrade the DVD counterparts to the new Blu ones.

I believe Season 2 is in October while the third I think sometime before Christmas.

The TNG films are going to be released as a collection. I believe at this time there will be a movies 7-11 boxed set which includes the recent JJ Abrams film, they'll release a complete film collection of movies 1-11, and the movies I think will eventually be sold separately, but perhaps not right away. So, think of the boxed set to come as 'TNG films + 1'.

Is this just your personal guess? Everything I've seen indicates the TNG films will get their own box set, which makes the most sense to me. Given that the new film is the start of a new continuity, I would hope they'll keep it out of the TNG box.

I'm pretty sure I've read it was supposed to be a boxed set containing films 7-11. Although I may have been confused due to the fact they mentioned a big 1-11 boxed set as well.

EDIT: Looks like you're right.

Is this just your personal guess? Everything I've seen indicates the TNG films will get their own box set, which makes the most sense to me. Given that the new film is the start of a new continuity, I would hope they'll keep it out of the TNG box.

Yeah, considering how they packaged the Complete Series on DVD, I certainly don't want a repeat when it comes to their movie package on Blu-ray.
Honestly, I liked the package that DS9 and Voyager seasons were packaged with all seven seasons in their own boxes, yet cased together. Why should TNG have been any different?
I know it may be to cut costs, but at whose expense? It certainly wasn't exactly "friendly" on the consumer, yet DS9 and Voyager packaged a more traditional way are priced less on Amazon.

Sorry about that off topic rant, but I mean, Paramount should go back to series packaging school. Anyway, I look forward to their offerings in the next few months, just hope they keep it simple and organized, unlike certain packs.

I'm really looking for this, can't wait too.
I can't wait too.

I'm kinda thinking all blu ray companies should do a "Sapphire Series" depending on quality. Like "Robocop" would be "Quarz Series" but "Terminator 2:Skynet" would be "Quibic Zirconia Series." It would give me a better sense of what to expect. :D

http://www.****************/img/i/P.jpgDon't forget rainbows and dot-crawl...

TNG really does suck on DVD.http://***************/9/P/i.jpg

lol i'm glad someone feels like me...TNG REALLY does suck :D

I'm kinda thinking all blu ray companies should do a "Sapphire Series" depending on quality. Like "Robocop" would be "Quarz Series" but "Terminator 2:Skynet" would be "Quibic Zirconia Series." It would give me a better sense of what to expect. :D

Your wish scares me! do not give these bluray companies this idea to try to start milking us from quartz to sapphire and then space crystals all the way!:eek:

Your wish scares me! do not give these bluray companies this idea to try to start milking us from quartz to sapphire and then space crystals all the way!:eek:

sorry but with the way studios are, this iddea might take off. :cool:

Can we please stop talking about these films so the thread will not keep appearing? It is agony waiting! :)

Can we please stop talking about these films so the thread will not keep appearing? It is agony waiting! :)

Don't worry. We will get these discs soon enough, eventually become bored of them for a long while, and then continue to crave for other movies to be released on Blu-ray. :)

Thanks, the standard DVD has DTS-ES and it is a great soundtrack, can't wait.
John

Could be that Gladiator is using the 6.1 discrete mix created for the theatrical DVD. It was developed, just like Paramount's Top Gun and Titanic 6.1 mixes, with the support of DTS.

The Blu-ray release of Top Gun had a 24 bit, DTS-MA 6.1 discrete track from the re-mixed 6.1 master along with a 5.1 Dolby TrueHD track (and the Special Edition DVD had a DTS-ES 6.1 track and a Dolby Digital 5.1 track). It could be that Gladiator on Blu will be the same way: use the DTS lossless codec because DTS helped with the new mix (well, not exactly new anymore).

The 6.1 track had such stand out moments as one of the arena gladiators attacking Russell Crowe's character whipping a weapon around his head and it sounded like it was swishing around the room in a circular panning effect, using the back channel too.

Of course, this is all speculation on my part, and it could simply be that Ridley Scott insisted on them using DTS rather than Dolby and it's just a DTS-MA 5.1 track from the original theatrical mix.


How many people bought that extra speaker or 2 in the back because of the promise of movies like Gladiator with its 6.1 discreet track or later because of the promise of 7.1 lossless with Blu ray? Now they barely release anything over 5.1 because they don't want to go to the extra trouble/cost and yet here is a movie that already had an extra channel when it came out on DVD for pete's sake and they can't put it on the Blu ray? What's all this bull about utilizing all the capabilities of Blu ray when they use a soundtrack with less channels than the DVD? Isn't this like using the original encode for Braveheart with all the warts/moles instead of using the newly available remastered one?
If 6.1 was good for Top Gun why not use it for Gladiator? Can anyone think of a reason?:confused::(

Tick..tick..tick.

At least it is the summertime now and and we all know how quickly that seems to go by so to speak. I asked people not to bump the thread because the wait is agony but ...

How many people bought that extra speaker or 2 in the back because of the promise of movies like Gladiator with its 6.1 discreet track or later because of the promise of 7.1 lossless with Blu ray? Now they barely release anything over 5.1 because they don't want to go to the extra trouble/cost and yet here is a movie that already had an extra channel when it came out on DVD for pete's sake and they can't put it on the Blu ray? What's all this bull about utilizing all the capabilities of Blu ray when they use a soundtrack with less channels than the DVD? Isn't this like using the original encode for Braveheart with all the warts/moles instead of using the newly available remastered one?
If 6.1 was good for Top Gun why not use it for Gladiator? Can anyone think of a reason?:confused::(

I know it's no excuse, but in a properly calibrated setup, I find those rear channels to really be unnecessary. 6.1 at least, anyways. 7.1 makes a bit of a difference but at the prime location in your home theater for viewing, you can get a GREAT rear effect from your two rear speakers in a 5.1.

I know it's no excuse, but in a properly calibrated setup, I find those rear channels to really be unnecessary. 6.1 at least, anyways. 7.1 makes a bit of a difference but at the prime location in your home theater for viewing, you can get a GREAT rear effect from your two rear speakers in a 5.1.
My experience is much different.
My side surrounds work great as do my rear surrounds.
It is very movie dependent. I got very used to having rear surrounds and really didn't appreciated them until one of the rears was out of commission for a ribbon replacement.
I noticed it right off.

How many people bought that extra speaker or 2 in the back because of the promise of movies like Gladiator with its 6.1 discreet track or later because of the promise of 7.1 lossless with Blu ray? Now they barely release anything over 5.1 because they don't want to go to the extra trouble/cost and yet here is a movie that already had an extra channel when it came out on DVD for pete's sake and they can't put it on the Blu ray? What's all this bull about utilizing all the capabilities of Blu ray when they use a soundtrack with less channels than the DVD? Isn't this like using the original encode for Braveheart with all the warts/moles instead of using the newly available remastered one?
If 6.1 was good for Top Gun why not use it for Gladiator? Can anyone think of a reason?:confused::(

Maybe they will do a later edition for more money so people will buy again as that is the only reason i can think of.

Once you have a great film properly in blu ray or hif def, then switiching out audio tracks as an update, would seem relatively simple, especially since my money says it was done in at least 6.1 as a master, or even 7.1

Years ago, I took the rears and the two fronts and rearranged them so that the fronts were more to the side while the rears were also not really rear
but more in the rear corners.

it was far better than the three in front and the two in rear. far bettter, hence my desire for 7.1 at a min for these movies.

but it really sucked when you wanted some simple two channel stereo or movies/tv that was not anything but two channel...

They got No excuse for not doing it.

Sort of like Dances with Wolves in blu ray, you got to wonder if it is marketing ploy, and when it finally comes out, it will be $$$85 or more

Well, yeah, the 'rears' in my 5.1 setup are at the sides of the listening area, that's where they're supposed to be placed. When mixed accordingly, they can make you feel like things are directly behind you.

I must say that the lack of 7.1 titles is very disappointing. Especially with DVDs that had the back channels.

Is it that much more expensive to mix these as 7.1? They are backwards compatible so it is not like consumers with 5.1 get screwed in any way.

I understand that my system is lacking because my preamp does not decode the new codecs. So I utilize my 7.1 analog inputs.

Problem with that of course is that I cannot use any systems to expand from 5.1 to 7.1.

I assume that 7.1 is not taking off or has a large enough demand in the market place?

Both GLADIATOR and BRAVEHEART are in the post anybody got there's yet?:)

Cant wait to find out how these look:cool:

Both GLADIATOR and BRAVEHEART are in the post anybody got there's yet?:)

Cant wait to find out how these look:cool:
lol. I am both excited and worried. For the price they're asking, the PQ and AQ better be friggin perfect.

Anyone know how they're justifying pricing these old titles higher than some new releases?

I think they "justify" it because these titles are desirable and highly prized by movie buffs so they figure we will pay more to get them than say Howard the Duck.

I'm still perplexed that they would reduce the sound on Gladiator from 6.1 on the DVD to 5.1 on the Blu ray. Seems like for the asking price top notch sound would have been included.

Both GLADIATOR and BRAVEHEART are in the post anybody got there's yet?:)

Cant wait to find out how these look:cool:

Last week I couldn't resist pre-ordering them from one of the known sites that "lets 'em fly." Hoping to receive that confirm email any day now, seems to be right about the time from street date anyway. :::fingers crossed:::

EDIT: SWEET MUTHA! Shoulda checked before I posted....card has now been fully charged!!! "FREEEEEEEEDOM!" (-;

EDIT #2: Shipping details confirmation email received, should have 'em in hand before the weekend! "Are you not entertained?!?!" =8^)

Since when did Paramount region lock discs ! this is a bad trend both Gladiator and Braveheart are locked

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb272/TauHeel05/GladiatorBack.jpg
Courtesy of Axelmusic

Was is ever confirmed it Gladiator contains both the TE and exctended? I see "deleted scenes" on the details - but thats hardly as nice as both cuts via branching. Never seen that extra footage, just curious.

I think they "justify" it because these titles are desirable and highly prized by movie buffs so they figure we will pay more to get them than say Howard the Duck.

whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.....do not knock Howard the Duck.....;)

Since when did Paramount region lock discs ! this is a bad trend both Gladiator and Braveheart are locked

Weird. Some sort of distribution rights issue? Like how Warner locked their German Rambo Blu-ray to Region B.

I wonder if the Universal release of Gladiator will be Region B locked... Fox's Braveheart obviously will be.

Was is ever confirmed it Gladiator contains both the TE and exctended? I see "deleted scenes" on the details - but thats hardly as nice as both cuts via branching. Never seen that extra footage, just curious.

It says so on three places on the back cover. :)

Since when did Paramount region lock discs ! this is a bad trend both Gladiator and Braveheart are locked

As a poster already said i think it's because Fox own the European distribution rights for Braveheart and i think Universal distribute it in Germany and France but not sure about the UK.

I hope the UK edition of Braveheart restores the one tiny cut applied back in the "good old days" of Ferman BBFC control.

Looking forward to hearing good things about these discs.

Thank goodness they included both cuts. It is so nice when we get to choose. :)

Definitely picking this up!

Region locked? Will they play on U.S. machines?

Region locked? Will they play on U.S. machines?

Obviously. They're US releases.

region locked? Will they play on u.s. Machines?

obviously. They're us releases.
lmao!!

It says so on three places on the back cover. :)

LMAO! Thanks! Took me a sec to spot it but sure enough you're right....







....and I'm a lazy reader. (=

Obviously. They're US releases.

:)

For some reason I thought I read above that these are the UK releases. Thanks.

Note that Universal is releasing Gladiator in the UK on September 7th and Fox is releasing Braveheart in the UK on November 2nd. Possible alternatives in case Paramount screws up these US releases with DNR.

Note that Universal is releasing Gladiator in the UK on September 7th and Fox is releasing Braveheart in the UK on November 2nd. Possible alternatives in case Paramount screws up these US releases with DNR.

Well, I'm hoping the UK is region free (and it should be, aye?) because the steelbook is just plain gorgeous.

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3466/gladiatorbdsteel3d.jpg

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gladiator-Limited-Steel-Book-Blu-ray/dp/B002HRE91A?tag=bluraycom-21

Note that Universal is releasing Gladiator in the UK on September 7th and Fox is releasing Braveheart in the UK on November 2nd. Possible alternatives in case Paramount screws up these US releases with DNR.

Looking forward to the screenshot comparisons on these.

Well, I'm hoping the UK is region free (and it should be, aye?) because the steelbook is just plain gorgeous.

Am I the only one who preferred the temp art they had up to this helmet design?

Note that Universal is releasing Gladiator in the UK on September 7th and Fox is releasing Braveheart in the UK on November 2nd. Possible alternatives in case Paramount screws up these US releases with DNR.


Apparently it was confirmed that the Gladiator encoding on both discs will be exactly the same, or so I was told.

LMAO! Thanks! Took me a sec to spot it but sure enough you're right....

....and I'm a lazy reader. (=

It also says on the bottom of h backcover...

2000/2005
151 min Theatrical/177 min Extended

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb272/TauHeel05/Braveheart-blurayBACK.jpg

Courtesy of Axelmusic

Purchased my copy of Braveheart today.
Audio is confirmed as Dolby TrueHD.
Comes with a $10 mail in rebate. Looks like Gladiator will also have one.

Special Features:
-Commentary Actor/Director Mel Gibson
-Braveheart Timelines
-Dimensional Battlefields of the Scottish Rebellion
-Braveheart: A Look Back
A Company of Equals (HD)
The Sound of Laughter (HD)
The Message of a Film (HD)
-Smithfield:Medieval Killing Fields (HD)
-Tales of William Wallace
-A Writer's Journey

Here are the pics. Taken with my cell:

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/7374/0818092159.jpg

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/981/0818092200.jpg

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6906/0818092201.jpg

Color me jealous! I'll be awaiting your thoughts on A/V quality.

2 of my faves!!! Well, c'mon tell us how Braveheart looks! :)

Well, I'm hoping the UK is region free (and it should be, aye?) because the steelbook is just plain gorgeous.
It should be region free as it is from Universal, but so should the Paramount release. However it's not. So I think this could be one of the titles from Universal that is region coded.

Color me jealous! I'll be awaiting your thoughts on A/V quality.

The anticipation is killing me! Please tell me that Gladiator is the best PQ ever seen on Blu-Ray!

Petey

Color me jealous! I'll be awaiting your thoughts on A/V quality.

To me, Video looks way better than the original DVD version I own.
The DVD looked dirty and soft, but the BR looks very good.
Audio was very strong during the battle scene I saw.
Haven't seen the entire film yet but it should not disappoint.

The anticipation is killing me! Please tell me that Gladiator is the best PQ ever seen on Blu-Ray!

Petey

I doubt that coz its by Ridley Scott.

The anticipation is killing me! Please tell me that Gladiator is the best PQ ever seen on Blu-Ray!

Petey
They are talking about Braveheart.
I doubt that coz its by Ridley Scott.
I assume your talking about his use of filters. I'm a big fan of the work he does with his cinematographers, so I may have to "throw down".;)

I can't believe I don't have Braveheart on DVD.:o Even so I've seen it close to a dozen times. Can't wait to watch it again.

To me, Video looks way better than the original DVD version I own.
The DVD looked dirty and soft, but the BR looks very good.
Audio was very strong during the battle scene I saw.
Haven't seen the entire film yet but it should not disappoint.

The original DVD had some specks from the cinema print on it but contained absolutely zero edge enhancement which was rare for a DVD back then.

This site here mentions more on this. Scroll down to see the praise of the original Braveheart release.

http://www.videophile.info/Guide_EE/Page_01.htm

I sure hope this release is better than most of the other catalog Paramount releases.

The earlier Gladiator dvd release (with the Ridley Scott sig on the cover) looks pretty effin' excellent upconverted to begin with...so though I'm sure it won't be "the best PQ ever seen on Blu", its not gonna be any dog either.

Paramount and their Region Locking can kizz my a**. Even if UNI and FOX region lock Gladiator and Braveheart I am fine with that coz the former is going to be Steelbook and the later is going to feature DTS-HD MA.

Shadow,

I was referring to Scott's usage of filters.