Hi everyone,

Picked up Sunshine and Man on Fire. Haven't watched them as of yet, but here's a few shots:

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/8544/img3275largeal7.jpg

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/2567/img3277largeur9.jpg

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/8517/img3284largeqm1.jpg

Wait a second...Man on Fire has absolutely NO extras!??!?!?!

Am I reading this right?

Because my pre-order is going to be immediately cancelled.

Wow...Sunshine!!!!!!!!

Love that movie!

Where did you get Sunshine?

More importantly-where did you find them this early??

i think one of his local stores get them in and bring them out early. if you live in NY maybe pm him with the location. paul's been getting many BDs early for quite some time now.

Wait a second...Man on Fire has absolutely NO extras!??!?!?!

Am I reading this right?

Because my pre-order is going to be immediately cancelled.

That's right. Not one freaking extras.

Wait a second...Man on Fire has absolutely NO extras!??!?!?!

Am I reading this right?

Because my pre-order is going to be immediately cancelled.

Are you kidding?! It has SMART MENU TECHNOLOGY. Sounds very expensive.

;)

Are you kidding?! It has SMART MENU TECHNOLOGY. Sounds very expensive.

;)

Thank god for that 50GB. :rolleyes:

Just cancelled from Amazon.

F that Man On Fire. I was holding out on the 2-disc set to pick this up with the extras. They could and should have at least ported them over. I will not be buying this. Thanks for the heads up!

Wait a second...Man on Fire has absolutely NO extras!??!?!?!

Am I reading this right?

Because my pre-order is going to be immediately cancelled.

What else is new for Fox:rolleyes: I think if and when Fox Blu-ray catalog has a decent port of DVD extras, it calls for a celebration. For some strange reason, their Day and Date releases are often barebones even when they get released alongside fully featured SD DVDs.

No extras when there is a 2 disc DVD = ashame.

Man on Fire is a must-buy for me, loved that movie.

how do they look?

Glad to see Fox dropping the "Beyond High Definition" banner on a few titles.

Screenshots please-screenshots!!!

Man on Fire is mine. I do not buy 1080p movies with lossless audio to watch 480i extras and 2.0 audio. You guys need new hobbies.

As someone who appreciates films and FILMMAKING, I care about this hobby. I'm not in this for the "latest and greatest."

I've spent the last few days going through the extras on Blade Runner and haven't even touched the film discs. The extras are the real gold.

Please don't tell me what to do.

Gee, with all the talk about bandwith, you'd think that Blu-ray would be able to figure out how to fit 2 192kbps commentaries on there AT THE VERY LEAST.

Stop making excuses for pathetic attempts at releases.

If Fox thinks that many people will double-dip a movie like Man on Fire on Blu-ray, then I believe they are grossly mistaken. Those who want the movie and all of the extras will wait for a proper release, while those who want just the movie will likely never buy any subsequent releases. Fox should have just included everything from the start. Of course, this is assuming that the back cover is right in that there really are no extras.

Sorry for the delay as I was checking out THE KINGDOM (I'm neutral, don't kill me. Very good looking disc BTW)

System:

Pioneer Elite 1140HD (ISF 6500k)
Panny BD30
Pioneer Elite VSX92
Kef ACE 6000 x 6
DefTech Supercube 15"

MAN ON FIRE looks incredible. Watched two sequences (shootout where girl gets kidnapped and anal C4). Everyone who knows the Tony Scott trademarks with undercranked, overcranked, different stock, etc understand the variations in picture quality. When it looks funky, it looks funky. When it's supposed to look good, it really, really shines.



DTS-MA is very aggressive. Lot's of 'whooshes' and low end. Nice sounding gunshots.

There are NO extras. None. Only trailers for other Fox films. No commentary as well. As i had the SD special edition, lack of features wasnt an issue. The PQ/AQ make up for it.

SUNSHINE tomorrow.

As for screenshots, i can only take shots with a digital SLR. Don't have a blu in my computers.

That cover art for Sunshine is absolutely terrible, but the movie is fantastic.

wtf

studios trickle these titles out and don't put any extras on them..they don't sell well and they start bitching about it.

Hello? Fox, GET A CLUE.....we're not going to buy Man on Fire 1.5 on bluray

As someone who appreciates films and FILMMAKING, I care about this hobby. I'm not in this for the "latest and greatest."

I've spent the last few days going through the extras on Blade Runner and haven't even touched the film discs. The extras are the real gold.

Please don't tell me what to do.

Gee, with all the talk about bandwith, you'd think that Blu-ray would be able to figure out how to fit 2 192kbps commentaries on there AT THE VERY LEAST.

Stop making excuses for pathetic attempts at releases.

You should stick to DVD IMHO, since thats where all the "Gold" is.

You should stick to DVD IMHO, since thats where all the "Gold" is.

Dude give it a rest, you are way off base on this.:rolleyes:

Extras are a part of this hobby, people enjoy watching the work that went into these films.

I enjoy watching movies in full 1080P, however I also love watching all the behind the scenes happenings during filming.

More importantly-where did you find them this early??

exactly.

That Sunshine cover art looks like a freaking bootleg.
Why doesn't it have that black stripe on the bottom like all Fox releases?

Do they only do it for 20th century and Fox Atomic? Why would they leave it off for Searchlight?

Paul are you going to test out the 1.1 features?
Make sure you watch Sunshine when you wont freak anyone out. Some of if gets pretty loud, and pretty violent. Unfortunately some of it isn't awesome.
It's still a must buy for me.

SUNSHINE - AVC @ 16 Mbps ????? Is this because of lack of space or due to PiP or a misprint ? :cool:

Bit Rate Fanatics prepare your AMMOS. :D

hem, man on fire without region encoding. )))

or there's flashlight on it (((

I need to get Sunshine... :)

That Sunshine cover art looks like a freaking bootleg.
Why doesn't it have that black stripe on the bottom like all Fox releases?

Do they only do it for 20th century and Fox Atomic? Why would they leave it off for Searchlight?

Paul are you going to test out the 1.1 features?
Make sure you watch Sunshine when you wont freak anyone out. Some of if gets pretty loud, and pretty violent. Unfortunately some of it isn't awesome.
It's still a must buy for me.

Fox might be dropping the black stripe like Disney is dropping the "swoosh". Likewise with Paramount and the silver border they dropped.

To the OP: If it's not to much trouble, can you take a pic of the Sunshine disc?

It's good to know Sunshine didn't get delayed. :)

It's good to know Sunshine didn't get delayed. :)

Just because its completely done doesn't mean that Fox couldn't come up with more lies to delay it. But with this one its in their best interest to sell it now. Not so much with ID4.

You should stick to DVD IMHO, since thats where all the "Gold" is.

I think you should stick to film prints. They'd be more fun for you to show off.

Yeah the cover does seemed a tad washed out. I also didn't know it was 1.1 I'll check that out later. Here's a shot of the disc:

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6048/img3285largeqe1.jpg

Ok, the 1.1 feature is ok. Just like HD-DVD with PIP. One feature was cool in concept but really wortless. Basically it's 4 scenes where you can move a dialogue track within the 5 speakers. The computer's voice in 2 scenes and the crazy captain's voice in 2 others.

Picture quality is very good. Some grain apparant but that's a given. Impressive, very impressive.

DTS-MA is wild. Heavy use of low end and surrounds.

No extras? No sale Fox.

SUNSHINE - AVC @ 16 Mbps ????? Is this because of lack of space or due to PiP or a misprint ? :cool:

Bit Rate Fanatics prepare your AMMOS. :D

Check again. That's 16 megabytes per second according to Fox ;)

They must be going for some kind of record.

Gee, with all the talk about bandwith, you'd think that Blu-ray would be able to figure out how to fit 2 192kbps commentaries on there AT THE VERY LEAST.


This has nothing to do with blu-ray and everything to do with Fox.

Brandon

I've never heard of Sunshine. Was it released domestically?

I've never heard of Sunshine. Was it released domestically?

Yes, but it came and went fairly quickly, and was released domestically months after its release elsewhere in the world. I believe I saw it in late July or early August.

I personally enjoyed the film and look forward to the disc, but IMO it's not for everyone. I don't think I could recommend it is as a blind buy.

I'll be getting Man On Fire regardless of the bare bones release.

I've never heard of Sunshine. Was it released domestically?

Never even heard of it? Wow.

Btw, thanks paul nyc for the pic.

Lol fox are the king of Error

2 on Prison Break, list 18mbits AVC, while it's actually around 30 if not more. List a French DD trakc and Japanese DD track, it's english only LOL!

Ok, the 1.1 feature is ok. Just like HD-DVD with PIP. One feature was cool in concept but really wortless. Basically it's 4 scenes where you can move a dialogue track within the 5 speakers. The computer's voice in 2 scenes and the crazy captain's voice in 2 others.

Picture quality is very good. Some grain apparant but that's a given. Impressive, very impressive.

DTS-MA is wild. Heavy use of low end and surrounds.

Paul, thanks for the information.

Do you have any means (read: PS3) to check the actually bitrate of the AVC encode - 16Mbit/s seems very low and might suggest a double encode for the IME feature despite it being profile 1.1 (profile 1.1 support alone doesn't mean that the IME is "true PIP"). Thanks.

This has nothing to do with blu-ray and everything to do with Fox.

Brandon

With this release, sure.

HOWEVER, how do you explain Donnie Brasco, SWAT and others losing their commentaries? Fox ain't the only one doing it.

Can't check the bitrate with the panny bd30. My old Sony 300 could though. Looks very good. Tier 1

With this release, sure.

HOWEVER, how do you explain Donnie Brasco, SWAT and others losing their commentaries? Fox ain't the only one doing it.

I've been reading your posts and it is readily apparent that you have some serious issues that you are blaming an entire format for, when you should be blaming the studios. "Extras" cost money. Even if the SD DVD release had tons of extras, the contractual agreements for these extras may have been solely for the SD DVD release and not for HD (research the Hollywood writers strike for a little background on how these things work); likewise, the extras may look just fine in SD but would detract from the overall product if they were included on the HD release. Also, studios have made fortunes by artificially extending the life of a title by periodically coming out with "better" editions of the very same product. It is in their best interest to wait and see how a particular title sells in its "basic" version before they invest resources in a "ultimate collector's edition".

Perhaps if you spent as much time reading media publications as you spend posting you'd understand the business better and thus make much more informed comments in your posts. Intentionally or not, you just come across as somebody who has an agenda.

Man On Fire is on a 50GB disc and uses the AVC codec. That means there's a lot of space on there not being used by Fox since it's barebones.

And to add insult to injury, the list price will be $39.95.

I've been reading your posts and it is readily apparent that you have some serious issues that you are blaming an entire format for, when you should be blaming the studios. "Extras" cost money. Even if the SD DVD release had tons of extras, the contractual agreements for these extras may have been solely for the SD DVD release and not for HD (research the Hollywood writers strike for a little background on how these things work); likewise, the extras may look just fine in SD but would detract from the overall product if they were included on the HD release. Also, studios have made fortunes by artificially extending the life of a title by periodically coming out with "better" editions of the very same product. It is in their best interest to wait and see how a particular title sells in its "basic" version before they invest resources in a "ultimate collector's edition".

Perhaps if you spent as much time reading media publications as you spend posting you'd understand the business better and thus make much more informed comments in your posts. Intentionally or not, you just come across as somebody who has an agenda.

As someone who started out collecting laserdiscs, perhaps YOU should do a little research with whom you're talking to before posting this inane crap.

I do have an agenda. I want ALL extras. Period. Blu-ray is the format that I've had to back those up for more often than not.

The studios OWN their extras. This isn't a case of Criterion licensing them. There is ABSOLUTELY no excuse to not include them. They don't cost money at this point. They're done and produced.

oh and btw...you've made a lot of claims in your post. I have one question for you:

LINK???

As someone who started out collecting laserdiscs, perhaps YOU should do a little research with whom you're talking to before posting this inane crap.

I do have an agenda. I want ALL extras. Period. Blu-ray is the format that I've had to back those up for more often than not.

The studios OWN their extras. This isn't a case of Criterion licensing them. There is ABSOLUTELY no excuse to not include them. They don't cost money at this point. They're done and produced.

oh and btw...you've made a lot of claims in your post. I have one question for you:

LINK???

I'm not taking sides here. I'm going to play both sides of the field. I do understand contracts and yes, sometimes SD material doesn't carry over to HD but that's rare. What is very common is the expense of creating HD bonus material. Most of the material for older releases weren't created in HD. So upconverting is a choice (not a very good one imho). It hasn't been until the last year or two that creating HDCAM-SR/D5 masters for HD bonus material to become common. It's very expensive to create a DLT with full HD material. How do i know this? Don't ask. Read my other posts and you can pretty much figure out where i come from.

Now, is it me or do the majority of us (early adaptors, if you will), have had laserdiscs (CAV FTW!!) and DVDS? We all had the extas before, so i don't really lose sleep when i purcahse a film that looks and sounds incredible. For the few that haven't bought other editions of all these films and want extras, yeah that's totally understandable. I consider that the minority though. I could be wrong.

It will not deter me away from purchasing a disc if extras are absent, if i know that the transfer and soundtrack are outstanding. Yeah, it's great to have the extras (Blade Runner for example) but do we really need to see EPK type stuff on HD? With extras, I watch them once and that's it. The 2nd disc becomes a coaster, lol.

Just my two cents.

With this release, sure.

HOWEVER, how do you explain Donnie Brasco, SWAT and others losing their commentaries? Fox ain't the only one doing it.

I believe what Brandon is referring to is that one shouldn't blame the capabilities of the format, which some could easily construe your posts to mean.

Fox couldn't care less what a few enthusiasts on AVS think about their supplements packages. As indicated by their pricing structure and strategy, it seems that all they care about is making the most amount of money in the short term with the prospect on getting people to double-dip down the road. If this is indeed their mindset, then I think that they are in for a rude awakening. Now that we are getting extremely faithful video transfers with lossless audio, I'm willing to bet that very, very few consumers will buy the same title twice on Blu-ray.

While Fox is the worst in this regard, you should keep in mind that there other studios releasing on both formats that aren't nearly as consumer-friendly as Disney.

Now that we are getting extremely faithful video transfers with lossless audio, I'm willing to bet that very, very few consumers will buy the same title twice on Blu-ray.


I concur.

I'm not taking sides here. I'm going to play both sides of the field. I do understand contracts and yes, sometimes SD material doesn't carry over to HD but that's rare. What is very common is the expense of creating HD bonus material. Most of the material for older releases weren't created in HD. So upconverting is a choice (not a very good one imho). It hasn't been until the last year or two that creating HDCAM-SR/D5 masters for HD bonus material to become common. It's very expensive to create a DLT with full HD material. How do i know this? Don't ask. Read my other posts and you can pretty much figure out where i come from.

Now, is it me or do the majority of us (early adaptors, if you will), have had laserdiscs (CAV FTW!!) and DVDS? We all had the extas before, so i don't really lose sleep when i purcahse a film that looks and sounds incredible. For the few that haven't bought other editions of all these films and want extras, yeah that's totally understandable. I consider that the minority though. I could be wrong.

It will not deter me away from purchasing a disc if extras are absent, if i know that the transfer and soundtrack are outstanding. Yeah, it's great to have the extras (Blade Runner for example) but do we really need to see EPK type stuff on HD? With extras, I watch them once and that's it. The 2nd disc becomes a coaster, lol.

Just my two cents.

There was someone who (at least) 2 years ago told me that most extras were being produced "and already had been" in HD for some time.

That being said, I don't care if the extras are in HD. Most of the older films won't have extras in HD and I'm fine with that. I want an archive of b-roll footage and whatknot with each disc. If a format is going to brag about capacity then size shouldn't be an issue with regards to fitting extras on a disc. I had asked Amir if it would be possible to encode SD using VC1 or any other codec and he said it would. That makes the amount of space needed inconsequential.

I had laserdisc. I would pay $100 just to get a special edition. I used to watch Coming Attractions on E! just to see trailers. I WANT the extras. i don't want to go back to paying $30 for just a movie. It's a package deal. DVD set the bar high and there should be absolutely NO going back. If studios complain then they dug their own grave.

Regardless, the general public is hesitant to buy into HD format as it is, do you REALLY think they're going to pay $30 for a movie that they already have as a packed double-disc DVD? If you're going to upgrade, make it a complete package. Make it worth their while. Give them absolutely fantastic picture and audio PLUS all the amazing extras they've come to expect from SD. Anything less and IMHO, these formats will be guaranteed to fail.

I'm not saying it's exclusively a Blu-ray problem. Top Gun and Superman The Movie are examples of discs I've purchased on HD DVD that did not come with all their supplements. However, the only reason I purchase them is because they came at Superbit-like pricing and it was STILL against my better judgement.

I am completely shocked that Fox is delaying titles like this and upon release, give us barebones films with high prices. That's moronic.

As someone who started out collecting laserdiscs, perhaps YOU should do a little research with whom you're talking to before posting this inane crap.

I do have an agenda. I want ALL extras. Period. Blu-ray is the format that I've had to back those up for more often than not.

The studios OWN their extras. This isn't a case of Criterion licensing them. There is ABSOLUTELY no excuse to not include them. They don't cost money at this point. They're done and produced.

oh and btw...you've made a lot of claims in your post. I have one question for you:

LINK???

This business is about making money...for all of the parties involved. The studios want to sell their content (over and over, if possible) and maintain their profit margins. They don't care if a few thousands of enthusiasts and hobbyists want ALL the extras (many of which, I'm afraid, don't actually exist). Not every director wants you to see "how it was made", or maybe he already sold that little "extra" to HBO. And if a title didn't have anything particularly special happening behind the scenes, what would the extras cover? The intricacies of catering for the cast and crew? Maybe there isn't an alternate ending or several minutes of silly outtakes. And as for the willingness of the average consumer to pay $30 for just a movie...well, seriously, when was the last time anybody paid the full retail price for any kind of DVD, hidef or otherwise? America shops at Walmart!!!

What I posted still stands and is absolutely valid, and I don't have to provide you with any "links" to prove it. You may not realize this, but not every word ever written is online, and not everything you read online is true. Trade publications are available at your local library...go read some of them. It might humble you a little to find out that there are many who actually know more than you do. High quality audio and video has never been a "hobby" for me...I've lived it since the days of widescreen 480p NTSC content and the very first video processors.

I didn't mean to insult you or get personal...it just annoys me to see someone who SHOULD know better (after all, you DO list yourself as being an actor and therefore someone who should be fully familiar with the industry) make such outrageous statements.

You say not everything I read online is true.

Exhibit A:

This business is about making money...for all of the parties involved. The studios want to sell their content (over and over, if possible) and maintain their profit margins. They don't care if a few thousands of enthusiasts and hobbyists want ALL the extras (many of which, I'm afraid, don't actually exist). Not every director wants you to see "how it was made", or maybe he already sold that little "extra" to HBO. And if a title didn't have anything particularly special happening behind the scenes, what would the extras cover? The intricacies of catering for the cast and crew? Maybe there isn't an alternate ending or several minutes of silly outtakes. And as for the willingness of the average consumer to pay $30 for just a movie...well, seriously, when was the last time anybody paid the full retail price for any kind of DVD, hidef or otherwise? America shops at Walmart!!!

What I posted still stands and is absolutely valid, and I don't have to provide you with any "links" to prove it. You may not realize this, but not every word ever written is online, and not everything you read online is true. Trade publications are available at your local library...go read some of them. It might humble you a little to find out that there are many who actually know more than you do. High quality audio and video has never been a "hobby" for me...I've lived it since the days of widescreen 480p NTSC content and the very first video processors.

I didn't mean to insult you or get personal...it just annoys me to see someone who SHOULD know better (after all, you DO list yourself as being an actor and therefore someone who should be fully familiar with the industry) make such outrageous statements.


Man on Fire is $28 at Amazon, which is almost $30. Who in their right mind is going to pay $30 for an old (by today's standards) film that's been completely stripped of all bonus features? Do you really think people are going to re-buy said title if and when it gets re-released?? Sooner or later, people are going to be fed up and stop the double-dipping, especially with titles that have these high prices.

So you speak condescendingly and then feel you don't need to back yourself up? That speaks volumes.

I'm quite familiar with the industry so please don't talk down to me. I'm also NOT asking for extras that haven't already been produced so please don't put words into my mouth. I've been collecting "extras" since I was very very young and still continue to do so. Trailers, EPK's and b-roll footage have always been a "given" even if they weren't included on video releases. All I ask for is that if there is previously released material from DVD or laserdisc and the production company still has the rights that it be included on HD. Nowhere in my posts do I ask for extras to be included that weren't a part of other releases so, again, don't put words into my mouth.

Please drop the attitude because I'm not giving it to you. If you think you know more (or better) and you clearly do, then prove it. If not, your opinion is just that.

I'd be more than happy to learn. Hell, I'll even admit you were right if I thought you possibly could be. So why don't you tell me where I should go instead of repeating how much you know and how little I don't?

Man On Fire with no extras = Buyer Pissed Off

Man on Fire without extras = $27.95 = Hard To Sell
Man on Fire with extras = $27.95 = Fire SALE
Man on Fire without extras = $19.95 = Fire SALE
Man on Fire without extras on BOGO = Absolutely no issues. Patience is Virtue. Let's wait for all these ridiculously high priced titles to be listed on BOGO sales.

So why don't you tell me where I should go instead of repeating how much you know and how little I don't?

Trade publications are available at your local library...go read some of them. As for myself, I'll do this entire forum a favor and forever cease any interaction with you. :D

Trade publications are available at your local library...go read some of them. As for myself, I'll do this entire forum a favor and forever cease any interaction with you. :D

Again, tell me what I'm looking for, Oh Vague One.

Is there some magical article on the rights associated with extras that I'm missing?

Answer the question.

And FYI, the trade papers ARE online.

Lol fox are the king of Error

2 on Prison Break, list 18mbits AVC, while it's actually around 30 if not more. List a French DD trakc and Japanese DD track, it's english only LOL!

I agree. That Prison Break listing bears no relation to what's actually on the disc. I can only hope Sunshine is the same thing.

I can't believe people give a hoot about extras!

I can't believe people give a hoot about extras!

I can't believe people don't give a hoot about extras!

I completely agree with DigitalfreakNYC, not including extras, espeically when they are on the DVD counterpart, is ridiculous.

I completely agree with DigitalfreakNYC, not including extras, espeically when they are on the DVD counterpart, is ridiculous.

Ridiculous TO YOU. I couldnt give a gosh darn about them, and NEVER will. I just want the BEST possible PQ/AQ. Thats it. Its why i am not a fan of gimmicks or formats that try to pull the wool over your eyes with gimmicks and claim they are more important then the presentation itself. Fat chance.

I couldnt give a gosh darn about them, and NEVER will. I just want the BEST possible PQ/AQ. Thats it. Its why i am not a fan of gimmicks or formats that try to pull the wool over your eyes with gimmicks and claim they are more important then the presentation itself. Fat chance.

Same here. What I really, really object to is when the inclusion of these gimmicky "extras" means that the PQ or AQ of the main feature suffer as a result.

I will still be purchasing this disc. I also never watch extras (other than gag reels/deleted scenes on comedies).

I don't have any other friends into "home theater" but I have a lot of friends who enjoy movies and I honestly don't know a single one who would decide NOT to buy a disc because of a lack of extras. AVS users are the minority in the market, and I think forget it frequently. To act like Fox is crazy to not include extras is silly... It will probably upset a few thousand people and the other 50000 people who are going to buy the disc could probably care less.

Fox has saved a little money, a huge percentage of their customers are happy, and they will in all likelihood lose very few sales over it.

I will still be purchasing this disc. I also never watch extras (other than gag reels/deleted scenes on comedies).

I don't have any other friends into "home theater" but I have a lot of friends who enjoy movies and I honestly don't know a single one who would decide NOT to buy a disc because of a lack of extras. AVS users are the minority in the market, and I think forget it frequently. To act like Fox is crazy to not include extras is silly... It will probably upset a few thousand people and the other 50000 people who are going to buy the disc could probably care less.

Fox has saved a little money, a huge percentage of their customers are happy, and they will in all likelihood lose very few sales over it.

Right. That's why double-dips are constant on SD DVD. Because no one buys re-releases with more extras. :rolleyes:

And how exactly do you know that Fox is saving money by not including them?

And why are ALL extras dismissed as gimmicks?

Right. That's why double-dips are constant on SD DVD. Because no one buys re-releases with more extras. :rolleyes:

And how exactly do you know that Fox is saving money by not including them?

And why are ALL extras dismissed as gimmicks?

Most re-releases also feature upgrade PQ/AQ. That's the main reason I double dip.

Personally I wish they'd just put a DVD with all the non-HD extras in the package. That way those who are sore about not being able to sell off their existing discs can do so, and yet the non-HD extras won't be taking any space away from the feature.

In the case of stuff like Transformers, well, if stuff like the HUD caused them to not have enough space for TrueHD, that's a damn shame. To me that would be the epitome of including a gimmick at the feature's expense.

Most re-releases also feature upgrade PQ/AQ. That's the main reason I double dip.

Personally I wish they'd just put a DVD with all the non-HD extras in the package. That way those who are sore about not being able to sell off their existing discs can do so, and yet the non-HD extras won't be taking any space away from the feature.

In the case of stuff like Transformers, well, if stuff like the HUD caused them to not have enough space for TrueHD, that's a damn shame. To me that would be the epitome of including a gimmick at the feature's expense.

That is incorrect. Many re-releases were already anamorphic and no new transfer is done OR a transfer with minimal improvement replaces the original.

There has also been ZERO evidence that space has been a factor for not including extras. Actually, the opposite is true. I have details about how much space was taken up by certain HD releases and their missing extras. Not one case was hampered by storage capacity. They ALL could have fit the extras without a problem. 100%.

Count me in as someone else who really cares about the extras on these discs. If a catalog title comes out w/o the extras of a packed DVD set, I'm MUCH less likely to spend the money on it.

A perfect example is Master and Commander. I love the film, but I have the DVD set from release day that has the beautiful packaging, map, disc of extras, etc. The Blu-Ray, as I understand it, is barebones. There's no way I'll be upgrading my DVD in this case for the price that Fox is asking.

If I can get the BR for $10-12 during a BOGO, then I'll get it, but not for the $25 that Fox charges for catalog titles. If Fox is going to charge premium prices for catalog titles, then they should give them premium treatment. Period.

I would pay $25 for the Master and Commander BR if it was a packed disc w/ all the extras plus upgraded video/audio.

Harry Potter 5's 2 extras in HD matters though...right?

Man on Fire

No Extras? No Sale...............................................

That is incorrect. Many re-releases were already anamorphic and no new transfer is done OR a transfer with minimal improvement replaces the original.

There has also been ZERO evidence that space has been a factor for not including extras. Actually, the opposite is true. I have details about how much space was taken up by certain HD releases and their missing extras. Not one case was hampered by storage capacity. They ALL could have fit the extras without a problem. 100%.

Well the improvement is subjective. An anamorphic release from 1997-2000 can be quite different from the anamorphic releases coming out today, even if they are the same transfer.

Take Braveheart for instance. The first one was anamorphic. Are you going to tell me the new one is not a big improvement over the last discs? I could name multiple examples like this.

Also, I suppose I could say there is ZERO evidence space has not been a factor, since it's not like studios are being forthright about this. Even if they say space is not an issue, how do we really know what compromises are or aren't being made unless we are on the creative team?

You say they all could have fit their extras. Do you author discs? Do you really know for certain?

You can say you suspect they could have fit the extras without a problem, but you really don't know for a fact. None of us non-industry types do.

Putting the size issue aside, Fox is obviously having problems biting off more than they can chew. No one has been more pissed at them about their BS announce/reschedule crap as I have been.

Even if you or I might think it's not a whole lot more time, money and effort to put SD extras on a BD disc which may have room, realistically that still represents extra time for the project. Is it a day? Two days? A week? Does it add more QC time? Who can know for sure. It is my suspicion Fox does not have or will not commit the resources necessary to have all their catalog releases done like The Fly for instance.

Will they double-dip these titles? If they do, I can't imagine it happening on most of these titles for at least 2 years. They can barely get new, unique releases out the door in time. Now I could see an unrated/extended cut of a Blu-Ray release coming sooner just because that is a more enticing way IMO of selling someone the same title again. Die Hard 4 immediately comes to mind, as does Mr. & Mrs. Smith.

Frankly I don't see Fox being affected much at all by those who refrain from purchasing their catalog titles based on their bare bones status. Fox appears to be following the same logic they did at the beginning of DVD. I mean, here we are roughly 10 years later and we still have no True Lies re-release. If True Lies came out as a bare bones Blu-Ray, I'd buy it in a second. Some extras would be fun, but I'm not going to deprive myself of the film for years over extras.

To answer your question, yes. I author discs myself. If they're missing extras, I'll make my own disc and sell the original so I always know how much space it takes up.

That is a FACT.

This forum has sizes for discs that show how much space has been leftover and unused. That amount has NEVER been less than the extras deleted (as far as the titles I've compared).

That is a FACT.

To answer your question, yes. I author discs myself. If they're missing extras, I'll make my own disc and sell the original so I always know how much space it takes up.

That is a FACT.

Well I meant professionally at an authoring house.


This forum has sizes for discs that show how much space has been leftover and unused. That amount has NEVER been less than the extras deleted (as far as the titles I've compared).

That is a FACT.

Geez - easy with the dramatics.

Again, see my point about the project overhead it adds to do these extras on the disc. You may think it's as easy as just dumping them on there, but is it really?

In the software testing group I work for, we have to budget time for everything. Someone will inevitably come along and say "Can't you just test this one little thing? It will only take 5 minutes." More often than not it's situations like this that cost us days if not a week or two extra in testing time. Who knows what Fox's internal workings are like. For all we know, it could literally be one person testing discs. I've never met a testing department in my IT career that wasn't chronically understaffed.

Maybe it should be as easy as dumping the SD extras on the extra capacity. Maybe there are rights issues. Who knows? Maybe Fox's contracts with talent did not specify extras could be used on other media besides DVD. Maybe they are as lazy and apathetic as you believe they are.

Again, we just don't know for sure.

I'll tell you this: if releasing stuff bare bones gets some of these catalog titles out the door significantly sooner than they would have otherwise, I say bring them on.

Well I meant professionally at an authoring house.




Geez - easy with the dramatics.

Again, see my point about the project overhead it adds to do these extras on the disc. You may think it's as easy as just dumping them on there, but is it really?

In the software testing group I work for, we have to budget time for everything. Someone will inevitably come along and say "Can't you just test this one little thing? It will only take 5 minutes." More often than not it's situations like this that cost us days if not a week or two extra in testing time. Who knows what Fox's internal workings are like. For all we know, it could literally be one person testing discs. I've never met a testing department in my IT career that wasn't chronically understaffed.

Maybe it should be as easy as dumping the SD extras on the extra capacity. Maybe there are rights issues. Who knows? Maybe Fox's contracts with talent did not specify extras could be used on other media besides DVD. Maybe they are as lazy and apathetic as you believe they are.

Again, we just don't know for sure.

I'll tell you this: if releasing stuff bare bones gets some of these catalog titles out the door significantly sooner than they would have otherwise, I say bring them on.

Umm, eight months of releasing zero titles this year is not even cutting it close to getting anything at all out the door sooner.

There isnt much of a logical excuse at all why Fox should provide the consumers less then what is on the DVD versions or even less then what other studios are providing yet charge even more then all other studios

Geez - easy with the dramatics.

Again, see my point about the project overhead it adds to do these extras on the disc. You may think it's as easy as just dumping them on there, but is it really?

In the software testing group I work for, we have to budget time for everything. Someone will inevitably come along and say "Can't you just test this one little thing? It will only take 5 minutes." More often than not it's situations like this that cost us days if not a week or two extra in testing time. Who knows what Fox's internal workings are like. For all we know, it could literally be one person testing discs. I've never met a testing department in my IT career that wasn't chronically understaffed.

Maybe it should be as easy as dumping the SD extras on the extra capacity. Maybe there are rights issues. Who knows? Maybe Fox's contracts with talent did not specify extras could be used on other media besides DVD. Maybe they are as lazy and apathetic as you believe they are.

Again, we just don't know for sure.

I'll tell you this: if releasing stuff bare bones gets some of these catalog titles out the door significantly sooner than they would have otherwise, I say bring them on.

Do you HONESTLY think it's more difficult for an authoring house to do what I can do on my home PC?!?!

By that logic, I guess it's just more difficult for Fox to do what Warner Brothers, Universal and(to a certain extent) Disney seem to have no problem doing.

You're right.

We should really cut them some slack. Especially when they keep churning out these amazing packed releases at a great pace.

:rolleyes:

Isn't Fox(News Corp) like one of 3 companies that control all US media?

They have the resources to put tons of extras on those things. Dreamworks is freaking tiny and their releases are full of stuff, some of it that's worth watching too.

If you just want to the movie then just get the ON-Demand versions. But if you like film as an art itself, then you probably want extras. I do.
Can we get back on topic. How awesome does Sunshine sound? And does it look a little 'hot'?(everything is bathed in sunlight)

Isn't Fox(News Corp) like one of 3 companies that control all US media?

They have the resources to put tons of extras on those things. Dreamworks is freaking tiny and their releases are full of stuff, some of it that's worth watching too.

If you just want to the movie then just get the ON-Demand versions. But if you like film as an art itself, then you probably want extras. I do.

You know, that brings up a good point.

All you people who couldn't care less about extras, you're going to love downloadable HD movies. I'm surprised you're even investing in these formats. Why not just wait for extra-less downloads?

Do you HONESTLY think it's more difficult for an authoring house to do what I can do on my home PC?!?!

By that logic, I guess it's just more difficult for Fox to do what Warner Brothers, Universal and(to a certain extent) Disney seem to have no problem doing.

You're right.

We should really cut them some slack. Especially when they keep churning out these amazing packed releases at a great pace.

:rolleyes:

Please point me to the point in my post where I said we should cut Fox slack.

I'm just trying to get you to admit there may be things going on behind the scenes that you or I don't know.

Umm, eight months of releasing zero titles this year is not even cutting it close to getting anything at all out the door sooner.

There isnt much of a logical excuse at all why Fox should provide the consumers less then what is on the DVD versions or even less then what other studios are providing yet charge even more then all other studios

I'm not making excuses for Fox, but technically it was about 160 days, or about 5 1/2 months. Night At The Museum came out 4/24/07. The first wave of October Fox titles came out 10/2.

Plus, while it's never been officially confirmed, I think we all know BD+ played a very large part in that delay.

I'm saying that since they've come back, they appear to have announced more than they can handle. And again my point was, if they have indeed bit off more than they can chew, I'd rather seem them go bare bones on some of these titles and get them out in the next 6 months than wait longer so they can include extras, HD or SD.

Isn't Fox(News Corp) like one of 3 companies that control all US media?

They have the resources to put tons of extras on those things. Dreamworks is freaking tiny and their releases are full of stuff, some of it that's worth watching too.

If you just want to the movie then just get the ON-Demand versions. But if you like film as an art itself, then you probably want extras. I do.
Can we get back on topic. How awesome does Sunshine sound? And does it look a little 'hot'?(everything is bathed in sunlight)

I'd like to think a company like Fox would put money into testing, but in my experience corporations are always stingy with budgeting money for non-revenue generating activities like testing.

And with that I'll apologize for contributing to anything that derailed the thread.

Back to Sunshine.... :)

I'm very interested to see how the colors are on the disc. IIRC the film theatrically had very subdued colors. A lot of the ship scenes when the sun wasn't a factor seemed to be lower light situations. I don't recall them being overally grainy (which wouldn't bother me anyway).

I for one would rather take the option of waiting longer and receiving the full package.

You know, that brings up a good point.

All you people who couldn't care less about extras, you're going to love downloadable HD movies. I'm surprised you're even investing in these formats. Why not just wait for extra-less downloads?

Who is "You People"? If you mean Blu-Ray fans, then perhaps you didnt read the note under the forum that said, "If you are not here for Blu-Ray...".

And how can you compare downloads to blu-ray? If anything, downloads are akin to the "other" format. We want high bitrate, lossless audio. Downloads are about LOW bitrates and LOSSY audio. Thats exactly what the "other" format offers, and we do not buy them as it is, why would we pay to rent them online? Sorry, we are after TOP quality, not what is considered "good enough".

At least Man on Fire is not delayed by Fox. My D-Theater copy is on ebay and getting it on disc is great. Call me crazy but I would rather watch films with my free time than watch extras. Give me great picture/audio quality and I am satisfied. Watching extras ruins the magic of the film for me anyway.

Tom

At least Man on Fire is not delayed by Fox. My D-Theater copy is on ebay and getting it on disc is great. Call me crazy but I would rather watch films with my free time than watch extras. Give me great picture/audio quality and I am satisfied. Watching extras ruins the magic of the film for me anyway.

Tom

Call me crazy but I would rather have the choice of having my 50 GB disc FILLED with whatever material is already readily available about a film, such as the 2-disc SE of Man on Fire that I can pick up at any store on SD, along with the great PQ/AQ that Blu-ray brings.

If you don't wanna watch extras, fine. Great. Don't watch 'em. I do. This is not an either/or type situation. I don't understand why people are always painting it that way. There is NO REASON Fox can't give us both. None. Period.

To say otherwise is to be a format apologist. Which gets all of us nowhere (except for the manufacturers).

Now that we are getting extremely faithful video transfers with lossless audio, I'm willing to bet that very, very few consumers will buy the same title twice on Blu-ray.

Agreed.
I can't believe very many would double-dip on BD for extras.
Maybe for lossless or a re-master, but not for extras.

Most likely studios are counting on double-dipping with BD.
The problem is BD ain't DVD.
BD is an entirely different paradigm.;)

will be mine as soon as i can get my hands on it or purchase online. i could care less about extras. why do i want to watch 480p video clips about the movie on an 1080i hdtv. as long as the pq/aq is top notch i really don't care about what extras are on a disk. can't wait for this blu ray!

Ridiculous TO YOU. I couldnt give a gosh darn about them, and NEVER will. I just want the BEST possible PQ/AQ. Thats it. Its why i am not a fan of gimmicks or formats that try to pull the wool over your eyes with gimmicks and claim they are more important then the presentation itself. Fat chance.
You know what? If they had included the extras, you don't have to watch any of them. With a whopping 50gb of space, you would think they could have included them. Why leave the dvd with an advantage over the BD? Why alienate some of your consumers by leaving them off? Why not please EVERYONE and include what you want: the best possible PQ/AQ and what others want: the best possible PQ/AQ and all the extras? I'll never understand why some defend Fox when it comes to their lazyness on certain releases. Maybe it's your job to defend Fox?

Sorry if this is intruding on the current fire-fight over Fox/extras/etc, but:

"How is Sunshine?"

I was mildly interested in this title when announced, but it would be a blind buy for me. So I'd like to know if the PQ and AQ are all they can be. And off-hand comments on plot and whether the movie is any good would be useful too. ;)

shinksma

You know what? If they had included the extras, you don't have to watch any of them. With a whopping 50gb of space, you would think they could have included them. Why leave the dvd with an advantage over the BD? Why alienate some of your consumers by leaving them off? Why not please EVERYONE and include what you want: the best possible PQ/AQ and what others want: the best possible PQ/AQ and all the extras? I'll never understand why some defend Fox when it comes to their lazyness on certain releases. Maybe it's your job to defend Fox?

Accusing the poster of being a shill isn't going to accomplish anything.

I never understood why people on a forum have to fight with each other when the obvious problem is with the studio releasing the movies. It's one thing to complain, which is fine, but it's another to fight with other posters. Of course, that goes both ways.

Just don't buy Fox's "extraless" releases. That is the only way to convey your feelings in a way Fox understands.

Who is "You People"? If you mean Blu-Ray fans, then perhaps you didnt read the note under the forum that said, "If you are not here for Blu-Ray...".

And how can you compare downloads to blu-ray? If anything, downloads are akin to the "other" format. We want high bitrate, lossless audio. Downloads are about LOW bitrates and LOSSY audio. Thats exactly what the "other" format offers, and we do not buy them as it is, why would we pay to rent them online? Sorry, we are after TOP quality, not what is considered "good enough".

Bro, I think if you read right after "you People" he says which people he was talking about. People who don't like extras. I'm sure "those people" can be found supporting both formats so relax. In fact the guy even uses the word "formats" plural. It's annoying enough that this thread became another extras/no extras debate instead of it being about Sunshine, but we don't need to look for reasons to turn this into a format debate. Please refer yourself to the forum rules.

Back to topic. This is a blind buy for me. Heard mixed things about it, but I love Danny Boyle's other films so I have high expectations. Would really appreciate some reviews from any of you getting this title early!

Who is "You People"? If you mean Blu-Ray fans, then perhaps you didnt read the note under the forum that said, "If you are not here for Blu-Ray...".

And how can you compare downloads to blu-ray? If anything, downloads are akin to the "other" format. We want high bitrate, lossless audio. Downloads are about LOW bitrates and LOSSY audio. Thats exactly what the "other" format offers, and we do not buy them as it is, why would we pay to rent them online? Sorry, we are after TOP quality, not what is considered "good enough".


Welcome to "you putting words into my mouth." Clearly you have a problem with me and that's fine but don't try and argue with me on a point that I'm not making.

I'm here for Blu-ray. I'm here to say how freakin' disappointed I am in a crappy release that I had pre-ordered.

And ditto on everything Dildatonr said. Don't make this about the formats. Make it about the studios.

man that sucks. i really like man on fire and usually always watch extras, especially on movies i really like. ill get it either when its rereleased, during a bogo, or when its on amazon marketplace for like 13 bucks

I am looking forward to Man on Fire and it is good to read the early report that the PQ & AQ are quite good. I'll probably pick this up the next time Amazon has a fox offer going because I really do not want to pay 28 bucks for their catalog releases.

Regarding the extras thing, I do not care much for extras so it doesn't matter much to me but I do think it is very lame Fox didn't port over the DVD extras and I can fully understand why many are pissed off. As others have stated, if one doesn't like extras then they don't have to watch them but they SHOULD be there if space is not a limitation and in this case it clearly isn't. Seems to me Fox is just being cheap and lazy again which is what they have continually done with their blu ray support. Sorry but a studio should not be charging top dollar for less product and IMO people should not be trying to rationalize it/defend them for this crap.

Sadly I am sure they will lose a decent amount of sales over this and then they will take the simple stance of pointing to lower sales for catalog titles and then will just continue to release these with the same effort and keep charging the same. After all, it is easier to use that mentality than actually see that if you released a full featured product and dropped the price (or just simply dropped the price to where EVERYONE ELSE IS regardless of extras, etc) then you'd have more sales. I do not expect Fox to clue in because reality shows the studios are clueless when it comes to simple logic which is why we still see 37609670936 movies a year that have high budgets and make 5 cents at the box office.

Man on Fire bears the visual resemblance of Deja Vu.

Sorry if this is intruding on the current fire-fight over Fox/extras/etc, but:

"How is Sunshine?"

I was mildly interested in this title when announced, but it would be a blind buy for me. So I'd like to know if the PQ and AQ are all they can be. And off-hand comments on plot and whether the movie is any good would be useful too. ;)

shinksma

PQ/AQ is top notch. Yes, there is some grain (mostly at start), but it's a very good transfer. I'd put it in a Tier 1. AQ is wild. I don't know who has DTS-MA but it's a great sounding track. I'm sure the DTS core will be great as well.

Enjoy.

Paul

Man on Fire bears the visual resemblance of Deja Vu.

Well...yeah. Tony Scott and Denzel. I wish Denzel would just stick to that. He hams it up in to many other movies. And you can see the gears start to turn in his head when he begins to improvize, he licks his lips and eyes star to twinkle and most of the time he'll grin a little.

It is super distracting. I was dissapointed when Ridley Scott didnt make hime tone that stuff down in American Gangster.

I'll pick this up during a sale. Dakota Fanning is no Abigail Breslin.

BTW-A fair warning to anyone that want to blind buy Sunshine, just so you dont feel cheated. The movie isn't purely sci-fi. It's also horror(Nobody spoil). That being said, the cinematography is awesome and it's a pretty good movie. I dont have the BD yet, but I bet it'll have solid PQ/AQ based purely on production values and the skill of the crew and director.

You should stick to DVD IMHO, since thats where all the "Gold" is.

I’m afraid I have to agree with JackBee on this one. I often lay awake at night thinking about how badly the studios are treated by us consumers and how they often feel “forced” to give consumers value for their product. I just wish Fox had a Paypal account so that we could pay them money directly without them having to be burdened with releasing titles at all. It seems so unfair that they have to do anything for our money.

It reminds me of a situation I encountered the other day when I went to buy a new car. Once I got all the paper work out of the way, the sales guy had the car brought around. I immediately noticed that the car contained two front seats when no such conversation about front seats occurred. I kindly said, “what the f**k’s with the front seats??? I never agreed to that??!?” He quickly told me that the seats were standard and that, in fact, they were included in the price of the car and caused no price increase over what we had agreed upon. Well, I’m clearly nobody’s fool. I told him, “I undoubtedly have no intention of getting more car for the same amount of money. If I wanted seats, I’d stick to riding a bike. That’s where all the ‘gold’ is!” Needless to say, we had the seats quickly removed before I could leave the lot with any sort of added value.

So keep fighting the good fight JackBee! I know some people disagree, but it’s always better to give people less for their money and not more. I certainly feel better knowing we have people like yourself and Rudy1 as our advocates. If only we could get Fox to really see the light and start charging $50-$70 for movie only discs (like they did with Laser), then we’d really have made a change for the better.

A boy can dream…

I’m afraid I have to agree with JackBee on this one. I often lay awake at night thinking about how badly the studios are treated by us consumers and how they often feel “forced” to give consumers value for their product. I just wish Fox had a Paypal account so that we could pay them money directly without them having to be burdened with releasing titles at all. It seems so unfair that they have to do anything for our money...

So keep fighting the good fight JackBee! I know some people disagree, but it’s always better to give people less for their money and not more. I certainly feel better knowing we have people like yourself and Rudy1 as our advocates. If only we could get Fox to really see the light and start charging $50-$70 for movie only discs (like they did with Laser), then we’d really have made a change for the better.

A boy can dream…

You my friend are a true visionary. Now, if you'll all excuse me, I'm going to go donate some plasma and drop off my earnings on Fox's doorstep.

I just noticed that LXG says AVC & 16mbs too. Did that one end up being higher bit rate?

My Sunshine order shipped today, so I should see it on Thursday/Friday

I like a disc with 'bonus features' as much as the next guy, but not for one second would it keep me from buying a next-gen disc because it lacks extras. 90% of discs I own I never go into extras anyway. Who's got time?? :-)

I like a disc with 'bonus features' as much as the next guy, but not for one second would it keep me from buying a next-gen disc because it lacks extras. 90% of discs I own I never go into extras anyway. Who's got time?? :-)

Apparently some people just can't pass up a chance to bash Fox.

I like a disc with 'bonus features' as much as the next guy, but not for one second would it keep me from buying a next-gen disc because it lacks extras. 90% of discs I own I never go into extras anyway. Who's got time?? :-)

And some people would say, "a little edge enhancement wouldn't keep me from buying a next-gen release." For others, "a lack of lossless audio wouldn't keep me from buying a next-gen release." Or how about, "not being in the full original aspect ratio wouldn't keep me from buying a next-gen release?" A lot of things rate as different importance for different people, but to outright say it's OK for people to get screwed because any offensive shadow hasn't hit your yard yet is short-sighted and not in the best interest of the format or it's owners. The fact remains that these extras have already been paid for, the legal clearances (especially on something as recent as Man on Fire) have been cleared, and the encodes already done (usually these bonus features are taken straight from the DVD encodes). Fox is not including these features on their discs as a way to give them a bag of tricks to reach back into when they feel a need to milk these titles again. Why would you, I, or anyone else enthusiastically encourage getting less than we are paying for?

Apparently some people just can't pass up a chance to bash Fox.
And apparently some people just can't pass up a chance to impulsively defend Fox without comprehending why. Are you actually advocating Fox give people less in exchange for the premium they charge?

And in response to "who's got the time." I happen to watch the new 3.5 hour making of Blade Runner documentary in one sitting. It's one of the best making of features ever created. Thankfully, Warner didn't see fit to drop it from the Blu-ray release since apparently only DVD is where the gold is. The Man on Fire doc is pretty good as well (also created by Charlie de Lauzirika), but only those who already had the 2-disc DVD (already a double dip on SD) will ever know.

And apparently some people just can't pass up a chance to impulsively defend Fox without comprehending why. Are you actually advocating Fox give people less in exchange for the premium they charge?

Fox releases have given me the very best PQ I have seen on releases such as Mr. Brooks, Prison Break, Silver Surfer, and Die Hard 4. The best possible PQ is what I want from high def. Apparently some people are more interested in getting SD extras on their high def discs than in getting the best possible PQ on the main feature.

Fox releases have given me the very best PQ I have seen on releases such as Mr. Brooks, Prison Break, Silver Surfer, and Die Hard 4. The best possible PQ is what I want from high def. Apparently some people are more interested in getting SD extras on their high def discs than in getting the best possible PQ on the main feature.

And Sony has been providing equally excellent quality (Spiderman 3, Rent, Close Encounters), and Disney (Santa Clause 3, Ratatouille, Meet the Robinsons, Pirates 3), and New Line (Hairspray, Rush Hour 3). Even Warner has done some incredible looking discs recently with Blade Runner and the recent Harry Potters. But only Fox has the balls to charge $40 for a disc like Robocop and then, not only do they not include the stuff from the long released special edition, they also can't be bothered with the newly created material from the 20th anniversary DVD that occurred just a month and a half earlier. Every single release I mentioned above not only has excellent PQ, but lossless audio (sometimes multiple tracks) and every single bonus feature (and in many cases even more than) contained on the DVDs. People seem to want to bitch endlessly about Warner not using BD to it's full potential, but yet never have anything to say when a studio like Fox releases nothing more than high-def laserdiscs. If they want to lower their catalog price on titles that they strip features from, I'll give em a nice big thumbs up. But don't for a second try to convince me that they're doing me a favor with their f**k the consumber (and for a premium!) Blu-ray policy. There's a reason why they're generally considered the worst Blu-ray studio by just about anyone with a brain and the ability to see clearly. And lest you think I'm some crazy "red ant" without a talking point, I could fairly easily guarantee that I've invested more money on the Blu-ray format in both software and hardware than yourself.

If you don't want to give a **** about extras, fine, don't give a ****. Walk away. But don't actively belittle those that do care.

Fox releases have given me the very best PQ I have seen on releases such as Mr. Brooks, Prison Break, Silver Surfer, and Die Hard 4. The best possible PQ is what I want from high def. Apparently some people are more interested in getting SD extras on their high def discs than in getting the best possible PQ on the main feature.

Blu-ray has 50 freakin GB to use. Are you telling me that you can't have the best possible PQ *AND* all the extras (which will be in SD) with that much space to work with!?!?!

If you don't want to give a **** about extras, fine, don't give a ****. Walk away. But don't actively belittle those that do care.

So where is it written that those who want to criticize Fox are permitted to express their opinion and those who want to praise Fox for their outstanding PQ are not permitted to express their opinion? This is a rule that I am not familiar with.

So where is it written that those who want to criticize Fox are permitted to express their opinion and those who want to praise Fox for their outstanding PQ are not permitted to express their opinion? This is a rule that I am not familiar with.

No one said you're not allowed to express your positive opinion. We're saying that you shouldn't constantly cut down those who are completely fed up with their business-practices with regards to Blu-ray.

We're not attacking your opinion. Why are you attacking ours?

No one said you're not allowed to express your positive opinion. We're saying that you shouldn't constantly cut down those who are completely fed up with their business-practices with regards to Blu-ray.

We're not attacking your opinion. Why are you attacking ours?

Because it seems to me that this vociferous complaining about a lack of standard def extras on high def discs is an extremely misguided way of looking at what is important on high def discs.

Because it seems to me that this vociferous complaining about a lack of standard def extras on high def discs is an extremely misguided way of looking at what is important on high def discs.

So what happens to extras for older movies? are we just supposed to drop everything for only that which is HD?

People who are only in this to "watch movies" and are casual movie fans may not care about extras but those of us who are involved in the filmmaking process and have always been interested in it don't care HOW we get the extras so long as we get them. To me, they are JUST as important as the film itself.

Yesterday I got some Star Wars footage from 1977 from a collector that had it taped from basic TV at the time and was enthralled. I love to know about the making of movies that I love and, chances are, if I'm buying it on home video, I'm very interested in it.

When I was buying laserdiscs, I would pay $100 as a 16 year old just to get a Criterion special edition of Evita or Se7en to watch those extras. Hell, it was "party time" if we ever got a trailer. And then DVD came along and set the bar extremely high. DVD was and still IS the perfect package. HD has to improve upon that package and not take away from it. If it's going to charge much higher prices, give people what made DVD so exciting and revolutionary PLUS amazing sound and picture quality.

There is absolutely NO reason why they cannot deliver both. None. No excuses. Anything less than that is pathetic.

DVD was and still IS the perfect package.

I am afraid that, after watching high def discs, I cannot agree that standard def DVDs are in any way "perfect."

I am afraid that, after watching high def discs, I cannot agree that standard def DVDs are in any way "perfect."

I said "package."

You're arguing semantics.

I love HD. I had a player as soon as they came out. It's honestly very difficult to watch movies in SD now but, again, I love movies so if that were the only option, so be it. But we're not talking about the movies here. We're talking about extras. They're a bonus. They're the icing on the cake and they are EXPECTED at this point. To see a high-profile movie like Man On Fire that has already spoiled people with a 2 disc set come out COMPLETELY barebones is idiotic and, to me, anyone who would pay $27 for a barebones disc has money to burn.

But that's their prerogative. If I can pick it up for $10, I will. That's all it's worth.

People who are only in this to "watch movies" and are casual movie fans may not care about extras but those of us who are involved in the filmmaking process and have always been interested in it don't care HOW we get the extras so long as we get them. To me, they are JUST as important as the film itself.


Are you insinuating one is only a "casual movie fan" if they don't watch extras all the time?

If so that's a bunch of ********.

Some extras deserve the time to view, like the aforementioned Blade Runner documentary.

But the majority of extras I've seen in my life have been ho-hum - not worth the time.

The stuff that de Lauzrika does for Ridley Scott's films and others are always worth seeing. But unfortunately those are the exception and not the rule.

Are you insinuating one is only a "casual movie fan" if they don't watch extras all the time?

If so that's a bunch of ********.

Some extras deserve the time to view, like the aforementioned Blade Runner documentary.

But the majority of extras I've seen in my life have been ho-hum - not worth the time.

The stuff that de Lauzrika does for Ridley Scott's films and others are always worth seeing. But unfortunately those are the exception and not the rule.

Why do you people get SO defensive? Jesus.

I'm not saying ALL extras are wonderful but, again, there is absolutely NO reason not to include them. None. They own the rights to them. The room is there on the disc.

How anyone could defend that boggles my mind.

"Sir? You'd like to sell me less for more? Why yes! Let's do that! What a wonderful idea!"

:rolleyes: :confused:

Why do you people get SO defensive? Jesus.

I'm not saying ALL extras are wonderful but, again, there is absolutely NO reason not to include them. None. They own the rights to them. The room is there on the disc.

How anyone could defend that boggles my mind.

"Sir? You'd like to sell me less for more? Why yes! Let's do that! What a wonderful idea!"

:rolleyes: :confused:

I don't consider that Fox is "selling me less for more." They are giving me outstanding PQ on the movie. That is what I want. As long as they continue doing that, I will be very happy.

Why do you people get SO defensive? Jesus.

I'm not saying ALL extras are wonderful but, again, there is absolutely NO reason not to include them. None. They own the rights to them. The room is there on the disc.

How anyone could defend that boggles my mind.

"Sir? You'd like to sell me less for more? Why yes! Let's do that! What a wonderful idea!"

:rolleyes: :confused:

I don't get defensive until blanket statements are made about me.

You didn't answer the question.

So what happens to extras for older movies? are we just supposed to drop everything for only that which is HD?
No, no, no. Your supposed to buy the Special Edition SD DVD AND the HD version. Its a privilege to give the studios your money.

There is absolutely NO reason why they cannot deliver both. None. No excuses. Anything less than that is pathetic.
Agreed. You aren't going to get better adoption with a less for more attitude.
J

I don't get defensive until blanket statements are made about me.

You didn't answer the question.

That's how you read it. That's not what i said.

Hence, you're defensive.

People who care about filmmaking will watch extras, yes. If you just care about movies, you'll just want the movie.

Some people just like to eat food, they don't care about the chef or the kitchen. I just happen to love both.

That's how you read it. That's not what i said.

Hence, you're defensive.

People who care about filmmaking will watch extras, yes. If you just care about movies, you'll just want the movie.

Some people just like to eat food, they don't care about the chef or the kitchen. I just happen to love both.

Still haven't answered the question.

"Are you insinuating one is only a "casual movie fan" if they don't watch extras all the time?"

A simple yes or no.

Still haven't answered the question.

"Are you insinuating one is only a "casual movie fan" if they don't watch extras all the time?"

A simple yes or no.

Read my last posting and you'll find it.

I SAID I NEVER SAID THAT.

EDIT: I don't want to stoke the fires any more as the thread is once again being derailed.

EDIT: I don't want to stoke the fires any more as the thread is once again being derailed.

I don't think its derailed. The disagreement concerns what is and is not on the Man on Fire disc.

Hey I like Die Hard 4. Fun popcorn film. Not every film has to be a cerebral tingling experience, ya know.

BTW, as the OP, I'm declaring that this thread has been derailed and should head back on course.

Hey I like Die Hard 4. Fun popcorn film. Not every film has to be a cerebral tingling experience, ya know.

BTW, as the OP, I'm declaring that this thread has been derailed and should head back on course.

But do you think Die Hard 4, in its edited, studio interference version is the best representation of that film? In other words, does presentation trump content or vice versa?

Well, I haven't seen the unrated version so I cannot comment on that. From what I've read, it's mostly digital squibs, altered dialogue via ADR and a few altered takes. If Maggie Q was butt naked, then i'd be pissed that the Blu wasn't unrated.

Die Hard films and similar genre films are really make home theatre shine. Most people won't purchase films like DEAD POETS SOCIETY to enjoy home theatre. " My captain, my captain" in DTS-MA 7.1 just doesn't have the same effect as "Come out to the coast, get together, have a few laughs".

In all fairness, most studios when DVD 1st came out were releasing shite. Catalog titles that only early adopters would purchase. "oooh DRAGONHEART laserdisc in DTS!". Yeah i bought that.

Fox will eventually step up (as their track record proves) and release more elaborate editions of films on Blu. Slow out of the gate, steady wins the race. They have released some nice SD discs, FIGHT CLUB, BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA, etc. Just give them some time to sell off their crap.

That is incorrect. Many re-releases were already anamorphic and no new transfer is done OR a transfer with minimal improvement replaces the original.

There has also been ZERO evidence that space has been a factor for not including extras. Actually, the opposite is true. I have details about how much space was taken up by certain HD releases and their missing extras. Not one case was hampered by storage capacity. They ALL could have fit the extras without a problem. 100%.

many re-releases on DVD did include a remastered video and some include extra DTS audio track. those are the only 2 reasons i've re-purchased any of my dvd's. i've never double-dipped on a dvd when the transfer and audio options are the same, usually an added DTS track will get me to re-buy a title.

that said, this shouldnt be the case with HDM, video/audio wise we should be getting the most stellar transfer with initial release. maybe some titles that dont currently have lossless audio will be re-released with them but i can't see something like POTC and SM series getting a better transfer somewhere down the line w/o moving to a whole new format that can perhaps hold the 4K HD masters.

we know you love your extras DigitalfreakNYC, but when you post stuff like "all that space/bandwidth and they can't fit 2 192k audio tracks" you are attacking the format and not the studio who chose not to include any extras on the disc. yes, lacking extras seem to be more of a problem with blu-ray releases, but it's only b/c of the studios on the blu-ray side, not the format itself.

Well, I haven't seen the unrated version so I cannot comment on that. From what I've read, it's mostly digital squibs, altered dialogue via ADR and a few altered takes.

And that does make a whole lot of difference.

Call me crazy, but the unrated version of Die Hard 4 is worth it just to hear Bruce Willis complete his famous line at the end. That line should have never been cut for the theatrical.

And that does make a whole lot of difference.

Really! Well, i guess i'll be double dipping. ADR out of synch at all?

Really! Well, i guess i'll be double dipping. ADR out of synch at all?

a few f-bombs from John really does make a difference. it changes the tone of the movie and the character of mcclane. i've also heard that to get pg13 the engineers lowered the levels on some of the sounds like gunshots and glass shatters. i dunno if these are restored for the unrated version or not, i also have not seen the unrated dvd in entirety, it just looks/sounds nothing compared to blu-ray :(

unfortunately no maggie q butt naked, not even a flash of nudity as was in Die Hard 1 at the xmas party :mad:

i bought the first 3 of the series via amazon's bogo sale and am waiting for the unrated 4th.

we know you love your extras DigitalfreakNYC, but when you post stuff like "all that space/bandwidth and they can't fit 2 192k audio tracks" you are attacking the format and not the studio who chose not to include any extras on the disc. yes, lacking extras seem to be more of a problem with blu-ray releases, but it's only b/c of the studios on the blu-ray side, not the format itself.

One poster complains that i'm attacking the format and another poster claims i'm attacking the studio.

Both say I can't do either.

Clearly I can't win.

I'm well aware that the problem is with the studios and not the format. But if you're going to EXCLUSIVELY support a format because of several technical advantages but yet continue NOT to use them, then what's the point of supporting that format at all? IMHO they're \only doing a disservice to the format by not utilizing all of it's capabilities.

How amazing would it be for them to say: look! we included 6 different languages in completely uncompressed 5.1 surround PLUS 2 commentary tracks PLUS delivered a great picture PLUS a TON of extras. Can HD DVD do that?

Instead, they said: we're gonna give you great picture and some great sound. End of sentence.

Which one is more advantageous?

If you HONESTLY think that Fox is doing Blu-ray a favor by releasing these half-assed titles then I question your reasoning.

If you HONESTLY think that Fox is doing Blu-ray a favor by releasing these half-assed titles then I question your reasoning.

hm if you read my post as "dont attack Fox", then either i miswrote or you misinterpreted my point. i have no problems with attacking the studio. fox is, as you said, doing a disservice to the format. i dont complain about lack of extras as they are to me at most a one-time viewing thing, but the delays on titles and the lack of unrated/dc versions is something i can't accept. DH4 and Mr. & Mrs. Smith i would be owning even at $28 if they had been the unrated versions.

man on fire could have a terd roasting in the sun as its blu ray extras and i would still buy it. Its all about PQ for this one.

man on fire could have a terd roasting in the sun as its blu ray extras and i would still buy it. Its all about PQ for this one.

If the PQ of the movie is as good as on Fox's other recent releases, I will be totally happy. :)

man on fire could have a terd roasting in the sun as its blu ray extras and i would still buy it. Its all about PQ for this one.

maybe we can wait til there's a BOGO deal with both titles in it. :)

man on fire i will own at some point with or w/o extras, sunshine i have not seen. i did just throw it in my queue at netflix tho.

I recieved MAN ON FIRE Monday. I cannot believe Fox released this barebones. Only supplements are trailers. Fox is the worst studio for either format.

I recieved MAN ON FIRE Monday. I cannot believe Fox released this barebones. Only supplements are trailers. Fox is the worst studio for either format.

The worst on special features? Sure, I'll give you that. But the AV quality on all of their recent discs has been superb and as long as the movie looks and sounds great, I'm not going to complain (except about the prices).

The worst on special features? Sure, I'll give you that. But the AV quality on all of their recent discs has been superb and as long as the movie looks and sounds great, I'm not going to complain (except about the prices).

I agree. Based on the PQ on their recent releases, Fox is becoming the best studio, IMO.

The worst on special features? Sure, I'll give you that. But the AV quality on all of their recent discs has been superb and as long as the movie looks and sounds great, I'm not going to complain (except about the prices).


I would not mind so much if they did not charge so much. Sony, Uni, Disney can release catalog titles at a decent price, why can't fox?

I would not mind so much if they did not charge so much. Sony, Uni, Disney can release catalog titles at a decent price, why can't fox?

Because they're bastards? Honestly, I have no clue why Fox is doing this, though from what I've heard, it's the same thing they did with DVD at the beginning. Hopefully, the $5 Fox Tax will go away sometime soon.

Man on Fire review on dvdbeaver

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews34/man_on_fire_blu-ray.htm