There was a really good comment on EngagetHD today. It really highlights just how big the various catalogs are for US Studios. It sure was an eye opener for me.

Chris Frost on EngagetHD (http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/01/22/universal-exec-says-studio-and-hd-dvd-are-moving-forward/#comments)

According to IMDB these exclusive companies have the US distribution rights to the following number of movies:

Universal - 5331
Paramoun - 5753
Dreamworks - 95
Weinstein - 183

Total 11362 films

20th Century Fox - 755
SOny Pictures - 419
Disney Buena Vista - 727
MGM - 3639
Columbia/Tri Star - 4323
Warner Brothers - 4623

Total: 14783

Grand Total of all movies from these companies: 26145
11362/26145 = 43%

Meaning HD DVD has 43% of all catalog titles available for potential release on it's format. It's completely laughable to hear that BDA has 80% of the major studios. Who cares when Fox/Sony/Buena Vista/Disney all acount for less than 2000 movies. That's not even half of Universal's back catalog.

This has never really been brought up from what i've seen...good point.

The restored Godfather collection in HD DVD would be at the top of my list from Paramount.

Why is Weinstein even listed? They haven't put out a single HD DVD other than Clerks II, have they?

Why is Weinstein even listed? They haven't put out a single HD DVD other than Clerks II, have they?

Along with Black Christmas, Derailed, Feast, Harsh Times, Lucky Number Slevin, The Matador, Pulse, Scary Movie 4, School for Scoundrels, and Wolf Creek.

Although I still wouldn't consider them an HD DVD supporter. Their last releases were back in June 2007.

GamerGuyX, I agree their HD DVD support isn't much, but at least it's 11 titles more than their Blu-ray support!

this makes things more interesting

Hmmmm, that's interesting, I had no idea any of those films were done by Weinstein. I watched Harsh Times the other night, don't recall the studio being shown before the movie but I swear it wasn't them.

The problem being the vast majority of these titles won't make a dent in sales. And having lots of titles means dick if it's not resulting in sales. Maybe if you want a particular title, its good news to you. But that news is mitigated by the fact that low sales may result in the format not continuing.

There was a really good comment on EngagetHD today. It really highlights just how big the various catalogs are for US Studios. It sure was an eye opener for me.

But its the good movies that count! Somebody needs to do a comparison of the Hit movies for each studio and then lets see where the numbers are. Disney as few movies compared to others but most are very good.

Most of the "vault" movies do not have elements suitable for a high definition transfer without extensive restoration and/or aren't commercially viable releases.

Most of the "vault" movies do not have elements suitable for a high definition transfer without extensive restoration and/or aren't commercially viable releases.

I totally agree, the ratio of total catalog titles to viable for HD release is valid. Although the title may require restoration, doing so and in turn the HD transfer has nothing to do with what format that winds up on the shelf. I'd be willing to bet that studios are doing that work and aren't too troubled by which format the release will be in.

Talk about a way to keep the number crunchers in business. Who wants to be on the team that has to grade the viability of all those titles for restoration and HD transfer?

Come to think of it, I wonder how many already have been restored, but just need to be re-transfered to HD?

I wish that the HD DVD studios would start releasing some movies.

The problem being the vast majority of these titles won't make a dent in sales. And having lots of titles means dick if it's not resulting in sales. Maybe if you want a particular title, its good news to you. But that news is mitigated by the fact that low sales may result in the format not continuing.

This is true and in the short term and when it counts IMO the total number of catalog titles doesn't mean muc. As things mature they better mean something because there aren't enough new releases to make a whole lot of money if that is all there is.

Art

This is the strongest argument I've seen yet for HD DVD not being dead yet. There is no question that Universal and Paramount have some powerful catalogue titles and could really put out a tremendous amount of HDMs if they chose to.

For whatever reason - Paramount has be a laggard and chose to hold back titles - so unless they change there policy fast, it's not likely to help HD DVD. Universal has released a fair amount of titles, but in the face of losing WB - would need to really step it up.

In my opinion - if Toshiba wants to stay in this thing, they need to both tout the remarkable films in these Catalogues and to push Universal or Paramount to step releases of some of those major titles.

20th Century Fox - 755 ?

That can't be right. (Started in 1915, merged in 1935, sold/resold 1978, 1981)

Then again, maybe it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films

Hmmmm, that's interesting, I had no idea any of those films were done by Weinstein. I watched Harsh Times the other night, don't recall the studio being shown before the movie but I swear it wasn't them.

It is. I also own the movie.

You can even search by studio and see for yourself:

http://hddvdstats.com/index.php

20th Century Fox - 755 ?

That can't be right. (Started in 1915, merged in 1935, sold/resold 1978, 1981)

Then again, maybe it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films

IMDB lists 1476 for Fox and the poster on endgadget omits Lionsgate who has the rights to 474 films.

Paramount to release first bluray's.... http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=24484

Paramount to release first bluray's.... http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=24484

in the UK... different countries can have different studios handling home video releases

i could point out quite a few bluray exclusives on hd dvd

Lets not forget that FOX charges $30 for catalog titles???? Do you really think FOX is going to make that big of an impact with Blu-Ray at these pricesa and buyers will pay that? I don't think so,not on catalog titles anyways.

This is the strongest argument I've seen yet for HD DVD not being dead yet. There is no question that Universal and Paramount have some powerful catalogue titles and could really put out a tremendous amount of HDMs if they chose to.

For whatever reason - Paramount has be a laggard and chose to hold back titles - so unless they change there policy fast, it's not likely to help HD DVD. Universal has released a fair amount of titles, but in the face of losing WB - would need to really step it up.

In my opinion - if Toshiba wants to stay in this thing, they need to both tout the remarkable films in these Catalogues and to push Universal or Paramount to step releases of some of those major titles.


Exactly, and it reminds me of another point I haven't seen being brought up. With total HDM numbers being so low right now, why shouldn't Paramount and Universal stick with HD-DVD and step up their releases? With Warner leaving, that thins out their competition for sales. So with over 1 million players (and growing recently) out there, and owners looking for something new, a release that might have sold 200,000 with Warner in the picture, might now sell 400,000 with them out of the picture.

So if they both release a load of titles this year, they could do very well (even better if they bring prices down some).

Also, if for some reason the demand goes down as the year goes on and they eventually look to go neutral, they'll have decent market data on what is and isn't selling well, so they'll know how to prioritize their releases for the other format.

I think it'd be very wise on their part to stick with HD-DVD for 6 to 9 months at least....

But the announcement on release of catalog titles from UNIVERSAL/PARAMOUNT should come before end of Q1'2008 else it will be disastrous for the format. Content is KING.

I'm red, but, honestly, this sounds like wishful thinking. I don't know who Chris Frost is, but I'd bet money those numbers aren't right. There's already a whole thread about this in the HD software area.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=896112

I think that kosty's thread -- which hasn't been updated to reflect the WB move -- would show the ratio at about 38/62, if it were updated. To be honest, even kosty's numbers on the Blu studios sounded low to me.

The "conventional wisdom" number the press keeps repeating is 30/70, based on absolutely no research that I've seen. I think that number undercounts the red, but 43/57 is just as far off in the other direction.

If Frost's numbers were right, that would mean that before Warners announced exclusivity HD DVD would have had roughly 16000 titles to Blu's 14700. And I think we would have heard a lot about how HD had more potential titles. I think I know why we didn't: It's not true.

I'm red, but, honestly, this sounds like wishful thinking. I don't know who Chris Frost is, but I'd bet money those numbers aren't right.

Well, it appears that Chris Frost didn't pull the figures out of his ass because, when I go to IMDB and check for the listing of titles of which Universal is the US distributor, the number it shows is 5331! Likewise, the number I get for Paramount is 5753! Exact matches. I'm sure the other numbers are correct because it is VERY easy to verify at IMDB!

So, I'll take your money! :)

Mark

Paramount to release first bluray's.... http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=24484

Follow the link to formatwarcentral(FUD central) and u will see no more blus ;)

http://formatwarcentral.com/index.php/2008/01/21/amazon-uk-lists-paramount-blu-ray-titles-for-pre-order/

First of all, I never said that the Paramount and Uni figures sounded way off. It's the Warner and Fox numbers, in particular, that sound fishy.

"verify at the IMDB" is meaningless. The IMDB is *filled* with errors. More to the point in this point is that the IMDB is woefully incomplete. How many films do they *not* have the video distributors for?

Frankly I haven't figured out how to specifically search the IMDB for US video rights holders. I'd love to know how. But I still wouldn't trust it.

I reiterate a side point I made: Frost's figures suggest that until three weeks ago, HD DVD had rights to *more* titles than did Blu-Ray. (Technically still do, I guess.) I can't recall ever hearing Toshiba or anyone else with a huge financial stake in this trumpeting that fact. Indeed, I only heard Blu-Ray people making that claim.

That doesn't strike you as odd?

I would add that the quality of the catalogs also favors that of HD-DVD supporting studios.

I would add that the quality of the catalogs also favors that of HD-DVD supporting studios.

If you mean aesthetic quality, well, that's a matter of taste. My preferences tend to favor Warner, probably followed by Universal, because they own so much stuff from the 30s and 40s.

A side point is how each studio uses their catalogs. That is, when it comes to SD DVD, Warners restores stuff and packages it better than anyone except *maybe* Criterion. Universal is the very worst. The epitome of this comparison is each studio's Marx Brothers set. Universal owns the rights to the early Paramount titles, which includes most of their best. Warner owns the rights to the later, MGM titles, which, despite A Night at the Opera, are not as good on average. Warner assembled a set that looked pretty good, with tons of extras. Universal took a bunch of choppy, scratchy prints; put one title per disc (even though the films are mostly very short), with not extras; and put all the extras -- all 17 minutes of them -- on a separate disc.

That may be an extreme example, but it's representative of Universal HE's policies and priorities regarding capital outlay and short term profit, which makes me distrust them to the core, no matter how nice their HD titles may have been to date.

If you mean aesthetic quality, well, that's a matter of taste. My preferences tend to favor Warner, probably followed by Universal, because they own so much stuff from the 30s and 40s.

A side point is how each studio uses their catalogs. That is, when it comes to SD DVD, Warners restores stuff and packages it better than anyone except *maybe* Criterion. Universal is the very worst. The epitome of this comparison is each studio's Marx Brothers set. Universal owns the rights to the early Paramount titles, which includes most of their best. Warner owns the rights to the later, MGM titles, which, despite A Night at the Opera, are not as good on average. Warner assembled a set that looked pretty good, with tons of extras. Universal took a bunch of choppy, scratchy prints; put one title per disc (even though the films are mostly very short), with not extras; and put all the extras -- all 17 minutes of them -- on a separate disc.

That may be an extreme example, but it's representative of Universal HE's policies and priorities regarding capital outlay and short term profit, which makes me distrust them to the core, no matter how nice their HD titles may have been to date.

I was thinking of the stuff from the 50's and 60's personally, AND made the mistake of grouping Warner with, Paramount and Universal STILL, in that thought(sigh).I would agree that Warner would tend to hold the rights to he best "older" films, mainly of the 30-early 50's.Paramount and Universal imo own the rights to most of the better films from the mid 60's through the late 80's.Funny enough, ALOT of the "good and fun"(not necessarily classic) old movies of yesteryear have fallen into public domain and are being picked up and restored by smaller studios more and more.The upcoming Bob Hope "Road to.." flicks come to mind.I can't wait for those to ship.Even if they are at least restored somewhat decently, the price is right and it's been a long time since i've seen them.

Most of the "vault" movies do not have elements suitable for a high definition transfer without extensive restoration and/or aren't commercially viable releases.

Many are getting hi-def transfers anyway for TV syndication packages.

The problem being the vast majority of these titles won't make a dent in sales. And having lots of titles means dick if it's not resulting in sales. Maybe if you want a particular title, its good news to you. But that news is mitigated by the fact that low sales may result in the format not continuing.

This is only half-true, there is a market for catalog, it's just the chicken and egg syndrome of catalog buyers not entering the fray because they see little they want, and studios not releasing them because they want a quick return. With the cost of entry dirt-cheap, you could shake catalog buyers of the fence by showing them that catalog is alive and well on HD DVD. IMO Universal shoulda been putting out things like FRANKENSTEIN and PSYCHO from day one

You can bet Universal wants to sell catalog, and of the majors, they really put out quite a bit, it's all in the 30-year-old window when they could be in the 75-30.

Many are getting hi-def transfers anyway for TV syndication packages.

And for DVDs. The studios have been re-mastering their catalogue in high-def for many years now. The high-def masters are downconverted for the normal DVD release. Costs of re-mastering or the inavailabilty of suitable masters are not the reason why we see so few classic movies on HD.

Besides The Godfather movies. I want to see Friday The 13th 1-8 released by Paramount. :cool:

Did all those titles from Paramount, Universal, Columbia and Warner even hit DVD? I'm thinking there's a significant portion of each of those studio's collections that never hit.

There was a really good comment on EngagetHD today. It really highlights just how big the various catalogs are for US Studios. It sure was an eye opener for me.

I'm an HD DVD supporter, but those numbers are off on the Blu side. Where's Lion's Gate and their 475 films? I don't see New Line's 523 films on that list. Why no mention of Touchstone and their 231 films? How is it that Disney/Buena Vista are listed as 727 films when according to IMDB Buena Vista has 726 films and Disney has 810 films? Why was Miramax and their 559 films ignored altogether? Adding up Disney and all their sub-studios should result in almost 2,500 films not 726.

It's difficult to get all of the rights straight because there are so many sub-studios and agreements with foreign film companies. On the Red side one can't simply say "Universal", one must include NBC, Working Title, Focus Features and Studio Canal. On the Blu side one can't just say Sony they must include Columbia, Tri-Star, Columbia Tri-Star (they released for years as one company), Screen Gems and portions of the MGM, Polygram and UA catalogs.

I've tried to come up with a total several times and an exact count is impossible but it's in the neighborhood of 16,000 potential HD DVD catalogs versus 22,000 potential Blu-ray catalogs. The point is that one still needs both formats to get everything.

fistofsouth, your post is more or less in line with my earlier statements, but I still can't figure out how you're getting as high as 16K for our side. I wish it were so, but I ca n't come anywhere near 16K without counting Warner on both sides. Without Warner, the percentage gets really grim.

fistofsouth, your post is more or less in line with my earlier statements, but I still can't figure out how you're getting as high as 16K for our side. I wish it were so, but I ca n't come anywhere near 16K without counting Warner on both sides. Without Warner, the percentage gets really grim.

Here you go:

Universal (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0005073/) 5332
MCA/Universal (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0026044/) 351
Studio Canal (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0047476/) 193
Amblin Entertainment (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0009119/) 135
Working Title Films (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0057311/) 104
Focus Features (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0042399/) 88
Imagine Entertainment (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0003687/) 80
October Films (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0017323/) 75
USA Films (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0043969/) 57
Polygram 1995-1999 (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0030612/) 58
UIP (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0074139/) 480
Paramount (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0023400/) 5,756
DreamWorks SKG (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0040938/) 177
MTV Films (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0034438/) 44
Weinstein (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0150452/) 183
Nickelodian (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0022565/) 241

Universal holds the rights to most of the pre-1950 UA catalog (about 600 films) as well:
Pre-1950 UA (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0026841/) 600

That gets us to 13,954 films

There are some additions and subtraction that can be made from that number (Universal has the rights to certain MGM films, Scion Films, and some Morgan Creek Productions, et al), but I just don't have the energy to research all of those right now. I do know they account for a few thousand more films because on one day I did have the energy to look up all the rights and that's where the 16,000 number came from.

At the end of the day you can use the most basic calculations and come up with almost 14,000 HD DVD catalogs and if you add in TV rights (the post-1973 NBC Library and the rights to CBS Productions that Paramount still maintains, plus BET, Sci-Fi, Spike and the rest) you get over 25,000 HD DVD catalogs. If HDM takes off the way DVD did those TV rights will be important, but at this stage in the game they don't have the impact that films do.

Fox has several thousand titles, probably around the same as Universal and Paramount. I think that the movies Fox controls are under different names containing 'Fox', so you need to add them all up.

Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation [us] shows over 3000 titles, for example. Here's what turns up when you search 'fox' under company names at IMDB

http://imdb.com/find?s=co&q=fox&x=19&y=7

Also, remember that there is much overlap, so the true total would be tedious to calculate, I would guess.

There literally may be thousands of awful, AWFUL movies in those large catalogs of Universal and Paramount. It ain't necessarily a good thing.

Boy, you fellas keep trying to find a way to make yourselves think HD DVD's gonna come back, huh? Makes me smile, and not in a condescending way. More like an, "Aww...adorable!" kinda way.

There literally may be thousands of awful, AWFUL movies in those large catalogs of Universal and Paramount. It ain't necessarily a good thing.

Boy, you fellas keep trying to find a way to make yourselves think HD DVD's gonna come back, huh? Makes me smile, and not in a condescending way. More like an, "Aww...adorable!" kinda way.

Yes and the same can be said about thousands of films in the Blu-ray catalog, but both catalogs contain value and both formats will have their share of Blockbuster exclusives for 2008.

It isn't about making a come back it's about having the best of HDM that can be had. That some people won't drop $125 to get in on HD DVD makes me smile and not in a condescending way more like an, "Aww..look who won't be enjoying American Gangster, Beowulf, Cloverfield, Iron Man, Hell Boy 2, Sweeney Todd, The Will Be Blood, Indiana Jones 4, Star Trek XI and The Hulk in 1080p because they are stubborn!" kind of way.

Well, luckily, I was smart and got both formats. Now I've got nothing to complain about! Honestly, that was one out of two ways to come out a winner in the format war. Either stay out of it completely or embrace both sides. I always intended to get a BluRay player, HD DVD just happened to be first.

Well, luckily, I was smart and got both formats. Now I've got nothing to complain about! Honestly, that was one out of two ways to come out a winner in the format war. Either stay out of it completely or embrace both sides. I always intended to get a BluRay player, HD DVD just happened to be first.

Well I am in the same boat. I always planned to be neutral and decided to go with HD DVD first based on a variety of reasons including, but not limited to content, features, PQ, price and the lack of region coding. I think most true film fans have always had then intention of going with both formats; why limit yourself? Plus when you have both you can choose the superior transfer when an alternate is available.

I'm happy i went HD DVD first and for me it was the only choice that made sense. Even if all other factors had been equal (specs, price, et al) I would have gone with HD DVD first just based on taste. I maintain an HD "wish list" that currently has 108 HDM films on it that I either own or intend to own; of those 83 are HD DVDs and 25 are BDs. There was little reason for me to pay twice as much to get an incomplete player that will play less than 25% of the HDM content I want.

Many of the 25 BDs on my list are only there because they are the only choice; Young Guns, The Usual Suspects, Dracula, RoboCop and Edward Scissorhands are all on the list despite the fact that I know they are sub-par transfers because I enjoy those films and have no alternative. It is interesting to note that only 2 of the BD s on my list are there because they are superior to their HD DVD counterparts; Total Recall because the BD does not have the pitch issue of the HD DVD import and The Prestige simply because the US BD is less expensive. Conversely Underworld, Underworld:Evolution, Reservoir Dogs, Terminator 2, 300, HP4, HP5 and Saw are all on my list in HD DVD format because they are superior to their BD counterparts in PQ, features or both.

Hey, I've got a wishlist too! It only consists of about 40 titles, TOTAL, out of both formats. I'm kinda choosy regarding past titles, but movies that come out from here on out, it won't matter what studio makes it in HiDef, I'll be able to watch it.

As it turns out, though, out of all the movies that are out on Blu Ray and HD DVD, HD DVD wins out big time. Blu Ray has a lot of options but many of them are awful, awful movies that 100% perfect picture can't do jacksh!t for. Same goes for HD DVD, too, of course. For me, anyhow. But my HiDef library consists mostly of HD DVDs, as does my wishlist.

That's the first time I've really realized that. Huh.

That gets us to 13,954 films



The theoretical size of the catalogue does not say anything. It's releases that count. A much more interesting and telling comparison would be the number of titles each studio has released so far on standard DVD.

This is what DVDEmpire currently lists for each of the Hollywood majors on DVD:

HD-DVD exclusive studios:

Paramount Pictures 2005
Dreamworks 193
Universal Studios 1699
Total 3897

Blu-Ray exclusive studios:

Warner Bros 3557
20th Century Fox 2141
Disney/Buena Vista 1733
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment 2514
Total 9945

The theoretical size of the catalogue does not say anything. It's releases that count. A much more interesting and telling comparison would be the number of titles each studio has released so far on standard DVD.

Universal has released more films on HDM than any other studio.

Universal: 144 (HD DVD)
Warner: 125 (HD DVD) 104 (BD)
Sony: 102 (BD)
FOX/MGM: 61 (BD)
Buena Vista: 57 (BD)
Paramount/DW: 48 (HD DVD) 33 (BD)
Lion's Gate: 36 (BD)
Weinstein: 11 (HD DVD)

This is why the Warner Announcement will hurt HD DVD, but if you look at all of HDM Universal comes in first and Paramount comes in sixth in total releases. It's sad that tiny Lion's Gate nearly keeps up with a Major Studio like Paramount, then again I was there when Live was releasing more DVDs than Paramount. Paramount is a let down on catalogs, but at least they are good for D&D releases and Universal has traditionally taken up a great deal of slack for HD DVD in Catalog releases. I guess we'll see what the next few months hold.

This is the strongest argument I've seen yet for HD DVD not being dead yet. There is no question that Universal and Paramount have some powerful catalogue titles and could really put out a tremendous amount of HDMs if they chose to.


The fact that they don't choose to - and for that matter, that the BD studios also don't choose to with their catalogue - says it all.

In terms of the format war, this is utterly meaningless. They're not coming out on HD. They're not coming out on BD. They're coming out (if ever) once there is one format with mass market acceptance.

Worldwide GM sells 120+ models, Toyota sells 60 and Toyota outsold it this year.

Pure numbers matter not. What matters is how many of these movies are bought by the public... and Warner alone controls 20% of DVD sales in USA.

Boy, you fellas keep trying to find a way to make yourselves think HD DVD's gonna come back, huh? Makes me smile, and not in a condescending way. More like an, "Aww...adorable!" kinda way.

QGUT, SNERT.

Gesundheit?

Besides The Godfather movies. I want to see Friday The 13th 1-8 released by Paramount. :cool:

Those have been remastered too! My brother is a huge fan of those movies and HD NET ws airing all 8 movies in a row in HD. Of course I invited him over the watch them and they looked great!

Paramount's HDM output (title wise) before their exclusive announcement and now - is dismal at best. I almost think of them as being an independent (e.g. Lions Gate, Weinstein).

Worldwide GM sells 120+ models, Toyota sells 60 and Toyota outsold it this year.

Pure numbers matter not. What matters is how many of these movies are bought by the public... and Warner alone controls 20% of DVD sales in USA.

Exactly. And the main factor that HAS to be considered is the install base. 1,000,000 players on the HD-DVD camp is nothing compared to 9.54 MILLION PS3's on the market world-wide + the Blu-Ray stand-alone players.

Check here for the PS3 numbers (this site is fairly accurate). I can not post a link to the url as I'm too new of a member, but here's the site:
www . vgchartz . com


It's about a 10:1 advantage once you count in the stand-alone Blu-Ray players. Hence the biggest reason Blu-Ray is out-selling HD-DVD.

In terms of the format war, this is utterly meaningless. They're not coming out on HD. They're not coming out on BD. They're coming out (if ever) once there is one format with mass market acceptance.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I agree with you. Since they aren't releasing widely and are not going to do so - then the impressive catalogues won't help, any more than magazines of unused ammo help in a firefight.

I was just saying, they are great catalogues and there are an incredible amount of movies - if they were inclined to save HD DVD (and I can't think of a good reason to do so) they have the only real ammo left. A massive push by the major heavy hitters in those catalogues might delay the inevitable. I say delay and inevitable because that's all I believe it would really accomplish. But a Hail Mary throw by these studios could give enough breathing space to HD DVD to come up with something to keep it in the game.

Will it happen? No.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I agree with you. Since they aren't releasing widely and are not going to do so - then the impressive catalogues won't help, any more than magazines of unused ammo help in a firefight.

This is true. If HD-DVD is easy to produce on current standard lines, and these studios are ACTUALLY backing HD-DVD right now, why in the world aren't we seeing ads in sales papers showing HD-DVD movies like Saving Private Ryan, Braveheart, Cinderella Man, etc?

It's for this reason my HD-DVD movie collection isn't growing. So far there really aren't any irrisistable releases for me.