I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

+1.

I'm not at all concerned with how HDM does against DVD. Downloads and the format war are the issues at the moment.

Well, I like older films and there's just not that much out on HDM. I haven't bought anything in hi-def for a while just because there is nothing of interest to me. I have purchased quite few titles recently on SD DVD that may not be on HDM for years. I do look forward to The Longest Day, Patton, Bonnie & Clyde and a few others, but there are just way too many CGI, horror, sci-fi films, and undesirable titles for my taste in HDM right now.

Well, I like older films and there's just not that much out on HDM. I haven't bought anything in hi-def for a while just because there is nothing of interest to me. I have purchased quite few titles recently on SD DVD that may not be on HDM for years. I do look forward to The Longest Day, Patton, Bonnie & Clyde and a few others, but there are just way too many CGI, horror, sci-fi films, and undesirable titles for my taste in HDM right now.

Ah! one of the few remaining WWII war film fans around. Patton, but in the 2:20 or 2:35 release?

A bridge too far, Memphis belle, Midway, Tora etc.

We might just see them, keep the faith.

Semper Fi

I don't understand this obsession either apparently the belief is that we'll start to see more catalog titles if HDM takes off. However, you can't expect only two yrs in that HDM can make a serious dent into DVD sales. Not when it requires a compatible display and hardware prices are in the 3-4 hundred range at least for blu-ray.

Personally, I could care less because I believe it will never match the success DVD had during its height. Sales will grow but keep in mind that there was no in demand movies or online content such as youtube when DVD came to market. Not to mention the fact that VHS or the tape format had been around for like 20yrs. The market conditions are different right now.

Just a couple of weeks ago my brother was talking about scenes from a movie we both like. He doesn't own it on DVD and all he had to do was go to youtube and we both watched those scenes. Knowing him if he couldn't access his favorite parts of the movie online he would have bought the dvd.

It seems that, for some people, since the Warner annoucement, HDM is doomed.

So we read a lot of post putting a negative spin on HDM:

HDM stand no chance versus downloads, HDM will always stay niche etc .. ad nauseam ...

In my case, its not a question of being concerned, its just a question of wanting more titles. The truth is, that for me, the title selection is pretty poor. I love HD, but I'm not going to buy movies I won't like, so I'm buying less now than I was 6 months ago. I've bought/preordered 5 titles for all of Q1 '08-that used to be 1-2 weeks worth for me. Its rather frustrating, and I'm starting to get the same feeling I got after I bought into SACD.
J

I watched a couple of dozen blu-rays from Netflix after I got my PS3. But I haven't watched one for months. I haven't even watched my free titles.

I'd rather watch content on DVD that I WANT TO SEE than blu-ray content that I don't. I hope it gets better in 2008 but the release schedules look pitiful so far.

I wish I could argue with the poor selection theory. Stuff I like, Alien, Jurassic etc etc. I don't got enough years left.

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

Looks like you knew all of this ahead of time by the tone of your post and of course you didn't.

We are just short of two years into HDM it should be picking up by now for those of us with limited lifespans.

Art

It seems that, for some people, since the Warner annoucement, HDM is doomed.

So we read a lot of post putting a negative spin on HDM:

HDM stand no chance versus downloads, HDM will always stay niche etc .. ad nauseam ...

Its not negative spin. Both HDM and downloads are in the early adopter stage. They are trying to reach the niche status that DVD-A and SACD could not. If they can do that, then they can worry about SD DVD.

It seems that, for some people, since the Warner annoucement, HDM is doomed.

So we read a lot of post putting a negative spin on HDM:

HDM stand no chance versus downloads, HDM will always stay niche etc .. ad nauseam ...

I have felt that HDM would be LD since the beginning. I don't see it as doomed, but instead I see it as a very good thing for enthusiasts. You'd think that wold be a good thing on an enthusiast forum. I guess everyone is so worried about the container that they have stopped worrying about the movie on the container.

I'm not at all concerned with how HDM does against DVD. Downloads and the format war are the issues at the moment.

I can't say I agree with this. There is no format war, just a couple studios that have yet to adopt blu-ray. And HD downloads will not be a significant threat to physical media for a number of years still in the US. Our infrastructure is just too far behind; no wonder given the size of our country but still shame on telcos for missing the boat.

HDM will do just fine in the window it has.

I do not understand why HD downloads are always included in the argument about media. I think that sales of discs will always be preferred. HD downloads will eventually overtake media rentals. When I want to watch a movie I haven't seen in a while I feel more comfortable grabbing a disc that I know will play. I don't have to deal with expired licenses and DRM. Also, a friend can borrow it if I choose to.

For us, it's the hope of cutting the waittime for StarWars and LotR (and others) to show up earlier, by a few months.

For the studios, the reason is in page 8 of HMM
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/hom021008/index.php?startpage=8

Time Warner saw a Q4 drop in revenue of 42%, (imo of which New Line's Golden Compass BoxOffice performance has a part in), along with declining DVD sales in 07. In this case, Time Warner is laying off about 100 people as part of a goal to reduce costs by 15%.

In the past, the studios always counted on DVD revenue to grow, when it plateaus, they get nervous and looked for other revenue sources. When revenue goes down, it translates to layoffs.

For years, DVD revenue was this magic balm that allowed them to weather the years when their boxoffice revenue goes down, but now that they are seeing that it is declining, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this first layoff is just the first round of what could be continuous austerity measures at the studios if DVD revenue keeps declining every year.

Now why does it decline? I have a theory, part of it is saturation in the home, but it also has to do with torrents, eyepatches and buckaneers. ;)

When companies see their profits decline, they have to do something to adjust. Profitability in each company is measured by ROI, if a company's profit margin get too close to interest rates in a bank, then the whole business is of no value to shareholders. If a division/company is not profitable, then if they don't find a way to return to profitability, deep cost cutting always happens.

Now why does it decline? I have a theory, part of it is saturation in the home, but it also has to do with torrents, eyepatches and buckaneers. ;)
New DVDs sell great. Catalog, not so great. Also, don't believe everything you hear or read. The music industry continues with it's "CD sales are down" mantra, while actual revenue has gone up for them with less overhead.

For us, it's the hope of cutting the waittime for StarWars and LotR (and others) to show up earlier, by a few months.

For the studios, the reason is in page 8 of HMM
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/hom021008/index.php?startpage=8

Time Warner saw a Q4 drop in revenue of 42%, (imo of which New Line's Golden Compass BoxOffice performance has a part in), along with declining DVD sales in 07. In this case, Time Warner is laying off about 100 people as part of a goal to reduce costs by 15%.

In the past, the studios always counted on DVD revenue to grow, when it plateaus, they get nervous and looked for other revenue sources. When revenue goes down, it translates to layoffs.

For years, DVD revenue was this magic balm that allowed them to weather the years when their boxoffice revenue goes down, but now that they are seeing that it is declining, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this first layoff is just the first round of what could be continuous austerity measures at the studios if DVD revenue keeps declining every year.

Now why does it decline? I have a theory, part of it is saturation in the home, but it also has to do with torrents, eyepatches and buckaneers. ;)

When companies see their profits decline, they have to do something to adjust. Profitability in each company is measured by ROI, if a company's profit margin get too close to interest rates in a bank, then the whole business is of no value to shareholders. If a division/company is not profitable, then if they don't find a way to return to profitability, deep cost cutting always happens.

Looks like Warner jumped ship too soon. :D They could have used the HD DVD revenues.

New DVDs sell great. Catalog, not so great. Also, don't believe everything you hear or read. The music industry continues with it's "CD sales are down" mantra, while actual revenue has gone up for them with less overhead.
The whole point of HDM, is to get us to (re)buy catalog titles. They don't need HDM for new titles.
J

The reason Q4 earnings were so much lower was do to last years sale of AOL's European online access business. Without the year-ago gains and other one-time effects, adjusted profits rose 17 percent on stronger results for cable TV and movies.


For us, it's the hope of cutting the waittime for StarWars and LotR (and others) to show up earlier, by a few months.

For the studios, the reason is in page 8 of HMM
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/hom021008/index.php?startpage=8

Time Warner saw a Q4 drop in revenue of 42%, (imo of which New Line's Golden Compass BoxOffice performance has a part in), along with declining DVD sales in 07. In this case, Time Warner is laying off about 100 people as part of a goal to reduce costs by 15%.

In the past, the studios always counted on DVD revenue to grow, when it plateaus, they get nervous and looked for other revenue sources. When revenue goes down, it translates to layoffs.

For years, DVD revenue was this magic balm that allowed them to weather the years when their boxoffice revenue goes down, but now that they are seeing that it is declining, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this first layoff is just the first round of what could be continuous austerity measures at the studios if DVD revenue keeps declining every year.

Now why does it decline? I have a theory, part of it is saturation in the home, but it also has to do with torrents, eyepatches and buckaneers. ;)

When companies see their profits decline, they have to do something to adjust. Profitability in each company is measured by ROI, if a company's profit margin get too close to interest rates in a bank, then the whole business is of no value to shareholders. If a division/company is not profitable, then if they don't find a way to return to profitability, deep cost cutting always happens.

Looks like Warner jumped ship too soon. :D They could have used the HD DVD revenues.

Or perhaps it's just strategic planning when you have two plants jostling for the same real estate and the farmer decided to prune one so the other can flourish. That way, instead of having weak yields from both plants, he might have a chance at a bumper crop when the remaining plant finally bears fruit, come harvest time.

Companies don't just plan 3 weeks ahead to meet payroll, they have to have a clear idea of where they want to be next year, and even 5 years from now.

Looks like you knew all of this ahead of time by the tone of your post and of course you didn't.

We are just short of two years into HDM it should be picking up by now for those of us with limited lifespans.

Art

To be honest I'm pretty happy with the Selection, Nearly all of my favorite top 10 movies of all time have already come out in HD. There are currently very few all time favorite movies of mine left that need to come out in HD. I had a much longer wait for these titles when DVD was released.

Call it luck or call it whatever you want but nearly all of my favorite movies are out in HD.

To be honest I'm pretty happy with the Selection, Nearly all of my favorite top 10 movies of all time have already come out in HD. There are currently very few all time favorite movies of mine left that need to come out in HD. I had a much longer wait for these titles when DVD was released.

Call it luck or call it whatever you want but nearly all of my favorite movies are out in HD.

I'd have to call it that. :)

Art

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

+1. Thank you. Good post.

So you guys are happy with the release rate of HDM after two years or all of your favorites are already out ?

I think reality is between impatients and and the rate is peachy keen IMO.

I think there's an understanding that titles will be released. New movies almost invariably get a Blu-Ray day and date release and we'll be seeing strong catalog titles as we move forward. We have a nice list from Warner for 2008 and Disney will start releasing its classics. You can already pick up on Blu-Ray, to name a few: Unforgiven, Rio Bravo, Wall Street, 2001, The Shining, Halloween, Blade Runner, The Wild Bunch, Rocky, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Die Hard, GoodFellas, Untouchables, The Searchers, etc. I think we're way ahead of where DVD was at this point and I think there will be many more titles by Christmas, which is when the format will really have an opportunity to reach a mass audience.

So you guys are happy with the release rate of HDM after two years or all of your favorites are already out ?

I think reality is between impatients and and the rate is peachy keen IMO.

I think we have to draw a line in the sand between what we'd like versus what will realistically sell.

If it were just "what we want", I think we can all agree that having every single movie ever made available on HDM would be the option we'd all want. Given the limited resources that studios have to work within, though, I'm personally surprised that we're even getting as much decent catalog as we've been seeing (with more coming down the pipeline).

I agree that having more releases would be a good thing, but the studios can only remaster a limited number of titles at a time with the existing facilities without quality suffering (look at what happened last year when Universal tried to push the envelope and accelerate their release rate), and I'm personally happy enough to let them go about the business as best they know how.

More releases is good, but if doing so cuts into the quality of the final product, I'm happier to wait just a bit longer to make sure that what ends up on the disc is worth the price premium.

I haven't been chiming in to often lately, but think HDM is starting to look like a joke, every day HD DVD gets more bad news in terms of support even though it's players are highly affordable and finished, on the other hand Blu-ray enjoys increasing content/CEM support, but their hardware situation is an incredible mess of the over-priced and the unfinished (I support both formats by the way)

Just this week HD DVD loses Netflix and BD picks up a couple class-action lawsuits. HDM news has been so negative for so long, I fear a general no-show, and with good reason.

Add to this the cost of disks, and the narrow focus of content, I'd say I couldn't write a better scenario on how to make a new technology with limited appeal fall on it's face. It's not even that new anymore either.

One might say that this is the sort of short-term thinking and focus on what will ultimately be meaningless facts that the OP was referring to. Of course, it might be that the OP is wrong and this sort of thinking is accurate. But I side with the OP on that debate.

I think all has progressed satisfactorily.. No complaints.

When the average ******* is ready to buy into HD, there will be so much more to choose from.

Just this week HD DVD loses Netflix and BD picks up a couple class-action lawsuits. HDM news has been so negative for so long, I fear a general no-show, and with good reason.This seems needlessly negative, and like most of the anti-HDM comments it comes mainly after 1/4/08 and mainly from one side. First of all, there's only one lawsuit, which seems almost entirely baseless. Second, the "mess" that you speak of doesn't seem to turn off consumers, who are not only buying more BD players than HD DVD, but also doing quite well (as in, nearly on par with DVD at the same point in it's lifecycle) during a very slow shopping period. If anything, the momentum of distributors, retailers, and now rental agencies towards one format is more promising for adoption. It's 100% confirmed now that the price issue is meaningless when confronted with software selection. With Blu-ray player prices dropping continuously throughout 2008 and beyond, plus increased exclusive support from all sectors of the home media industry, and an increasingly murkier future for HD via the Internet, HDM feels like it has a fighting chance again. Do I think it will be the next DVD? No, but DVD was so wildly successful that we probably won't see anything grow like it did for a decade or more.

I haven't been chiming in to often lately, but think HDM is starting to look like a joke, every day HD DVD gets more bad news in terms of support even though it's players are highly affordable and finished, on the other hand Blu-ray enjoys increasing content/CEM support, but their hardware situation is an incredible mess of the over-priced and the unfinished (I support both formats by the way)

Just this week HD DVD loses Netflix and BD picks up a couple class-action lawsuits. HDM news has been so negative for so long, I fear a general no-show, and with good reason.

Add to this the cost of disks, and the narrow focus of content, I'd say I couldn't write a better scenario on how to make a new technology with limited appeal fall on it's face. It's not even that new anymore either.


Tim,

I could have written this. I went purple very soon after the Warner shift and looked forward to being able to get all HDM movies. But I never found that joy and contentment. Instead I saw gaping holes in content and absurd pricing. Whatever optimism I once had for HDM is long gone.

I'd be happy to buy a Blu-Ray for $39.99, but only if that meant I could get it when it opened in theaters. I was excited to see Hoosiers had been released on Blu. But when I saw the MSRP was $39.99 I was appalled. I mean for a flat 20 yr old transfer I have to drop $40?? There is NO WAY this is going to succeed. There is just no value with HDM, and thats coming from an enthusiast.

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

People did the same bickering when DVD was new. Look at the frenzy BladeRunner started.

Why should we change now? Our job as early adopters is to prune and beta test new technologies for J6P's use, which in the end benefits us both. We pressure studios for higher quality, we pressure for catalog releases, we demand quality and quantity and are darn pushy about getting it. The more of a fight we put up the better we all have it in the end.

Tim,

I could have written this. I went purple very soon after the Warner shift and looked forward to being able to get all HDM movies. But I never found that joy and contentment. Instead I saw gaping holes in content and absurd pricing. Whatever optimism I once had for HDM is long gone.

I'd be happy to buy a Blu-Ray for $39.99, but only if that meant I could get it when it opened in theaters. I was excited to see Hoosiers had been released on Blu. But when I saw the MSRP was $39.99 I was appalled. I mean for a flat 20 yr old transfer I have to drop $40?? There is NO WAY this is going to succeed. There is just no value with HDM, and thats coming from an enthusiast.

You do realize that a MSRP of $40 means it will be in stores for around $20 right?

With all of the BOGO sales and other deals, I think I've managed to spend less on HDM than I did on DVD, if not then its close.

Oh brother.... So many here are hopeless...

Blu Ray will take hold and will be ubiquitous. The fact is it is simply not ready for the ones still complaining.

It's 100% confirmed now that the price issue is meaningless when confronted with software selection. With Blu-ray player prices dropping continuously throughout 2008 and beyond, plus increased exclusive support from all sectors of the home media industry, and an increasingly murkier future for HD via the Internet, HDM feels like it has a fighting chance again.

??? Price is meaningless? Show me how well Fox's $40 catalogs have sold?

BD pricing dropping continuously in 2008??? Street pricing on almost all SAL players is UP $100 since the beginning of the year, PLUS there is no longer 5 free movies. Essentially SALs cost $150 more for the same players than they did 40 days ago.

I'm purple but I have been shocked at the pricing and lock of support from secondary sources (rental, SW sales, etc) for BOTH. My local Blockbuster doesn't have any movies that have been released since XMas on Blu (no Sunshine, 3:10 to Yuma, etc); Netflix has been dismal in their HDM efforts. Pricing has gotten to be a bad joke with a complete lack of sales across the board.

Your optimism is great but I don't share it.

You do realize that a MSRP of $40 means it will be in stores for around $20 right?

With all of the BOGO sales and other deals, I think I've managed to spend less on HDM than I did on DVD, if not then its close.

Ack! No. $40 MSRP means $35 at Best Buy PLUS TAX. You can find them for the bargain price of $28 at Amazon.

There hasn't been a BOGO since Warner switched (for EITHER) (fortunately, it wasn't cut short and I expected a dearth of discounts and bought a PILE).

I loved the pricing when they were duking it out and we had 30% off then BOGO at Amazon going on all the time. But thats long gone now.

??? Price is meaningless? Show me how well Fox's $40 catalogs have sold?I was talking about player prices.
BD pricing dropping continuously in 2008??? Street pricing on almost all SAL players is UP $100 since the beginning of the year, PLUS there is no longer 5 free movies. Essentially SALs cost $150 more for the same players than they did 40 days ago.That is neither universal, nor expected to last past a slow sales period for electronics. If you'd bothered reading the CES threads, you would have seen multiple players coming in at lower MSRPs (which obviously translates to lower retail prices), with $250 being discussed by mid-year. Not coincidentally, the middle of the year is when consumer electronics sales start to pick up, as opposed to Q1, when sales are pretty low.

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales.Some don't like this, but I personally think that comparing to where DVD was at the same point in its life is useful. Every great oak was once a sapling, and it is easy for people to disparage every sapling by pointing out that it isn't as as great as an old oak tree. So far I've been impressed with how well the number of users has done compared to DVD at the same point, even with a format war. People can see from here:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/cemadvdsales.html

that at around the same age as Blu-ray, DVD had shipped (not necessarily sold) about 1.4 million DVD players in the US and a little more at the same age as HD DVD (which launched a little earlier than Blu-ray).

As far as wanting more in a short time-frame, that is just human nature. When people look back at history time tends to get collapsed. This is true for sports and other events, where time seems to take longer when you are in the situation than looking back at situations from the past.

--Darin

Second, the "mess" that you speak of doesn't seem to turn off consumers, who are not only buying more BD players than HD DVD, but also doing quite well (as in, nearly on par with DVD at the same point in it's lifecycle) during a very slow shopping period.

There are too many factors involved now to compare HD media adoption to that of DVD. I don't see any volume numbers so I don't know if CE manufacturers are defining the sales as going quite well, especially with the PS3 owning so much of the hardware market.

As for consumers not being turned off by the hardware "mess," I am ready to go purple but don't see value in any of the currently available players. Maybe all consumers but me don't care, but it's not working for me right now.

It's 100% confirmed now that the price issue is meaningless when confronted with software selection.Really? How is anything 100% determined? What is determined is that content drives adoption. It is also determined that consumers never had the option of deciding anything about format preference or price preference.

Obviously, price and content availability are factors, but there is not way to measure them exclusively. Interdependence of all factors is leading to the current numbers. Too bad the biggest deciding factors have been determined by companies trying to drive up margins, removing value from consumers.

With Blu-ray player prices dropping continuously throughout 2008 and beyond, plus increased exclusive support from all sectors of the home media industry, and an increasingly murkier future for HD via the Internet, HDM feels like it has a fighting chance again.Well, we're about 11.5% of the way through the year, and Blu-ray player prices are not dropping yet, so the continuously statement seems rather overly optimistic at this time.

RE: Samsung being Sued

1. It gets dismissed
2. It goes to court.....and 2-4 years later it is resolved.

At best, owners of the Samsnug player will get either a $50 credit or less. The owners will already have a new BD player..

So, this type of case only benefits the lawyers..

Speaking of the rush...

Netflix is wasting no time! Here's an email I just received..

Dear jeff,

You're receiving this email because you have asked to receive high-definition movies in the HD DVD format. As you may have heard, most of the major movie studios have recently decided to release their high-definition movies exclusively in the Blu-ray format.

In order to provide the best selection of high-definition titles for our members, we have decided to go exclusively with Blu-ray as well. While we will continue to make our current selection of HD DVD titles available to you for the next several months, we will not be adding additional HD DVD titles or reordering replacements.

Toward the end of February, HD DVDs in your Saved Queue will automatically be changed to standard definition DVDs. Then toward the end of this year, all HD DVDs in your Queue will be changed to standard definition DVDs. Don't worry, we will contact you before this happens. You can click here to change your format preferences. We're sorry for any inconvenience.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call us at 1 (888) 638-3549. -The Netflix Team

I think it's the yayo

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

Thank you!

I was talking about player prices.
That is neither universal, nor expected to last past a slow sales period for electronics. If you'd bothered reading the CES threads, you would have seen multiple players coming in at lower MSRPs (which obviously translates to lower retail prices), with $250 being discussed by mid-year. Not coincidentally, the middle of the year is when consumer electronics sales start to pick up, as opposed to Q1, when sales are pretty low.

Say what??? You Said:

"BD prices dropping continuously in 2008"

Which changed to:

CES has announced $299 off brand players.

I read plenty of the CES news. But it is CES. You do understand that MANY things that are announced at CES NEVER see the light of day right? Even if we DO get a $299 Sansui in July, it will be more expensive than the Sony 300, the Samsung 1400, the Aquos BD player, etc were before XMas last year and into Jan 2008 (all were readily available at $299 with 5 free movies which is worth ATLEAST $11/movie). This is a LONG WAYS AWAY FROM "BD prices dropping continuously in 2008".

Best Buy, Net-Flix, Block Buster ... soon Circuit City, Target and Wal-Mart. They HAVE to rally behind blu because Apple, VUDU, X-Box live and XstreamHD are going to steal away their cash cow optical discs. $30 dics will disappear when $4.99 VOD is here.

Many people on these forums want the classics, most of which (other than animated Disney) probably have sold 2-3 million copies on DVD over the life of there release many of them much less. At this time its not cost effective to spend all that effort getting these titles out, its more effective to get movies out that have wide appeal like Star Wars, LOTR, Jurassic Park, or major fan appeal like Serenity.




Time Warner saw a Q4 drop in revenue of 42%, (imo of which New Line's Golden Compass BoxOffice performance has a part in)

I believe they thought it would have made a lot of money (close to LOTR). It probably has still actually made money, even though it cost $180m, due to the rest of the world here its almost $70m but they worldwide combined numbers are about $330m and DVD sales will easily make enough if it hasn't.

Let me know when VOD delivers lossless audio.

Best Buy, Net-Flix, Block Buster ... soon Circuit City, Target and Wal-Mart. They HAVE to rally behind blu because Apple, VUDU, X-Box live and XstreamHD are going to steal away their cash cow optical discs. $30 dics will disappear when $4.99 VOD is here.



No. No way they will disappear for a while. I am one who wants HDM downloads, but most people rent. Most people who rent do so with a pay per month plan. They are used to paying 15.00 or 20.00 a month to rent many more titles than one would if they paid a 4.99 per movie for VOD.

What you want and what I want and what reality will dictate are defintely not the same.

It would be great if you could just flip a switch and every movie you ever wanted would be out on HDM (especially your format of choice). Yes, it would be better to have everything now (though impossible). i guess i'll just have to accept that many of the DVDs i would want to replace will never be available in HDM (maybe downloads eventually, if they ever got their act together). In fact my attachment to HDM is tenuous at best (and may end if/when HD DVD goes away). If anything, that makes me less likely to buy into BR (i would need to see strong enough sales numbers, both stand-alone hardware and discs to even consider it). It is still a long and perilous road for HDM (with many variables, HDM will probably never reach 50% of the DVD market - at least these iterations). If whatever you want with HDM doesn't happen in the next 2-3 years (disc releases, etc) there is a chance it never will.

i am not willing to concede that HDM is doing better than DVD at this point in its life. DVD didn't have probably 70%+ of the installed base as a game console with playback capabilities (i'll get to that later, sort of). 100% of DVD players sold then were dedicated. i know many will disagree with this assessment, but here goes anyway. In another thread, i set my view of the effective player scenario in the year 2007 based on software sales (assuming 10 discs was an effective purchaser using supplied Nielsen data, i think). When you break it down by that criteria the installed base in 2007 was something like 570,000 for BR and 360,000 for HD DVD (less sure on the HD DVD number). So, the effective (active) base for both was a little over 1 million combined since inception. However, this does not take into account the likely 1-2 million, or more, discs counted as sales at retail with no cost to the consumer. Regardless of the data you see (especially if you ask why the data is the way it is), it doesn't look like HDM is really taking off. Sure the base will grow in the future, but by how much is debatable (and it is also debatable about how much having two competitive formats has helped adoption at this point). It doesn't help HDM that the upper bounds of adoption rate is the adoption rate of HDTVs (at least you didn't usually have to buy a new TV to play DVDs).

The biggest competitor to HDM (currently) is upconversion. If upconversion (which will probably improve) is good enough for the vast majority, then HDM is definitely doomed to wander the earth like laser disc. Downloads are great in theory (lower cost distribution, more potential available titles) but is a long ways off. Yes i believe downloads, hybrid discs or a variation are the future.

Let me know when VOD delivers lossless audio.

I'd be fine with good quality DD+ 7.1 if the video quality of VODs would be anything better than those compression-ridden, craptastic upscaled SD-like Apple or M$ ones...

I watched a couple of dozen blu-rays from Netflix after I got my PS3. But I haven't watched one for months. I haven't even watched my free titles.

I'd rather watch content on DVD that I WANT TO SEE than blu-ray content that I don't. I hope it gets better in 2008 but the release schedules look pitiful so far.
+1

The rush is... I'm impatient! I've seen some movies in HD, which has fueled my anticipation because I can imagine how great all my favorites could look if only they'd release them. But even now, I'm still buying more SD DVDs than Blu-Ray discs!

I wish I could argue with the poor selection theory. Stuff I like, Alien, Jurassic etc etc. I don't got enough years left.

me either, probably.:(

:D

I think we have to draw a line in the sand between what we'd like versus what will realistically sell.

.

You are absolutely right but not what the OP said. Honestly after the numbers quoted for several classics, it simply looks grim IMO. Times have changed and ,most importantly, the demographic has changed from LD and early DVD days. We all know it and will negatively impact sales of great catalog titles.

I believe we are in for a very ,very strange ride if we expect the DVD cloth to be rewoven.

Lets see how Lawrence of Arabia does.:o


How do you think The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Bridge on the River Kwai, or the Ten Commandments might do with the PS3 crowd ?
Art

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

I pretty much agree with this. Overall, I am pretty happy where we are at this time in HDM, especially when you consider the format war!

I am confident that things will only get better, and more and more catalog titles will be released (see Warner's recent announcement as an example).

It seems that, for some people, since the Warner annoucement, HDM is doomed.

So we read a lot of post putting a negative spin on HDM:

HDM stand no chance versus downloads, HDM will always stay niche etc .. ad nauseam ...

Downloads are years away from being main stream. People want to pop in the video and hit play, not download for hours and deal with DRM via a PC then hook that PC up to their theater. Not until FIOS is everywhere will downloads be king. It woudl take a big part of a day for me to download a HD movie now and then to deal with the DRM issues and such, forget it. Besides I like building a small content library as well so when I am in the mood for a particular movie I grab it and put it in and hit play. If Sony/BDA can get their act together now that can become somewhat main stream, but if they waste the next 1-2 years fighting format war and figuring out how to release a final spec BD player that doesn't need a firmware every other month then maybe BD will catch on.

You are absolutely right but not what the OP said. Honestly after the numbers quoted for several classics, it simply looks grim IMO. Times have changed and ,most importantly, the demographic has changed from LD and early DVD days. We all know it and will negatively impact sales of great catalog titles.
Do you really think the demographic has changed? I'm not so sure.

I think you (Art) are a pretty good representative of the old LD crowd; very "into" movies, and while appreciative of the newer tech, you consider that the improvement in A/V quality to be an enhancement of the underlying quality of the content.

I'm personally probably closer to the "console crowd"; including here PS3 owners as well as the Xbox 360 add-on owners. I'm just as happy watching a brainless popcorn flick as I am watching Citizen Kane - as long as I'm entertained in some fashion, I feel I've gotten my money's worth.

I think the core standalone owner crowd, on both sides of the HDM fence, are still much more like you than me. This isn't a bad thing; it just is what it is.

The difference today is that the technophilic gamer demographic is demonstrably larger than the videophilic A/V early adopters; the so-called "PS3 effect" in action.

I believe we are in for a very ,very strange ride if we expect the DVD cloth to be rewoven.

I don't think there's any chance that we're going to see the same pattern that DVD underwent. DVD was very much the right technology at the right time. HDM is a nice bonus, and may eventually become widespread, but while DVD almost universally represents an improvement over previous technologies for presentation, there are cases where content was never produced at any resolution higher than 480p, and that content will not benefit much from high definition, aside from perhaps an audio upgrade (which not everyone can or will appreciate).

Lets see how Lawrence of Arabia does.:o

How do you think The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Bridge on the River Kwai, or the Ten Commandments might do with the PS3 crowd ?
I don't know. The PS3 ownership is, for the time being, older than most people assume (as is the Xbox 360 ownership). And good movies will always be good movies.

However, what the studios are facing is that these brilliant classics are too old for much of the gamer demographic to have experienced personally in the theater or even on television. I'm barely old enough to remember these movies myself (34), and I'm from the "first wave" of video gamers from back in the 1980s. I think a lot of people who are like me can also appreciate and remember these wonderful films.

But it's also true that there's a younger segment of the audience for game consoles, and for them, they have no point of reference for a movie like Bridge Over the River Kwai. It's not their fault; the only experience many of them have had with World War II is reading about it in a textbook in their history classes. Many of the participants in WWII have passed on, and it's increasingly unlikely that they have family, friends, or acquaintances who can give them a personal perspective on such a film, and I think that's important.

Many great Hollywood films fall under similar trouble with younger audiences. It would not surprise me to have an 18-year old tell me that they don't know what Ben-Hur is, for instance. And why should they have?

I think that we need to bring more of the mainstream in before the great catalog titles will see the sales that they deserve. It's not that the younger buyers can't appreciate these titles; it's that many simply have no awareness of them.

For a true high def movie lover, the only sensible course is to pray - hard - that HDM takes off and becomes commonplace. Because only then can we have a market where these fantastic films can be given enough exposure to receive the TLC that you, I, and hopefully everyone on this forum desperately wishes that every high definition release could get.

Sales volume and revenue is the carrot that will persuade the studios to open their vaults and give us what we want.

Though I now own Blu-Ray (and over 100 titles purchased in a 4-week span), there's no doubt in my mind that HD DVD was poised to hit mainstream in 2008. The players were complete, the pricing was affordable, they proved they could sell 100K units in mere days at the right price, and they also had a great 2008 slate of exclusive films that would have definitely turned the tide. A full year ahead with more exclusive studios and some HUGE A+ list titles...

Then WB was bought by the BDA.

Soon, we'd see negative news for HD DVD almost daily, culminating with today's news from Netflix and Best Buy. HD DVD, though a fantastic format and a great value, is approaching non-relevance in the marketplace now. Not because it doesn't deliver equal performance to Blu-Ray at a fraction of the price...not because it doesn't offer fully functional players while Blu-Ray is still working towards this end...and not because it currently has as many titles on the market as Blu-Ray. No, we have to watch as this excellent format fizzles because Sony and the BDA have bought studios, end-caps, viral marketing campaigns and public perception.

Paid shills like Bill Hunt have been blasting HD DVD for over a year now, crying for the end of the format. And for what? What makes Blu-Ray superior to HD DVD in these people's eyes? I have both formats and I can honestly say HD DVD is its equal in the very least and superior in many ways. And the value is certainly not up for debate -- a full 1080p player with 7 free movies for under $200?!? I needed to shell out TWICE this amount for a freakin' videogame console in order to play BD discs (since the BDA has yet to hear of an affordable fully-functional player)...and now they've even taken away the 5 free movies!

Blu-Ray enthusiasts will counter with the typical, "Well...if only HD DVD could win a single week in 2007..." This is utter BS, as we all know that they ran over 20 BOGO sales in 2007 to counter every major title HD DVD released. Where are these sales now? For everyone that wanted the death of HD DVD for no reason other than fanboyism -- how do you like a single format future now? After months with BOGO sales every other week, there hasn't even been a glimmer of such a sale on the Blu-Ray front. Prices on amazon have risen, BOGO's have ended, Sony's MSRP continues to climb (Spiderman 3, Close Encounters, Dewey Cox)...and apparently sales volumes have dropped considerably. Blu-Ray crushes HD DVD in software sales more than ever in percentages yet their own volumes have been shrinking. Gee, I wonder why? Grossly inflate sales volumes with constant give-aways, get the entire user-base accustomed to these bi-monthly sales, then terminate the practice overnight. Just another gimmick by the BDA while Bill Hunt and the like pontificate about how much better this scenario is for the future of HDM. Sure, let's rid the world of the evil format that was more affordable, a better value, and fully functional to pave the way for the same thing only more expensive and less complete. Great idea, especially in a quickly-dying economy that is the current state of the US!

As I stated, I own Blu-Ray now so my bases are covered. But IMO Blu-Ray is doomed to niche status for a long, long, long time...maybe even for its entire existence. It's nothing more than a PS3 format now, and I don't believe it will ever amount to much more. Of course hardware prices will drop as will the cost of the movies to some degree. But we all know manufacturing costs for BD discs are more than any other format, and to build the infrastructure to support mass quantities of BD discs will cost more billions (and who do you think will bear the brunt of these costs?) Meanwhile, all the CE companies and BD-supporting studios can now try to keep prices up as long as possible to recoup some of their losses with this format in its battle with HD DVD...we're already seeing this now.

HD DVD's presence in the marketplace was the best thing for HDM, as it forced Blu-Ray to lower prices quicker and to improve its quality. If it weren't for the strong-armed tactics displayed by the BD coalition HD DVD could have already been on the verge of going mainstream. Now we're stuck with the format that doesn't even see the need to sell a complete player! Everyone that cried for the single-format future better not come crying with, "Where's all the BOGO sales??" or "$50 MSRP for Vantage Point, what's Sony smoking?", "$40 for The Princess Bride without any extras?", etc, etc. You wanted it and now you got it.

Not because it doesn't deliver equal performance to Blu-Ray at a fraction of the price...
And the value is certainly not up for debate -- a full 1080p player with 7 free movies for under $200?!?Toshiba isn't running a charity. You make it sound like their deals were because HD DVD is just inherently so much cheaper, when the truth is that these lower player prices were a necessity for Toshiba to even stay in the game and now they might as well have lowered the price just after the Warner announcement as wait and have to clearance the players at even less money later. You don't actually believe that the under $200 price for the HD-A30 is because HD DVD players are so much cheaper to make, do you? Try asking some people behind the scenes at other companies who were looking at making players for each side about how much difference there was going to be in actual cost to them and I think you would find that it really wasn't that much. But Toshiba had to price their's lower for other reasons (like to compete with the PS3, because they didn't retain all their studios exclusively before launch, because they didn't have Disney, who they told "No" when Disney asked for the ability to region encode like the DVD group gave them for DVDs, and because of losing Warner recently).

The value is definitely in question when one player isn't likely to get a lot of content released for its main purchase next year or subsequent years and will be more difficult to get rentals for, for many people. Toshiba doesn't have those low prices or the included discs out of the goodness of their hearts.

And as far as the BDA buying Warner, the same people providing the information about a big payoff to Warner also said that Warner told Toshiba that they wouldn't take a payoff from them to go to HD DVD exclusively unless Toshiba could get another big studio to release on HD DVD. So, if you believe those rumors, then Toshiba didn't even have the option to pay Warner to go to HD DVD exclusively, since they weren't able to meet a precondition. If it was just about the payoffs then Warner would have likely told Toshiba to match or exceed what the other side offered. It isn't that Toshiba didn't want to get WB to come their way in exchange for something, but that WB wouldn't do it unless Toshiba improved their position by getting somebody else too. Kind of like a star quarterback who is a free agent saying that he will only go to team A if they get a star wide receiver away from team B (since the quarterback's goal is to win championships) and when team A fails, he signs with team B, resulting in fans of team A accusing team B of just paying the quarterback off.

--Darin

Though I now own Blu-Ray (and over 100 titles purchased in a 4-week span), there's no doubt in my mind that HD DVD was poised to hit mainstream in 2008. The players were complete, the pricing was affordable, they proved they could sell 100K units in mere days at the right price, and they also had a great 2008 slate of exclusive films that would have definitely turned the tide. A full year ahead with more exclusive studios and some HUGE A+ list titles...

Then WB was bought by the BDA.

I stopped reading your post after this comment.

These sour grapes arguments really need to end. Whether WB was "bought" by the BDA or not doesn't really matter, especially when you know that if the table was turned and it was Toshiba who "bought" WB, you and other HD DVD supporters wouldn't be saying a single negative thing about it.

Why is it that HD DVD supporters just somehow feel better about WB going BD exclusive if they can say that they were "bought off"?

Darin,

No question Toshiba has needed to drop the prices of players in order to compete, but the fact remains that HD DVD players have been about half the cost of Blu-Ray players since the launch of the formats and have remained significantly more affordable. My post wasn't to determine why the players are less, merely to state that they are less and thus are more affordable. As a result, HD DVD was poised to go mainstream faster in this troubled economy with players reaching sub-$100 levels in some instances.

As for the WB factor, I agree with your perspective that Warner wanted to see another studio supporting HD DVD. But that's my whole problem with this format war fiasco -- the Blu-Ray studios and CE companies formed a cartel that remained resistant to releasing on the HD DVD format no matter how many players Toshiba moved...remember the report of their attack on LG for "breaking rank" and releasing a dual-format player? This entire "format war" was an abomination that has led to so many pay-offs and back-door dealings it isn't even funny. And in the end, the only people to lose out have been us.

Believe me, there are plenty of folks thinking of pursuing HDM but the cost of Blu-Ray has turned them off. It hasn't been the lack of 100% studio support that has thwarted these formats -- it's the cost of entry more than anything else. And the fact that the vast majority of people are content with DVD and only about 30% of the US population even owns an HDTV! The "2-format" theory of hurting HDM adoption is overstated.

I stopped reading your post after this comment.

These sour grapes arguments really need to end. Whether WB was "bought" by the BDA or not doesn't really matter, especially when you know that if the table was turned and it was Toshiba who "bought" WB, you and other HD DVD supporters wouldn't be saying a single negative thing about it.

Why is it that HD DVD supporters just somehow feel better about WB going BD exclusive if they can say that they were "bought off"?

These are hardly "sour grapes" as I own Blu-Ray and over 100 BD discs. It is now in my best interests if at least one of these formats grows.

I was never "for" either side buying off studios. I always believed the best thing for HDM was for all studios to support both formats. This way, the consumer could have spoken and supported the better value, whichever you believe that format to be. The idea of a group of companies and studios attempting to strong-arm the consumer doesn't sit well with me -- competition in the marketplace is always best for the consumer. Just look at the fact that Blu-Ray, after sponsoring BOGO sales every other week (or more) has not seen the need to run such a sale since the WB defection. Coincidence?

This is one of the most awesomest threads. Especially you, Bob! My sentiments exactly...

No question Toshiba has needed to drop the prices of players in order to compete, but the fact remains that HD DVD players have been about half the cost of Blu-Ray players since the launch of the formats and have remained significantly more affordable.Of course. Because Toshiba had too. Even before launch. They had 2 of their exclusive studios go neutral after a time where a report after a function they attended estimated that they would price their initial player at about $1000. They didn't come out with anything denying that, but then when it looked like the PS3 would launch at much less and they had only one exclusive studio, they announced $500 for their initial MSRP for the HD-A1 just before CES in January of 2005.
My post wasn't to determine why the players are less, merely to state that they are less and thus are more affordable.Sure seemed to be about why the Blu-ray ran specials that they don't run now and implied that HD DVD as a format was cheaper. The HD DVD players were so cheap mostly as a result of Blu-ray and if Toshiba had ever really gained the upper hand we could have seen what they would have done when they weren't forced to sell their players so low. We already saw that after the Warner announcement they dropped the HD-A3 to $149 MSRP and while some implied they were planning on doing it anyway, there was an ad at Best Buy a couple of weeks later for $299, when the MSRP had been dropped to $149 earlier. So, they sure weren't planning on dropping it to $149 when they did, and it is easy to claim they would have done it later, since it is hard to prove they wouldn't have if they had been the ones to get Warner.
As a result, HD DVD was poised to go mainstream faster in this troubled economy with players reaching sub-$100 levels in some instances.Then your other post is very misleading. They reached those levels because the HD-A2s didn't sell well enough at the higher prices and because they had to in order to compete, but you act like those would have been their prices if HD DVD was the only format or dominated (which is what would have been required to go mainstream). Now you mention that $200 for the HD-A30, but that is again out of necessity and doesn't say what player prices would be if Toshiba was in charge and was going to sell a ton of players. I knew a while ago that Toshiba had plans to sell a limited number of players at losses in order to try to get to a position where one of more studios would go their way. Doesn't mean they would have been willing to offer the same deals if those studios had come their way.
But that's my whole problem with this format war fiasco -- the Blu-Ray studios and CE companies formed a cartel that remained resistant to releasing on the HD DVD format no matter how many players Toshiba moved...
The idea of a group of companies and studios attempting to strong-arm the consumer doesn't sit well with me -- competition in the marketplace is always best for the consumer.
Seriously, how do you feel at the cartel that was the DVD forum and Sony deciding to give in to Toshiba and Warner long ago (before DVD came out). Toshiba basically strong-armed Sony back then and we didn't get the competition we could have if Sony had chosen to fight instead of giving in to Toshiba. Does that bother you? That is one of the reasons Toshiba got into a powerful position with DVD and tried to go against most of the industry this time with HD DVD.
The "2-format" theory of hurting HDM adoption is overstated.Some people may overstate it (pretty much everything gets overstated by somebody), but I do think the format war continuing would have definitely hurt adoption going forward. It also caused a lot of people to spend money on 2 players when they could have just bought one (countering the 2 formats making things cheaper to a degree).
I always believed the best thing for HDM was for all studios to support both formats.Formats have to sell themselves to studios too. I realize you just gave the above as an opinion, but do you think studios should have been legally obligated to release on both? Do you think employees of the studios were wrong to look at each format and recommend that they release on one (and which one)? For instance, Disney got the ability to region encode for DVD. Toshiba refused to provide them that ability for HD DVD (although I understand that Toshiba was fine with adding it, but couldn't find anybody willing to actually take the task of overseeing that feature). Disney also seemed to care about the copy protection the format would provide them, given that they basically lost entire markets to piracy with DVD. Were studios like Disney wrong to ask for features for themselves and chose a side, or should whoever designed the formats have been able to basically ignore what each studio wanted, but have the studios obligated to release on them anyway? Disney told Toshiba that they wanted 50GB discs. Toshiba is the one that didn't meet that or provide the region encoding ability Disney asked for.

Do you work for a company, have your own company, etc.? Do you think a company you work or your own company should have to provide their product for whatever platform somebody else chooses? Should the studios have to release on HD VMD now? What if I come up with a format. Should they have to release on it too?

--Darin

These are hardly "sour grapes" as I own Blu-Ray and over 100 BD discs. It is now in my best interests if at least one of these formats grows.

I was never "for" either side buying off studios. I always believed the best thing for HDM was for all studios to support both formats. This way, the consumer could have spoken and supported the better value, whichever you believe that format to be. The idea of a group of companies and studios attempting to strong-arm the consumer doesn't sit well with me -- competition in the marketplace is always best for the consumer. Just look at the fact that Blu-Ray, after sponsoring BOGO sales every other week (or more) has not seen the need to run such a sale since the WB defection. Coincidence?

Such is life in a format war, which takes place in a capitalist marketplace. Nothing new or surprising about any of it.

And your comment about "strong arming the consumer" doesn't make sense. Would you say that DVD was strong arming the consumer? After all, there was no competition with that format (i.e. no format war). Was DVD anti consumer as a result? Why would a single HD format be any different than a single DVD format in terms of being anti consumer, or being "strong armed"?

Please explain.

Edit: I see that Darin beat me to it:


Seriously, how do you feel at the cartel that was the DVD forum and Sony deciding to give in to Toshiba and Warner long ago (before DVD came out). Toshiba basically strong-armed Sony back then and we didn't get the competition we could have if Sony had chosen to fight instead of giving in to Toshiba. Does that bother you? That is one of the reasons Toshiba got into a powerful position with DVD and tried to go against most of the industry this time with HD DVD.

--Darin

Exactly! :cool:

Turning back to the topic of the thread, I think Blu-Ray has to do a few things before the next big sales opportunity, Christmas 2008. That's ten months to do the following:

Introduce more players with 1.1 and 2.0 capability. The Panasonic is a good start. There should be others, particuarly from Sony.
Cut the prices for the introductory models like the Sony BDP-S300. This will likely happen with the release of new models.
Continue to fill out catalog titles from many genres. The Warner and Disney announcements are a good start. Sony, Fox, and MGM should follow suit.
Drop MSRP on discs a few dollars.
Watch as consumers continue to buy HDTVs.
Introduce more games for PS3.That's all. (I am assuming that HD-DVD is effectively dead by Summer, let alone Christmas, which seems like a safe assumption after today.) If even some of these happen, Christmas should be very good for Blu-Ray. There's really no rush at all, particuarly given today's announcements from Netflix and Best Buy.

I don't own any HD media or player, but it is totally beyond me that someone could wish for the existence of two HDM formats.

Why not three or four formats it would be even better isn't it ?

You multiply the formats => you multiply the overhead for the publisher, the renters, the retailers, the manufacturers. You make more expensive products because these overheads translate into increased costs which will be included in the final price.

Add to this the consumer confusion and the annoyances of having to deal with several formats.

For which consumer gain should we have to cope with such negatives ?

The formats are just containers for the content. HD DVD or Blu-Ray, the content is more or less the same.

You are absolutely right but not what the OP said. Honestly after the numbers quoted for several classics, it simply looks grim IMO. Times have changed and ,most importantly, the demographic has changed from LD and early DVD days. We all know it and will negatively impact sales of great catalog titles.

I believe we are in for a very ,very strange ride if we expect the DVD cloth to be rewoven.

Lets see how Lawrence of Arabia does.:o


How do you think The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Bridge on the River Kwai, or the Ten Commandments might do with the PS3 crowd ?
Art

I completely agree with this post.

and this actually supports Art's comments.
However, what the studios are facing is that these brilliant classics are too old for much of the gamer demographic to have experienced personally in the theater or even on television. I'm barely old enough to remember these movies myself (34), and I'm from the "first wave" of video gamers from back in the 1980s. I think a lot of people who are like me can also appreciate and remember these wonderful films.

But it's also true that there's a younger segment of the audience for game consoles, and for them, they have no point of reference for a movie like Bridge Over the River Kwai. It's not their fault; the only experience many of them have had with World War II is reading about it in a textbook in their history classes. Many of the participants in WWII have passed on, and it's increasingly unlikely that they have family, friends, or acquaintances who can give them a personal perspective on such a film, and I think that's important.

Many great Hollywood films fall under similar trouble with younger audiences. It would not surprise me to have an 18-year old tell me that they don't know what Ben-Hur is, for instance. And why should they have?

I think that we need to bring more of the mainstream in before the great catalog titles will see the sales that they deserve. It's not that the younger buyers can't appreciate these titles; it's that many simply have no awareness of them.

I find this quite depressing.
J

I find this quite depressing.


Yes, I just see HDM not coming through for great film lovers ,at least not in the next few years ,which may be the window it has. I have hundreds of DVDs I'd replace with HD given the chance but there aren't enough of us apparently.

I've heard it said that the studios don't need HDM for recent releases they still make plenty there with DVD but they need it to sell the catalog again. They have to be scratching their heads right now.

Art

I've heard it said that the studios don't need HDM for recent releases they still make plenty there with DVD but they need it to sell the catalog again. They have to be scratching their heads right now.

Maybe they would have been wise to invest in expanding their catalogs a bit sooner. No, they don't sell that well right now, but if they're looking to attract the movie enthusiast, then it would only make sense to have the movies out there and see who shows up. Which comes first, hardware or software?

The reality is that DVD saturated the market with product that exceeded anything previously available. If one has watched each of his movies an average of 1.2 times or so over the last 8 years, how willingly will most be to reinvest in another copy in HD? For the most part, I would, but the I've just about exhausted my software interest in the HD DVD releases and I see very little catalog on the Blu-ray side to sway me to get one of their players right now. HD DVD got me to give them a shot when full featured players fell below $300, which seemed to be a value based on software available. I don't see the same value for my tastes in Blu right now.

They can scratch their heads and wait or they can invest in putting out more variety of titles and see if they can attract more buyers. Until they decide what to do, I'll bide my time with my HD and SD DVDs.

Maybe they would have been wise to invest in expanding their catalogs a bit sooner. No, they don't sell that well right now, but if they're looking to attract the movie enthusiast, then it would only make sense to have the movies out there and see who shows up.

<snip>

They can scratch their heads and wait or they can invest in putting out more variety of titles and see if they can attract more buyers. Until they decide what to do, I'll bide my time with my HD and SD DVDs.

I agree with this. If the studios invest in putting out more catalog titles faster, they will eventually get their money back and then make a profit. I would think, that if they were really looking at this long term, and actually believed BD was the future, the studios would be cranking out catalog titles (and no, they aren't right now), instead of day/date and bargain bin titles.
J

How do you think The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Bridge on the River Kwai, or the Ten Commandments might do with the PS3 crowd ?
Art

IMHO more people bought PS3 primarily for its Blu-Ray ability than people bought a standalone Blu-Ray player, and because of that sales of standalone BD players are abysmal.

You could have said the same at the beginning of DVD when a big chunk of DVD players where PS2. Now we have these movies on DVD.

As Blu-Ray has edged closer to winning, its stand-alone sales appear to have improved significantly. I'm not sure I buy the PS3 demographic argument, but if there was merit to it, it may be diminishing as time goes on and it will only continue to do so. As the market matures, we'll see more titles and more diverse titles. But it won't happen overnight and it didn't happen overnight with DVD. There are a number of strong titles already and we'll see many more in 2008. Patience is a virtue in this situation.

I am 48 years old. I bought the PS3 first and foremost as a Bluray player. I have 53 BDs, 3 PS3 games, and 2 kids. I am a movie and home theater buff. A lot of thought went into what format I was going to buy into before I made my PS3 purchase. I have over 500 standard DVDs and dammit, if I was going to upgrade my movie collection to a High Def format, it better be the one that was going to be around for awhile. I also wanted a player that would not become obsolete as the format developed. Many factors were computed into my decision, but the one that carried the most weight had to be CONTENT. A format can't survive without media. Two things made me dead sure Bluray would eventually be left standing. First, Sony owns a movie studio. That guaranteed not only content, but exclusive content. Second, Disney. Having 2 young kids, I know the power of Disney. You may love them or hate them, but you have to respect them. They do things right.....and always seem to be successful. Yes, there were other things that played into the decision, but my bottom line was content and those 2 studios guaranteed I would have a steady stream of it.

I chose to post this because I see a lot of elitist snobbery directed at people who have PS3 game consoles. People who are perceived as shmoes who just stumbled into bluray. I know 4 other friends and relatives who purchased PS3s and they did so because of it's HD movie playing capabilities, not to play games. Just had to get that off my chest.

Kinda sad when the PS3 is the best HiDef hardware for the BDA, but the credit goes to Sony for putting up great piece of equipment. Although its still a little pricey for me, I am hoping that it comes down in price and/or a stand alone comes along with finalized specs.

I am not a rich fellow and love to save money, but rushing to kill HD DVD is sad really. HD DVD deserves to be praised just as much as Blu-ray.

Because our society today demands instant satisfaction and instant gratification. many people simply cannot slow down their lives, they must have everything now. Even if it is not what they really want, then they complain about it.

I know plenty of people who bought a PS3 for BD play back but that doesn't change the fact that it is first and foremost a game console. More stand alones may sell but the early BD adopters are primarily gamers not movie lovers. This showed in the very poor attach rate with at one point the number of BD discs underselling the number of players !

Even if the skewing is not overwhelming it will none the less really put a damper of older catalog titles getting out. The sales numbers bare this out.

I personally built a theater to present films the best they could be in my home. The fact that catalog is thin makes it slim pickens for quality choices. I do not foresee this changing soon.

Because our society today demands instant satisfaction and instant gratification. many people simply cannot slow down their lives, they must have everything now. Even if it is not what they really want, then they complain about it.

Sad but true.

I know plenty of people who bought a PS3 for BD play back but that doesn't change the fact that it is first and foremost a game console.

Well, Art, actually if you think about it, it does change the fact that it is first and foremost a game console. In other words if 75% of people who bought the PS3 bought it solely for the purpose of playing BD movies, that would make it a movie player "first and foremost", wouldn't it? I'm not saying that is the case, but simply that if many people did buy the PS3 as primarily a movie player, what difference does it make that it can also play games?

In the end the only thing that matters is whether the studios see enough demand for catalog titles to make it worth releasing them. At this point in the game, I see no reason to be overly pessimistic about it, especially when you consider that we have been dealing with a format war.

Well, Art, actually if you think about it, it does change the fact that it is first and foremost a game console. In other words if 75% of people who bought the PS3 bought it solely for the purpose of playing BD movies, that would make it a movie player "first and foremost", wouldn't it? I'm not saying that is the case, but simply that if many people did buy the PS3 as primarily a movie player, what difference does it make that it can also play games?




It would no doubt but I'd like to see where 75% of those purchasing a PS3 got it for playing BD movies primarily, not the case the attach rate showed that already.

It was a brilliant move by Sony to put the BD drive in the PS3 in the war since this and better marketing won that war for them but it resulted in an owner demographic very different from that of early adoption of LD and DVD.

Art

Best Buy, Net-Flix, Block Buster ... soon Circuit City, Target and Wal-Mart. They HAVE to rally behind blu because Apple, VUDU, X-Box live and XstreamHD are going to steal away their cash cow optical discs. $30 dics will disappear when $4.99 VOD is here.

Agreed. Blu Ray is the recipient of good fortunes thanks to FUD. For once, I guess FUD is a good thing.

It would no doubt but I'd like to see where 75% of those purchasing a PS3 got it for playing BD movies primarily, not the case the attach rate showed that already.

It was a brilliant move by Sony to put the BD drive in the PS3 in the war since this and better marketing won that war for them but it resulted in an owner demographic very different from that of early adoption of LD and DVD.

Art

Exactly the reason I believe we are going to have to live with much less of the classics on BD at least for a while. Only CGI, horror and such are selling in quantity due at least in part to theat demographic. We can only hope it starts to change over time.

It would no doubt but I'd like to see where 75% of those purchasing a PS3 got it for playing BD movies primarily, not the case the attach rate showed that already.


I'm not saying that is the case, but simply that if many people did buy the PS3 as primarily a movie player, what difference does it make that it can also play games?


.

Exactly the reason I believe we are going to have to live with much less of the classics on BD at least for a while. Only CGI, horror and such are selling in quantity due at least in part to theat demographic. We can only hope it starts to change over time.

As the stand-alone crowd increases and refugees from HD-DVD buy Blu-Ray players, the numbers will start making classics and catalog titles more appealing for studios. And, of course, its not like we don't have some nice catalog films either released or announced already. But I too would like to see more. But I'm patient given that the HD-DVD corpse is still warm (indeed, it doesn't seem to know it is dead yet). Casablanca and Sleeping Beauty are nice titles we'll see in 2008.

Hey there - I'm kind of on a limited budget ($150) and am looking for a Blu-Ray player to play HD movies that actually works, can be connected to a network for updates, is HDMI 1.3 compliant and does an outstanding job of upconverting my extensive DVD collection. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Anyone? :rolleyes:

Hey there - I'm kind of on a limited budget ($150) and am looking for a Blu-Ray player to play HD movies that actually works, can be connected to a network for updates, is HDMI 1.3 compliant and does an outstanding job of upconverting my extensive DVD collection. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Anyone? :rolleyes:

This is off topic and does not appear designed to do anything other than draw people into the same discussion that gets threads locked. No such thing exists, just like there's no HD-DVD player at any price that will be able to play more than 25% of all movies come May. We get it.

I think having all 6 (7? or whatever) major studios unified behind one format could cause a momentum gain that is exponential.

Both formats are handicapped on content, one more so. I dont feel I miss much nowadays on blu ray, but I'm an early adopter. Not having all the new movies coming out on 1 format is a huge hurdle because dvd is a unified format.

All indications are this will happen soon. How soon noone knows. But as the places that sell and rent hdm move toward blu, it will become harder and harder to hold out.

I agree with this. If the studios invest in putting out more catalog titles faster, they will eventually get their money back and then make a profit. I would think, that if they were really looking at this long term, and actually believed BD was the future, the studios would be cranking out catalog titles (and no, they aren't right now), instead of day/date and bargain bin titles.
J
I don't think it's a question of the studios not necessarily wanting to invest in catalog at the moment; it's being physically unable to.

There is only so much capacity out there for quality remastering and encoding work. As it stands, I think among the major studios only Sony, Warner, and Disney do anything resembling a majority of their own remastering and encoding in-house, and even they have limited amounts of manpower. I'm pretty sure Paramount, Universal, and Fox all outsource much of their work, based on comments made by insiders here and elsewhere.

I want great catalog titles to show up as much as anyone, but what I don't want (and what no one here should want) is half-baked mastering and encoding rushed out the door just to appease the crowd. We saw that last year with Universal, when they went into double-time output mode and released a relative flood of titles. You got the occasional gem like Hot Fuzz, but a lot of poorly produced titles as well.

Would you like to see a repeat of this, with the firm knowledge that a double dip will be forthcoming with better PQ down the road on your most cherished films?

I know plenty of people who bought a PS3 for BD play back but that doesn't change the fact that it is first and foremost a game console. More stand alones may sell but the early BD adopters are primarily gamers not movie lovers. This showed in the very poor attach rate with at one point the number of BD discs underselling the number of players !

Even if the skewing is not overwhelming it will none the less really put a damper of older catalog titles getting out. The sales numbers bare this out.

I personally built a theater to present films the best they could be in my home. The fact that catalog is thin makes it slim pickens for quality choices. I do not foresee this changing soon.
Relax, Art.

The "PS3 effect" will always be strong, but in all honesty it doesn't change the realities. PS3 owners, regardless of their buying habits, aren't affecting the purchasing decisions of the standalone owners.

Standalone owners are still buying the titles they always have. The real problem we have is that even the standalone owners aren't biting on catalog as much as one might hope. Sony has said that they were disappointed with the sales figures on CE3K, and that's probably one of the most PS3-centric high profile catalog titles you can have, alongside Blade Runner.

The question we really need to be asking is: why are the standalone owners not buying their share of catalog titles? Even if no PS3 or 360 add-on owners bought a copy, the standalone core ought to be buying these movies - right?

At this stage, there should be something on the order of 600K HD DVD standalones, and nearly as many Blu-ray standalones on the market. This is the marketing "core" for older catalog titles, and it's underperforming.

I think much of it is simply lack of awareness, along with apathy, plus the market split. A catalog title on only one format has only that half-millionish core to draw on, plus any incidental buys from the gamer demographic. This needs to change - and it will. The retailers certainly want it to. The studios definitely want it to.

The task is to educate our fellow consumers and show them what they're missing - not just in PQ and AQ, but to use that shiny new HDTV they bought in ways they never dreamed possible.

I don't think it's a question of the studios not necessarily wanting to invest in catalog at the moment; it's being physically unable to.

There is only so much capacity out there for quality remastering and encoding work. As it stands, I think among the major studios only Sony, Warner, and Disney do anything resembling a majority of their own remastering and encoding in-house, and even they have limited amounts of manpower. I'm pretty sure Paramount, Universal, and Fox all outsource much of their work, based on comments made by insiders here and elsewhere.

I want great catalog titles to show up as much as anyone, but what I don't want (and what no one here should want) is half-baked mastering and encoding rushed out the door just to appease the crowd. We saw that last year with Universal, when they went into double-time output mode and released a relative flood of titles. You got the occasional gem like Hot Fuzz, but a lot of poorly produced titles as well.

Would you like to see a repeat of this, with the firm knowledge that a double dip will be forthcoming with better PQ down the road on your most cherished films?

I don't think Universal's problems were because they were rushed. I just don't think they cared.
I would be greatly surprised if production (remastering etc.) was even close to max. capacity.
Besides, many catalog titles are already remastered either for new DVD releases, or for HD broadcasts. now, if you are telling me there is a slowdown at the replication end of things...

J

It was a brilliant move by Sony to put the BD drive in the PS3 in the war since this and better marketing won that war for them but it resulted in an owner demographic very different from that of early adoption of LD and DVD.

Art

IMO, increased popularity of video gaming has had a powerful affect on the way movies are made and what types of movies are made. Action thrillers in which the protagonist fights his way, level after level, through hoards of villains until he reaches the final encounter with the mastermind villain, are the main fare nowadays. These movies unabashedly follow comic book plots and video game designs and are dominated by CGI effects. Blockbuster movies and combat video games are more and more alike. In that sense, the PS3 was a perfect idea: Use it to watch video game movies and to play video games. After all, video games are selling really well, while movies seem to be declining. The PS3 is the perfect hardware for what the entertainment industry has become.

Having said that, I really doubt that most of the movies I would bother to watch more than once will ever appear on Blu-ray -- at least not within my lifetime. The PS3 format is the HDM champion, and the PS3 format is not likely to cater to classic movie buffs. Sure, a few movies like that will come out in HD now and then; but they won't sell well in today's demographic. People criticize Sony and Blu-ray for appealing to the gamer market. What they fail to understand is that the gamer market and the movie market are coming closer together as tastes in movies has shifted.

As these Hollywood trends get stronger and fewer "quality" movies (to my mind) get made, I turn increasingly to foreign, classic, and independent films. I think these will remain in DVD format indefinitely.

I have to admit that I watched some HD DVD movies solely because they had nice color and great clarity. I got over that. As Shakespeare said, the play's the thing. The content of the movie itself is far more important to me than the format. Some silent movies are masterpieces and will never have the CGI clean look that modern moviegoers delight in.

Art, I think you are very on the mark here. But I think it goes beyond formats to culture in general. Most -- but not all -- of the movies that have wildly successful weekends at the box office and sell millions of DVD and BD shiny disks will be video game type movies.

I don't think Universal's problems were because they were rushed. I just don't think they cared.
I would be greatly surprised if production (remastering etc.) was even close to max. capacity.
Besides, many catalog titles are already remastered either for new DVD releases, or for HD broadcasts. now, if you are telling me there is a slowdown at the replication end of things...

J
I don't really think it's a replication issue (if it was, what is Universal's excuse?)

It's possible that they just didn't care enough, but that goes hand in hand with being able to find someone who will put enough work into restoration/mastering/encoding to make a title shine. We have shining examples of what happens when it's done right (Grand Prix, for instance).

If you look at Warner's comments at their 85th anniversary celebration regarding their upcoming release slate, they made a point of talking about getting releases done correctly, and that tells me that the manpower resources available is scarce enough that it has to be rationed.

I don't really think it's a replication issue (if it was, what is Universal's excuse?)

It's possible that they just didn't care enough, but that goes hand in hand with being able to find someone who will put enough work into restoration/mastering/encoding to make a title shine. We have shining examples of what happens when it's done right (Grand Prix, for instance).

If you look at Warner's comments at their 85th anniversary celebration regarding their upcoming release slate, they made a point of talking about getting releases done correctly, and that tells me that the manpower resources available is scarce enough that it has to be rationed.

You make a good point. I think that, due to production costs, studios will want to make more money on fewer titles. Unfortunately, this means that we will see only a few hundred releases per year for a while, even though BD has won the HDM battle. I think that this alone -- limited number of releases per year -- will guarantee that HDM remain a niche product. When you think about it, it is quite amazing that over 90,000 titles have been released on DVD since that format began.

IMO, increased popularity of video gaming has had a powerful affect on the way movies are made and what types of movies are made. Action thrillers in which the protagonist fights his way, level after level, through hoards of villains until he reaches the final encounter with the mastermind villain, are the main fare nowadays. These movies unabashedly follow comic book plots and video game designs and are dominated by CGI effects. Blockbuster movies and combat video games are more and more alike. In that sense, the PS3 was a perfect idea: Use it to watch video game movies and to play video games. After all, video games are selling really well, while movies seem to be declining. The PS3 is the perfect hardware for what the entertainment industry has become.

Having said that, I really doubt that most of the movies I would bother to watch more than once will ever appear on Blu-ray -- at least not within my lifetime. The PS3 format is the HDM champion, and the PS3 format is not likely to cater to classic movie buffs. Sure, a few movies like that will come out in HD now and then; but they won't sell well in today's demographic. People criticize Sony and Blu-ray for appealing to the gamer market. What they fail to understand is that the gamer market and the movie market are coming closer together as tastes in movies has shifted.

As these Hollywood trends get stronger and fewer "quality" movies (to my mind) get made, I turn increasingly to foreign, classic, and independent films. I think these will remain in DVD format indefinitely.

I have to admit that I watched some HD DVD movies solely because they had nice color and great clarity. I got over that. As Shakespeare said, the play's the thing. The content of the movie itself is far more important to me than the format. Some silent movies are masterpieces and will never have the CGI clean look that modern moviegoers delight in.

Art, I think you are very on the mark here. But I think it goes beyond formats to culture in general. Most -- but not all -- of the movies that have wildly successful weekends at the box office and sell millions of DVD and BD shiny disks will be video game type movies.

You make a few very perceptive observations that I had not even noticed. Allthough the demogrphic is the issue, there is much more at work and it isn't even as simple as I had considered.

It is sobering ,since at first, I thought that HDM was going to be just a DVD upgrade that would have a good flow of titles like DVD had ten years ago. I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

You make a few very perceptive observations that I had not even noticed. Allthough the demogrphic is the issue, there is much more at work and it isn't even as simple as I had considered.

It is sobering ,since at first, I thought that HDM was going to be just a DVD upgrade that would have a good flow of titles like DVD had ten years ago. I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

It's posts/opinions like these and the one you've quoted which keep me coming back to AVS and leave me a glimmer of hope for the future.

IMO, increased popularity of video gaming has had a powerful affect on the way movies are made and what types of movies are made. Action thrillers in which the protagonist fights his way, level after level, through hoards of villains until he reaches the final encounter with the mastermind villain, are the main fare nowadays. These movies unabashedly follow comic book plots and video game designs and are dominated by CGI effects. Blockbuster movies and combat video games are more and more alike. In that sense, the PS3 was a perfect idea: Use it to watch video game movies and to play video games. After all, video games are selling really well, while movies seem to be declining. The PS3 is the perfect hardware for what the entertainment industry has become.

Having said that, I really doubt that most of the movies I would bother to watch more than once will ever appear on Blu-ray -- at least not within my lifetime. The PS3 format is the HDM champion, and the PS3 format is not likely to cater to classic movie buffs. Sure, a few movies like that will come out in HD now and then; but they won't sell well in today's demographic. People criticize Sony and Blu-ray for appealing to the gamer market. What they fail to understand is that the gamer market and the movie market are coming closer together as tastes in movies has shifted.

As these Hollywood trends get stronger and fewer "quality" movies (to my mind) get made, I turn increasingly to foreign, classic, and independent films. I think these will remain in DVD format indefinitely.

I have to admit that I watched some HD DVD movies solely because they had nice color and great clarity. I got over that. As Shakespeare said, the play's the thing. The content of the movie itself is far more important to me than the format. Some silent movies are masterpieces and will never have the CGI clean look that modern moviegoers delight in.

Art, I think you are very on the mark here. But I think it goes beyond formats to culture in general. Most -- but not all -- of the movies that have wildly successful weekends at the box office and sell millions of DVD and BD shiny disks will be video game type movies.

Generally speaking you are correct. I know that the majority of films I would want in my library will take many years, if ever, to make it to hd. That's why I continue to add to my sd collection and am in no hurry to rush out and buy an overpriced BluRay player.

Generally speaking you are correct. I know that the majority of films I would want in my library will take many years, if ever, to make it to hd. That's why I continue to add to my sd collection and am in no hurry to rush out and buy an overpriced BluRay player.

In my case this is the reason I still buy DVD catalog titles. I hope I will live to see them in HD but ...............

Art

It is sobering ,since at first, I thought that HDM was going to be just a DVD upgrade that would have a good flow of titles like DVD had ten years ago. I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

Is my memory completely failing me here? Did DVD really have a "good flow of (catalog) titles ten years ago" compared to what we are getting now with HDM? I don't really remember it that way. :confused:

In my case this is the reason I still buy DVD catalog titles. I hope I will live to see them in HD but ...............

Art

Let's put it this way, Art; I'll bet you will be a grandfather many times over by the time "The Asphalt Jungle" makes it to hd!

IMO, increased popularity of video gaming has had a powerful affect on the way movies are made and what types of movies are made. Action thrillers in which the protagonist fights his way, level after level, through hoards of villains until he reaches the final encounter with the mastermind villain, are the main fare nowadays. These movies unabashedly follow comic book plots and video game designs and are dominated by CGI effects. Blockbuster movies and combat video games are more and more alike. In that sense, the PS3 was a perfect idea: Use it to watch video game movies and to play video games. After all, video games are selling really well, while movies seem to be declining. The PS3 is the perfect hardware for what the entertainment industry has become.

Having said that, I really doubt that most of the movies I would bother to watch more than once will ever appear on Blu-ray -- at least not within my lifetime. The PS3 format is the HDM champion, and the PS3 format is not likely to cater to classic movie buffs. Sure, a few movies like that will come out in HD now and then; but they won't sell well in today's demographic. People criticize Sony and Blu-ray for appealing to the gamer market. What they fail to understand is that the gamer market and the movie market are coming closer together as tastes in movies has shifted.

As these Hollywood trends get stronger and fewer "quality" movies (to my mind) get made, I turn increasingly to foreign, classic, and independent films. I think these will remain in DVD format indefinitely.

I have to admit that I watched some HD DVD movies solely because they had nice color and great clarity. I got over that. As Shakespeare said, the play's the thing. The content of the movie itself is far more important to me than the format. Some silent movies are masterpieces and will never have the CGI clean look that modern moviegoers delight in.

Art, I think you are very on the mark here. But I think it goes beyond formats to culture in general. Most -- but not all -- of the movies that have wildly successful weekends at the box office and sell millions of DVD and BD shiny disks will be video game type movies.

Much of this seems a lament of the state of Hollywood generally, rather than HDM specifically. These are interesting points, but I think we'll see a number of excellent releases in 2008, including many that are not the sort of movie that you attribute to the video game influence. There are many examples of non-CGI, non-action movies that are on Blu-Ray. I think as we move forward and the numbers of stand-alones increase, we'll see more titles because costs will drop. This is what happened with DVD. But it will take time, which is what this thread is about. It took years for DVD to get where it is.

Is my memory completely failing me here? Did DVD really have a "good flow of (catalog) titles ten years ago" compared to what we are getting now with HDM? I don't really remember it that way. :confused:

Well go look at high def digest releases. In the first couple of years they had plenty of recent titles but also some relatively obscure ones thrown in.

Art

Lets pick a few from 1998:

Capricorn One
Cabaret
Carrie
Bonnie and Clyde
Brazil
The Black Hole
The Big Chill
Das Boot
Cool Hand Luke
The China Syndrome
The Birds
Cat On a Hot Tin Roof
The Big Chill
The Cain Mutiny
Anny Hall
Altered States
Dr Strangelove

I went though just a few ABCs

These films were between 15 and thirty years old at the time.

Art

Art

I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

That's a damn shame if that is true. Some of the classics are the best transfers in my opinion.

I think what we need is for BD replication/mastering to get much more attainable for the people that need it so the price can come down. It's too damn expensive for most.

The studios as well need to up the encoding/mastering staff properly to be able to justify the need. :D

Hell, if anything, release them on HD DVD. :cool:;):)

Hope you got something in the mail today..........

Cliffy

Lets pick a few from 1998:

Capricorn One
Cabaret
Carrie
Bonnie and Clyde
Brazil
The Black Hole
The Big Chill
Das Boot
Cool Hand Luke
The China Syndrome
The Birds
Cat On a Hot Tin Roof
The Big Chill
The Cain Mutiny
Anny Hall
Altered States
Dr Strangelove

I went though just a few ABCs

These films were between 15 and thirty years old at the time.

Art

Art

Art, where did you get this list from? Linky?

Is my memory completely failing me here? Did DVD really have a "good flow of (catalog) titles ten years ago" compared to what we are getting now with HDM? I don't really remember it that way. :confused:

If you are curious about when DVD titles were originally released, all you have to do is take a look at the entry on Amazon for that particular title, in the "product details" section. I checked out a few that I remember as being early releases-
Chaplin Mutuals-November 19, 1997
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari-October 15, 1997
Halloween-November 12, 1997
Evil Dead 2-October 13, 1998
A Night to Remember-May 13, 1998 (So Criterion was already releasing titles barely over a year after the DVD format debuted.)

There was LOTS of variety within two years of the format's debut in spring of 1997. Some of the variety was thanks to companies like Image who transitioned quite smoothly from laserdisc to DVD.

Art, where did you get this list from? Linky?

There's a partial list of releases from 1999 here:

http://www.onvideo.org/calendar/dvd_99.htm

Here's a sampling of A-F titles that were at least 15 years old at the time:


Against All Odds (1984)
Alfred Hitchcock DVD Gift Set, The "Psycho Collector's Edition," "Vertigo Collector's Edition," "Alfred Hitchcock Presents"
Alien (1979)
Alvarez Kelly (1966)
And Now for Something Completely Different (1971)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Badlands (1973)
Barbarella (1968) Jane Fonda
Barefoot in the Park (1967)
Bataan (1943) Robert Taylor
Battlestar Galactica (1978)
Betsy, The (1978)
Big Red One, The (1980)
Blue Lagoon (1980)
Bonnie and Clyde (1967)
Brazil (1985)
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Bride of Frankenstein, The (1935)
Buddy Holly Story, The (1978)
Bye, Bye Birdie (1963)
Carnal Knowledge (1971)
Carousel (1956)
Charade (1963)
China Syndrome, The (1979)
Chinatown (1974)
Christine (1983)
Christmas Carol, A (1938)
Cleopatra Jones (1973)
Dark Crystal, The (1983)
David and Lisa (1962)
Dawn of the Dead (1979)
Deathtrap (1982)
Divine Madness (1980)
Django (1966)
Dracula Special Edition (1931)
Falcon and the Snowman, The (1985)
Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982)
First Deadly Sin, The (1980)
Five Easy Pieces (1970)
Five Eric Rohmer films: (Summer, A Good Marriage, The Aviator's Wife, Full Moon in Paris, Boyfriends & Girlfriends)
Francoise Truffaut Collection (The 400 Blows, The Last Metro, Confidentially Yours, Love on the Run, Shoot the Piano Player, Two English Girls)
Francoise Truffaut Collection II (The Woman Next Door, Jules and Jim, The Soft Skin, Stolen Kisses, Bed & Board, Les Mistons/Antoine & Colette)
Frankenstein (1931)
Friday the 13th (1980)
Friday the 13th, Part 2 (1981)
Fright Night (1985)


Certainly was a time when movie enthusiasts were courted by studios. Just doesn't seem the same now.

You make a few very perceptive observations that I had not even noticed. Allthough the demogrphic is the issue, there is much more at work and it isn't even as simple as I had considered.

It is sobering ,since at first, I thought that HDM was going to be just a DVD upgrade that would have a good flow of titles like DVD had ten years ago. I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

One of the best posts.

There's a partial list of releases from 1999 here:

http://www.onvideo.org/calendar/dvd_99.htm

Here's a sampling of A-F titles that were at least 15 years old at the time:


Against All Odds (1984)
Alfred Hitchcock DVD Gift Set, The "Psycho Collector's Edition," "Vertigo Collector's Edition," "Alfred Hitchcock Presents"
Alien (1979)
Alvarez Kelly (1966)
And Now for Something Completely Different (1971)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Badlands (1973)
Barbarella (1968) Jane Fonda
Barefoot in the Park (1967)
Bataan (1943) Robert Taylor
Battlestar Galactica (1978)
Betsy, The (1978)
Big Red One, The (1980)
Blue Lagoon (1980)
Bonnie and Clyde (1967)
Brazil (1985)
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Bride of Frankenstein, The (1935)
Buddy Holly Story, The (1978)
Bye, Bye Birdie (1963)
Carnal Knowledge (1971)
Carousel (1956)
Charade (1963)
China Syndrome, The (1979)
Chinatown (1974)
Christine (1983)
Christmas Carol, A (1938)
Cleopatra Jones (1973)
Dark Crystal, The (1983)
David and Lisa (1962)
Dawn of the Dead (1979)
Deathtrap (1982)
Divine Madness (1980)
Django (1966)
Dracula Special Edition (1931)
Falcon and the Snowman, The (1985)
Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982)
First Deadly Sin, The (1980)
Five Easy Pieces (1970)
Five Eric Rohmer films: (Summer, A Good Marriage, The Aviator's Wife, Full Moon in Paris, Boyfriends & Girlfriends)
Francoise Truffaut Collection (The 400 Blows, The Last Metro, Confidentially Yours, Love on the Run, Shoot the Piano Player, Two English Girls)
Francoise Truffaut Collection II (The Woman Next Door, Jules and Jim, The Soft Skin, Stolen Kisses, Bed & Board, Les Mistons/Antoine & Colette)
Frankenstein (1931)
Friday the 13th (1980)
Friday the 13th, Part 2 (1981)
Fright Night (1985)


Certainly was a time when movie enthusiasts were courted by studios. Just doesn't seem the same now.

Thanks. It looks like my memory was failing me. That list also includes some Kurosawa titles like "Ran" and "Yojimbo".

Of course we do need to consider how those titles looked back then. Many were taken from the Laserdisc master and didn't look too great. I think the studios will have much more work to do on these classic catalog titles before releasing them in HD than they did with DVD.

That said, I hope they all get their butts in gear to get the work done asap. Needless to say, there are numerous classic titles that I badly want in HD....including the announced release next year of North by Northwest, which I expect to look fantastic.

I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

I have to wonder how much of this was due to the small market size at the time. Have any 2006 releases reached 5 figures? How many are >50k?

Many were taken from the Laserdisc master and didn't look too great.

Reminds me of The Lost Boys DVD. HORRIBLE.

Cliff

Tim,

I could have written this. I went purple very soon after the Warner shift and looked forward to being able to get all HDM movies. But I never found that joy and contentment. Instead I saw gaping holes in content and absurd pricing. Whatever optimism I once had for HDM is long gone.

I'd be happy to buy a Blu-Ray for $39.99, but only if that meant I could get it when it opened in theaters. I was excited to see Hoosiers had been released on Blu. But when I saw the MSRP was $39.99 I was appalled. I mean for a flat 20 yr old transfer I have to drop $40?? There is NO WAY this is going to succeed. There is just no value with HDM, and thats coming from an enthusiast.

Drop $40? I actually spent $8.68 for my copy of Hoosiers on Blu-Ray. Some of you need to get with the times. Darwin's Theory in full effect here folks.

Items Ordered Price
1 of: Hoosiers [Blu-ray] [Blu-ray]
By: Gene Hackman (Actor), et al
Sold by: Amazon.com, LLC
$27.95
- 1 item(s) Gift options: None

1 of: Edward Scissorhands [Blu-ray] [Blu-ray]
By: Caroline Aaron (Actor), et al
Sold by: Amazon.com, LLC
$27.95
- 1 item(s) Gift options: None


Item(s) Subtotal: $55.90
Shipping & Handling: $3.97
Promotional Certificate: -$5.59
Super Saver Discount: -$3.97
Promotional Certificate: -$5.00
Promotion Applied: -$27.95
-----
Total Before Tax: $17.36
Sales tax: $0.00
-----
Total for this Shipment: $17.36

Though I now own Blu-Ray (and over 100 titles purchased in a 4-week span), there's no doubt in my mind that HD DVD was poised to hit mainstream in 2008. The players were complete, the pricing was affordable, they proved they could sell 100K units in mere days at the right price, and they also had a great 2008 slate of exclusive films that would have definitely turned the tide. A full year ahead with more exclusive studios and some HUGE A+ list titles...

Then WB was bought by the BDA.

Soon, we'd see negative news for HD DVD almost daily, culminating with today's news from Netflix and Best Buy. HD DVD, though a fantastic format and a great value, is approaching non-relevance in the marketplace now. Not because it doesn't deliver equal performance to Blu-Ray at a fraction of the price...not because it doesn't offer fully functional players while Blu-Ray is still working towards this end...and not because it currently has as many titles on the market as Blu-Ray. No, we have to watch as this excellent format fizzles because Sony and the BDA have bought studios, end-caps, viral marketing campaigns and public perception.

Paid shills like Bill Hunt have been blasting HD DVD for over a year now, crying for the end of the format. And for what? What makes Blu-Ray superior to HD DVD in these people's eyes? I have both formats and I can honestly say HD DVD is its equal in the very least and superior in many ways. And the value is certainly not up for debate -- a full 1080p player with 7 free movies for under $200?!? I needed to shell out TWICE this amount for a freakin' videogame console in order to play BD discs (since the BDA has yet to hear of an affordable fully-functional player)...and now they've even taken away the 5 free movies!

Blu-Ray enthusiasts will counter with the typical, "Well...if only HD DVD could win a single week in 2007..." This is utter BS, as we all know that they ran over 20 BOGO sales in 2007 to counter every major title HD DVD released. Where are these sales now? For everyone that wanted the death of HD DVD for no reason other than fanboyism -- how do you like a single format future now? After months with BOGO sales every other week, there hasn't even been a glimmer of such a sale on the Blu-Ray front. Prices on amazon have risen, BOGO's have ended, Sony's MSRP continues to climb (Spiderman 3, Close Encounters, Dewey Cox)...and apparently sales volumes have dropped considerably. Blu-Ray crushes HD DVD in software sales more than ever in percentages yet their own volumes have been shrinking. Gee, I wonder why? Grossly inflate sales volumes with constant give-aways, get the entire user-base accustomed to these bi-monthly sales, then terminate the practice overnight. Just another gimmick by the BDA while Bill Hunt and the like pontificate about how much better this scenario is for the future of HDM. Sure, let's rid the world of the evil format that was more affordable, a better value, and fully functional to pave the way for the same thing only more expensive and less complete. Great idea, especially in a quickly-dying economy that is the current state of the US!

As I stated, I own Blu-Ray now so my bases are covered. But IMO Blu-Ray is doomed to niche status for a long, long, long time...maybe even for its entire existence. It's nothing more than a PS3 format now, and I don't believe it will ever amount to much more. Of course hardware prices will drop as will the cost of the movies to some degree. But we all know manufacturing costs for BD discs are more than any other format, and to build the infrastructure to support mass quantities of BD discs will cost more billions (and who do you think will bear the brunt of these costs?) Meanwhile, all the CE companies and BD-supporting studios can now try to keep prices up as long as possible to recoup some of their losses with this format in its battle with HD DVD...we're already seeing this now.

HD DVD's presence in the marketplace was the best thing for HDM, as it forced Blu-Ray to lower prices quicker and to improve its quality. If it weren't for the strong-armed tactics displayed by the BD coalition HD DVD could have already been on the verge of going mainstream. Now we're stuck with the format that doesn't even see the need to sell a complete player! Everyone that cried for the single-format future better not come crying with, "Where's all the BOGO sales??" or "$50 MSRP for Vantage Point, what's Sony smoking?", "$40 for The Princess Bride without any extras?", etc, etc. You wanted it and now you got it.

Got what? Some cheese to go with that wine..:rolleyes:

Hey there - I'm kind of on a limited budget ($150) and am looking for a Blu-Ray player to play HD movies that actually works, can be connected to a network for updates, is HDMI 1.3 compliant and does an outstanding job of upconverting my extensive DVD collection. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Anyone? :rolleyes:


You will have to wait a couple of more years until you can afford a player or get a better job. In 1999 2 years after DVD released players cost an avg of $300. I am confident you will be able to purchase a Blu-Ray player for $300 before 2008 is over with. Your limited budget of $150 would have not purchased a DVD player until 2003. It took DVD 6 years after birth to avg. $150 player prices. Patience is a virtue...

"These average prices matter. Look at DVD player sales: In 1999, U.S. consumers bought some 4 million DVD players at an average of $270 each. By 2003, they scooped up 23 million units at an average price of $138--more than five times volume at about half the price over the course of four years."
http://www.forbes.com/2005/01/14/cx_ah_0114tentech.html

Art, where did you get this list from? Linky?

Rob,
I have an ultimate DVD guide put out by WSR in 2001. I don't know if this is available on line.

Art

Let's put it this way, Art; I'll bet you will be a grandfather many times over by the time "The Asphalt Jungle" makes it to hd!
Asphalt Jungle . . . They don't even have "African Queen" and "Houdini" on standard DVD as of this late date.

p.s. Asphalt Jungle is one of my favorites.

You make a few very perceptive observations that I had not even noticed. Allthough the demogrphic is the issue, there is much more at work and it isn't even as simple as I had considered.

It is sobering ,since at first, I thought that HDM was going to be just a DVD upgrade that would have a good flow of titles like DVD had ten years ago. I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art
I feel the same as you and Web. I'm sure there are others out there too, but we are the minority of HDM buyers. Lately I've found myself buying more DVDs, and far less HDM. Judging from the announced titles, it looks like my purchases will continue along those lines.
J

Let's put it this way, Art; I'll bet you will be a grandfather many times over by the time "The Asphalt Jungle" makes it to hd!
What a great film and very sad but you are probably right.:(

Art

Yea ,the lists of releases on DVD ten years ago put how anemic HDM is in even greater perspective.

art

I began to see that this path was not going to be traveled again when I heard how poorly Casablanca,Forbidden Planet ,Mutiny on the Bounty and others had sold.

Art

But these titles don't perform extraordinary well on SD DVDs do they ? I tend to think HD sales are somewhat proportional to SD sales in certain cases. Besides, when you're a studio these days you know you'll sell more Resident Evil and Doom than the whole Bogart or Welles catalog...

Yea ,the lists of releases on DVD ten years ago put how anemic HDM is in even greater perspective.

art

Maybe but ten years ago, the vhs->dvd upgrade was a desperate need for certain titles, now it's different... To me, it looks like HDM will always be a niche, but I certainly hope it will grow bigger...

(btw Art, each time I look at your home theater, it's the best I've ever seen! I know I haven't seen thousands, but it's just wonderful!)

But these titles don't perform extraordinary well on SD DVDs do they ? I tend to think HD sales are somewhat proportional to SD sales in certain cases. Besides, when you're a studio these days you know you'll sell more Resident Evil and Doom than the whole Bogart or Welles catalog...
That's not the point. The DVDs probably aren't selling at all anymore. In many cases, these have already been remastered, so they just have to sell enough to repay disc production costs. For the studios, its almost free money. Also, if they widen the customer base, there will be more sales in the long run anyway.
J

Drop $40? I actually spent $8.68 for my copy of Hoosiers on Blu-Ray. Some of you need to get with the times. Darwin's Theory in full effect here folks.


Is that Darwin's Theory of Blu-ray Special Buys, Discounts and BOGOS ?

Besides, when you're a studio these days you know you'll sell more Resident Evil and Doom than the whole Bogart or Welles catalog...

But they it's not the same people why buy Doom or Citizen Kane

If CK isn't released, people who are interested in CK won't buy Doom instead.

So you know that by releasing both kind of titles you'll make more money.

(btw Art, each time I look at your home theater, it's the best I've ever seen! I know I haven't seen thousands, but it's just wonderful!)


Very kind of you , thanks ! It has been a dream come true for me.

art

But they it's not the same people why buy Doom or Citizen Kane

If CK isn't released, people who are interested in CK won't buy Doom instead.

So you know that by releasing both kind of titles you'll make more money.

This is true but ,none the less, obviously by the released titles ,BD in particular hasn't seen enough money in releasing catalog to bother.

Art

That's not the point. The DVDs probably aren't selling at all anymore. In many cases, these have already been remastered, so they just have to sell enough to repay disc production costs. For the studios, its almost free money. Also, if they widen the customer base, there will be more sales in the long run anyway.
J

Most of these releases sell from bargain bins. These hardly move for retail pricing that studio's like to see.

There is little in it for studios by doing a HD release. It only replaces a DVD sale at a higher cost level. It will sell a few to early adopters and HT nuts at the current pricing levels but mass market consumers expect the DVD price levels perhaps 1 or 2 $ premium for the HD value.
My guess is that 80% of DVD sales are from discs priced $10 or lower.

HD isn't going to grow the home video market five fold like DVD did.
Overall the HVM shows a decline, Warner is sacking people. Apart from a few high profile classic releases I do not expect much from warner. Especially on a format that is more expensive to author, qc and replicate.

It really is DVDA sacd all over.
Downloading is now taking on the CD.

Lets pick a few from 1998:

Capricorn One
Cabaret
Carrie
Bonnie and Clyde
Brazil
The Black Hole
The Big Chill
Das Boot
Cool Hand Luke
The China Syndrome
The Birds
Cat On a Hot Tin Roof
The Big Chill
The Cain Mutiny
Anny Hall
Altered States
Dr Strangelove

I went though just a few ABCs

These films were between 15 and thirty years old at the time.

Art
This gets back to my point about mastering, though.

Back in 1998, none of these titles really needed anything special done to them to prepare them for DVD release, aside from encoding and pressing. There were quite probably flaws in the masters, but they most likely weren't visible on DVD, and even when the flaws were visible, most people were just so glad to get a copy, they didn't care so much.

Today, you need a 2K or 4K scanner, plus some probable restoration and cleanup work, to make a title HDM-worthy. Then you need an expensive suite of compression and encoding tools, and the expertise to use those tools.

In other words, it took a lot less effort to release on DVD than it does now for HDM. Releasing catalog was easy by comparison on DVD.

These films were between 15 and thirty years old at the time.

Art

Art

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates_historical.html

You can also find a lot of HD title who where between 15 and thirty yeards old at the time of their release.

Most of these releases sell from bargain bins. These hardly move for retail pricing that studio's like to see.


Sorry, could you tell me where I could find the Criterion Collection in the bargain bin? I'll gladly buy them.
J

Asphalt Jungle . . . They don't even have "African Queen" and "Houdini" on standard DVD as of this late date.

p.s. Asphalt Jungle is one of my favorites.

I chose that specific title because I know Art is a fellow Film Noir buff. Glad you like it as well.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates_historical.html

You can also find a lot of HD title who where between 15 and thirty yeards old at the time of their release.

Would you like to put up your list of HDM to my DVD after two years from launch ?:D

Art

This gets back to my point about mastering, though.

Back in 1998, none of these titles really needed anything special done to them to prepare them for DVD release, aside from encoding and pressing. There were quite probably flaws in the masters, but they most likely weren't visible on DVD, and even when the flaws were visible, most people were just so glad to get a copy, they didn't care so much.

Today, you need a 2K or 4K scanner, plus some probable restoration and cleanup work, to make a title HDM-worthy. Then you need an expensive suite of compression and encoding tools, and the expertise to use those tools.

In other words, it took a lot less effort to release on DVD than it does now for HDM. Releasing catalog was easy by comparison on DVD.

So what ! It still proves my point ,to date ,it has been too much trouble for them to bother and I bet it will be for a long time.

Art

So what ! It still proves my point ,to date ,it has been too much trouble for them to bother and I bet it will be for a long time.

Art

So what? It means all those titles you're complaining about not being there aren't there for a reason. :/ I thought that was the point I was trying to make?

I know we'd all love to just snap our fingers and have these titles magically appear, but there are realities to be observed here.

Would you like to put up your list of HDM to my DVD after two years from launch ?:D


For sure they won't be the same as ten years passed since 1998..

Were you making a point about the age of movie at the time they were released on DVD or HDM ? or was it about their artistic value ?

For sure they won't be the same as ten years passed since 1998..

Were you making a point about the age of movie at the time they were released on DVD or HDM ? or was it about their artistic value ?

HDM is almost two years old. My point was look at the list of DVDs out at that point in DVDs history compared to HDM after that time. If you look at catlog titles from each (eg films say over 15 years old at the time) it won't be close.

Art

So what? It means all those titles you're complaining about not being there aren't there for a reason. :/ I thought that was the point I was trying to make?

I know we'd all love to just snap our fingers and have these titles magically appear, but there are realities to be observed here.

This was the original post:

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

My point is that the optimism was generated there by saying we shouldn't compare HDM to a 10 year old format. Well, I'm not, I'm comparing them head to head after just under two years of age and DVD hammers HDM in catalog titles released.

The reasons for this I know and understand but that doesn't change the anemic release schedule.


Art

The studios aren't finding the move to HDM profitable yet, and that's the main problem.

If they release an older movie and need to spend big $ remastering it (Close Encounters Of the Third Kind), the limited sales aren't enough to justify the expense. If they release an older movie without the expense, you get crappy transfers like Wall Street, Robocop and Spartacus and nobody buys it due to poor reviews! It's a Catch-22 that they can't win, so we get more Ghost Riders and fewer Blade Runners.

Where's Princess Bride, Ronin, Silence Of the Lambs from Fox / MGM, Poltergeist, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Amadeus from WB, or Legend, Brazil, and Scarface from Universal? These were all mentioned or officially announced and are now gone. Universal dug deep into their vault and took heat for some shoddy transfers -- now they've basically disappeared (though that may be simply the result of HD DVD's possible demise). But certainly the landscape has dictated that catalog films simply don't sell.

It would seem to me that the consumer electronics companies have done their part promoting HDM hardware. Prices are lower and war is coming to close.

If the studios want HDM to succeed on a large scale it's time for them to do their part. Universal and Paramount need to come around, and ALL OF THEM need to start releasing a wide variety of good HDM titles.

Will it happen? Who knows? I have always suspected that studios would love to move to a download marketplace where we can be charged for every viewing, the pesky used marketplace would be gone and our viewing habits can be stored and scrutinized by marketers.

The studios aren't finding the move to HDM profitable yet, and that's the main problem.

If they release an older movie and need to spend big $ remastering it (Close Encounters Of the Third Kind), the limited sales aren't enough to justify the expense. If they release an older movie without the expense, you get crappy transfers like Wall Street, Robocop and Spartacus and nobody buys it due to poor reviews! It's a Catch-22 that they can't win, so we get more Ghost Riders and fewer Blade Runners.

Where's Princess Bride, Ronin, Silence Of the Lambs from Fox / MGM, Poltergeist, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Amadeus from WB, or Legend, Brazil, and Scarface from Universal? These were all mentioned or officially announced and are now gone. Universal dug deep into their vault and took heat for some shoddy transfers -- now they've basically disappeared (though that may be simply the result of HD DVD's possible demise). But certainly the landscape has dictated that catalog films simply don't sell.

Yes.
I'm beginning to wonder, if the studios are having second thoughts on HDM. Where are all those titles you mentioned? I do remember them being mentioned. I would buy pretty much all of those. Hell, that would almost double my HDM purchases for the quarter.
J

This was the original post:

.. that doesn't change the anemic release schedule...
Art

Art,
Very appropriate phrase.
D

Downloads are years away from being main stream.

I don't know about you, but I watch all the latest trailers in HD on my computer after having downloaded them over the Internet. I'd say that watching movies on Ipods will stay more mainstream than optical HDM from now and till eternity. My guess is that studios are busy with preparing downloadable movies rather than optical HDM.

I don't know about you, but I watch all the latest trailers in HD on my computer after having downloaded them over the Internet. I'd say that watching movies on Ipods will stay more mainstream than optical HDM from now and till eternity. My guess is that studios are busy with preparing downloadable movies rather than optical HDM.

I see that you're in Sweden. I'm not sure about there, but here in the US, high speed internet is a joke. It will be a long time before downloads can get close to physical sales.

I see that you're in Sweden. I'm not sure about there, but here in the US, high speed internet is a joke. It will be a long time before downloads can get close to physical sales.

Bad for you good for us, are in the process of upgrading to 24mbit myself. So the problem isnt really the speed, its how to backup.

Also someone has to provide content aswell.

I see that you're in Sweden. I'm not sure about there, but here in the US, high speed internet is a joke. It will be a long time before downloads can get close to physical sales.

Well I've had 100mbits for 3 years but no such thing as Vudu or AppleTV, so I can't use my connection righteously :rolleyes:

I'd rather downgrade the speed for legal content :eek:

But the point I was making is that downloads are uncharted business opportunities which can spur investor interests and thereby making the download business grow faster than the optical HDM which by the way has to compete with DVD and that's a toughie. So I reckon studios prioritizing movie downloads.

I think one way of getting consumers into download, could be that they could download the SD now and have the rights to download a HD version of the movie when their bandwith is high enough.

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

If we look at shelf-space in video stores, if blu-ray is going to replace DVD, it has to replace or at least double up with the DVD shelf-space, and I find this highly unlikely to ever happen. Beacuse, people are going to have to replace all of their DVD players with blu-ray players in order to fully make use of their current movie experience, since blu-ray isn't a combo format like HD DVD could have been.

On top of that, new mobile devices using Nvidia's APX 2500 chip will make life even tougher for blu-ray since people could, with these smartphones, be using one single device for watching movies on the bus or train and in their homes on the HDTV with a 720p resolution.

I think blu-rays chance to shine is with putting out only really good movies that deserve 1080p resolution. Studios should focus their blu-ray efforts on the classics such as Scarface, Star Wars original trilogy etc and not on Eragon or Norbit etc. See blu-ray for what it is, a niche format with a niche crowd begging for the gems of movie history.

One reason I feel that the BD of CE3K didn't sell that well was the dang price!
A 2 disc set, yes? MSRP $50. How much was the 5 disc Blade Runner BD set....? $10 LESS!
One of my FAVE films ever but that was too much. I snagged it new off an amazon seller for $20.00.

One reason I feel that the BD of CE3K didn't sell that well was the dang price!
A 2 disc set, yes? MSRP $50. How much was the 5 disc Blade Runner BD set....? $10 LESS!

Well price is a big issue, but also Blade runner is a better movie.

When I saw CE3K a month ago, I remembered why I never bought it on DVD.

I'd say that watching movies on Ipods will stay more mainstream than optical HDM from now and till eternity.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2006/11/21/ipod-video-a-waste-of-money---report

The study, which monitored a panel of 400 iPod users in the US, found that only one per cent of iPod users and 2.2 per cent of video iPod users watched videos on their gadgets.

Only 15.8 per cent of iPod users have played a video on either iPod or iTunes.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2006/11/21/ipod-video-a-waste-of-money---report

This news was before iTunes movie rentals and still it's on par with blu-ray which is about 1-2% of DVD sales. Besides, I don't consider an Ipod the only device for handheld movies. For instance, the upcoming Windows Smartphones has to have some kind of service for HD movies if they are to utilize the HDMI-output.

Point is that blu-ray business is kind of like trying to find a spot to sunbathe on a crowded beach whereas downloadable movie business is an uncharted island where you can pick any beach you like as your special spot. Downloadable movies only have to fight against the varying quality of illegal downloadable movies, while blu-ray has to take on the giant blob that is DVD.

It would be wise of the studios to focus on quality rather than quantity when it comes to blu-ray.

Originally Posted by The Inquirer
The study, which monitored a panel of 400 iPod users in the US, found that only one per cent of iPod users and 2.2 per cent of video iPod users watched videos on their gadgets.

Only 15.8 per cent of iPod users have played a video on either iPod or iTunes.

I've been an iPod user for over 4 years but just got my first one that can play video. Didn't think I'd care much about it. Ripped a few DVDs using Handbrake and find it to be quite cool (everything looks HD on a 1" screen :))

Anyway, will likely get an Apple TV this weekend and get my kids Nanos to play video in the next couple of months. I'm not saying it will be a major trend, but there is much room for growth in the Apple video side of things, especially if they add significant amounts of content.

As I was choosing which DVDs to rip, I was surprised to feel a little resentment for my HD DVD titles because they were going to be limited to being watched in the family room on the HD. I'm thinking digital copies will have to be a standard feature of Blu-ray movies if they're going to grab as much potential market as possible.

It may not be about the iPod, but I do think it'll be about flexibility. In this way, HD media is similar to DVD-A and SACD.

Windows Smartphones has to have some kind of service for HD movies if they are to utilize the HDMI-output.


smartphone .. HD movie .. HDMI .. in the same sentence :confused:

Well price is a big issue, but also Blade runner is a better movie.

When I saw CE3K a month ago, I remembered why I never bought it on DVD.

I disagree. While BR might have been much more groundbreaking, as an overall film, I think CE3K is better. CE3K was also a MUCh bigger hit.
But I think that price had quite a bit to do with it.
$49.99 for a 2 disc set when BR was $39.99 for a 5 disc set...

I disagree. While BR might have been much more groundbreaking, as an overall film, I think CE3K is better. CE3K was also a MUCh bigger hit.
But I think that price had quite a bit to do with it.
$49.99 for a 2 disc set when BR was $39.99 for a 5 disc set...

Personally I think CE3K is easily Spielberg's most overrated movie. I just don't get it. Nothing special about this movie at all, and it is mostly a big bore-fest.

Blade Runner, on the other hand..... :cool:

I disagree.

Most critics felt the same way when each film came out. Look at the reviews. BR got mediocre reviews at best. CE3K got mostly raves. (not even talking about box office...)

:)

I disagree.

Most critics felt the same way when each film came out. Look at the reviews. BR got mediocre reviews at best. CE3K got mostly raves. (not even talking about box office...)

:)

Oh, I know that I am in a minority on that one (re disliking CE3K). Of course, it doesn't make my opinion any less valid. I won't even bother renting CE3K on Blu-ray as I have no intention of ever sitting through that snorefest again. ;)

Oh yeah, BR is a real rollercoaster of a ride pacing-wise...

Talk about snore-fest...

(I keed, I keed...)

Like them both. :)

Oh yeah, BR is a real rollercoaster of a ride pacing-wise...

Talk about snore-fest...

(I keed, I keed...)

Like them both. :)

It's always a matter of perspective. Some people think Lawrence of Arabia is boring! :eek:

sadly, most of the younger generation I fear.

Actually, even sadder, not so much!

Actually, even sadder, not so much!

Why is that sad? I think its sad that older people dont enjoy movies like Pirates, Spiderman or Superbad. Just because us young people (Im 27) think that Blade Runner and Close Encounters were really bad and boring doesnt make us bad. Different tastes for different time periods.

Why is that sad?

Because I can actually understand why a teenager might think that a film like Lawrence of Arabia is boring considering the high impact/fast paced stuff that they are into at this stage of their life. I have a harder time understanding why older people would feel the same way.

Personally I think CE3K is easily Spielberg's most overrated movie. I just don't get it. Nothing special about this movie at all, and it is mostly a big bore-fest.

Blade Runner, on the other hand..... :cool:
I think most all of SS movies are wildly overrated.
CE3K...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz and the tone theme is annoying to say the least.
But the guy's a jillionaire so what do I know.
Why is that sad?
If you have to ask....

I think most all of SS movies are wildly overrated.
CE3K...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz and the tone theme is annoying to say the least.
But the guy's a jillionaire so what do I know.



With a few notable exceptions, I most certainly agree.

Why is that sad? I think its sad that older people dont enjoy movies like Pirates, Spiderman or Superbad. Just because us young people (Im 27) think that Blade Runner and Close Encounters were really bad and boring doesnt make us bad. Different tastes for different time periods.

Who says? I'm gonna be 50 in May. Didn't like Close Encounters when I was younger than you and still don't! But I have all the Spiderman movies.

Because I can actually understand why a teenager might think that a film like Lawrence of Arabia is boring considering the high impact/fast paced stuff that they are into at this stage of their life. I have a harder time understanding why older people would feel the same way.

+2. I still don't understand why "Transformers", and I own it on HD DVD is so popular on high def. I will take "Lawrence" any day. However, I am 52. Oh, by the way, even though I was a HD DVD supporter, with the writing on the wall, I will support Blu-ray to the best of my ability. I PREFER optical formats versus downloads.

Ah! one of the few remaining WWII war film fans around. Patton, but in the 2:20 or 2:35 release?


Couldn't agree more... except I'd argue that pretty much anybody that loves great filmmaking of any genre should enjoy Patton.

When you think about it, it is quite amazing that over 90,000 titles have been released on DVD since that format began.

Yep. And even more incredible are the titles that never did, for varying reasons.

With a few notable exceptions, I most certainly agree.Jaws, Schindler, Duel, Raiders(1), SPR.
For me in that order although SPR is really pushing it.

Patton:cool:

Jaws, Schindler, Duel, Raiders(1), SPR.
For me in that order although SPR is really pushing it.

Patton:cool:

You listed the same ones I would have listed! SPR is not pushing it for me though.

Jaws, Schindler, Duel, Raiders(1), SPR.
For me in that order although SPR is really pushing it.

Patton:cool:

No empire of the sun! blashphemy!

+2. I still don't understand why "Transformers", and I own it on HD DVD is so popular on high def. I will take "Lawrence" any day. However, I am 52. Oh, by the way, even though I was a HD DVD supporter, with the writing on the wall, I will support Blu-ray to the best of my ability. I PREFER optical formats versus downloads.

+one more. I am 55 and grew up in the 1950s and 1960s (let's hear it for B&W TV). I got Transformers, as well, when it came out on HD DVD, watched it once, and doubt I ever will again. I kind of felt the same way with 300. Not in every case, but I think it's just a matter of a generation gap in people's tastes. I really look forward to Lawrence, Patton, How The West Was Won, Sand Pebbles, etc. After watching a film like 12 Angry Men, it is hard to go back and view so many of these CGI movies. Sure, they look and sound impressive, but......
All I can say is my HDM purchases have pretty much ground to a halt. I hope, if anything, the end to this war will bring more quailty classic titles to viewers.

I think it's more about personal taste than age. That and screen sizes, I saw Transformers in the Cinerama Dome and I can totally understand while this would be popular in Hi-Def when you figure that most of the screens being used tend to be bigger, it's impressive and it looks like a Michael Bay movie. There are a number of so called classic films there are boring and some that are not. And there are some I used to like and now make me wonder why I did like them. Since we are throwing film titles around..I could stand not to ever see 2001:A Space Odyssey ever again. Sacrilege, I know but that's just me.

HDM is fine, but facts are facts.

If you get wrapped up in a movie, the video quality is almost not even noticed.

Take for examples fims like Chinatown, or The Third Man, two of my favorites.

You just get so caught up in the story and the characters that the resolution is meaningless.

Great films would be great even if you could only view them in 480i.

On the other hand, films like Transformers needs that wow factor, that, "I can't believe what i just saw" factor. They need that earth shattering bass and groundbreaking CGI.

Simply because the story, Robots coming from another planet to look for an all powerful Cube with the help of a boy and his new girlfriend, is so utterly infantile its ridiculous.

HDM is fine, but facts are facts.

If you get wrapped up in a movie, the video quality is almost not even noticed.

Take for examples fims like Chinatown, or The Third Man, two of my favorites.

You just get so caught up in the story and the characters that the resolution is meaningless.

Great films would be great even if you could only view them in 480i.

On the other hand, films like Transformers needs that wow factor, that, "I can't believe what i just saw" factor. They need that earth shattering bass and groundbreaking CGI.

Simply because the story, Robots coming from another planet to look for an all powerful Cube with the help of a boy and his new girlfriend, is so utterly infantile its ridiculous.

I know what you are saying, but I don't think that you can make a blanket statement like this and be accurate. For example, a big part of the appeal of Lawrence of Arabia is how beautifully the vast landscapes were captured on 65mm film, which added extra depth and clarity. It is one of the greatest films ever made (ok, the GREATEST ;)), but you would not be getting all the impact this movie has to offer by watching it in SD at 480i (not to mention on a smaller screen).

And, frankly, even movies like The Third Man, which contains some fantastic black and white cinematography, would benefit greatly by HD.

I'm confused why some people are so concerned about HDM sales versus DVD sales. Concerned why so and so titles aren't available yet.

OMG, so and so movie that took 7 years to be released on DVD isn't out on HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet! :rolleyes: Or posts that point out that DVD sales crush those of HDM. Well, thanks for that Sherlock, I didn't know that an established format of 10+ years would have huge sales compared to a fledgling and at the moment, niche format. *smacks head*

Can't we take a look at the big picture and chill a little bit?

Of course sales aren't going to be close. Of course, not all our favorites are going to be out. There's plenty of fine titles available, so please try to just enjoy them.

Amen! Preach on my brother!

I agree with the OP 100%. Sure we all would like every title available to us now but it's not realistic for that to happen. It didn't happen with DVD either and those titles that were released early were more often than not very poor productions. Who here would choose the 1997 release over the newer Blade Runner? If they rush these titles through just to fill the shelves then it's more likely we're going to get substandard releases. In fact it's already happened in some cases. Patience is required.

As far as Spielberg stuff goes. I think it's just that he has a larger catalog of "must haves" over other directors. For a lot of people anyway, not everyone of course.

Spielberg titles I would definitely buy on BD include

Jaws (1975)
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Empire of the Sun (1987)
Always (1989)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
Jurassic Park (1993)
Schindler's List (1993)
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
Amistad (1997)
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
Minority Report (2002)
Munich (2005)
War of the Worlds (2005)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

I would buy on BD if the price was right (on sale for $10 or less)

Duel (1971) (TV)
E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) (or if included in boxset)
The Color Purple (1985)
Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001)

I loved the first two thirds of CE3K, but the last part with the goofy 'concert' with the UFO was just plain stupid. Blade Runner is great throughout, much better movie.

HDM is fine, but facts are facts.

If you get wrapped up in a movie, the video quality is almost not even noticed.

Take for examples fims like Chinatown, or The Third Man, two of my favorites.

You just get so caught up in the story and the characters that the resolution is meaningless.

Great films would be great even if you could only view them in 480i.

On the other hand, films like Transformers needs that wow factor, that, "I can't believe what i just saw" factor. They need that earth shattering bass and groundbreaking CGI.

Simply because the story, Robots coming from another planet to look for an all powerful Cube with the help of a boy and his new girlfriend, is so utterly infantile its ridiculous.
I would love to see this on BD. I am still waiting for "The Guns of Navarone."

No empire of the sun! blashphemy!You are so correct HuntzHD! I knew I was forgetting something.
"P-51 Mustang, Cadillac of the sky!
I liked SPR upon first viewing and actually misted up on the final scene.
I forgot about JP as well, still over-rated but enjoyable

I know what you are saying, but I don't think that you can make a blanket statement like this and be accurate. For example, a big part of the appeal of Lawrence of Arabia is how beautifully the vast landscapes were captured on 65mm film, which added extra depth and clarity. It is one of the greatest films ever made (ok, the GREATEST ;)), but you would not be getting all the impact this movie has to offer by watching it in SD at 480i (not to mention on a smaller screen).

And, frankly, even movies like The Third Man, which contains some fantastic black and white cinematography, would benefit greatly by HD.
DUH!!!:D

I have the Criterion of The Third Man, that would be an instant buy.
Black and White gives such great depth field.
People who think that B&W is useless in HD are really missing a few axons.

DUH!!!:D

I have the Criterion of The Third Man, that would be an instant buy.
Black and White gives such great depth field.
People who think that B&W is useless in HD are really missing a few axons.

:)

I wonder how long we will have to wait before Criterion releases on Blu? It will be awhile, I'm sure. :(

I would love to see this on BD. I am still waiting for "The Guns of Navarone."

"Guns of Navarone" is amazing.

For sure they won't be the same as ten years passed since 1998..

Were you making a point about the age of movie at the time they were released on DVD or HDM ? or was it about their artistic value ?

None of the above. The point was ,even at a little less than two years into the history of HDM and DVD ,the number of catalog titles released on HDM doesn't touch the number released on DVD. The argument that HDM is new is invalid (at least comparing it to DVD),it isn't getting anything close to DVD catalog at the same age.

Now there are all sorts of reasons for this, many of which have been discussed here already but just saying HDM is new isn't enough.


Art

I would love to see this on BD. I am still waiting for "The Guns of Navarone."

"Guns" would be good. I saw this at the Director's Guild a few years ago and they had a new print of it. I can truthfully say it blew away a majority of release prints I have seen. Has the makings of a good Hi-Def release.