The Thing (1982) coming this October

[MovieSwede]

Originally Posted by raoul_duke

Sticking with the HD DVD of this AND Dawn Of The Dead. OH UNIVERSAL!! Just when it was looking so good for you!

If they cant get access to BD50 for all their releases, something has to go.

So its either this on a BD25 or not at all.


There isnt so much Universal can do about it.

[Stevie76]

Yup, I just want the movies, extras isn´t that important to me.

The only sad thing is that the 80 minute doc on The Thing is missing, but I still got the DVD.

[Henke007]

Ohh another HD title that's been in the collection the last 20 months or so
its bad times for a former HD DVD suporter to not get any new releases from Universal catalog wise, the DD+ is just fine i am not to excited over a BD-25 disc!!

King Kong is likely the only one i will replace and i hope its the extended edition as well!!

[JBLsound4645]

Wow doesn’t this have the same extras as the (signature laserdisc) then later found on DVD because I never owned the signature version but when I was watching the extras I noticed the (laserdisc flying-saucer) that told me, it was signature version.

Talk about a triple dipping!

[DM2006RI]

If they cant get access to BD50 for all their releases, something has to go.

So its either this on a BD25 or not at all.


There isnt so much Universal can do about it.

Yeah there is -- they can wait until they DO "have access" to BD50s, instead of giving us stripped-down releases that don't fulfill BD's potential.

It's titles like this that are going to give Uni a bad name IF this the road they're going to go down.

[357]

What's all this mess about not having access to BD50s?

[Dave Mack]

Originally Posted by Jim Morrison

Before everyone gets carried away and starts tossing out those old DVDs & HD DVDs, you might want to look at the spec list..

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=68306

Where's the 80 minute doc and all the other extras?

wow that sucks.

[DavidHir]

This title is obviously being set-up for an eventual "Ultimate" edition on a BD-50, higher bit rate encode, extras, etc. At least they're including DTS-MA now though and not pulling a Warner audio shaft.

[JBlacklow]

Apart from the outtakes and trailer, everything (including the documentary) could be covered by U-Control, and BD-Live could have the rest. Perhaps we should wait and see how it shakes out.

[Brian81]

Wow - the same transfers (likely) but they were able to improve the audio to lossless (a common complaint about HD DVD titles, blamed on capacity) and yet still keep it under 25GB (which shows that they could have had the lossless on the 30GB discs). Another nice twist on the capacity issue.

[robertc88]

I have the HD DVD. We'll see. I'll probably rent it to check the PQ and AQ.

[Spizz]

Originally Posted by DM2006RI

Yeah there is -- they can wait until they DO "have access" to BD50s, instead of giving us stripped-down releases that don't fulfill BD's potential.

I agree (if the lack of access to BD50s is really the case).

[whitestang06]

Originally Posted by Brian81

Wow - the same transfers (likely) but they were able to improve the audio to lossless (a common complaint about HD DVD titles, blamed on capacity) and yet still keep it under 25GB (which shows that they could have had the lossless on the 30GB discs). Another nice twist on the capacity issue.

The capacity issue was essentially nonsense. One of the primary reasons that many BD's exceed 30GB is that they have so many language tracks. Multiple PCM and TrueHD tracks take up a lot of space.

[357]

Originally Posted by 357

What's all this mess about not having access to BD50s?

...

[mosul210]

This is a great sci-fi movie, one of my favorites. I for one will stay with my HD DVD copy, looks amazing by the way. But I do recommend this title on blue for those who have yet to own this gem on high def.

[JBlacklow]

Originally Posted by Spizz

I agree (if the lack of access to BD50s is really the case).

I don't know why people keep on spreading the "Universal can't find any BD50s" meme as gospel, because Universal has a bunch of BD50 titles, including the "Mummy" films, "Doomsday", "Miami Vice", both "Heroes" sets, "Forgetting Sarah Marshall", "Knocked Up", and "The 40-Year Old Virgin".

[KingLeerUK]

Has there been any word as to whether Universal has commissioned a new transfer for this or will we get the VC-1 transfer used on the HD-DVD?

I would really, really like for Universal to pull a new master (different than the transfer) for this film. The've been using the same one for the last 3 releases (DVD, DVD-re-release and HD-DVD) which is easy to spot due to the consistent dirt/specs. I own both the original DVD (retained for isolated score) and the DVD re-release (anamorphic) but decided not to delve into HD-DVD (which seems to have been the correct decision). This is one of the few films I'll watch with some regularity and I hope that Universal "gets it right" and doesn't shaft us with a half-assed effort only to double-dip us with a BD-50 version in 3 years.

[Malcolm_B]

It's what I'm expecting, and there was nothing wrong with the very nice looking HD DVD, except for the lack of lossless, the only reason I'll be double-dipping. Unless I read that Universal really screwed the pooch on this one.

[Jedi2016]

Well, they've been DNRing the crap out of their last few BDs, so it has me worried about this one.

[DavidHir]

Agreed, this one is not looking good at all.

[Drandonuts]

Well, the previous editions of all 3 of these (Land, Dawn, and Thing) didn't have U-Control features, so maybe all the features are incorporated in the new U-Control track.

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

...
I would really, really like for Universal to pull a new master (different than the transfer) for this film. The've been using the same one for the last 3 releases (DVD, DVD-re-release and HD-DVD) which is easy to spot due to the consistent dirt/specs.

"Consistent dirt/specks" would have to do with the original film source itself.

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

I own both the original DVD (retained for isolated score) and the DVD re-release (anamorphic) but decided not to delve into HD-DVD (which seems to have been the correct decision)...

Where did you get the idea that upgrading to the HD-DVD of THE THING was a bad idea? The HD-DVD of THE THING is probably one of the best reviewed catalogue High Def titles out there, and for good reason- it looks terrific. If the same transfer that was used for the HD-DVD is used for the Blu-ray version with no unnecessary DNR applied, it should at the very least look just as terrific as the terrific HD-DVD version.

Vincent

[tkbryant]

Originally Posted by JBlacklow

I don't know why people keep on spreading the "Universal can't find any BD50s" meme as gospel, because Universal has a bunch of BD50 titles, including the "Mummy" films, "Doomsday", "Miami Vice", both "Heroes" sets, "Forgetting Sarah Marshall", "Knocked Up", and "The 40-Year Old Virgin".

Doomsday is a BD25.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

"Consistent dirt/specks" would have to do with the original film source itself.



Where did you get the idea that upgrading to the HD-DVD of THE THING was a bad idea? The HD-DVD of THE THING is probably one of the best reviewed catalogue High Def titles out there, and for good reason- it looks terrific. If the same transfer that was used for the HD-DVD is used for the Blu-ray version with no unnecessary DNR applied, it should at the very least look just as terrific as the terrific HD-DVD version.

Vincent

Nailed it. I am happy with the HD DVD encode of The Thing though there is nothing wrong with UNI re-encoding with higher bit rates just for the heck of it but without any tweaking.

[GizmoDVD]

Last I heard this was dropping the 80 min documentary. That right there will make me keep my HD DVD over the BD.

[KingLeerUK]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

"Consistent dirt/specks" would have to do with the original film source itself.



Where did you get the idea that upgrading to the HD-DVD of THE THING was a bad idea? The HD-DVD of THE THING is probably one of the best reviewed catalogue High Def titles out there, and for good reason- it looks terrific. If the same transfer that was used for the HD-DVD is used for the Blu-ray version with no unnecessary DNR applied, it should at the very least look just as terrific as the terrific HD-DVD version.

Vincent

My not upgrading to the HD-DVD version had a lot more to do with a wait-and-see attitude to the Blu-ray/HD-DVD than questions about the HD-DVD release itself.

As far as consistent dirt and specs, it means that Universal hasn't gone back to the well for a new transfer/master in forever. While this film is not a mega-blockbuster of outright favourite of the masses, it is a cult classic in its own right and it would be wonderful to have a nice restoration with an improved transfer done for a Blu-ray release. Sadly, this probably won't happen for years.

[MovieSwede]

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

My not upgrading to the HD-DVD version had a lot more to do with a wait-and-see attitude to the Blu-ray/HD-DVD than questions about the HD-DVD release itself.

As far as consistent dirt and specs, it means that Universal hasn't gone back to the well for a new transfer/master in forever. While this film is not a mega-blockbuster of outright favourite of the masses, it is a cult classic in its own right and it would be wonderful to have a nice restoration with an improved transfer done for a Blu-ray release. Sadly, this probably won't happen for years.

I dont really see any reason for Universal to remaster this. There are other titles that needs to be remastered.

[Dickieduvet]

Originally Posted by MovieSwede

I dont really see any reason for Universal to remaster this. There are other titles that needs to be remastered.

Jaws

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by KingLeerUK

...

As far as consistent dirt and specs, it means that Universal hasn't gone back to the well for a new transfer/master in forever. While this film is not a mega-blockbuster of outright favourite of the masses, it is a cult classic in its own right and it would be wonderful to have a nice restoration with an improved transfer done for a Blu-ray release. Sadly, this probably won't happen for years.

"In forever"? The anamorphic DVD (which replaced the earlier non-anamorphic version) created from the HD master was released in 2004. A four-year old HD master isn't "old", and again, THE THING looks terrific in High Definition so I'm confused as to why you think a completely new film-to-HD transfer needs to be done. "Consistent dirt and speckles" only indicates that the same film element was used for both the older, non-anamorphic transfer, and the newer HD master used for the 2004 DVD re-release and the HD-DVD. Even if Universal did a completely new HD telecine for the Blu-ray, they'd probably use the same archival film element (likely the 35mm InterPositive) with the same "dirt and speckles" from their vault, so I don't see what you hope to gain.

Vincent

[FoxyMulder]

I would rather see some dirt and specks on the print and have it retain the grain structure than have a new remaster where Universal applies it's DNR and reduces the image to a smooth HD disaster.

I am worried that they might go smoother for the Blu release based on what has happened to other HD DVD port overs. Keeping fingers crossed they don't but if it's the same person who worked on U571 and The Mummy movies then it's going to be smoother and worse for it with lesser detail levels. Ok i know The Mummy movies actually had some scenes being smoother and DNRed while others were sharper or left untouched so that might happen to The Thing too.