764 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

I have just received news from a friend and former colleague that the US release of these DVDs is still up in the air. Apparently, Sony HT are still 50/50 on whether to release the Ultimate Editions in the USA at all, and hold off for Blu-Ray early next year. This would coincide with the Casino Royale DVD.

I will keep you all aprised of any further developments, but for now, the advice was to buy the Region 2 discs.

Ugh. Call me impatient, but I'd really like to see these released in the US this year.

[Neil S. Bulk]

I have just received news from a friend and former colleague that the US release of these DVDs is still up in the air. Apparently, Sony HT are still 50/50 on whether to release the Ultimate Editions in the USA at all, and hold off for Blu-Ray early next year. This would coincide with the Casino Royale DVD.

I will keep you all aprised of any further developments, but for now, the advice was to buy the Region 2 discs.

That's unusual, since the DVDs were advertised on an R1 disc (Fun With Dick and Jane). And when has a studio given up the chance to sell something multiple times? I wish the R1 release was timed with the UK (my birthday) but I'm hopeful these will be released here at some point this year.

Neil - looking forward to the new picture transfers but not the new sound mixes

[Nimsworth]

For all you Aussies the new release date is August 15th according to an email from ezydvd.

[Turn]

I have just received news from a friend and former colleague that the US release of these DVDs is still up in the air. Apparently, Sony HT are still 50/50 on whether to release the Ultimate Editions in the USA at all, and hold off for Blu-Ray early next year. This would coincide with the Casino Royale DVD.

I will keep you all aprised of any further developments, but for now, the advice was to buy the Region 2 discs.

Ugh. Call me impatient, but I'd really like to see these released in the US this year.

Have they learned nothing from George Lucas? There's a hungry fan base out there who wants this product now. The real film snobs will wait for the Blu-Ray release more than most Bond fans.

By not putting this out in conjunction with CR's theatrical release would mean missing the lucrative Christmas season, where a lot of fans make their purchases. The CR DVD release likely will be in March or April of 2007, which isn't exactly the peak buying season for a 20-disc set. That's the time to push the new product and maybe pull in more to buy it who didn't the first time.

Most of all, I don't know if I'm ready to purchase a Blu-Ray player just yet. Why should I purchase a system that's unproven and splitting studios? I still think the whole thing could turn into a Beta/Divx/New Coke thing.

[Bon-san]

Beta/Divx/New Coke thing

Sounds like a single from a Heaven 17 comeback album.

[K1Bond007]

Sony finally updated their site with information (features) on the DVDs (confirmed July 17 for the UK).

Dr. No UE
From Russia with Love UE
Goldfinger UE
--- No listing for Thunderball ---
You Only Live Twice UE
On Her Majesty's Secret Service UE
Diamonds Are Forever UE
Live and Let Die UE
The Man with the Golden Gun UE
The Spy Who Loved Me UE
Moonraker UE -- Interestingly mis-titled "Moonraker (1975)"
For Your Eyes Only UE
Octopussy UE
A View to a Kill UE
The Living Daylights UE
Licence to Kill UE
GoldenEye UE
Tomorrow Never Dies UE
The World Is Not Enough UE
--- No listing for Die Another Day ---

Nothing really new, but ... it's on an official site now. Uhh yay?

[Qwerty]

Odd that they omit TB and DAD.

[wonkabars]

I have not been vocal on the forums for some time, but this just may be the topic that gets me out of CBN forum retirement.

I did not buy all of the special edition DVDs, because I hated the transfer, plain and simple. The awful cover 'art' displayed on the cases always made me feel like I was wise in waiting for the inevitable next gen release of the films.

When I heard about the Ultimate collection here, I was pumped. I had many conversations with a fellow filmmaker friend of mine about how Sony/MGM now has a chance to correct their huge mistakes in terms of the transfer and cover art. We talked about how out of ANY infamous film franchise, the Bond saga has the BEST iconic poster art...that reflected the film and the era it was filmed in. In our heads, the new DVDs would be like the Hitchcock signature collection, or more currently, the Tennessee Williams box set...both of which have the original poster art on the DVD cover. Now I log on today on CBN (I know, this is old news...I am bogged down with editing), and see these AWFUL cover designs, that look like a highschool intern made them in his spare time. This just really deflated me, as I am a huge fan of original poster work, but especially in the Bond films. Why try to modernize something that is not modern???

Here is the problem: movie studios release DVDs in the hope that they can compete with not only the box office, but the other DVDs on the shelves within the same genre. But when you take Live and Let Die, and package it to look like The Bourne Supremacy...not only is it misleading, but it almost makes the films laughable to a casual Bond fan, or general movie fan.

They should have made the 60s, 70s, 80s Bond be what it is/was. When you have amazing poster art that spans generations, why use anything else just for a temporary release?

[Tiin007]

I have not been vocal on the forums for some time, but this just may be the topic that gets me out of CBN forum retirement.

I did not buy all of the special edition DVDs, because I hated the transfer, plain and simple. The awful cover 'art' displayed on the cases always made me feel like I was wise in waiting for the inevitable next gen release of the films.

Wait a second. Let me get this straight: You decided not to buy the Bond DVDs because you hated the cover art??? And you still call yourself a Bond fan??

Look, I wasn't so pleased by the cover art of the special editions, but I still bought the DVDs because:
1) Better quality than VHS
2) Needed them on new format because soon they would stop making VCRs
3) Wanted all the special features
4) I'm a Bond fan

It really amazes me how often "fans" judge a book by its cover.

[wonkabars]

Wait a second. Let me get this straight: You decided not to buy the Bond DVDs because you hated the cover art??? And you still call yourself a Bond fan??

Look, I wasn't so pleased by the cover art of the special editions, but I still bought the DVDs because:
1) Better quality than VHS
2) Needed them on new format because soon they would stop making VCRs
3) Wanted all the special features
4) I'm a Bond fan

It really amazes me how often "fans" judge a book by its cover.

You need to read my post again. I stated that my main reason was that I thought the transfers were shoddy at best. The cover art was the icing on the cake for me, I just cannot stand when movie studios bypass the imagery that has represented corresponding films for decades, and market a DVD with psuedo-modern trash.

I would even argue that they are not that much better than the VHS copies, save the widescreen format.

I do think that the special features were pretty good, though. I did own a few of them, by the way.

Yes, I do consider myself a Bond fan when I think about the tons of money I have spent on my collection, and time reading about the films and watching the movies hundreds of time.

[Problem Eliminator]

the Bond saga has the BEST iconic poster art...that reflected the film and the era it was filmed in. ... Now I ...see these AWFUL cover designs, that look like a highschool intern made them in his spare time. This just really deflated me, as I am a huge fan of original poster work, but especially in the Bond films. Why try to modernize something that is not modern???...They should have made the 60s, 70s, 80s Bond be what it is/was. When you have amazing poster art that spans generations, why use anything else just for a temporary release?

Because it keeps Bond "with the times" and provides a consistent, classy look for the set. Do you still buy your sugar in a burlap sack? By your logic of "Why try to modernize something that is not modern", why would you buy them on DVD anyway, much less watch them on a TV? These are modernizations of the "not modern" original 35m prints of the films. If you are so anti-updating, you better fire up the projector and get out the checkbook to acquire those original prints.

As I have said before, I am a devoted fan of the Bond posters- my collection is near 200 overall. I love having them FRAMED ON THE WALL where they belong, not on a DVD cover. CBS FOX took that lazy approach with the VHS releases many years ago, and it was haphazard and inconsistent. "Modernizing" the art for the DVD covers provides a consistent, uniform, classy look to the set. It says "these belong together." Just slapping the old (though admittedly great) poster art on each cover would create a hodge-podge of drastically different art, ranging from the disparate likes of TSWLM to TND. This would smack of "Heres a bunch of random MGM movies put together in a box for ya" rather than "Here is a 20 film collection of a legendary character that, while changing with the times, has retained the essence you know and love."

The wonderful Bond poster art belongs as just that- posters. The new DVDs deserve these uniform, stylized covers that provide consistency while still showcasing the unique elements of each film.

[Tiin007]

Wait a second. Let me get this straight: You decided not to buy the Bond DVDs because you hated the cover art??? And you still call yourself a Bond fan??

Look, I wasn't so pleased by the cover art of the special editions, but I still bought the DVDs because:
1) Better quality than VHS
2) Needed them on new format because soon they would stop making VCRs
3) Wanted all the special features
4) I'm a Bond fan

It really amazes me how often "fans" judge a book by its cover.

You need to read my post again. I stated that my main reason was that I thought the transfers were shoddy at best. The cover art was the icing on the cake for me, I just cannot stand when movie studios bypass the imagery that has represented corresponding films for decades, and market a DVD with psuedo-modern trash.

I would even argue that they are not that much better than the VHS copies, save the widescreen format.

I do think that the special features were pretty good, though. I did own a few of them, by the way.

Yes, I do consider myself a Bond fan when I think about the tons of money I have spent on my collection, and time reading about the films and watching the movies hundreds of time.

My mistake, then.

[wonkabars]

Because it keeps Bond "with the times" and provides a consistent, classy look for the set. Do you still buy your sugar in a burlap sack? By your logic of "Why try to modernize something that is not modern", why would you buy them on DVD anyway, much less watch them on a TV? These are modernizations of the "not modern" original 35m prints of the films. If you are so anti-updating, you better fire up the projector and get out the checkbook to acquire those original prints.

Bond is timeless, that is why new packaging only hurts its marketability...it gives false production imagery, thus dating it to the 2000s. Classic movies should never be marketed at what is a current trend...such as poor man's photoshopped stuff, which is the current one. Many studios realize this, that the content (promotional and the film itself) is timeless and appealing within its initial material...just look at most of 20th Century's, Warner Bros, and so on. They are starting to swing the marketing trend back to original formats. If it is not broken, why fix it? Just look at the new Star Wars box art. That is anything but 'classy. The sugar and projector metaphor is like comparing apples to oranges. I am not talking about food containers or technology, just the appeal to original and classic imagery within the realm of the movie industry.

Edited by wonkabars, 01 June 2006 - 08:22 PM.

[simon_hrdng]

I don't now if this has been posted yet, but dvdactive.com has the back cover art for each film.

[K1Bond007]

I don't now if this has been posted yet, but dvdactive.com has the back cover art for each film.

Awesome. Super hi-res too. I like this site.

http://www.dvdactive...e-editions.html

Direct link.

[DLibrasnow]

Awesome. Super hi-res too. I like this site.

http://www.dvdactive...e-editions.html

Direct link.

That's an incredible site K1, especially because it gives us such a good look at the back of the DVD cases.

[K1Bond007]

Hmm the runtimes are all off...by 5 minutes or so in comparison to what is stated on the back on the SE boxes and IMDb (meaning probably no changes were made).

GE and LTK (supposedly uncut) don't appear to be any different. Maybe all that talk was what appears in the deleted scenes?

Actually I just noticed that GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies have "Uncut" under their title. Amazon lists GE as uncut, but not TND. That's news to me <no TND pun intended>. So what was cut from TND?

[Problem Eliminator]

Because it keeps Bond "with the times" and provides a consistent, classy look for the set. Do you still buy your sugar in a burlap sack? By your logic of "Why try to modernize something that is not modern", why would you buy them on DVD anyway, much less watch them on a TV? These are modernizations of the "not modern" original 35m prints of the films. If you are so anti-updating, you better fire up the projector and get out the checkbook to acquire those original prints.

Bond is timeless, that is why new packaging only hurts its marketability...it gives false production imagery, thus dating it to the 2000s. Classic movies should never be marketed at what is a current trend... just the appeal to original and classic imagery within the realm of the movie industry.

I beg to differ. New packaging hurts marketing? Not usually, in film or otherwise. The reason the posters for "Superman Returns" feature a new, stylized "S" logo instead of the old Chris Reeve era one, the reason a Coke can looks different now than it did in 1980, the reason the Tampa Bay Buccaneers no longer wear their hideous orange uniforms, is because contemporary marketing sells.

I am a fan of art, and many interpretations thereof. For me, the beauty of Bond marketing is the wide variety of imagery it has produced over the years. You seem to want 1 single poster image to represent a film as a poster and a DVD cover (and maybe a novel cover too, following your logic). Me, I'm secure in appreciating the poster for what it is, hanging on my wall, and also having a different design on the DVD cover. How is more Bond art a bad thing?

[Genrewriter]

I have just received news from a friend and former colleague that the US release of these DVDs is still up in the air. Apparently, Sony HT are still 50/50 on whether to release the Ultimate Editions in the USA at all, and hold off for Blu-Ray early next year. This would coincide with the Casino Royale DVD.

I will keep you all aprised of any further developments, but for now, the advice was to buy the Region 2 discs.

Ugh. Call me impatient, but I'd really like to see these released in the US this year.

I read on the Digital Bits website that from now on, all domestic releases of MGM films will be through Fox. This is probably what's holding things up.

[K1Bond007]

I have just received news from a friend and former colleague that the US release of these DVDs is still up in the air. Apparently, Sony HT are still 50/50 on whether to release the Ultimate Editions in the USA at all, and hold off for Blu-Ray early next year. This would coincide with the Casino Royale DVD.

I will keep you all aprised of any further developments, but for now, the advice was to buy the Region 2 discs.

Ugh. Call me impatient, but I'd really like to see these released in the US this year.

I read on the Digital Bits website that from now on, all domestic releases of MGM films will be through Fox. This is probably what's holding things up.

I heard the same as the guy above from another source about Blu-ray and how to market it.

[Qwerty]

So what was cut from TND?

CBn article here: http://commanderbond...=Story&SID=3243

[Arbogast777]

Post deleted

Edited by Arbogast777, 02 June 2006 - 09:01 PM.

[wonkabars]

I beg to differ. New packaging hurts marketing? Not usually, in film or otherwise. The reason the posters for "Superman Returns" feature a new, stylized "S" logo instead of the old Chris Reeve era one, the reason a Coke can looks different now than it did in 1980, the reason the Tampa Bay Buccaneers no longer wear their hideous orange uniforms, is because contemporary marketing sells.

I am a fan of art, and many interpretations thereof. For me, the beauty of Bond marketing is the wide variety of imagery it has produced over the years. You seem to want 1 single poster image to represent a film as a poster and a DVD cover (and maybe a novel cover too, following your logic). Me, I'm secure in appreciating the poster for what it is, hanging on my wall, and also having a different design on the DVD cover. How is more Bond art a bad thing?

Ok, I am not talking about what sells versus what does not. I am talking about what I think fits the saga better in terms of marketing. You could have the original art in the center..and maybe have a silver border a couple inches thick on the bottom of each film saying UE info, and when all the movies are together, the bindings make the 007 logo or something.

Don't get me started on Superman..that logo is not even about new marketing, its about abandoning the character altogether. But ultimately we are going to disagree. I do not really want to talk about sugar, projectors, Chris Reeve, Coke, or the Tampa Bay Bucs. I am just throwing my two cents out there in this regard. Like I said earlier, several studios do it this way I am talking about and it works.

I am all for new Bond art, for sure. Let me know when new Bond "art" is released.

[DLibrasnow]

Here's a LINK to good pics of the front and back covers of the new DVD's. Beware dial-up users!

Arbo, that's the same link that K1Bond007 already provided in this thread.

[yaridovic]

So, the subtitles in english for hard of hearing are only for the movie, but the normal english subtitles are available for the extras too, I suppose. Am I right?

[Arbogast777]

DLibrasnow,
You're right - I think I skipped a page when looking through the thread. I deleted my post. Sorry K1Bond007!

[Qwerty]

-----UPDATE-----

James Bond 'Ultimate Edition' DVD Back Cover Art & Specs

_{Back cover art, subtitles, and other specs online}

[Qwerty]

Interesting to see AVTAK with a '12' certificate now...

[Qwerty]

-----UPDATE-----

'A View To A Kill' to be Released with '12' Certificate

_{Upcoming 'Ultimate Edition' James Bond DVD release}

[Gabriel]

It's great that these are all 'proper' versions of the films. I take my hat off to Sony for allowing the certificates to be raised rather than cutting the films. I wish more studios would have the balls to do this!

I actually rather like A View to a Kill. Great title sequence/music and Roger is still very amusing. Never knew about the cuts, so pleased to hear I'll see it properly at last!

Edited by Gabriel, 16 June 2006 - 10:13 AM.