32 replies to this topic

[Daddy Bond]

Well, like most of you, I have a budget. I don't have unlimited resources to purchase every movie/box set that I want immediately.

So, I purchase 1 item per paycheck - generally a TV series box set or an anticipated movie.

If you plan your purchases, what's next on your list? What's coming up that you're definitely going to buy. Maybe it's an older release, maybe it's a new release.

I just got the Love Comes Softly series for my wife.

My next purchase will be Season 1 of the Jetsons (yes, I said the Jetsons). Remember folks, I have a number of kids, so I buy for them as well.

After that, season 5 of Mission Impossible.

Then Quantum of Solace.

What about you?

What's your next planned Blu-ray/DVD purchase?

[Loomis]

SOLACE, QUANTUM OF SOLACE.

[Judo chop]

I need to pawn off about 30 more DVDs to my co-workers first, to feed my Sony Blu-Ray Player Purchase Fund©. (Anybody needing a copy of RED DAWN, or LIKE FATHER LIKE SON??? $3. Just $3.)

Once that's done and the player is purchased, I will be picking up QOS and THE DARK KNIGHT.

And once that's done, I will be watching them until my eyes develop a raisin-like texture.

[Safari Suit]

I might have stretched to $2.98 for Like Father Like Son. Do you have Vice Versa? I'm not really interested in 18 Again.

[Daddy Bond]

I need to pawn off about 30 more DVDs to my co-workers first, to feed my Sony Blu-Ray Player Purchase Fund©. (Anybody needing a copy of RED DAWN, or LIKE FATHER LIKE SON??? $3. Just $3.)

Once that's done and the player is purchased, I will be picking up QOS and THE DARK KNIGHT.

And once that's done, I will be watching them until my eyes develop a raisin-like texture.

I'm trying to picture eyes with a raisin like texture. Doesn't sound too pleasant.

[DamnCoffee]

When I get my PS3 sorted out, I'm planning to get some Blu-Ray Bonds, probably Dr. No and From Russia With Love.

I'll hold out a few months for Quantum of Solace, since I will be getting the DVD, anyway.

I've currently started collecting the Doctor Who Classic Series, so I'll probably get a few of them.

[Judo chop]

Do you have Vice Versa?

No I don't, but incidentally, I claim my Hollywood fame to be that I knew the little girl from VICE VERSA who pouts, “They got my project.” Not just knew her, but had a few beers with her in her apartment. (She was a friend of my girlfriend at the time. A time best forgotten.)

And very incidentally, she is also the same girl-actress who gets blown up at the beginning of UNTOUCHABLES. “Mister… you forgot your briefcase!” Mister…”

<boom>

Could I interest you in an EVIL DEAD II, OMEN III or INNER SPACE, perhaps?

[zencat]

My only pre-orders at the moment are Bond. With Netflix, I no longer feel the need to build up a personal movie library. I've been burned too many times. I had a huge VHS collection, then LaserDisc, then DVD, and I watched all become obsolete (even DVD, because many pre-'00 DVDs are not formatted for 16:9 TVs). I've gone over to Blu-Ray, but I'm only going to buy those movies that I have a great personal passion for. Which means Bond (and I was on the fence for a while with Bond), Universal Monsters (waitin' on these) and a handful of miscellaneous films.

[Professor Dent]

The next wave of Bond flicks with Quantum of Solace are on my purchase list. Like zencat, I'm a Netflix user so I rent much more than I ever used to. A lot of movies that I would have purchased in the past like Wanted or Death Race were rentals only for me now. I'll be buying only those movies that really are my favorites. Plus, with me waiting longer to buy, I'll be buying them much at a cheaper price than I otherwise would have. Also, I'll hopefully avoid the double dip that I got hit with so often with DVD.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

My only pre-orders at the moment are Bond. With Netflix, I no longer feel the need to build up a personal movie library. I've been burned too many times. I had a huge VHS collection, then LaserDisc, then DVD, and I watched all become obsolete (even DVD, because many pre-'00 DVDs are not formatted for 16:9 TVs). I've gone over to Blu-Ray, but I'm only going to buy those movies that I have a great personal passion for. Which means Bond (and I was on the fence for a while with Bond), Universal Monsters (waitin' on these) and a handful of miscellaneous films.

I jumped the dvd wagon relatively late (2003) and I learnt quick enough to avoid 4x3 dvds. Out of 3 I bought, I've since rebought VERTIGO in 16x9. The other two, YELLOW SUBMARINE and RAVENOUS have yet to receive an anamorphic transfer.
I have a little over 100 titles now (not counting Bond, that I considered outside regular movies) and have no problem about sticking to my standard definition discs. The VHS to DVD gap was so wide that however sweet a movie can look on BR, the gap is only incremental. 16x9 discs will not become immediately obsolete as BR players can read them. Eventually, movies will no longer be released on standard dvd's, I know that. But for the moment, new releases coming out are generally reductions of BR releases so rather than getting worse, dvd's are looking better than ever. When the time comes, I'll switch. BR releases emphasize new movies and there's not a lot to pick from. Most films in my collection have yet to make it onto BR and I'd be surprised more than a third do in the foreseeable future. Early dvd's focused on catalogue titles, whereas BR's focus on hot releases.
Even if I'd a BR player, I wouldn't bother buying AVTAK and GE until a next generation transfer that fixed the cropping issue with both films.
My next purchase is Stephen Frears' GUMSHOE (1971). It's an SD-only release

[DLibrasnow]

Early dvd's focused on catalogue titles, whereas BR's focus on hot releases.

Not actually true. When DVD first came out they focused heavily on new releases. Usually a DVD would be available for retail about the same time their VHS counterpart was avaialble for rental only. That effectively meant that movies were available to buy on DVD about 2 to 3 months ahead of the VHS tape.

That was brought home to me at one time in 1998 when I accidently clicked on a link in Amazon for a VHS tape and was shocked to find it over $100 when the DVD was $20.

I remember all the active campaigns to get catalog titles on DVD. It seemed to take forever to get BRAVEHEART on DVD (2000). These delays led to theories/rumors for several years in the late 1990s and early 2000s that Lucas and Spielberg would never support DVD and were just going to wait until high definition media was available.

[Loomis]

BR releases emphasize new movies and there's not a lot to pick from. Most films in my collection have yet to make it onto BR and I'd be surprised more than a third do in the foreseeable future.

Agreed. I'm deeply disappointed by the general lack on Blu-ray of anything other than the hottest new releases (read: safe, conservative, guaranteed-to-sell-by-the-truckload, lowest-common-denominator fare). Mind you, I'm writing this from a British perspective - we're particularly poorly served by Blu-ray in this country. The only reason it's taken off over here to the limited extent it has is because lots of people own PS3 players. I think it's more than possible that Blu-ray will fare about as well as laserdisc fared in this country, i.e. that it'll prove a near-total flop.

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

[DLibrasnow]

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

No you are incorrect. This site has a section of screenshots that compare DVD to Blu-ray, including older movies:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/

Just watched "Eagle Has Landed":
http://www.dvdbeaver...ded_blu-ray.htm

And most analysts now acknowledge that Blu-ray will become the dominant media until 2017. Blu-ray sales have already overtaken DVD sales in Japan and are lightyears ahead of where DVD was in this stage in its lifetime.

[Daddy Bond]

BR releases emphasize new movies and there's not a lot to pick from. Most films in my collection have yet to make it onto BR and I'd be surprised more than a third do in the foreseeable future.

Agreed. I'm deeply disappointed by the general lack on Blu-ray of anything other than the hottest new releases (read: safe, conservative, guaranteed-to-sell-by-the-truckload, lowest-common-denominator fare). Mind you, I'm writing this from a British perspective - we're particularly poorly served by Blu-ray in this country. The only reason it's taken off over here to the limited extent it has is because lots of people own PS3 players. I think it's more than possible that Blu-ray will fare about as well as laserdisc fared in this country, i.e. that it'll prove a near-total flop.

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

All films should look better on Blu-ray as long as there is a good, clean master to create the Blu-ray from - since Blu-ray is lower resolution than film dating back to the 1930's. Movies like Gone with the Wind, Lawrence of Arabia or Ben Hur should look amazing.

[Loomis]

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

No you are incorrect.

Why, then, are so many people writing on internet fora, Amazon, etc. that it's only the most recent films that look the best on Blu-ray? Admittedly, there are exceptions: 2001 and ZULU, for instance, are said to look stunning, but the impression I'm getting is that by and large anything that's more than a few years old ain't gonna look as good on Blu-ray.

And most analysts now acknowledge that Blu-ray will become the dominant media until 2017.

What's going to happen in 2017?

Blu-ray sales have already overtaken DVD sales in Japan

I doubt it. VHS is still the dominant format in Japan. Yes, VHS. Strange but true. Even DVD never really took off over there. The Japanese invent these things and unleash them to the world but don't actually go in for them much themselves, it would appear.

[Daddy Bond]

Loomis wrote

Why, then, are so many people writing on internet fora, Amazon, etc. that it's only the most recent films that look the best on Blu-ray? Admittedly, there are exceptions: 2001 and ZULU, for instance, are said to look stunning, but the impression I'm getting is that by and large anything that's more than a few years old ain't gonna look as good on Blu-ray.

Answer:

Well, if a movie does not have a good master from which to make the Blu-ray or there were other imperfections in the original filming of a movie (lighting, focus, etc.) then there could be a problem with the transfer to Blu-ray, however, film doesn't technically have pixels or lines of resolution like all forms of digital media. When film captures an image it is a chemical reaction that is naturally higher resolution.

HOWEVER, if we could find the rough equivalent of pixels - the resolution of a really good 35mm camera shot (film) - if I could put it in pixel terms (although it doesn't really have pixels per se) would be equivalent to approximately 9 million pixels. HDTV 1080i is only like 2,073,600 pixels.

Now, most Hollywood movies were shot with film much larger than 35mm. Some movies, like Ben Hur were shot in 70mm. Can you imagine the resolution on a 70mm piece of film with maximum lighting, pristine focus? It completely blows Blue-ray out of the water. That's why, if you have a high quality original master of a film that was shot well it is much cleaner and sharper than High Def.

Some may be concerned about the transfer to Blue-ray because of a lack of good original masters for films, or at least a high quality transfer, or shoddy filmmakeing, or just a poor transfer process.

However, I chaulk most of it up to urban myth. People just assume that HDTV is higher resolution than film, but they're wrong, it's not. Blue-ray and High Def are MUCH lower resolution than film shot 50+ years ago. Yes, the old techology was STILL better!

So, future generations, with technology BETTER than Blue-ray may YET see even clearer copies of the Bond movies (if the masters are good quality). Although, there is a limit where they human eye cannot discern a real difference.

Does this help?

[Loomis]

Yep. Cheers, Daddy.

[DLibrasnow]

Loomis,
I provided proof that older movies also look better in Blu-ray, but I notice you conveniently chose to ignoire it.

Again, I repeat:
"This site has a section of screenshots that compare DVD to Blu-ray, including older movies:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/

Just watched "Eagle Has Landed":
http://www.dvdbeaver...ded_blu-ray.htm"

There are a number of screenshots on that site comparing older moviers on DVD with the Blu-ray version. The "The Eagle Has Landed" comparisons show just how shoddy the DVD is and how much improvement the Blu-ray is. There are countless other examples on that site as well.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

Early dvd's focused on catalogue titles, whereas BR's focus on hot releases.

Not actually true. When DVD first came out they focused heavily on new releases. Usually a DVD would be available for retail about the same time their VHS counterpart was avaialble for rental only. That effectively meant that movies were available to buy on DVD about 2 to 3 months ahead of the VHS tape.

That was brought home to me at one time in 1998 when I accidently clicked on a link in Amazon for a VHS tape and was shocked to find it over $100 when the DVD was $20.

I remember all the active campaigns to get catalog titles on DVD. It seemed to take forever to get BRAVEHEART on DVD (2000). These delays led to theories/rumors for several years in the late 1990s and early 2000s that Lucas and Spielberg would never support DVD and were just going to wait until high definition media was available.

I don't know for sure since I wasn't buying discs in '97-98 but I've got several early titles that are really old movies considering it was a new format. On BR, you can count old movies available on Mickey Mouse's fingers.
What you mention about BRAVEHEART is very interesting, especially since the film came out after DVD debuted. Nowadays no new release would get skipped on digital home video. DVD was a breakthough so many decisions were played pretty much by ear. With BR, you get the feeling that everything's coldly calculated.

BR releases emphasize new movies and there's not a lot to pick from. Most films in my collection have yet to make it onto BR and I'd be surprised more than a third do in the foreseeable future.

Agreed. I'm deeply disappointed by the general lack on Blu-ray of anything other than the hottest new releases (read: safe, conservative, guaranteed-to-sell-by-the-truckload, lowest-common-denominator fare). Mind you, I'm writing this from a British perspective - we're particularly poorly served by Blu-ray in this country. The only reason it's taken off over here to the limited extent it has is because lots of people own PS3 players. I think it's more than possible that Blu-ray will fare about as well as laserdisc fared in this country, i.e. that it'll prove a near-total flop.

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

One issue with BR is that one's promised "perfect picture" and older movies, regardless of the fact they'll indeed look better than on DVD, will not look perfect because of age/preservation factors. BR audiences have yet to be educated on what to expect from it. There was an article on the digital bits about BR users complaining about films showing video noise when in actuality what they showed was film grain. this is bound to be a factor on how many old movies get released on BR.

[eddychaput]

But then am I right in thinking that few films that are more than a couple of years old are going to look good on Blu-ray anyway?

No you are incorrect. This site has a section of screenshots that compare DVD to Blu-ray, including older movies:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/

Just watched "Eagle Has Landed":
http://www.dvdbeaver...ded_blu-ray.htm

And most analysts now acknowledge that Blu-ray will become the dominant media until 2017. Blu-ray sales have already overtaken DVD sales in Japan and are lightyears ahead of where DVD was in this stage in its lifetime.

It's strange. It seems as though it depends on the film. When I looked at the DVD/Blu-Ray comparisons of A History of Violence and Batman Returns, it was clear that Blu-Ray was better. When I looked at the Raging Bull, Casablanca and Dark Ciy DVD/Blu-Ray comparisons, I either honestly couldn't tell the difference, or when I noticed an improvement, it was kind of minimal.

I'm still convinced Blu-ray is better, but maybe not by leaps and bounds. Just better.

Edited by eddychaput, 07 February 2009 - 01:56 AM.

[Hotwinds]

Good question.
I dont own a BluRay player yet but I am going to purchase a concert of my favorite band, Yes: Live At Montreux.
I guess that will be the first thing I watch when I get one.

[DLibrasnow]

My next Blu-ray purchase will be BODY OF LIES.

[eddychaput]

My next Blu-ray purchase will be BODY OF LIES.

Fun movie but not one I feel the need to see again.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

My next Blu-ray purchase will be BODY OF LIES.

Got it on SD yesterday (R1 dvd's arrive here before their US street date). Not Scott's finest movie but a decent effort. I'm surprised most members on this site aren't talking about this instead of those awful Bourne sequels (note the word sequel, I thought the first film to be a treat). BOL is a real espionage thriller with a very interesting second reading about what the fork the west is doing in the middle east. One featurette explains the novel is inspired by THE MAN WHO NEVER WAS, a WW2 operation headed by Ewen Montagu (one of the many alleged real James Bonds). I was really thrilled when I saw that since I also own that film on DVD.

[Turn]

The only ones I know on my radar are QoS, NSNA and wave 3 of Bond. But I build some of my collection based on what type of sales certain stores have, whereas I can pick up some titles for half the price of their retail or less.

[DLibrasnow]

One featurette explains the novel is inspired by THE MAN WHO NEVER WAS, a WW2 operation headed by Ewen Montagu (one of the many alleged real James Bonds). I was really thrilled when I saw that since I also own that film on DVD.

I also own that movie on DVD. However, much of what is shown in the movie has since been debunked. Although it is based on Mongtagu's own recounting of events in the book The Man Who Never Was (which I also own), recently declassified documents revealed that Montagu was not entirely honest on the precise details of the operation (probably due to the Official Secrets Act).
I own a number of books on the Double Cross System and Allied deception practices during WWII. The three best are The Deceivers: Allied Military Deception in the Second World War by Thaddeus Holt (an enormous 1,170 page book), Bodyguard of Lies: The Extraordinary True Story Behind D-Day by Anthony Cave Brown (the title to this 960 page book from the Churchill quote "In war-time, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies") and The Spies Who Never Were: The True Story of the Nazi Spies Who Were Actually Allied Double Agents by Hervie Haufler.
As a Bond fan I would seek out the Terence Young directed movie TRIPLE CROSS starring Christopher Plummer, Gert Frobe and Claudine Auger. It recounts the true story of Eddie Chapman who was recruited as a spy by the Nazi's but in reality worked for British intelligence. I own that on Region 2 DVD (it has never received a Region 1 DVD release).

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

One featurette explains the novel is inspired by THE MAN WHO NEVER WAS, a WW2 operation headed by Ewen Montagu (one of the many alleged real James Bonds). I was really thrilled when I saw that since I also own that film on DVD.

I also own that movie on DVD. However, much of what is shown in the movie has since been debunked. Although it is based on Mongtagu's own recounting of events in the book The Man Who Never Was (which I also own), recently declassified documents revealed that Montagu was not entirely honest on the precise details of the operation (probably due to the Official Secrets Act).
I own a number of books on the Double Cross System and Allied deception practices during WWII. The three best are The Deceivers: Allied Military Deception in the Second World War by Thaddeus Holt (an enormous 1,170 page book), Bodyguard of Lies: The Extraordinary True Story Behind D-Day by Anthony Cave Brown (the title to this 960 page book from the Churchill quote "In war-time, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies") and The Spies Who Never Were: The True Story of the Nazi Spies Who Were Actually Allied Double Agents by Hervie Haufler.
As a Bond fan I would seek out the Terence Young directed movie TRIPLE CROSS starring Christopher Plummer, Gert Frobe and Claudine Auger. It recounts the true story of Eddie Chapman who was recruited as a spy by the Nazi's but in reality worked for British intelligence. I own that on Region 2 DVD (it has never received a Region 1 DVD release).

I saw TC ages ago, 1983 at the latest. It's easy to find on R2 here. One thing I find interesting about BR is that apparently, it doesn't suffer from PAL speedup, which I hate, so I'll wait for that.
I also own Montagu's book. The movie has a lot of poetic licence but then again a movie should be an independent work, regardless of whether it's based on another source or not. Regarding the book, I had the feeling reading that it was cleaned up anyway. Details may have been tampered but the core of it is fascinating nonetheless.
Many thanks for the book suggestions.

[eddychaput]

Heck, I'm interested in anything with Christopher Plummer.

[Scottlee]

I'll be getting season one of NCIS next payday on a recommendation from my fiancee. We're just coming to the end of watching four straight seasons of CSI : Las Vegas on dvd so I guess we need a change before starting season five.

I always get a film or two on payday as well, and if Quantum of Solace is out by then (Feb 25th) then I'll probably get that. There are also five or six other Bond films I still don't own on ultimate edition, so I might get one of those if QOS isn't out yet.

Away from Bond I have a strong urge to buy the double batman pack of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, the latter of which I STILL have not seen.

[Professor Dent]

I'll be getting season one of NCIS next payday on a recommendation from my fiancee. We're just coming to the end of watching four straight seasons of CSI : Las Vegas on dvd so I guess we need a change before starting season five.

NCIS is a good show. A little more action that the CSI Vegas show & good humor. The show is now in it's 6th season & has evolved well with mixing-up the cast to stay fresh.