|
So, I got my first Blu-ray player a couple weeks ago and will actually be getting a TV worthy of watching them on soon. My first haul of BDs has been pretty great so far. I got a 3-pack with A History of Violence, Eastern Promises and No Country for Old Men for less than $20; a 3-pack of Bond movies for less than $20; the Back to the Future Trilogy for $15; True Grit for $20; The A-Team, The Losers, and Inception for around $10 a piece. I also plan on picking up Breaking Bad Season 3, Inglourious Basterds and Hero before I finish my expensive little spree. I'm really psyched to explore the possibilities of Blue-ray though.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
LesterGroans posted:So, I got my first Blu-ray player a couple weeks ago and will actually be getting a TV worthy of watching them on soon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
Space_Butler posted:Fox has announced It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia: Season 6 for a blu-ray release on September 13. Despite (from what little info has actually gotten out) the disappointing sales of The League and Sunny Season 5 blu-rays, Fox has nonetheless decided to just keep going releasing those series on blu. Good on them, it's about time Fox stopped abandoning tv shows on blu-ray. Always Sunny BDs would probably sell better if there was any compelling reason whatsoever to have them on BD over the DVDs that drop below $20 within weeks of release..
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 17:39
|
|
|
RichterIX posted:Always Sunny BDs would probably sell better if there was any compelling reason whatsoever to have them on BD over the DVDs that drop below $20 within weeks of release..
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
fenix down posted:A question you will be asking yourself a lot in the coming months: Is it cheaper on ebay or amazon?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 18:33
|
|
|
Space_Butler posted:The new season was actually shot in high def, as was the bonus extended cut they made of "Lethal Weapon 5". I'd say thats one compelling reason. Touche. Still, it's hard to wonder why sales for the last season weren't good. I'm glad they're continuing with it knowing that it's actually worthwhile now!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 18:46
|
|
|
The cast has actually said they switched to HD partially because they felt bad that people were getting ripped off from the previous Blu-Ray releases which were just upscales
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Vol. 1 - Oct. 25th Pre-order for this one just went up on Amazon $24.49 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...ASIN=B0058O1FHK quote:Buzzing about the internet today was news concerning the Tom and Jerry Golden Collection, Volume 1. Whereas I’m working on this set and had been sworn to secrecy about it, I couldn’t mention it before. Since the box art was leaked and a bunch of mis-information is now being spread, I have no choice but to violate my arrangement with the studio and clear up some facts. http://www.cartoonbrew.com/classic/tom-jerry-on-blu-ray.html quote:Update: Warner released the supplemental materials for this set, and they include: Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Jun 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2011 23:37
|
|
|
I'm curious which version of the old black lady we'll see in Tom & Jerry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 00:15
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:I'm curious which version of the old black lady we'll see in Tom & Jerry. Given how stringent Warners was with sticking to the original Looney Tunes shorts, probably the original version, no matter how racist it might seem now. They'll throw a disclaimer from a prominent African-American in front of them to cover their asses on any possible backlash, like the Whoopi thing on the Golden Collections.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 01:17
|
|
|
frumpsnake posted:lovely older discs with 4:3 transfers and flipper discs don't count. I'm talking about separate Fullscreen and Widescreen releases, released simultaneously. The first Harry Potter is the *only* release I can think of with separate versions outside the US. In Australia, Warner decided to only release the 4:3 version. There was a large backlash on that one with many people having to import the UK disc. The original Trainspotting DVD release had a flipdisc with a fullscreen/widescreen version in Australia too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 01:31
|
|
|
RichterIX posted:Touche. Still, it's hard to wonder why sales for the last season weren't good. I'm glad they're continuing with it knowing that it's actually worthwhile now!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
frumpsnake posted:(It was kinda funny buying 'The Incredibles' and having Brad Bird thank me for 'choosing the widescreen version'. What did he say on the fullscreen disc?) The Incredibles and A Bug's Life were both re-rendered with the shot compositions changed for the fullscreen versions, so he probably talks about that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 02:56
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:Funny side note: it took me way too long to convince my mom that the black bars were, in fact, not covering up the top and bottom of the video. I know someone made a Kubrick comment before, and I'll just throw this out there: You actually are covering up the top and bottom with a lot of movies. The only thing is, the top and the bottom are supposed to be covered up. Aspect ratios, by and large, is a terrible conversation to ever have with people. It's incredibly complex for such a simple subject, and it is very hard to explain verbally. For the time being, let's just assume that this is 1999 and you are shooting with 35mm film. Really, the sides chopped off holds true 100% of the time only for anamorphically shot features, and those are typically 2.35:1. That's because with anamorphic lenses, the full frame of the film is used, the light is just compressed horizontally. Another name for these films is scope. Then you got 1.85:1 films. These are often shot with the full 4x3 frame exposed, but then in the theater it will be matted. When you release it for home video, you can open up the tops and the bottoms. Of course, it gets a little more complicated than that. Obviously, there is going to be dead space on the top and the bottom where nothing much of importance will happen because the director can't really use that space. Then you run into issues where you can't open up the tops or bottoms because it would expose a boom mic or other film magic that would be covered up by the mattes. Or shots with CGI: often they only do the CGI for what you can see theatrically, so those shots can't be opened up since the CGI would just stop in the middle of the screen. So those shots have to be cropped. And of course, all of this is assuming you apply the mattes during the presentation of a film; some films are shot with the mattes on the camera (I think Monty Python's Holy Grail was done this way). Now of course, that's before we throw into the mix Super 35, which has a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, but depending on the shot and all the specifics, can be opened up greatly exposing a ton more picture on the home video version, or have to be cropped significantly due to the reasons I listed before. And then there's digital video and oh god this is incredibly hard to explain. So yes, the widescreen version is usually the director approved version.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 04:28
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:I know someone made a Kubrick comment before, and I'll just throw this out there: Except when it comes to Kubrick. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 04:37
|
|
|
Finally got around to watching The Thin Red Line. I think that is the prettiest Blu-Ray I've ever seen. Incredible!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 04:42
|
|
|
Role Play McMurphy posted:Could be because there wasn't a worthwhile episode to be found beneath all that product placement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 11:37
|
|
|
Hey, whatever happened to those Looney Tunes collections Warner announced in, what, 2008?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 12:40
|
|
|
Nate RFB posted:I really hope you are being sarcastic because this is seriously the worst Sunny "debate". I wasn't and wouldn't know because I haven't engaged in any Sunny "debates." All I know is I was a big fan and the latest season made me laugh maybe two times, total. The product placement part is a cheap shot to illustrate my frustration with the show.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 13:30
|
|
|
God drat you, IASIP makers, for using real beer brands in your comedy centered around a bar. Glenn Howerton had a pretty big tirade about it over twitter IIRC and made pretty much anyone who genuinely was upset at the "product placement" look like complete idiots.
Nate RFB fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Jul 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 14:12
|
|
|
The product placement was hilarious. Apparently they didn't even intend for the first bumper to be "This episode brought to you by Coors Light," but I thought that was the funniest part.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
Nate RFB posted:God drat you, IASIP makers, for using real beer brands in your comedy centered around a bar. Glenn Howerton had a pretty big tirade about it over twitter IIRC and made pretty much anyone who genuinely was upset at the "product placement" look like complete idiots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 16:40
|
|
|
TheManWithNoName posted:It's retarded and doesn't add anything to the show. I think the only legitimate  moment was the Dave & Buster's commercials that followed an episode that had several scenes in a Dave & Buster's, something as mentioned before the creators had no clue was coming and were pretty miffed the network had put them in. E: And wouldn't be an issue anyways on the commercial-less BDs/DVDs.
Nate RFB fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Jul 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Nate RFB posted:Money to make the show? But seriously, why would it be so much better if they had generic no-name fake beer in a loving bar as opposed to real beer? I wonder if these are the same people who sperged out about Budweiser being all over the place in Treme. I'm sure Seinfeld would be funnier if it was set in a Denny's, or Friends was in a Starbucks. Real products don't make the show any funnier, and to introduce them this far into the show is distracting and transparent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 17:29
|
|
|
Nate RFB posted:God drat you, IASIP makers, for using real beer brands in your comedy centered around a bar. Glenn Howerton had a pretty big tirade about it over twitter IIRC and made pretty much anyone who genuinely was upset at the "product placement" look like complete idiots. Yeah, no, like I said, the real problem was that the episodes sucked. The product placement (most notably Subway, which has had annoyingly blatant product placement in three or four shows now) is just poop-icing on the lovely cake. I'll pay the product placement premium for better production values and writing, I'm gonna get annoyed if they're trying to sell me something on a shittier show. Not one of the Sunny cast is at all worthwhile on Twitter so I wouldn't know what sermon he preached to the choir.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
TheManWithNoName posted:They don't need money to make the show. Didn't they sign like a six season contract a couple years ago? So your justification for the network not needing money is them being tied into longterm contracts with the people on the show? Do you realize how contradictory (and extremely retarded) that sounds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 17:59
|
|
|
Posting my response in the Sunny thread because this is probably an annoying derail to everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 18:02
|
|
|
Role Play McMurphy posted:Could be because there wasn't a worthwhile episode to be found beneath all that product placement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 19:16
|
|
|
TheManWithNoName posted:I'm sure Seinfeld would be funnier if it was set in a Denny's, or Friends was in a Starbucks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1HXXcVFySM
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 19:18
|
|
|
Space_Butler posted:Great post! Thanks for not only starting a derail with an off-topic comment (before you try to twist a claim that it was on topic, I dare you to tell me how this relates to blu-ray at all), but dragging up a debate that ended almost 7 months ago. double dare me and i'll do it. sorry I haven't cared to keep up on all the latest Sunny debates since I don't participate in discussions about a Bad Show
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
If Sunny was a burger...
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 20:02
|
|
|
henpod posted:If Sunny was a burger...
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
fenix down posted:That is a tasty burger!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
I have incredibly strong opinions on a comedy show for stoners. First of all
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 21:00
|
|
|
It's Always Sunny isn't stoner comedy 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
Role Play McMurphy posted:double dare me and i'll do it. sorry I haven't cared to keep up on all the latest Sunny debates since I don't participate in discussions about a Bad Show Back to the thread at hand, the Stargate: Atlantis box art has officially been unveiled, and it looks like a pretty thick box. Space_Butler fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Jul 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 22:37
|
|
|
Doesn't seem like it's 100% confirmed, but it looks like the Halloween II blu is going to included "Terror in the Aisles" as a special feature.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2011 23:02
|
|
|
The Phantom Goat posted:Doesn't seem like it's 100% confirmed, but it looks like the Halloween II blu is going to included "Terror in the Aisles" as a special feature. I saw this and have been thinking about it a lot. It makes sense since it's hosted by Donald Pleasance and Jamie Lee Curtis and was made around the same time as Halloween II, but why would they make it a special feature? It's a pretty rare VHS tape and never made it to DVD. It would be awesome to see (especially if it's in HD), but considering the treatment all other Halloween II releases have gotten, I'm somewhat doubtful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2011 00:40
|
|
|
Captain Charisma posted:The cast has actually said they switched to HD partially because they felt bad that people were getting ripped off from the previous Blu-Ray releases which were just upscales And then we have Community which is shot and broadcast in HD, produced and distributed by Sony, and not a bluray in sight. If there wasn't a coupon code that dropped it to $13 around the time it came out I wouldn't have bought it at all. Dan Harmon even posted on Twitter a while ago that he has no explanation as to why there isn't one, doesn't know if season 2 will get one, and can't control it anyway so please stop bothering him about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2011 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
qbert posted:Except when it comes to Kubrick. Not really. Kubrick shot his films full-frame because he didn't want them pan-scanned on home video, and released them in open-format because 16:9 televisions weren't prevalent. There aren't any indications that he preferred the Academy ratio over widescreen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2011 04:18
|
|
