I picked up 9 films for around $130 a couple weeks ago from the sale at Amazon...And as I suspect that there may be a BOGO on Sony/Disney titles next week I may make my first Blu-ray purchase, even though I'm a couple months away from a player. I'm actually not buying Pirates 3 or SM3 on standard DVD because of my eventual purchase of a blu player. I know the first two Pirates films have traditionally been offered on the BOGO sales so I'm keeping my fingers crossed for next time.

I couldn't agree with you more Champ, it just doesn't seem worth it to venture out to a commercial cinema anymore. The cost v. experience ratio is hardly worth it. I will still go to see a few big films though...Last one I saw was Rendition (not really that good) and then Transformers before that. My wife and I used to go a couple times per month.

My local Scotiabank Thatre (formerly Paramount) recently brought back cheap Tuesdays. $5 for a movie and $10 for a movie with a small popcorn and regular drink. Its the only day i go there anymore. Also my local AMC has been running early matinees on the weekend for awhile now. The shows start before noon and cost $6. And you still get normal the amount of Moviewatcher points. Good deals. I haven't paid full price for a movie in over a year. 

Vega: Yeah, I own the first two Bourne films. The Identity came with my A30 (which is a great player by the way) and I picked up Supremacy during the Amazon sale. I think that put the total just over the actual trilogy price by about two bucks. The sales really make it worth while on both sides of the coin. I just wish I'd see more of them from HD DVD.

Bob: Our local AMC theatres do the matinees as well. For us to get to one it's about a 50 mile round trip though so it can be a little impractical at times. Then if we actually want the "good" AMC theatre which is on Disney property (I live just outside of Orlando) it's close to 50 miles one way. The only time we go there anymore is if there's already a shopping trip involved for my wife...

Champ: Honestly, if you decide to get an HD player I can't imagine you'll be disappointed. When my wife and I watched Transformers we were both blown away by it. What we experienced in our home theater blew away the performance of the AMC we saw it in originally.

We're film fans, period. While I think it's a pain in the ass to have to get different players for different movies I'll do it. My preference is HD DVD but I have no problem adopting a little blu player into our home. There are about 20 or so titles we consider must haves. Memoirs of a Geisha, the Pirates trilogy, Spider-Man trilogy, both Underworld titles, House of 1000 Corpses and the Devil's Rejects, Pearl Harbor just to name some of them. After a lot of discussion we came to the agreement on player price and now I'll just keep an eye out for the right time. I expect it to happen by February. From there on it doesn't matter what happens with the war. I think both sides have far too much invested in it to concede. We'll be able to sit back and watch nearly all the films we truly want in high definition.

HD DVD and Blu-ray players - $600
Our favorite Blu-ray exclusive upgrades - $300
Watching all of our favorites in HD - priceless...

"THE LOOK AND SOUND OF PURPLE"...soon enough anyway.

I'm a loyal AMC theater goer (MovieWatcher and everything) and I don't have a cup. Couldn't buy a loyalty cup if I wanted to. I feel ripped off now. That's actually a good idea. As for the concessions...I would feel guilty bringing my own in. Something just seems wrong to me! I applaud you for doing it though! Beats paying $13.50 for a popcorn and two drinks...Besides we don't really eat candy, it's popcorn or nachos for us. Can't imagine it would be very easy (or clean) to try to smuggle nacho cheese in my pockets.

Anyway, in all seriousness commercial venues will continue to lose customers until they get their acts together. They have to give people an experience they can't even come close to at home. With Blu-ray and HD DVD slowly increasing market penetration it's going to be hard for the major chains to continue brining people in, even on big blockbuster releases. With home theater continually evolving and matching or beating the audio and visual experience of commercial cinemas, it's going to be crucial for them to find something that the average movie-goer can't get at home. Home theater has taken away the wonders of a widescreen (and a giant screen for that matter) and immersive sound. One can even get the "audience effect" by inviting others over. Of course the scale is smaller but generally speaking I think the result is the same.

Quoting Calidain:

Quote:
I guess I am in the minority when it comes to the movie theater experience!!!  As much as I love my little home theater, I still rush out to see every movie (as many as I can anyway) at the theater when they finally release.  I love the crowds for the most part, especially on a big premiere because I enjoy the audience response almost as much as the films themselves.  As for the price of the concessions, I can understand the issue.  At my local Harkins Theater, I always buy the Loyalty cup ($4.00), a 32oz refillable plastic logo cup that gets me a beverage for $1 each time I go to the movies.  I no longer buy food from the concession, instead we usually buy the theater size candy boxes from our local Walgreens and smuggle them into the theater.

I agree with you, nothing like seeing a great film with a respectful crowd on the really BIG screen.  Not every movie, but some deserve to be seen on the biggest screen you can find.

Quoting twojayz:

Quote:
Asc - I tell you what, you go through my posts and cherry pick my list of lies for me. Since I own HD DVD I'm not sure I'm capable of doing so...You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't been here since the beginning of this forum, not even close. As a matter of fact my first post here was around page 105...

Yes, your beginning was on Page 105.  The following are you misleading or flat incorrect posts:

Posted: September 14, 2007 5:27 PM (Page 105)

For instance, the idea that Blu-Ray uses the same technologies as HD DVD, as I've seen posted on this forum. That is simply not the case. Yes, Blu-Ray has support for it, yet (to my knowledge) there have been no titles actually produced using it (MPEG4). I could be wrong on that but as I said, as far as I know my information is still accurate.

You came into the thread with inaccurate information.  See Highdefdigest.com for MPEG4 Part 10 releases.  Not a good start.

Posted: September 15, 2007 10:52 AM (Page 107)

The latest tech from both Dolby and DTS as well as 1080p/24 fps are available and the cost to me will be around $300-$350. Even the least expensive BD player will run close to twice that with no true performance advantages.
(Misleading.  Blu-ray movies having lossless sound on over 60% of all titles is no performance advantage?  HD DVD movies having lossless sound on under 30% of all titles is having the same performance?)

Disc capacity makes no difference to me since M4 uitilizes a far more efficient process which allows the same quality (if not marginally better) with a smaller file size, eliminating the need for larger capacity media.

Misleading.  MPEG4 is hardly utilized on HD DVD.  I guess HD DVD had the NEED for larger capacity media with the 51GB.  To bad they couldn't increase the bandwidth, so that titles like Nature's Journey couldn't outperform it with less disc space available.

Posted: September 16, 2007 7:02 PM (Page 110)

Regardless of whether or not it is encoded for a lowest common denominator, if one format is better it will be noticeable.

Huh.  Wrong.  I think most of us know this NOT to be true.  The try to convince people up is down tactic or you just didn't know any better.  All things being the same during encoding...faithfully reproducing that encode will yield the same results.

Posted: September 17, 2007 5:03 PM (Page 112)

I don't care which format has more titles available with a specific spec, if the capability is there the choices will come. And BOTH formats offer all the capabilities you say favor BD.

Not true.  See sig line on lossless audio.  That's part of what favors Blu-ray.  That is one of the results of higher bandwidth.  BTW, what happened to the MANDATORY DD+ @ 3Mbps?

Posted: September 17, 2007 5:49 PM (Page 112)

Because of the high cost of production Sony lost profit on every PS3 it sold at least up to the past few months. That is what, six to seven months of losing money on 1.5 million units sold. Couple that with the fact the BD players and the software is still way too high to produce for a long term commitment by anyone, including Sony.

Last line is WRONG and misleading.  Content producers like R&B Films says the cost difference is small (Question #5).

With the Paramount/Dreamworks announcement and some believing Warner to follow suit, how long will it be before a majority of the other studios drop the exclusivity to BD? If others realize they can make more money by either releasing on both formats or switching camps where does that leave BD? Speaking of exclusives, Onkyo is to release a HD player soon and Denon has not ruled out a HD player in the near future.

Misleading.  Why would studios leave to support the format with the least amount of Hollywood studio support?  In what world does that make sense?  Why would there be more money from the HD DVD side when Blu-ray outsells HD DVD 2:1 and 3:1?

BD was rushed to market before it was ready. This has left a bad taste in many mouths.

Misleading.  Insinuating that the HD DVD player wasn't rushed to market before it was ready...it clearly was.  Voice sync, color conversion, luma values are being clipped, dynamic range not preserved, wrong color space for HD material if HDMI is converted to DVI, around 1 min. 40 sec. power-up time, player lock ups, etc.  Samsung Blu-ray player had the NR chip, for softer images, turned on and had about a 50 sec power-up time.

One last thing is this...Sony has a horrendous history of releasing proprietary technology in stand alone products. Really the only success they have had in the past 3 decades is in fact the PlayStation line of product.

Misleading.  Sony has had many successes...3.5" Floppy disc, CD, DVD (smaller part), DV, and miniDV.  Since you mentioned the Playstation line, I will mention the Trinitron and Walkman line.  Very successful.

In short, Sony will have a much harder time actually pulling out a true victory than Toshiba will. Some will argue that Toshiba is a stronger company financially and can actually sustain the monetary requirements much better than Sony can.

[i]Misleading.  It is the BDA against Toshiba in the CE world.  Toshiba doesn't make what Sony makes a year...no less Panasonic, Mitsubishi, etc.  Here are the revenues for Toshiba and Sony alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony

That's not even looking at the others.[/i]

Posted: September 17, 2007 7:50 PM (Page 113)

If you're so well versed on all the specifications of each format then you wouldn't say the things you say, knowing that they are highly misleading if not flat out wrong.

Misleading...the specs are not highly misleading or flat out wrong.  The specs is what keeps Transformers from having a lossless soundtrack with good PQ as stated by Paramount. The audio section.

Posted: September 17, 2007 8:59 PM (Page 113)

The cd, as you pointed out was a co-developed product so that doesn't count either. Sony also contributed to the development of HD DVD...Did you know that?

Misleading...Blu-ray is a co-developed product with Panasonic and a few other companies...so was DVD and by proxy HD DVD.

Posted: September 17, 2007 9:16 PM (Page 113)

No, I am not including actual BD titles because as I said the production cost on those is still considerably higher than it should be even though they are selling.

Misleading.  "Considerably higher than it should be"?  What should it be?  It's comparable with DVD when it first came out.  Check out the HDM vs. DVD thread.

Posted: September 18, 2007 5:55 PM (Page 114)

Toshiba is doing a hell of a lot better since it costs considerably less for them to produce the hardware because it is based on standard DVD manufacturing processes. You do know that, right?

Misleading.  You have no clue if that is correct or not.  You don't know what parts are based on DVD manufacturing and what parts are not.  You also don't know what it costs to manufacturer any of the Blu-ray players...standalone or not.  I would be glad to see any source information for that statement.

Posted: September 20, 2007 8:24 PM (Page 119)

You can't use the excuse that HD limitations prevent the better BD experience when HD DVD is actually getting better audio tracks...Think about that argument for a minute and explain how the lack of "better technology" affords HD the opportunity to use a better audio track and then forces BD to use a lesser one.

Misleading.  You are trying to get people to think that the HD DVD was getting the better audio for some technical reason other than the studios' decision.  Most BD exclusive titles have lossless soundtracks and higher video bitrates.  That automatically means it's possible from a neutral studio on Blu-ray.

Posted: September 21, 2007 4:44 PM (Page 119)

I agree that the age of any film will reflect in the overall quality of the transfer to either format. I have seen age mentioned in reviews before but never paid much mind to it.

Wrong.  If properly taken care of, B&W film's age does not reflect anywhere near as much as color films in the overall quality of the transfer.  It's due to the dye in color films.

Posted: October 7, 2007 6:16 PM (Page 127)

HD DVD has to live down to the limits of a 25 GB BD disc as well...Can we agree that both formats limit each other to some degree? I for one am willing to make that concession.

Misleading.  You are acting like Blu-ray does not have a 50GB available at the request of the studios.  See Nature's Journey...BD25 and HD DVD 30GB...the BD version still has the better audio/video presentation.

Posted: October 11, 2007 6:45 PM (Page 130)

This is why you're picked on...

Maybe you're looking at it wrong...YTD and SI numbers will rise for HD DVD also, that's kind of the way sales figures go. If everything plays out no differently than current YTD trends then BD won't increase its lead. They will both grow in unison.

Picked on for being right.  The sales gap has grown as I said it would and by the amount I said it would.  If I'm usually looking at things from the wrong angle, WHY do I end up being correct so far down the road?  This a where someone that's not blind would have to re-evaluate their thinking.  Let's see how many end up doing that...shall we?


Discs sold: Blu-ray over 4 million...HD DVD over 2.5 million

Some of you know (the Internet stalkers, anyway) that I also post as Wellinformed.  Here was my prediction about 7 months ago.

Quote:
Wellinformed @ May 8th 2007 1:36PM

I'm glad Blu-ray outsold HD DVD by 500,000 discs in the first quarter of this year (no...Neilsen Videoscan numbers does not count free discs). At that rate, the disc sales gap should be 1.5 million in favor of Blu-ray by the end of the year.

Here's the link.

I can keep going if you wish, but my point has already been made.

Oh please what kind of post was that!?
I think bob might be right...

BTW I read Disney made a serious error on their PotC3 Blu-ray disc... either the packaging is wrong (stating 1080i for the feature) or the movie, unlike the other Disney Blu-ray's, is actually 1080i. I guess someone at Marketing has been sleeping on the job and okayed the package...

Quoting Mark Harrison:

Quote:
There's no way Disney would make such a gigantic blunder on one of their biggest titles.

Disney rep confirms it is incorrect packaging.

Not a very good week for Disney and their Blu Rays when you add in this blunder too.

Happily it doesn't affect me at all, the first Pirates film was so bad I never saw another and would never buy any of it!