To do that sucessfully, you'll have to ask the movie studios to stop promoting DVD and Blu Ray together. I doubt it'll happen though. It's inevitable that this was going to happen. I think having seperate DVD and BD forums is about as segregated as it'll ever get.

I guess different people have different standards. I personally do not have a single blockbuster in my collection on BD (perhaps only Apocalypto). BD has had me excited primarily with its effect on classics.

Pro-B

If I may...Pro-B certainly rubs some posters the wrong way. I personally have no issue with him. He's a die-hard film purist, and it comes through sometimes as harsh. Pro-B truly accepts no substitute...you know? I find Pro-B to be quite thorough in explanations and strong on opinion, and I appreciate it. I think those who have a problem with him simply don't understand that, and take it as an elitist attitude, which I can see happening.

But back to the point...

It's quite a different debate on this matter than the infamous HD debates of just a year ago. I'm all for film purity and having it look and sound the best that it can, but that also has to be reigned in by my wallet. I would love to have every DVD I own replaced with a HD version, but it's simply not realistic, and in most cases, will probably never see a release on BD.

In situations like the Third Man, which is one of my all time fave films, I may be tempted to go to Blu when I get a player. But it's not necessary, as I'm unsure how much of a difference it will actually make. Would I like to see it in 1080p, remastered? Sure. Does it affect my enjoyment of the movie? Not in the least. Because the Criterion SD DVD is still miles better than the old garbage VHS transfer which made me fall in love with the film.

I see the lines as less clear cut that "dvd collector" or "film afficio", and it's unfair to try to lump everyone in either category. I'm a Hiroyuki Nakano fan...and the only way I could get Stereo future was an HK of the Japanese Release, which I believe is probably a boot (I was told differently at the time...but now it's apparent). The quality isn't great, but it's certainly watchable and I enjoyed it regardless, because I want to see the film. On the other hand, when I watch the Matrix, I want to be blown away, which is why I got it on HD. It's a very situational thing for me, and I'd assume the lot of posters here.

Precisely. I was pleased as hell with the restoration of the Seven Samurai, but at this point, I'm on my 3rd version, and not sure if I'm up for purchasing #4. I love the film, and if it's a night/day improvement over the current Criterion SD, then I will certainly consider it. But it doesn't affect my love for the film. Then again, I have a number of goofy/silly things in my collection, and I could give a shit if it's Blu, like American Pie. It only is watched once in a while, and it's fine for that...certainly not a classic, you know?

But that was the whole point of the statement I made - BD is a natural supplement if you are a film buff. Nowhere in my posts did I state that you have to go with the one or the other (SDVD/BD). Obviously, the BD market is growing so it would take time to reach the variety we have with SDVD. This was the case when we transitioned from VHS to DVD (and even today we still have titles that appeared on VHS but did not make it to DVD), so to think or wait for the BD catalog to match that of DVD is not only unrealistic, it is also rather naive. This is the whole point of this debate!

Furthermore, I also see, in a very near future, a two-tier market where the studios will have a very simple scheme to work with - a loaded with extras BD version of a film, and a budget extra-less DVD. The 2DVD discs will be eliminated. I think that such an approach will shift the market gradually in the direction they, the studios, desire without angering a lot of those customers who consider price a huge factor (we all do, but some are willing to pay top $ for their favorite films).

Pro-B

Oh, I know...wasn't trying to put words in your mouth (or on your keyboard...whatever).

But what you outline in the second part is truly a sad thing...and it's probably the way it will go. My parents certainly aren't going to go Blu, as they could give a shit, but love the extras on, say, the Wall*E 3-disc. Even that release is a sham though, because the 3rd disc is essentially useless to them, as all it serves is for a digital copy. And they have the balls to price it at a similar MSRP as the blu...

It is just the way business is done. Take a look at how many independent distributors went belly-up during the last 12 months. The DVD market reached its peak a few years ago and has slowly been declining. When it reaches that certain point where revenue between the two, BD and SDVD, is comparable the phasing will occur. It is a natural progression, at least in the eyes of the generation that is coming behind us, behind the people who witnessed the boom of DVD. Think about this - there are a lot of film enthusiasts who came on board with DVD and never thought about collecting VHS. Now, there is a whole new generation of film enthusiasts coming on board with BD that will never think about collecting DVDs. It is a cycle, it happened with VHS to DVD, and it will happen with DVD to BD.

It is also called aging

Pro-B

I've always been into films, not formats. At times I kinda wish I hadn't got seriously into DVD and should have curtailed things when I tossed most of my VHS collection many years back. I've held off from BD so far as I know it'll just be another black hole for my money, but I'm by no means against it; chances are I'll get a PS3 before a dedicated player (which, of course, will be another black hole with the $$$ I'll spend on games). I imagine I'll embrace BD when it becomes the norm (in line with Pro-B's outline above) and DVD is truly the new VHS...

In other words, the improved picture and sound quality alone isn't enough to get people to switch to Blu-Ray.

I think that says a lot about the overall (lack of) appeal of the new format.

(don't get me wrong... I don't opposed Blu-Ray at all... I just don't think the appeal is that great to many many happy DVD and/or film enthusiasts)

Short of DVDs going out of stock, or a crazy new technology that enables you to interact with the movies you watch, I'm not switching.

I'd have a completely different opinion if he were able to admit being wrong about things. I guess it's a pride thing but I've narrowed some questions down to him in the past or ask for proof about something he said, where there is none, and the only thing that happens is he'll stop posting for awhile, ignoring the question completely.

I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong about something and have more respect for those that can do the same. It's not easy for some people.

Back to the topic though, if BR fails, I see it as people being happy with upconverting players and not wanting to spend a lot more money on a BR player. Sony saying their low end players are going to stay at $299 isn't going to help people jump over.

This is a debatable observation and I think that you are missing the point of my statement.

DVD did not become what it is because people suddenly realized that it is a tremendous improvement over VHS. In fact, DVD was effectively dismissed by many because it tried to instill a brand new philosophy of viewing films at home - original aspect ration, multiple subtitle options, extras, etc. With other words, the studios made it succeed.

Now consider this, the parties that made DVD a success, are the same parties that changed people's perceptions about quality and value, and rightfully so. These are also the same parties that own the content you get on DVD.

I hope you understand what I am trying to reveal to you, and why I disagree with your pessimistic view on Blu-ray.

You really do not have to be a "Blu-ray fan" to recognize what is shaping out. You simply have to realize that generations, and formats for that matter, change.

It is what drives markets and economies.

Pro-B

I think Dragon's Lair and Space Ace are on BR

It seems like generic talk is still your forte!

Pro-B

I buy both.

Wow, some of you are really taking what Pro-B said the wrong way. You have to undestand where he's coming from, which is from the perspective of a true cinemaphile.

Any cinemaphile who has the money should want to view these films in HD, since it's a fact that BD offers the best video and audio quality available. It's not true at all that upconverted DVDs match BD, much less offer better quality than BD. That's just a silly thing to say.

If you aren't a hardcore cinemaphile, and DVD is as far as you want to go, that's fine. If you don't have the money to spend to dive in just yet, that's obviously fine as well.

I'm like Pro-B, in that the lies and misinformation is what ticks me off the most. People saying you have to spend thousands of dollars to notice a difference, people claiming that upconvered DVD is just as good or even better than BD, etc...

If the only thing that matters to some of you is the actual content of film, the story of the picture, and you don't care much about the audio and video, that's fine also. But for many of us, film goes beyond just the story, and very much includes the visual aspects of video and audio. I couldn't be more thrilled by seeing the classics as good as many of them look on BD. I can only imagine how the director's of some of these pictures would love to see their work in homes, looking just about as perfect as it did the first day it was put on film.

Ha ha, I knew you would respond with something like that while still avoiding answering such questions. Just like before when I brought up ignoring answering questions that would show BR in a bad light.

Thanks.

edit:
Here's where you tried to discredit me when I brought up people not wanting to switch to BR because they're happy with upconverting DVD players.

Yet here we are in this thread.

Back to high prices for BR, the new Narnia movie and Wanted can be had on BR for $19.99 at Sears. That's a step in the right direction.

Preach, brother.

I see you points to some degree. Don't have time to read all of the recent posts, but here are two quick points.

I feel that a person can be just as much as a film aficionado with a VHS on a 5" black and white as a person with a hundred thousand dollar home theater. The movie is the thing. Better sound and/or picture is just bells and whistles. Saying or implying that a true fan has to go blu-ray is just wrong.

Also, the blu-ray library is very much geared towards mainstream stuff right now. I could easily see a classic film buff having only 3 or 4 of their 500 favorite movies available. How can you even begin to imply that true fans should go blu when there is nothing available. Heck, I consider myself a mainstream fluffy film fan, and only a dozen or less of my top 200 films are on blu ray.

Then there is the whole quality is relative argument. I don't think any of us should argue with anyone who thinks that DVD is good enough for them, especially when you have to admit that there is a minimum of a 2-1 price difference right now. Sure, there are some blu rays cheaper than the same film on DVD, and sometimes the cost is only slightly higher. But for pretty much everyone, the price difference is at least 2 to 1.

Joe public sees DVDs at $5-15 and blu-rays at $20-35.

I'll use myself as another extreme, a bargain shopper. This year I've bought about 60 blu rays for perhaps $8 each on average. (I've been patient and very savvy in my shopping, most bargain hunters are probably higher per disc than that.) I've bought about 500 DVDs at perhaps $3 per film.

I'd rather have 80 great films on DVD than 30 from a very limited selection on blu-ray.

Could not have said it better.

I love film, it makes no sense to me whatsoever, for me, to stay with DVD, when a superior way to enjoy cinema now exists. So yeah, when a DVD announcement is made, my first thoughts are, when will it be in Blu.

I'm a film collector, not a DVD colloctor.

Not to mention that there are features other than just better A/V quality that's possible on BD.

I already bought my first 3 BDs, but it's more of a purchase as a reserve - I still don't have a BD-player and I don't know when I will get it. Sure I will be buying BDs in future, but I'm also keeping most of DVDs - LEs, gift boxes, films that are not on BD yet and DVDs with extra features not presented on BD.
I'm not buying BD-player for a couple of reasons - first I need HD-TV and other equipment otherwise there's no use in it. Second - I want multiregional BD-player, because I don't want to limit myself with only American or only European BDs - I've always been buying editions I like most and not because they'll be compatible with my player. Don't like when companies tell me which DVDs or BDs to buy - if I want one from the US - I'll get it, if I want a Thai one - I'll get a Thai one. So I'm waiting for the moment when multiregional players become available and when they cost less then $500!

I'll only upgrade to BR if there's no other way to obtain a certain title. Untill then, I'm still perfectly fine with DVD.

$499.99 and it streams Netflix

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-LG-BD300-Mul...QQcmdZViewItem

With 30% cashback that's tempting.