This

Well, here's the short-term advantage for the studios: there simply aren't enough new releases to rely on for the supply of Blu-ray content right now. Ergo, there will never be a better time for catalog releases. I agree, though, that the longer they wait the less likely the average person will have an interest in a given release. Still, I think there are enough movies whose stars are still active and popular that they will continue to draw in fans who will look to find their earlier work.

There's now an entire generation who thinks of Tom Cruise as the bat-shit crazy guy jumping on Oprah's couch and brainwashing Katie Holmes that will, eventually, explore his filmography and find their way to [I]Cocktail/I]. Why? Because that's what movie fans have always done: see as many things with actors they really like as they can. In the pre-home video era, that meant that stars, not stories, were the focus of trailers. Today, it means IMDB is an important online resource for fans who want to explore other things with those actors in them.

Ultimately, the viability of the format lies in its ability to sell product. And if Tom Cruise continues to be marketable, then his earlier features are viable releases. To date, the only DVD release of Cocktail was a barebones issue. If Warner (I think it was theirs) rolled out a Blu-ray edition with some bonus material--and it really doesn't matter what it is, so long as it includes the music video for "Kokomo"--then I think it would sell reasonably well. Not only does it star a still-popular lead actor, which could bring in newer fans, but it would be a serious upgrade for fans of the film who bought that earlier DVD. Plenty of people may have liked the film but hadn't adopted DVD when it went out of print. There are numerous Cocktails out there, and can really give the format a boost.

But, yes, I agree that the window for this opportunity is quite limited and the studios need to roll out these catalog titles--at least the more easily marketable ones--in the next year, two tops, if they are to sell these titles to the younger buyers.

I do not believe that blu-ray will take over DVDs. First off all, there is the price. To properly enjoy blu-rays requires a fair investment, when considering a respectable sized HDTV, the blu-ray player itself and a receiver with the surround sound speakers. All of these components quickly add up to a lot of money (probably more than the "average" consumer is willing to spend). In addition, compared to standard DVD players, blu-ray players are fairly complicated when users (particularly less tech savvy users) have to take into account blu-ray profiles, hdmi versions and the necessary firmware upgrades that most newer blu-ray players require. Next, as most members have stated, the library of blu-ray titles, when compared to the DVD library, is fairly limited. Finally, I think that blu-ray manufacturers themselves may also present an obstacle to people upgrading to blu-ray. As probably everyone that reads this board knows, in the near future both manufacturers of HDTVs and of blu-ray players are going to introduce HDTVs and blu-ray players that will offer "true" 3D for home viewing. While I'm sure some people are excited by this prospect, I wonder how many people that finally made the switch to blu-ray, with the latest blu-ray player and a nice 1080P HDTV, are going to be very happy that their brand new home theater is not going to be able to play every single blu-ray disc, and will, in essence, have outdated technology. Of course, that is only my humble opinion.

Personally I am not really willing to replace all of my DVDs with Blu but will continue buying new release Blu/DVD combo packs and Blu-Ray in general if the prices keep falling

Agreed to some extent. Clearly, the Blu-Ray manufacturers had a window of opportunity that was partially missed with the HD/BD problem but they also missed the boat by promoting Blu-Ray as being able to handle the film in HD AS well as all the featurettes/special feature stuff. Then the studios shot the manufacturers in the foot by promptly issuing a bunch of bare-bone releases. The biggest problem for manufacturers on the next 'big thing' is with higher video resolution comes the law of diminishing returns. Perhaps that why so much attention is being paid to 3D stuff.

Yes, as someone mentioned many consumers will double-dip for a special film, but how many really special films are out there and how many young people coming up really really care about films enough to get off video games and the Internet to notice?

I might be wrong here but wasn't vhs phased out even before that?

Yes, that "video" look you may see on some HDTVs playing blu-rays is solely the fault of the TV and not the blu-ray.

Like noworries says, it has to do with refresh rate, and it's usually because of LCD-TVs and how they don't handle motion very well, so they've implemented this "IFC" thing that makes the movement look smoother, but it just kills the look of the image and makes it look like a cheap (though sharp) soap opera instead of a film. But this is just with LCD TV and not Plasmas or LEDs.

Blu-ray films look very much like films on my plasma, trust me.

If I remember correctly 2005's "A History of Violence" was the last major studio title released on VHS.

It would have to be more than 5 years. Lots of people are happy with DVD and it'll be a slow push. Price drops, Disney coupons, BR/DVD combos that are priced only a couple dollars above just the DVD(like Shorts) will help.

I don't think there will be some new big thing that will replace BR because that's not going to change the people that are still on DVD. In fact they'll probably stay away from it even more with the reasoning that if blu-ray failed at overtaking DVD, why wouldn't this also fail. Then that format will be the thing before the next big thing. You'll also still have people complaining about expensive TVs and audio equipment necessary to use it.

In reality, the stuff normal people watch DVDs with is fine for blu-ray. Yes, more expensive stuff makes it look and sound better but the same can be said about DVD.

There was a story a year ago about the last place that distributed them finally stopping.

On a side note, the girl that works next to me bought a PS3 from Wal-Mart on Black Friday and has been really vocal about how pleased she's been with blu-ray.

I sometimes wonder if a lot of HDTV owners really care about the fact that their TV is capable of delivering Hi-Def.

I think the slim & sleek asthetics of HDTVs are more the selling feature than the HD capabilities.

The look of HDTV says "I've got a new TV, not like one of those old, bulky CRT TVs".

It's similar when computer monitors became slim. Everyone seemed to ditch their CRT as they took-up less space and looked sleeker. Less important was whether the monitor was 16:9 or 4:3 or Hi-Def as long as it was slim & a flat panel.

While I personally buy Blu when I can, I don't forsee Blu-Ray overtaking DVD in the mainstream market, at least any time soon.

I personally don't really care about BR and higher quality movies. I don't want to say I cannot notice a difference, but it's just not something that's important to me. I don't spend a ton on DVDs, and cannot justify paying more for a BR when I get most of my DVDs for like $5.

Yeah, that's part of the problem. You go into Best Buy, and they have a DVD of a movie for $9.99, and then there's the Blu-ray, and it's $29.99.

The software prices really need to start coming down to be more in line with DVD prices. A Blu-ray should probably cost about $5 more than its DVD counterpart.

Christ, you can buy a 4-pack of "The Matrix" (all three movies plus Animatrix) for well under $20 - I've seen it as low as $9.99, and then there's the Ultimate Matrix on Blu-ray for $99.99.

I can understand the studios wanting to make as much money as they can, but they have to understand that buying pre-recorded movies, especially ones that have been out a few years, are impulse purchases for most people.

Consumers have already been trained to pick up DVDs for under $10, and most of us are going to balk at the $30 price tags on these things.

Sho' nuff, and if they want to move more catalog titles and get my wife and I to upgrade very many of our 700+ titles to BD, they're gonna have to get into that price point. Still, I have to give them credit for pricing new releases comparable to, and in many cases less than, their DVD counterparts. I realize this is just a ploy to entice the masses into making the technological jump, and as long as it favors me I'm on board with it. I only hope that the economies of scale catch up around the time that parity goes away and that the price of the format altogether will be more in line with what DVD has been the last several years.

And, while I'm giving credit to studios, hats off to Disney. When you can make one purchase and have a title on Blu-ray, DVD and a digital copy, and reasonably priced at that, then I think that's a good thing.

Prices have come down. You can go into Target right now and find Blu-rays for $9.99 and $14.99.

I've also been able to buy blu-ray/dvd combo for only a couple dollars more than the DVD only edition.

Over the past couple of weeks, the DVD with less bonus features has been more expensive than the BRD couterpart at Target.

Star Trek (with cool Enterprise case): $27 DVD; $20 BRD.
Terminator Salvation: $23 DVD; $20 BRD.

I imagine that the trend will only continue.

TLK

The local Best Buy & Future Shop flyers in the Vancouver, Canada area are advertising:

Harry Potter: $17.99 - DVD & $26.99 for the Blu-ray

Julia & Julia: $24.99 DVD & $31.99 for the Blu-ray

Public Enemies: $18.99 DVD & $26.99 Blu-ray

They have select Lion's Gate titles like Total Recall, Reservoir Dogs, Dirty Dancing, Crash etc. for $9.99 but again these are titles you have been able to purchase for $4.99 on DVD over the last few years.

I think with people buying fewer new release DVDs at $18.99, the price of Blu-ray is more of a reason for consumers to think twice before plunking down almost $30 on just any new release.

Blu-rays may never take over the DVD market, but they are coming into the mainstream very nicely. The prices are finally sensible to me, and players are very affordable for what the average person needs. They are looking less like a footnote in format history every day.

But that's Canada and you guys don't count.

Over here at Wal-Mart, Harry Potter is $15.32 for the Blu-ray/DVD combo. The comparable edition, with special features, comes in costing more at $18.86.

Julia & Julia doesn't matter because I'm not a female.

Public Enemies is $18.86 for the Blu-ray/DVD combo and only $3 cheaper for the DVD only.

Once again, Canada doesn't count.

We can argue this back and forth till we are blue in the face. Bottom line is that sometimes the blue ray version is cheaper than the dvd version. Most of the time that isnt the case.

Oh, and there isnt a reason to be a dick to Canadians.

I'm just saying when you're trying to argue prices and using funny money, it solves nothing.

Canada sucks, I'm not referring to the people trapped there.

Well, what you don't know is that a band of Canadian women once abducted and traumatized MisterPeepers. Hence not only his disdain for Canadians, but his pronounced disdain for females and films that target them, such as Julie & Julia. He's reasonably well adjusted, all things considered.

Well, my secret's out.

Greatest 2,000th post ever!