Regarding Lethal Weapon having 'everything' the previous dvds contained. You are incorrect if you think it contains 'everything'!

http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_ite...or=1#topoftabs



First off, it should be noted that this HD-DVD version of the film is the theatrical one, not the Director’s Cut (which is available on standard DVD). I prefer the theatrical cut to the director’s version, but viewers should be aware of what their getting on this release. The good news is that Warners has included most of the director’s cut footage as bonus material on this disc (in standard, but anamorphic format) with one exception: the sniper scene involving Riggs is not here...I have no idea why it was left out of the deleted footage. The deleted footage runs a total of about 5 minutes, and the only other extra on the HD-DVD is the theatrical trailer


So while the SD dvd had two releases,one the theatrical,then years later a directors cut/extended version.

The HD version contains the theatrical version only while it contains some but not all of the directors cut footage as an extra. And unfortunately it's missing the [B]best] of the deleted scenes(sniper scene)!

They still haven't figured out how to do seamless branching on HD DVD (or probably Blu-ray either), which would make it possible to put several cuts of a movie on a disc.

Over at computerworld there is an article comparing the two formats and it points out that most HD-DVDs are nearly maxed out in space with the small amount of extras currently being released on discs. For example - Last Samauri was a 27+ Gigs (out of 30). How in the world do you think you could fit all 4 Leathal Weapons on one disc if one movie is taking up that kind of space. I still expect we will see movies like Lord of the Rings spread across multiple disc - HD takes a huge amount of space - its just a fact.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/...icleId=9001361

To be fair, these numbers aren't absolute.

One -- The Last Samurai was one of the first encodes for HD DVD, performed last year. The compression tools are a lot more efficient now (Microsoft claims that they could fit Return of the King on one 30 gig disc without any concerns), and because the compressionists knew they had so much space at their disposal, they didn't work that hard to keep the file size down.

Two -- The extras are still encoded in MPEG-2, which gobbles up a lot of space.

I think this just answered why I'm not picking it up. thanks.

I'm a little dense-- what does "software on chip" mean?

Basically it means creating a specific set of functions for a chip vs. the current approach used in the HD DVD players. The current approach is to use an Intel Pentium 4 which is a fully featured, general purpose CPU. SoC would be boiling that down to essential functionality and removing the general purpose nature of the chip... that would remove lots of parts inside the chip. The drawback being it isn't nearly as easily "updatable" in the field.

The term is system-on-chip.

I guess I should have been clear when I made the Lethal Weapon comment. Originally, I meant it could fit all four Lethal Weapon movies on there as they currently are...not in HD. I know that all four wouldn't fit in HD, then again, I didn't know how many gigs an HD transfer took.

And digital...I think you'll be gracing my ignore list. Reading through this forum, your bashing is the one thing consistent in most of the threads.

= J

Ah...then i guess you're forgetting about my "news" being consistant as well. See ya!

I wonder if something like this would ever happen? that could be a great selling point for those who don't really care about HD but do care about space.

Maybe. Don May Jr. from Synapse Films talked about the possibility of taking some of his movies without HD transfers and doing double/triple features.

1. The public has been told, in every major article I've read, to stay away for now.

2. Then the public sees the price tag which is $350-450 higher for the player and $10 more for the movie and keeps on walking.

Right, but the point is that nothing about these formats -- positive or negative -- has really cemented in the minds of the public. Barely anyone knows they exist. They haven't really gotten that much press, there isn't much of a buzz behind 'em, they aren't displayed overly prominently in stores, the marketing blitz is still months off... I just mean, if you picked twenty people off the street and asked them about HD DVD and Blu-ray, the overwhelming majority (1) would not know what you're talking about, (2) would have maybe some very, very cursory knowledge, or (3) thought they knew but were mistaking it for something else.

This may happen, but I think people will snub it the way they snub DVDs that feature two or three movies on a disc, as cheapie budget knockoffs.

Ignoring all the biting remarks being made at the moment. I'll just say what do you expect from the first generation of the new High Definition formats? The first set of discs out on DVD were the same way. Same thing with most new technology. Just wait, new players soon, new discs, new and old movies. You may not see such a huge section in Best Buy as you would for DVDs or CDs, but patience is a virtue. The war has just begun, cook some popcorn, sit back, and watch these two formats battle it out. Competition breeds benefits for us consumers.

Imagine TV series...you could fit certain ones all on one Blu-Ray disc.

= J

Please don't take this as bashing because it isn't intended as such.

and

While I understand what you are suggesting (from a purely technical standpoint, it is feasible), I really don't see why anyone would buy it. Why would I want to invest a sizeable amount of money in an HDTV and HD DVD or Blu-ray player, only to then go out and buy SD content to watch on it? The whole point of both formats is the dramatic improvements in video and audio they offer. The storage capacity is really secondary to that.

For me, personally, it would be utterly pointless to even consider putting all four Lethal Weapon movies in SD on a single HD disc. More than likely it wouldn't save much money, and even if it did cost less it certainly wouldn't enhance the experience of watching any of the films. As far as TV shows go, unless a show is shot on SD video (and most shows I collect aren't, they are shot on 35mm film), if they are to be released on HD DVD or Blu-ray, I would much rather have them presented in HD, not SD.

Here, here!!! *applause*

the title of this thread is one of the more appropriate i've seen.

I didn't read it that way. I thought it was obvious that he was just making a point about how the space wasn't being utilized.

And it'll have to stay in our imagination along with the 50GB BD discs.

This is the only post that has some actual thought in it. This is the reason for all the wasted space. Sony will be double dipping with Blu-Ray and Warner will eventually double dip with Lethal Weapon. They have been spoiled by the double dipping craze. They know they can do it and that people are willing to buy multiple copies of the same flick with some rather weak extras so why would they stop?

The studios know that they can do what they with DVD and them not knowing how to use the new formats is complete BS. They had enough experience with DVD and should have no problem creating extras for the new formats. It might not be at the level of what the new formats could create, but they definitely can do something.

There is also substantial costs in creating extras. It can cost nearly $1m dollars for your average disc and the studio has to sell a certain amount so that it can make some money. That's why I think you won't be seeing any crazy and innovative extras because the cost is so high to do them. Unless there is a way to create those extras for next to nothing you will see this trend continue.

This is the reason both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are pieces of shit, not because of the technology but because of the people behind them.

Oh and forget about HD extras because for the most part you won't see any.

I'd prefer the extras to be on an extra disc anyway. No use wasting any space that could be used to increase the PQ of the main feature. PQ is my primary concern, AQ next, then everything else. As long as the extras don't interfere with PQ/AQ I'd like to have them... but not at a huge extra cost like they've been trying to do with SD DVD lately. Fortunately, HD DVD seems to be able to provide pristine PQ and include all the extras from the DVD release. Great for me.

"Little-to-no HD DVD-exclusive extras" equals "piece of shit"? How do you arrive at that?

I'm with awmurray -- heck, if the concept of extras completely evaporated tomorrow, I wouldn't blink twice.