Close but not quite... at least you can upconvert an SD on a HD DVD player, can't do that with an LD player.

Hell, I made sizable investments in HD DVD hardware and software, and I still think it's going away. But I wouldn't make any more investments now.

Well, look at it from the perspective of Universal and Paramount (moreso universal then paramount tho, since paramount sucks when it comes to the number of releases). You can slow the HD DVD releases to a halt by releasing just day/dates and future catalog titles, and you have a catalog of 100+ already encoded HD DVDs you can port to blu-ray and release 2-3 a week for the whole year, all of that is major profit for work already finished. I wouldnt expect it long till everything is out on BD, would be silly to expect otherwise IMO.

Not true.... HD-DVD is a very very close quality level to Blu-Ray.... not quite blu-ray, but close. Depending on the transfer, I have seen several HD-DVD's that look and sound better than Blu-ray. Just because the better technology is there doesn't mean that the movie transfer people will utilize it. Bringing up Laserdisc is not even close to the same situation. There are many great things about HD-DVD and it is almost as good as Blu-ray. I think for the money if it's worth it to see any of the exclusive HD-DVD's then I would get those and enjoy them (today). Everything else, just buy in Blu-ray. A net flix subscription will offer most of the HD-DVD movies and then you can at least see them in HD while not investing $10-$30 a piece in the discs. I have a huge Laserdisc collection that I will occasionally pull out some of the rare stuff and watch. Disney's Song of the South was only available on Laserdisc and I doubt if it will ever be put on DVD much less HD or Blu-ray. Many of the original Looney Tunes cartoons are still ONLY available on Laserdisc. Hopefully those will eventually come out on at least standard DVD. My movie collection spans every format except VHS or Beta...I never invested into those.

Like the label or not the majority of BD owners are PS3 owners and the disc sales pretty much prove that the vast majority are younger males that prefer mainstream action and comedy films. Despite the larger user base classic films have sold just as poorly on Blu-ray so I see Warner in no hurry to move them to Blu-ray. Wizard of Oz was announced for last year and never showed up and Bonnie and Clyde is about the only major classic I can even think of currently on the release list.

I would also mention I am a PS3 owner that has snatched up every classic possible on HD DVD and Blu-ray, but there doesn't seem to be many of us at all.

Switch BD to HD-DVD, and PS3 to any Toshiba model, and you just described the majority of HD-DVD folks as well. Are you thinking their primary demographic is baby boomers or women?

As someone in the 18-24 crowd with a PS3 I'm insulted that a lot of "good" movies aren't available on the format. Granted, I have some that I love truly, but the reason why I have more HD DVD titles is because there were older and many times better movies available. I mean, I can't say anything bad about Superbad, The Departed, or 3:10 to Yuma, and having The Last Waltz, the first three Die Hard movies, and The Fly is quite honorable for the format. But for the love of Fred Ward, with stuff like the Fox titles I would rather pay $40 for a BD edition of Fight Club or Alien than Me, Myself, and Irene (an underrated comedy with an unnecessary release on the format) and Chain Reaction.

As a consumer I don't doubt Blu-ray or HD DVD as a format, but with the former I must be in a minority (in the world view) for wanting better, "older" titles.

When the general base of Blu-ray players in inside of a video game console, the term "gamers" is fairly accurate. Warner themselves have even mentioned this 2-3 times as well. If Warner really thought that those classic titles would sell on Blu-ray, they would have released them day and date with the HD DVD versions (as I believe nearly all of these on HD DVD were released when Blu-ray players were available). Remember, HD DVD only had a 2 month head start, and the "classic" titles can easily be ported, no HDi or anything like that to overcome.

Maybe in your opinion, but not mine, and not the others you posting that they will be buying one since it's the most future proof BD player out there.

I'll repeat the same question to you. Just who do you think the target demographic of HD-DVD is if not the same demographic that buy PS3's?

You've said basically what I've felt about the high def formats all along. Without better (or, in the case of some studios, any) classic and catalog representation, I'll never be fully supportive of either. It's my opinion that right from the beginning HD-DVD had and continues to have a far stronger library of titles as a whole, and this is unquestionably helped by the beautiful restorations from Warner and a smattering of older films from Universal and Paramount -- although the latter two have made just as many mistakes in failing to release HD versions along side new DVD releases of their classics and popular older movies.

Unfortunately, sales have shown that these are not what the current group of consumers are interested in and I fear that it will discourage more from being released. Warner will certainly continue, as they've always been strong supporters of film restoration, but I'm betting the number and variety of titles will be reduced significantly from here on out, especially now that they're Blu-only. I'll be quite surprised if they even bother to put out BR editions of current HD-exclusives such as Mutiny On the Bounty, Grand Prix or Forbidden Planet (all of which are positively gorgeous, I might add).

The excuse can generally be interpreted as the studios are waiting for the base to be larger before putting out significant older films, but what better way to help expand the market than to make them available in the first place... especially when HD masters are right there for so many of them.

Given that Paramount hasn't released much...(a dozen titles or so?) since their exclusive HD deal... I don't think it'd take long at all. (end of the yr?). Universal I'm hoping will jump onboard with their big summer movies in the fall (mummy 3, HB2, etc) I'd expect maybe some of their bigger movies for the holidays as well. (Bourne trilogy - "Bourne goes Blue!"), the rest...yeah probably over the next two yrs after that...

I'm not Sony, I'm not Toshiba. I don't know what the demographics they are shooting for are, but if I had to guess, Blu-ray = gamer, younger buyers and HD DVD = mature, older buyers. The movies on both formats show this pretty clear. Regardless of how great the PS3 is as a Blu-ray player, fact is its in a video game console and most people see that as kiddie.

Great post, and I agree with every word of it. With several studios -- particularly Universal -- so hellbent on releasing the most random, uninteresting titles from their back catalogs, I don't know why they wouldn't go for something with a little more prestige. Maybe Charade wouldn't sell any better than Mobsters, and maybe Touch of Evil wouldn't sell any better than The Wedding Date, but would they sell any worse? At least movies like that could catch a cineaste's eye and convince him to buy into the format. It's always disappointing to read how poorly titles like Forbidden Planet sold, but at least you had a thousand or so people enthusiastically seeking out a copy. Who sincerely wants Mobsters or The Watcher?

I wish as just a matter of practice that the studios would at least release their more prominent catalog titles on HD DVD and Blu-ray alongside newly released DVD editions. Even though it's not my favorite movie in the world, I was really disappointed that Paramount's re-release of To Catch a Thief didn't have a high-def version released at the same time. Likewise for Warner's The Maltese Falcon, even though it was heavily rumored at the time.

I think "The Watcher" and "GI Jane" on both formats gets the WTF award for releasing them. Was anyone really clamoring for those titles?

Which does nothing to change the fact the label is accurate.

4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days

Yeah, but I guess I'm just gonna bleed Blu for a while. I don't want to pad any of those HD-DVD numbers. If the prices on players and software become embarrassing low, I might bite. But still, I'd only be buying Paramount or Universal stuff. I will support Warner with BD titles. If they decide to give me a "Casablanca" BD soon, so be it.

It's only "accurate" if you apply it to both sides.

Unless of course you're ingoring all those pesky folks who only have HD-DVD because it's hooked up to their Xbox 360's.

And that's different than those XBox 360 add ons... how?

It's even more clear now that the "gamer" and "kiddie" angle is just another way to get digs in at anybody who supports Blu.

If not meant as a dig, let's see you back it up. How many "kiddies" are buying PS3's and what are they playing on them, because I don't see much for them on the PS3 platform. What I see is a lot of young adults buying them, and the games, and they are the same age of the majority of people buying into HD-DVD.

No, if you would actually read what I wrote in the first post you would see that. Classics have not sold well in either format. HD DVD or BD with its much larger user base. HD movies to this point have been dominated by the same male demo as gamers and the PS3 and 360 add on are a big reason. HD DVD did at least have a larger percentage of standalones out there and I'm hoping we see more of that for BD.

We need standalone sales for BD to increase so we can get a broader demographic on board. If it gets to the point that nothing pre 1990s sells or is released I will have no interest in supporting the format. The number of classics on board for 2008 are pathetic. Bonnie and Clyde and Lawrence of Arabia are great, but I would expect a lot more in HD video's third year on the market.

BTW, no on is digging at you. Obviously you are one of the people like myself that is buying the classics on BD. We just need more of us and I don't think PS3 sales alone will make that happen. Most of the people I know that are considering BD would never buy a PS3 to watch movies on. Profile 2.0 compliant is great, but they want a BD player to watch movies on not a game system since they have never owned one and would not feel comfortable using it for movies.

We also need faster BD standalones. My friends first reaction when I showed him my Sharp Aquos was why the hell does it take so long to start up and load a disc? They are used to the easy and quick DVD players and expect their HD players to just be high def versions of that simple hardware design.