The 40-Year-Old Virgin Blu-ray; different transfer than HD DVD?
 

I kept waiting, hoping that specs or information would come out stating if the Blu-ray "40-Year-Old Virgin" would have a new transfer (read: not DNR/EE'd to heck like the HD DVD), but haven't found such information yet. I know it'll have the option to watch the theatrical version (Woo!), which indicates that maybe it won't be a claymation type image, but has anything official been said?

I'm wondering as well. If so I will definitely dump my HD DVD, but may do so any way for the superior theatrical cut.

It seems it could happen given how Universal has redone other transfers from previous HD DVD's. Then again, the results have been mixed, so who knows how it will turn out.

Universal hasn't actually struck new masters for any of the titles they've ported to Blu-ray. All they've done is re-encode the compression, in some cases mildly improving and in other cases mildly worsening them.

Unfortunately, 40 Year-Old Virgin has edge enhancement caked into the master. It's going to look just as bad on Blu-ray unless they remaster it from scratch.

Reviewers should be getting it next week....and if past Universal BD catalogs hold true, don't expect anything nicer than whats on HD DVD. The Theatrical version though...I don't know.

Whatever. This could add another two hours to this movie and I would love it.

Same here. :lol:

I have the review copy, and the review should follow shortly. I can confirm, DNR, EE, and compression issues. Not any different really than the HD-DVD.

Yep.

Watched it the other night on BD and compared to my HD copy...exactly the same.

Why does Universal have to do this? Doesn't high definition seem like it's the best we'd get at home without having to do anything to the master to make it look prettier? Edge enhancement is terrible, and so is DNR. Ugh.

Another question is: why bother with new transfers on some discs but not others?

I don't think they are doing "new" transfers just a new encode (for some). The only reason I can think of is to save a bit of space to make room for the DTS MA track (vs the smaller DD+ tracks on most of the Uni doubledips like 40 YO). Remember, most of these titles were on 30GB discs and have to go down to 25GB. So they have to cut 5GB of space somehow...and most of HD DVD extras were in SD so they don't take up that much room. 40Y0 has no excuse since it went from a 30GB disc to 50GB (but it did add the Theatrical Cut in HD which leads me too...)

I was more curious to see if the Theatrical cut on the BD (40 YO) did not have EE...but it does :(

We've discussed it before here...but many people not 'in the know' like average consumers think HD stuff should be pretty and clean. They consider grain to be 'dirty' and not HD-like.

I'd much rather see intended grain then wax-like crap on 40 YO and Scary Movie. A little bit on DNR is fine with me...a little, but not like what happened to Pans Labrynth.

Well, I sort of wrote an 'open question' to Universal in my upcoming review.

That's the thing, I understand they're trying to sell blu-rays to a crowd that wants their high def, and a majority of this crowd thinks grain=bad. Grain CAN be bad, if it's due to compression issues, which this movie has. But when you take FILM grain, and you put a filter over the image to remove that, you're taking away detail, and doing other funky things to the image.

But when it took so long for many to understand the difference between full screen and widescreen, I think this is going to be an enormous uphill debate that will be talked about for years and years to come.

That's what I meant to say - just being lazy with the lingo. :)

So, is there any reason to get the BD if I already have the HD-DVD? Extras?

Unless you want the Theatrical Cut in HD - no. The DTS MA in this type of film is not really a huge improvement over the DD+ (IMO).

Nope. Unless your HD DVD player goes poopy.

Plus I like my slip cover to much :) One of the few releases that had one (American Gangster being the second)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Universal using seamless branching on these discs (40YO and Sarah Marshall)? Why would the theatrical cut look any different in that case? I highly doubt they're putting two full encodes of the movie on it.

It does not look any different - I had hoped it would have two different encodes though (so it may not have the EE applied to the Theatrical Cut).

As for seamless branching...I don't know if its used or not in 40 YO, Knocked Up or FSM. Though in FSM case, I think it was (some slight macro-blocking appears at the same time in both versions of the film).

I'm pretty sure they're using seamless branching. IIRC, seamless branching was enabled on the format from launch. There's no reason not to use it, and many good reasons to use it (don't have to put two separate encodes on the disc, two separate lossless audio tracks, and do a new encode of the theatrical cuts).

Very true, but IIRC, American Gangster has both cuts of the film on one BD but only one has lossless (the other is standard DD5.1). I'll have to double-check as my copies are still in my car right now.

Hmm. That's odd. Are you sure it's not just a listing error? Did you cycle through the audio options on both cuts?

That doesn't necessarily mean they put two different complete video encodes on the disc though. I know of situations where, due to seamless branching, one cut has certain audio options the other cut doesn't.