To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Per blu-ray.com:

Cinemablend has this info for the LE set: the 50th Anniversary Edition comes with a hardcover book featuring memorabilia from the film, including poster art, story boards, script pages and other things.

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/ne...1322517446.jpg

Amazon Link - Standard Version

Amazon Link - Limited Edition Version

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

I will be picking this up. Thanks for the heads up!

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Great to see Universal finally releasing some catalog stuff, with this and All Quiet. Perhaps there's some hope for The Birds and other Hitchcock after all.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Both films have the 100 Years of Universal featurette. I hope that's a sign that they intend to release many older titles from their back catalog. Like The Birds, Rear Window, and the remaining Hitchcock films. I'm also hoping it means we'll finally get some Monster films.

Jaws and E.T. will also likely be arriving in 2012. I could also see The Sting and The Deer Hunter being released.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

I also found this memo from Ron Meyer of Universal talking about the 100 year anniversary:

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Very happy about To Kill... I would also be in for every title you mentioned.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

One of my favorite books and movies. Will definitely be picking this up!

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

One of my all-time favorites. Owned the original DVD, upgraded to the Legacy version, but never even watched it. Looks like I can sell it for about as much as I paid for it, so I'm probably in for this.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Preordered. This will be a triple dip for me. Had the original dvd, then the Legacy version. Watched both multiple times.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

That cover looks 10 million times better than the POS (just because of the combo banner, which is presumably a placeholder) on the Amazon page

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA300_.jpg

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

This is probably stupid to ask out loud, but how significant are BD editions for black and white films? Is the improvement in transfer/ picture quality as noticeable as it is for many color movies? I don't think I've ever watched one, but I'd like to pick up this one since it's one of my favorite films.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

I like the slipcover but could do without the "open for more" part.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Jesus, yes it's a significant improvement. 1080p is 1080p, regardless of whether it's black and white or color. Netflix the BD of "Casablanca" is you have to.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Absolutely. Film is inherently a high definition medium, with a native resolution greater than 1080p video. Doesn't matter if the movie is black and white or color, if the transfer is done well, BD will make a difference.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

As others have said, it can help tremendously. The Citizen Kane blu is the best I have ever seen the movie, and I've seen some very good prints of it in theaters going back to the 1970s. If the transfer is done well, it will look much better than an SD transfer.

The biggest limitation is the condition of the film elements used. Lots of older films weren't stored properly, had negatives that were overprinted and worn out, were edited for reissue and the original footage discarded, etc., etc. The DVD of To Kill a Mockingbird has two noticiable shots where it appears that lower quality dupe material had to be used to replace footage that was damaged or lost. One is a relatively unimportant establishing shot, but the other, unfortunately, is a key scene near the end of the film with Atticus and Scout, and the lower quality is very noticable. I've read that the original negative for TKaM was used to make hundreds of original prints, and that some sections were torn and worn to the point that they fell apart, and there may not be any better sources for these shots.

WB uncovered several better film prints for CK than had been used for the previous DVD (the original negative was lost in a fire in the 1970s) and did a much better job with the transfer than the earlier, overly DNRed one, and it looks great.

Bottom line, if the film has good materials to work with and the transfer is done well, a B&W film can look spectacular on blu.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

The DVD of Kane is indeed ghastly. The master used was, I believe, one of the early Lowry restorations where they hadn't figured out how to optimize the technology and was noise-reduced into oblivion. While DVD probably uses more DNR than BD as a matter of course, due to the need to compress the source file to a smaller size, even compared to other DVDs I'm amazed at how poor the old Warner disc is.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

DVDBeaver

I know that the site's screencaps aren't perfect, but this looks entirely too smoothed out. Not encouraging.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

it does look a little waxy....not terrible but certainly could've been better

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

The standard version is a slipcover over case. The deluxe edition is the same discs, but in a digibook. It's $8 more on Amazon. I love digibooks, but I'm not sure I want to spend that much more just for that.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

UK version works out to be about $20 with shipping on Amazon UK.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

My thoughts exactly. The blu-ray.com caps look better, but I think I'll wait for more feedback once the disc is officially released. Was hoping Universal wouldn't be up to their old tricks on some of these new releases.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

The digibook has dropped to $24.99 on Amazon.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

For the record, Robert Harris has weighed in on this disc at HTF. There are some issues with the image, although most of them can be traced back to poor condition of the source elements:

"In my humble opinion, and to my eye, what the technicians at Universal have attempted to do is to homogenize the image, so as not to have a shot or sequence from one generation bumping into a different generation, with abrupt changes in grain structure, contrast or resolution. They've put in their time, thought things through, and have created a quality product."

He seems to feel Universal did the best they could with what they have, a mix of elements most of which are several generations away from OCN. His one caveat, which others have alluded to:

"My take on the Blu-ray is that it generally looks beautiful. A very nice job. I'm less thrilled, albeit not overly disturbed, by the handling of field enlargements, as rather than grain slowly building, it just isn't there. It's matched to the surrounding shots. This is a technical judgement call, but I don't agree with it."

He does not feel the image has been excessively scrubbed.

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

Ack! Meant to get the digibook but got the regular version from amazon instead (I thought there was just the digibook) - is it worth my time to return/exchange?

Re: To Kill a Mockingbird - 1/31/12
 

I did the same thing, I preordered it at a time when I believe the standard (non digibook) was the only preorder available.

Then I got to thinking, is a digibook worth an extra $8? That's basically all you're getting, its the same discs with same content.

To me, the answer was no. I am a fan of digibooks, have about 10 or so in my collection, but I can do without. Besides, the standard blu has a nice 100th anniversary slipcover as it is (if you're into that).