Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Search   
Empire Magazine and iPad
Follow Me on Pinterest YouTube Tumblr
Empire
Trending On Empire
Star Wars: The Force Awakens Teaser Trailer
The Farewell To Middle-earth Issue
Review Of The Year 2014
Subscribe: Get 12 Issues For £25
Buy the perfect Christmas present this year
Farewell To Middle-earth
Full details of our Peter Jackson-edited issue
Empire Blogs
Empire States

Back to all blogs Comment Now

Note To Hollywood: How To Get People To Switch To Blu-Ray

Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 09:29 by Helen O'Hara in Empire States
Note To Hollywood: How To Get People To Switch To Blu-Ray

According to a press release out today, even the record-breaking sales of Avatar haven't lifted Blu-ray out of the doldrums. Screen Digest reports that, "A combination of a slower-than-expected fall in retail prices and the impact of the worst economic recession in living memory ensured that – unlike in the US – sales of Blu-ray hardware failed to live up to expectations in the key international markets in 2009. Furthermore, those homes that did acquire a BD player or PS3 by the end of the year bought fewer Blu-ray Discs (BDs) than anticipated – less than 1.5 titles per household on average. For many people, it seems, DVD remains ‘good enough’ for most titles and the additional cost of opting for a hi-def BD version simply cannot be justified in the current climate of austerity."

Now I've been hi-def now for a while, my collection of Blu-rays is steadily growing, and I love it. It's beautiful, it sounds good, and I'm even liking the blue plastic boxes. But I think I've already identified a reason why the wider film-loving public hasn't thrown their DVD players to the wind and signed up en masse to this ace new technology. And it's not the players being expensive (they're not, anymore) or the discs being pricey (although that's still true relative to DVD) or the fact that key films still aren't out on the format (Star Wars, where are you?). I don't even think it's just down to the recession or having less disposable income. I think people are just worried that they're being taken for fools.

Here's the thing: VHS was around for the guts of 20 years before DVD came along and thoroughly outclassed it. It's been less than 10 years since DVD really took over, and some of us are still only just getting around to replacing all our old titles (heck, I still don't own Grosse Pointe Blank on DVD, so I haven't seen it in waaaay too long). Blu-ray's been in the works since the ink was dry on the "DVD sales hit one million" news stories, and there's an argument that it's just been too quick. People don't see as radical a difference this time around to justify that new investment: sure, Blu-ray's decidedly better if you have a big shiny TV, but to the untrained eye it doesn't appear to be the quantum leap that VHS-to-DVD was.

What's more, when DVD came in with all its bells and whistles and extras, the irritating practice of double-dipping releases really got going. You could buy the first release disc, with maybe a trailer on it and an animated menu, but a few months later would come the Special Edition, then the Collector's Edition, then the Ultimate Super-Duper-We're-Not-Kidding-You-Need-This-Edition, and consumers would find themselves continually assaulted by the feeling that the version they had was only for rubes. Having bought some discs two or three times already, people aren't prepared to upgrade again. They're already feeling hard done by.

And studios aren't helping themselves either. Blu-rays are big enough that they can hold as much information as you can throw at them - standard-setting releases like Blade Runner: Final Cut or Close Encounters come packed  with every conceivable version of the film and every possible extra to boot. In other words, not just the standard DVD extras from the most recent release (or even a longer-ago release, or even fewer extras than the DVD boasted, as is the case with some Blu-rays) but specially-cut new material or long forgotten snippets. I know there's been a rush to get some films on to Blu-ray to boost the selection, but we need all discs to be up to this standard to make it worth shelling out for.

And worryingly, elsewhere on Blu-ray, the double-dipping has started again. At least one recent major studio release already has a standard and a Deluxe edition, and frankly  that's irritating. Now I'm sure there's some explanation for it - maybe the studio committed to a day-and-date release with the DVD and then not all the extras were ready - but it risks turning people off. Enough Blu-ray releases have been pushed back or delayed that it's hardly an unprecedented move to hold it back and pack stuff on if something like that was the reason, and if you've got leftovers, heck, that's what the BD Live function is for: to allow you to add in material later and give users more value for their money. The relative lack of extra goodies on the potentially-ace BD-Live, while we're on the subject, doesn't exactly do the cause any good either. Double-dipping destroys consumer goodwill and irritates the serious fans who are your highest consumers.

So Hollywood and Techno-ville, please note. If you want us to invest in your new toys, please, for the love of Zeus, give us something in return. Promise us that we will only ever need one Blu-ray for each film, and that they will therefore represent value for money and a return on our investment as well as ace picture and sound. Promise us that the extras will be spiffier and better and will include every extra previously released. Do that, and film fans all over will sign up with happy hearts and buy every disc you throw at them. Everybody wins; I promise.

Login or register to comment.

Comments

1 dogstarman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:33
Personally speaking, I can't see the point in paying out £20 for a Blu-Ray that has slightly better picture quality and sound than a DVD of the same movie which costs half the price.

When DVDs first came out, I replaced my video collection with DVDs because the jump in quality between the two mediums was massive and immediately apparent. I didn't mind paying the extra to replace my movie collection with something better.

But Blu-Ray? I mean, yes it is slightly better sound and picture quality. But it is over-hyped and really isn't a massive improvement on DVD. Its the Emperor's new clothes of current consumer electronics - and few people seem to be buying into it.

2 stevolegendbauer
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:39
I agree. I embraced the format having heard about all the better picture and more extras. The first ones I bought all were fantastic and came with boatloads of extras, but more recently I feel like I've been cheated. With the fact that they can hold so much data, I presumed the Lord of the Rings Blu-Rays would be the best Blu-Rays possible, but there was no extended editions and no new extras, so I spent 60 euro on better picture, I already had all the theatrical versions and extended versions of the films on DVD and now the Blu-Rays mean Ive bought all three films three times, and Jackson says that all the still unseen footage will be released at a later date in an "ultimate edition" pack, plus eventually there will be a 3D version, so how many times do I need to buy the one film.

3 reddevilsman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:46
Hi there, I am a huge movie fan and had an extensive VHS collection years ago which i then, over a period of years totally replaced with DVDs. My DVD collection is huge, to be honest it's closer to a library rather than colection. It's in the thousands, yet despite owning a PS3 with Blu-Ray player for over a year now I only own 7 Blu-Rays, and 3 of them were gifts!!

There is only ONE reason for this and it is the PRICE! I have a couple of mates who are almost as movie mad as me, and they're the same. Their DVD collection absolutely dwarfs their Blu-Rays and again it's simply due to PRICE!!

I have heard that there's talk about companies selling movie players that allow you to access a huge online virtual hard drive and you'll buy a movie, which you can watch via the player but you'll never have the hard copy of it, it'll be stored online, and so I understand some people are concerned about spending money on a Blu-Ray collection only for that technology to come in.

But i love having a collection I can look at and touch but the current price difference between DVD & Blu-Ray is just insane. To use the Avatar example, at the minute it's available on DVD for an average of £11 were as Blu-Ray avg is £20. In a top store the other day Leon Directors Cut DVD was £5 but the Blu-Ray was £15.99!! And worst of all, you have films of yesteryear, filmed before HD camera's were even being used (so it's sort of a HD retrofit rather than true HD) retailing at £19/20. Ghostbusters is £16! You can buy the I & II boxset for £5!!

Star Trek has been out for over a year and in the same three letter High Street store it's selling on Blu-Ray at £24.99!! I mean come on!! £25 for 1 film! The DVD of it is £12

What retailers need to realise is that Blu-Ray is in direct COMPETITION with DVD and there needs to be a big reduction in price. Sure it should cost more, it's better technology but twice or three times as much? No way! Do that and people will keep ignoring it!

4 dogstarman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:47
Exactly! I mean, I brought 'Star Wars' three times on video (standard, wide-screen editions and then the Special Editions) and twice on DVD.

Apparently the 'Star Wars' Blu-Rays later this year aren't even going to be definitive editions. Plus the original films are old and will probably look grainy on Blu-Ray anyway, as anything made pre-1987 seems to, for some reason.

There's no point in buying them. Its a rip-off.

5 reddevilsman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:49
* Ghostbusters I&II DVD boxset is £5. Thats what I meant :)

6 KingofallSamurai
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:59
I totally agree with this - does Hollywood expect us to repurchase titles in perpetuity? The next problem is that I think that the market is going to switch to digital downloads eventually. So buying Blu-Rays quickly renders itself pointless. The only way around this is the 'Combi-Packs' which apart from sounding terrible, offer a Blu-Ray, DVD and Digital Copy for a not-too-inflated price. Of course the problem with this is that the download isn't in HD and it's not crazy to expect that at some point the studios will start adding these on, meaning anyone that wants the HD download will have to repay for a new Combi-Pack or re-buy the HD film separately.

To help consumers avoid this problem, I think Empire should have a Double-Dipper Alert feature where you warn consumers of films that are likely to get a second release (eg blatantly Avatar), and also let customers know of films which have recently either had that second release OR have been released in fully-featured versions in the first place. Perhaps also a feature that flags up 'Combi-Packs' ...

7 Juliette
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 10:59
This is an argument I've had with my brother so many times - he thinks it's worth paying for better quality, I don't. DVD was worth switching to because of the extras, and also because menus and scene selections are so on are a bit easier to use and they're smaller and easier to store. But I won't pay more money just for better picture - it's not worth it. And I think a lot of non-geeky, non-techy people feel the same.

8 SignorSpielbergo
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:01
The issue is that, as you said, to the untrained eye there really is no difference so what's the point in shelling out the extra? Unless you're a tech-head then there's absolutely no reason to buy a more expensive disc that can only be played in one rare kind of player - the massive prevalence of DVD everywhere now means that people are reluctant to spend extra money on something they'll get less use out of. That's exactly why the DVD/Blu-Ray combi packs seem to now be with virtually every release - you get the hi-def version, but you also get the version you can take round your friend's or play on your laptop.

Also, with technology getting better it means that most DVD players now upscale to a pretty excellent degree now anyway, so no one is complaining about the quality of their picture not matching the capabilities of their shiny new HD TV. I have a PS3 (which I'm sure most Blu-Ray buyers own) and the upscaling on it is absolutely superb - I own 1 Blu-Ray which is Cars and the increased picture quality compared to if I play my fiance's DVD copy on the upscaling PS3 is essentially non-existent.

9 skeletonjack
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:03
I've owned a Blu Ray player for a while now, but don't buy many discs simply because they're too expensive. End of. Nothing to do with availability of certain films.

10 gavoconnor
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:05
I have a dvd collection of over 200+ dvds and recently bought a blue ray player.

For some releases I would activily buy the blue ray (Gladiator), even though I had it on vhs and dvd. But there double dipping that now too.

Its the whole idea of replacing the dvds that I own that is putting me off excessive buying of blue rays. I already own 2 copies of blade runner on dvd, an I no it will be better on blue ray, but I just dont want to pay for it again.

Other films like Moon, Public Enemies and the Hurt Locker i have bought on blue ray straight away, but what of Goodfellas, Casino, Raging Bull, Speed etc which I already own on dvd? I dont want to re-buy them again.

I think people are being more selective and more cautious when buying blue rays 'cause there more expensive. In HMV you can get 2 dvds for 2 for €12 or the same dvds on blue ray for 2 for €30 (which is still not a bad deal if you ask me).




11 Lemure
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:08
It is simply a case of DVD to Blu-Ray is not a big enough technological leap compared to VHS to DVD. Great sound and picture is all very well, but you can buy the 2disc DVD of T2 for a fiver. And considering the size of Blu-Ray discs, there is little more extras than on DVD.

To call it the new Laser Disc is perfectly justified.

12 Leon
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:16
Two words: Jurassic Park.

That alone would get a blu ray player sale out of me. Come on Spielberg get it together.

13 Beanieman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:17
The thing that annoys me is the pricing, I refuse to purchase in the high street now (HMV Looking at you here) some of their pricing is extortionate All my BD's have been play.com purchase or gifts from people (who I've asked to get from t'web) in the year that I've had a player I now have 25+ films and band of brothers and are collecting even more

Hell No to high street
Hell yes to Web

14 MonkeysDad
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:18
I'm personally going for convenience over HD.
In the middle of ripping stacks of my old DVD's to a huge hard drive, ditching copy protection in the process.That way I can stream the movies around the house or put them on a mobile device (I've bought all my DVD's legit, why shouldn't I?).
The "Digital Copy" included with some Blu-Rays and the availability on iTunes is a sign that the studios realise people want this, but the DRM's a nightmare.

15 captainrentboy
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:20
I'm one of the people that have invested in Blu Ray, I've got around 120ish so far, and after seeing and hearing the difference the format can offer (admiteddely far too many are still being released with awful transfer jobs), I now easily notice quite a distracting drop in quality going back to watching regular DVDS.
I do agree that the format isn't for everyone though and unless you've got the AV set up to back up the format (After muchos saving I've got a 60" HDTV and a decent surround sound kit, so recent films like Avatar do look/sound absolutely fantasic) the bump in quality wont be particularly earth shattering, especially to non techy types.
Like the blog mentions, the price on the discs do need to drop by quite a bit, especially high street prices, HMV being particularly overly expensive. And again the special features need considerable bulking out compared to their DVD equivilants. Is it really so difficult to make all special features HD for starters?

16 Dr Science
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:26
I just don't agree with some of these comments - I'm not a techno geek and I'm not a completist anorak collector - I have a PS3 and a 40inch 1080p LED tv which cost lest than £500 - so it's not the best HD TV out there.

I've built up a collection of c.20 Blu Rays in the past year and I've paid about £10 for most of them (thanks to buying almost exclusively from online retailers).

I never really got the fuss about extras - commentaries are annoying, making ofs are sometimes interesting but usually rubbish, deleted scenes should almost always stay deleted, etc.

For me it's all about the picture quality - and the difference between DVD and Blu Ray is significant - but it really depends what film you're buying - if it's not a visual spectacle in the first place then get it on DVD - but if it's an epic with awesome visuals then get it on blu ray.

Having said all that - I totally agree about the cynicism of the distributors and their double dipping approach - I actually don't own any versions of Star Wars except VHS becuase I got the originals, the re-masters and the special editions and then I got sick of giving George Lucas my money. I think the Lord of the Rings and Avatar releases are the worst kind of corporate piss-taking

I think the major problem for blu ray sales is that you can still play dvds in a blu ray player

17 absolution
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:36
They are simply a waste of money at the moment.

For one Blu-ray, you can get a small collection of decent DVD's to last a month. (Depending on how you watch them).

Simply, the price needs to be lowered.

18 timmcollins
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:39
I have been burning my DVDs to hard drive and replacing some of them with Blu Rays over the last few months. If it's a blockbuster I'll buy the Blu Ray, if it's a comedy or drama, I'm happy with an AVI file. This means I can eventually bin my 1000+ DVDs and get some shelf space back.

19 jimoakley666
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:44
They are too frigging expensive and I am NOT replacing my fucking dvd collection when I've only just replaced my VHS collection. They can piss off.

20 Blunderbuss
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 11:49
The primary reason that BR sales haven't taken off is simple; it doesn't offer the average consumer (i.e. the non-film obsessives make the bulk of electronics purchases) enough new stuff to justify the costs. Improved picture & sound quality and some bells and whistles are not enough to justify forking out for a new player and a whole bunch of new and more expensive disks.

DVDs by contrast offered advantages over VHS that even the layman could see the value of. The players were smaller, disks lasted longer than tape, the picture and sound quality was streets ahead and didn't degrade over time, you needed less storage space for the disks, you didn't need to screw around with rewinding or fast forwarding...the list was enormous.

A secondary reason for the slow uptake could possibly be the suspicion on the part of most consumers that some other, better means of watching movies and TV shows in just around the corner. VoD and digital downloading in HD are already a reality and are likely to become more ubiquitous in the next decade. Why bother forking out for a BR player and all the disks when in a few years you'll be able to download any movie at any time in HD and stream it to your TV?

21 boredbluekoala
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:06
On a big screen with surround sound, Blu-Ray is awesome, a side by side comparison of Avatar on DVD and Blu-Ray will convince you of that. I rent from Blockbuster every week, and they have got it right. Blu-ray rental is the same price as DVD rental. As far as retail is concerned THAT is the way to shift units. If Blu-Ray is reduced to the same cost as a DVD then there is no reason NOT to buy it. (the difference between mainstream and niche)

22 Hillsman
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:18
I have about 20 blu-rays - only a few of them are films that I already had on DVD. The rest are films that I was interested in seeing and if I can get blu-ray for a decent price, I will buy blu-ray. Picture and sound are superior - and not just "a little" better. They are expensive, but there are deals to be had if you are patient and willing to shop around. That said, sometimes the DVD will do if the blu-ray price is over-inflated (e.g. Iron Man) and there is no way I would consider buying a film like Avatar or Watchmen until the final ultimate versions with all content are released! As for LOTR Trilogy, the DVD special editions I own will do - amazing films, but they get watched about once per year (if even that!)

23 thechair
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:20
Good points all. Plus one - I have a massive DVD collection that replaced a massive VHS collection and wasn't ready to throw in the towel on the lovelies (do NOT like BD blue boxes at all) so I bought and HD TV and a quality upscaling DVD player. The picture looks so beautiful and crisp that it appears almost 3D (as commented by many friends), so what's the point in upgrading and paying more for discs when I buy so many? Practically none.

24 Mad Dog Tannen
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:20
The biggest problem for me is the same one that dogged the arrival of DVD. The studios don't bother to create proper HD transfers for back catalogue films. They beat us around the head with tales of super amazing picture and sound, but on the whole only brand new movies are given that treatment.

I fell for it both times. At first, DVDs of older films looked like crap until the remastered Special Editions came along, and the same goes for blu-rays. The sooner these studios give each title the proper HD treatment, the more blu-rays I'll be buying.

25 Mad Dog Tannen
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:21
The biggest problem for me is the same one that dogged the arrival of DVD. The studios don't bother to create proper HD transfers for back catalogue films. They beat us around the head with tales of super amazing picture and sound, but on the whole only brand new movies are given that treatment.

I fell for it both times. At first, DVDs of older films looked like crap until the remastered Special Editions came along, and the same goes for blu-rays. The sooner these studios give each title the proper HD treatment, the more blu-rays I'll be buying.

26 tummidge
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:38
I got a Blu-ray player at Christmas and my plan was just to rent my Blu-rays as they are so expensive. I think they are great for people who use them constantly and are always watching films, but average joes will always rather pay £10/£12 for a new release DVD than the £17-£20 of a new BR.

I have only paid over a tenner for a few Blu-rays and most of them I have bought because I can't rent them as they don't let you take out Universal titles released since last year. Also I have still bought films on DVD which are available on BR as paying £3 is always better than £10.

I've recently purchased The Fellowship of the Ring online as buying each film individually is cheaper than getting the boxset.

27 The Voice of Fate
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:43
Another issue might be that, even on a big HD TV screen, the women I know simply can't see the difference between BD & DVD. I'm politely indulged and allowed to by the occasional BD if it's a spectacular film, but BD is not something for every day purchases. This might be related to women's ability to multi-task being better than men's. When I watch a film, the outside world largely fades away, but the women I know will also be having a non-related conversation, looking at a book, thinking about somehting they are going to do tomorrow etc. I can't do this, but I suspect that I do pay more attention to the one thing I am doing, and hence see the difference clearly. Who knows?

28 jolietjake78
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:56
I've been a huge film fan since the age of 4 and have been fascinated with the process ever since i figured out that building space ships and flying them for real for Star Wars would be too expensive (hey, I was 5 ok) so when DVD showed up I jumped on the bandwagon to get my hands on all the commentaries and Making Ofs i could but with BD I simply can't justify the expense because, as others have pointed out, there's not enough of a leap. I'll admit watching them on a good set up will make a huge difference with picture & sound but with almost all players offering upscaling the DVDs look almost as good anyway so why fork out on average £9 more for the BD??? Plus there’s not near enough difference in the extras to make buying the Blu version worthwhile

Also with how the market is going in 10/15 years time form of audio/visual entertainment will me downloaded, you want have a hard copy of everything just a 10 terabyte PC sat under the stairs feeding your TV, music players, games consoles the lot so why bother forking out now for something which itself will go the way of Betamax pretty quickly.

29 Gretzky
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 12:56
The Voice of Fate - what the hell kind of sexist guff are you spouting? I hope your tongue is firmly in cheek with that post... The article was written by a woman in the first place! I'm female and a BD geek. Blu-ray is the way forward and the first format I consider when buying new movies for home use.

I'm proud to be able to see that the BDs for Star Trek, Avatar, The Dark Knight etc etc are substantially better quality than on DVD (upscaled or no - upscaling DVDs can't match BD quality). Anyone who can't see that either needs their eyes testing or their TV set-up fixing.

I agree with previous posts that the cost of BD is somewhat prohibitive, however as with all capitalism it comes down to what you choose to spend your money on...

30 pablohoolio
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 13:03
I have a PS3 and around 30 Bluray discs, and I love them, but Bluray simply will never take off to the average person in the highstreet when stores like HMV are charging £30 for the likes of Iron Man. It's a ludicrous pricing policy, when you can pick up the same film off play.com or Amazon for around £12 on Bluray.

I went into my local HMV, and some of the Bluray prices were obscene. So it simply won't take off as much as DVD unless they come down in price. I have never bought any of my Bluray's from the high street, it's way too expensive.

(as a side note, it's not just BD, Deadwood complete series was £70 in HMV, £26 on Amazon!)

I also agree with people who say that if you can't see the difference in BD and DVD, you need your eyes testing, or are simply full of bravado because you havn't upgraded yet. There is, on certain discs, a MASSIVE difference in quality.

If HMV and the like had online pricing, it would be a lot more popular.

31 hellboy22
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 13:25
I have amassed a collection of about 10 Blu rays so far and I won't be replacing all of my DVD collection upto Blu ray but what I do is when a new release comes out if it isn't really a film that suits blu ray a period film or an indie something like (500) Days of Summer for example where there isn't many special effects then normal dvd is fine but then Iron man 1 & 2, Kick Ass etc where there's special effects I think really benefit from being in High Def I also feel Pixar movies look great in HD. So weigh it up before buying is there enough eye candy for it to be suped up in blu if not buy on dvd that's what I do.

32 nucleargibbon
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 13:50
Have any PS3 owners ever noticed their PS3's playing Blu-Rays at not-quite-the-right speed? I bought Transformers on Blu Ray but there's a VERY subtle (but noticeable and therefore annoying) jerkyness in the frame rate, and all the characters voices are ever-so-slightly lower in tone than they should be (like a record player thats not quite spinning fast enough). I set up my DVD and Blu Ray versions of the film to play in sync, and low and behold the Blu Ray version ends up about 5 minutes behind the DVD version by the end. Has anyone else noticed anything like this? Or is my PS3 just a bit defective?

33 captainrentboy
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 14:09
I hate to be 'that' geek, but people stating that an upscaled DVD is in round about the same league as one of the top notch Blu Rays are kidding themselves slightly :)
Even my mum, when she's over my house, can see the difference and she's one of the biggest technophobes I know.

34 shitneck
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 14:20
I detest the blu-ray experience, not because of the double dipping, or the pricing, but the hardware.
I (very stupidly) paid £300 for the samsung bdp1000 when it first reared it's ugly head, and it was great. I purchased lots of used discs from amazon, as my player was not region locked either. Then disney released the pirates films, and woe and behold, they would not play as the players firmware needed updating. Updated the firmware, the film then took 7 minutes to 'boot' and then i found out that samsung had the region free capability removed!! i sent email after email to samsung and they never bothered once to respond. So now i am sitting on 20 blu-ray discs that no longer play because of the selfish twats at samsung. Now if i buy a disc, i am lucky if it will play correctly as samsung have stated they are no longer providing support for my player! And they wonder why sales are down and people are reluctant to part with hard earned cash when they treat their customers with the utmost contempt!
So i may consider buying a new blu-ray player when the price drops to the current level of dvd players... or i may just join the thousands of others who get the films by other, much more affordable methods. Judging by the money the film industry makes, this really doesn't seem to that wrong anymore does it?

35 Lanta
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 14:23

Of course I like the idea of seeing things in better quality. Later this week the DVR in the living room is going to be upgraded to a HD box so we can view HD channels.

But Blu Ray? It's likely to be a long time before I can be convinced to buy that player or discs.

I upgraded from VHS to DVD because of not just quality, but extras, smaller disc sizes, no rewinding, etc etc. Blu Ray just doesn't offer that many advances. Sometimes the Blu Ray discs don't even seem to offer as many extras as the DVDs. I haven't yet finished replacing all my old videos - why the hell would I want to start replacing all my DVDs? I can't even afford all the *new* ones I want to buy without buying the same films all over again.

When Blu Ray discs are the same price as DVDs, and have just as many or even more extras, then I'll probably start buying them, just because, why get lesser quality discs for the same price? But while they're massively more expensive, no way. And as for replacing films I already have - maybe a few of the best blockbusters, if I see them in a sale somewhere, but certainly not most of my collection.

36 spark1
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 14:30
the pricing on the high street is big mistake-'star trek' 1 disc is £5 at tescos compared to £20+ at hmv.
forcing double dipping is also off putting-'stargate' released as a vanilla then a SE within a few months not good.

i've got most of my blu rays from 2nd shops at minimum £7-10 a disc.

bigging up HD picture quality obscures the potential of the in movie option and more interactive menus to entice consumers.

37 Marwood
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 14:43
All good points.

I was lucky enought to get a Blu Ray player for Christmas 2009 and love it; I'd had Sky HD in the house for a while anyway and the XBox is hooked up using a HDMI cable so I'm a HD convert. Blu Ray had put me off because of price so getting the player as a gift was great; however I later found out what it cost and to be honest it was cheap enough that I would have bought one myself anyway if I'd really looked into it - I think it had just been so long since first price watching that I hadn't realised how much they'd tumbled.

However despite all this I have resisted getting a lot of Blu Ray films; I have a mighty (around 600) DVD collection anyway so I'm not replacing that. So far the only ones I've bought have been those I think really deserve the HD treatment (so I've rebought a few films in the newer format) and have around 20 films on Blu. I joined Lovefilm a while ago though so I'm buying a lot less films anyway as a way to fight the recession and save some money for a new house.

I get the format query because 3D DVD is on the horizon but at this point I do think Blu had unfortunate timing by being launched just before an economic meltdown and doing what technology manufacturers always do: charge massive amounts for the hardware upon launch and wait ages before lowering those prices. They might have found sales better if the prices had been lower to begin with considering the global money woes - now its arguably too late for Blu to make the sort of impact DVD made when it was first released.

38 adamhound
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:00
@nucleargibbon

PS3s cannot display Blu-Rays in 24p like standalone players can thats why it looks jumpy I believe.

Had a bluray player for some time now but havent bought a disk in ages due to increasing costs and feeling a little let down by the size of the disk and the actual content included..

Like others have said before upscaling has really dealt a blow to BR sales too


39 davelogan
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:12
Got my stepdad a blu ray player for his birthday. We haven't bought any blu rays yet, despite how people keep saying that we have to. DVD is still what I buy. It's cheaper and you can watch it almost anywhere now. We just rent blu rays out from our video store maybe once a week, way cheaper than buying and you dont feel quite as ripped off if it's an average transfer.

40 Merecraft
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:12
All physical media is dying as a format so maybe thats why people aren't buying into it? It's easier and cheaper to store HD movies, photos and music on a hard disk than it is to buy lots of extremely expensive disks for a format that will be superceded in a couple of years anyway.

41 stuxmusic
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:18
I've seen blu-ray. And I've seen DVD. And, more importantly, I've seen the uprated DVD to 720p. And that is good enough right now that I don't need the extra player, or pay two times the amount for the disks. It also didn't help that PS3 was almost two times the price of Xbox360 when I was buying, and heard the news that Microsoft were looking into making a Blu-ray attachment to replace their HD-DVD one. When they gave up on that I was annoyed, but I realised it didn't matter that much because it would still uprate the DVDs I was watching!

42 boostergold
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:18
When blu ray appeared I, like many others scoffed at the very idea of it. Wow only 5 times better picture, that'll make a lot of difference i'm sure. Then after " the war" was over I took the plunge with a Sony bdps300; great player though Betamax sized. For the first week I compared Casino Royale BR with the upscaled dvd I still had, gobsmacked at the clarity. The edges were crisp, and not blocky square shapes! I was wrong about Blu Ray. That was 2 years ago. I sold that player and upgraded to the newer model by Xmas that year, faster load times and the Sony support for firmware is excellent. Summer last year got a great bargain on the same player for the bedroom. Then Xmas last year got my hands on a 7.1 surround system which has a Blu Ray player in it (its a Samsung and yes its not a great player and can't upgrade the firmware but thats down to Samsung and only use it as a receiver anyway). So yes I have 3 BR players and tell everyone how great it is and I was the biggest sceptic around. On to the pricing, I do agree that shop prices are ridiculous although supermarkets are quite good for BR discs I tend to shop online always. The only time I buy a dvd now is for tv shows that aren't on BR, I simply couldn't watch a movie on dvd now! That is just how it is. And Helen thanks for mentioning my fave film ever Grosse Pointe Blank. I watched it the other day and whilst I still enjoy the actual film the upscale was good but a perfect example of why Blu Ray is head and shoulders above dvd. I said to the mrs that it is crying out to be released on BR, and I for one will be buying it the day it is!

43 philyerbootz
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:36
A lot of people here seem to believe that upscaled DVD is comparable to a Blu-Ray, but haven't mentioned what kind of telly they are using to compare.
'HD-Ready' and 'Full-HD' are 2 very different things. (And if you are still using your old standard def TV as a tool for comparison please leave the room).

The reason for slow uptake will indeed be the added expense, as you can only FULLY experience how much better blu-ray is if you have a FULL HD telly with 1080p capabilities. Watching blu-ray on anything less is pretty pointless.

Add to this, places like HMV doing nothing to help by charging silly money per disc to the passing punter and there is suddenly no mystery here.

44 rezapocmk3
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:45
The PS3 can display films at 24fps, theres an option for it in the settings menu, but your telly needs to be 24fps compatible.

Nucleargibbons TV probably isnt and if he switches off the PS3's 24fps mode the jerkyness will stop.

Blu Rays are too expensive in the eyes of the public when there are just standalone discs. I only tend to buy those with digital copies or dvd copies included as I like to be able to have either an iphone or psp copy of the film for travel.

45 Seamie
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 15:47
I've had a Blu Ray player for about three years now and bought roughly about 30-40 BD discs since. I've never seen it as a 'replace my whole DVD collection' I just buy the movies I want on Blu Ray that I think will look great. In other words 'Up' was a no brainer on BD. Looks amazing, sounds great etc. 'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly'?? I'll take the DVD please! You don't HAVE to replace your entire collection just buy the ones you want to buy! I am gagging for Jurassic Park on Blu Ray though!! Hurry up Universal!!!

46 Wozza31
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 16:34
People who claim there isn't a noticable difference between DVD and Hi Definition have either never watched anything in HD or have piss poor eyesight.

The reason why sales are so low is plain and simply expense. At the moment in my local HMV their Bluray deal is 2 for £25, but all the same titles, plus many more including newer ones, are in the DVD offer of 2 for £10. That is a difference beyond justification.

I got my Bluray for Christmas 2008. In the first 2 months I acquired about 30 discs from Xmas and birthday gifts (b'day's early Jan), Woolworths closing down and a friend who worked in the warehouse of Zavvi. Between Feb and Xmas just gone I bought 3 blurays and this year I've so far bought one. But there are plenty I would have bought were they a decent price.

Features are irrelevant.

47 smoothiedudie
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 16:35
To be honest Helen, I have about 300 DVDs. I really can't be bothered to spend money buying blurays of all of those films when the difference in quality is pretty minimal. I may buy visually stunning films in Blu-Ray (let me know when Lawrence of Arabia comes out in that format), but i really don't think I'm going to be committing to Blu-Ray that same I have to DVD. And I don't think the studio can do anything to change that.

48 Andy Oates
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 18:19
I love Blur Ray but the thing that really pisses me off is that some disks work and others don't and the firmware updates are just annoying. I recently bought Sherlock Holmes on BR and had to take it back and swap it for the DVD because it just would not play on my Samsung Blu Ray player. Why is slightly different technology used for different Blu Rays? It's stupid at least you know with a DVD that it will play and you don't need some stupid download to watch it.

49 D.J
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 18:39
I just think it would be nice if The Addams Family got a regular DVD release, let alone blu ray.

50 tysmuse
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 18:48
I got Blu-Ray in order to try and tone down on my buying habits. I only wanted to own the very best films, not just ones you can pick up for £3 in HMV. So my collection is now only growing at the rate of about 7 discs per year.

Since I got Blu-Ray, a few of my mates have too and they're buying them like crazy, so i was surprised to learn that they're not selling all too well.

As for Hollywood, fuck 'em. This double release is a disgusting joke, greedy bastards.

51 Ambition
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 19:41
I think part of the problem is that BD is being marketed to a generation of people who are quite happy to watch entire movies or TV shows on youtube, or i-player equivalents. I don't think that picture and audio quality is a priority for that many people - i know HDTVs sell like hot cakes, but i think that's more to do with the fact that if you want a giant fashionable LCD TV your going to have to buy an HD one. Most people with HD sets aren't yet watching Blu-ray or Sky HD, because the extra cost isn't justified. They need to make BD the SAME price as DVD before it takes off. At which point Sony might well wonder why they bothered

52 __Red__
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 19:51
I've been collecting films since I was 15 first with VHS and then DVDs. The jump was a simple and obvious one with the far superior picture and sound quality at the time, and some of the special features you get nowadays are sometimes great (T2 Ultimate Version still my fav), eventually I got to the point where I would rather have the best version of the actual film - directors cut/extended version etc.

I would quite happily go to bluray IF ...
1 - The crap with double dipping stops. We had this crap with DVD and we should not stand for this now. When DVDs came out studios quickly jumped on getting the DVDs out without the features as they wanted to have their movies in the shops before anyone else. The features came later once they all saw the benefits to it and is now the norm. You even get a choice of 1 or 2 disk versions released at the same time for people who arent bothered with the extras. There is no excuse this time around to release a bluray film where the DVD is superior.

2 - Sort the bloody hardware out. I will NOT buy a bluray player that I have to keep updating with sodding firmware upgrades everytime I want to play a particular release (I'm looking at Avatar here). The amount of grief my friends have with their players when playing films as they have to update firmware only to find other films then dont work. When was the last time we had to update the firmware of our DVD player? I suspect the answer is never.

3 - If the studios want to control the regions then release the same bloody film across the regions. I buy my films from the US as well as the UK because the US will often have a better version of the UK version. Admittedly it can sometimes be the other way round but very rare. I dont like waiting 6 months either :)

4 - £20+ for a film is taking the piss.

Have to admit when seeing avatar in the shop on bluray that it was stunning. Still not enough to convince me. Sony have a lot to answer for for the mess we're in.

53 EmpireLover
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 20:05
In the end it all comes down to money, as other comments tell rightly. people are not buying blue ray dvds because they cannot afford blue ray players. in like 10 20 years or so they may be affordable, another reason why people these blue ray's because they are not bothered because they do not care about quality that much, they just want to watch the movie. My local store have dvds which i buy sometimes, normal dvds are £3.00 and the blue ray's are like £20.00 what price range do you agree with more?

I have my playstation which has a blue ray player, i buy blue ray dvds SOMETIMES. because i cannot afford them, but i can buy normal dvds for £3.00 because its cheap, so in the end they need to sort out there prices and people will be intrested a little bit more.

54 moviemaniac-7
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 20:40
I fully agree with the argument that it's been too soon after the introduction of DVD. I for one am a film lover, but still hesitate to go Blu-Ray. For the simple reason having to replace the 100s of films I own once again. Only recently after moving I got rid of the VHS collection I had been working on for so many years after officially replacing everything by DVD. The next step in home entertainment will be streaming and Blu-Ray is a step that can be easily skipped by the average consumer.

55 swordsandsandals
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 20:59
Helen, where was your starred point?*

*Not that they are obligatory, it's just nice.

56 jeffamania
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 21:13
The reasons I dont buy bluray discs are simple
1) my dvd collection is already huge...
2) whats the point now...most movies can be downloaded or digitally transferred in high definition. Why should I pay £15 plus for a movie
3) I cant rip a bluray disc. I have ripped and stored all my dvd movies on my hard drive...I watch them off my PS3 or DVD player with built in USB. It soo much better than having a huge cupboard of DVDs. Also i dont need to load the disc into the player and back anymore or misplace discs in the wrong jackets. I can buy a new dvd for less than £10, rip it and sell it on. cheaper than renting and I now own the film. I cant do that with a bluray disc
4) my PS3 upgrades the picture of normal dvd to high definition anyway so the bluray impact is minimal
5) regional coding!!! back to the bad days!!! At least with DVD, I own multi region DVD players.
6) the video game is now a major distraction for me and many other people the way it wasnt for folks when DVD was first launched
7) the cable and digital channels now show some many new movies these days, you gotta ask yourself why spend so much money on bluray when the HD movie will be shown on TV in a couple of months
the truth is that the future is 'downloads'..ie the disc will no longer be relevant, just the content!!! Bluray;s time will not be long

57 stayduft
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 21:17
Blu-ray was dead in the water before release. There is no point in replacing my DVD's with other discs when in a couple of years I will be able to download HD movies legitimately. Also they are taking the piss with the price. 25 quid for lethal weapon 2? Don't reckon.

58 mrjones
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 21:20
Minor point following everyone's "BD is too expensive" comments.

Most semi-new BDs can be picked up for about a tenner online, which isn't all that, tbh.

The big difference, that no-one has mentioned, is that in the meantime DVDs have fallen to being virtually free, (anything more than 2 months old is now prolly a fiver or under).

BD prices are comparable to DVD prices 12-18 months ago; it's that DVDs have become incredibly cheap. Great for the DVD consumer; not great for the BD-wannabe.

I wonder whether it's in the manufacturers interests to make BDs over DVDs? Since presumably BD is no cheaper to make than DVD< (unlike the difference between VHS and DVD), what's the benefit to Universal/Fox et al to knock out BD on the cheap over DVD; all the comments on here indicate that ppl are buying DVD over BD, so it's not as though ppl are stopping buying movies.

Typical Sony propietary tech; without a comeptitive marketplace, they get to screw over the manufacturers, who pass on the cost to us. Anyone remember Beta?

Oh, and I heartily agree about the massive difference between online and offline shopping; I had some Virgin vouchers that I resolutely didn't use for about 18 months because everytime I went into Virgin I was certain that I could get whatever it was online cheaper, and I felt like I was being ripped off. I ended up having to overpay just to use them, (and it's wrong when getting somethinhg for free leaves you feeling like you've been done over somehow)

/endrant

59 lrb662003
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 21:51
Blu-Ray is an AMAZING format, the detail is stunning, and an upscaled DVD is simply no match.
The only problem is the price of new releases. I personally wait a couple of months and make sure I shop around for the best prices. Seriously I have around 60 Blu-Rays now including boxsets and have some real bargains (Band of Brothers £13) who can argue with that, I watched it on DVD and it is simply no match.
I belive if they sort the prices out they will fly off the shelves. I even read somewhere that Blu-Rays cost less to produce ( dont't know if there is any truth to that)

60 hatebox
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 22:07
I agree with the author. I expect there's already technology in development to be released in 5-10 years that'll beat Blu Rays and the media hype will start up all over again. DVDs were obviously better than VHS for so many reasons, with Blu Ray... the difference just isn't convincing enough for most. The discs ARE still expensive too.

I imagine the more Hi-Def TVs that are sold will help the format's cause though: some DVDs I've watched on the (admittedly) big Hi-Def TV I have look shocking.

61 ChesterCopperpot
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 22:20
This is all very reminiscent of the "You Wouldn't Steal A Car" blog. A lot of you will hate me for saying this but I refuse to be ripped off and treated like a mug so I stopped paying for double dip releases (or any such release) a long time ago and now download films like The Losers and Kick-Ass in brilliant DVD quality. The studios are just being unbelievably thick (as well being THE cause of piracy in the first place) and the sooner that they realise the future is downloadable on-demand 1080p movies for a reasonable fee at the same time as they are released in cinemas (something which I seem to remember Empire reporting Morgan Freeman being an advocate of a few years ago) people are not going to continue to purchase Blu-Rays when there is a more convenient and cheaper option. If people want to see a film in a cinema in 3D then give them that option. If others just want a film made of 0's and 1's on their hard drive, give it to them.

It's certainly a damn sight greener!

62 durelius
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 22:47
I love Blu-ray I think the quality of picture is excellent and I'm only seeing it at 720p, unfortunately I haven't been able to get the sound to how I wanted with my PS3 so that means probably more hardware to buy to appreciate the sound. I have a small collection at moment and I'm only really buying blu-ray for the movies I really think will be worthy, what is a pain in the ass the the vanilla issue crap of the likes of Avatar and LOTR it's just bullshit and they are plain stealing from the consumer in my opinion, putting something out there when they know full well they'll ship out the deluxe version in 6-9 months time. No I've learned to hold myself back from jumping as soon as a film I really like comes out, I'll wait for the better version and I'll wait until it's on offer as well.

63 nclowe
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 23:14
I bought myself a blu-ray player before christmas mainly as I wanted to enjoy the new Star Trek in all its HD glory. Since then however I have only actually bought 3 other blu-rays - why? Mainly down to the price tbh! I also cannot see the point in replacing my current DVDs with blu-rays unless there is something new and amazing to offer.

I also agree with the other posters. Gone are the days of buying releases the day they come out - I've been stung too many times later discovering a new super-duper version on the horizon. If I want to watch the film instead I just lovefilm it until the Big Daddy version is released...

64 gordon_m_b
Posted on Tuesday June 1, 2010, 23:37
at the moment, i just not interested in shelling out a small amount of money for a blu-ray player, when within a couple of months it will drop in price a stupid amount when 3D blu-players and tv's kick off. just waiting until the get stumped where to take it next.....then ill invest

65 Paulo1
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 00:58
I'm very slowly buying blu-rays, i love the better quality. However it was recently announced that they are making a new type of blu-ray discs that will hold more or whatever that will be incompatible with 'older' blu ray players and ps3's. This angers me greatly being the owner of a ps3 and an earlyish blu-ray player.
I will definitely not be changing to this 3D fad until the glasses are not needed, it also helps that the ps3 will be able to play 3D films and games.

66 rayhiggins
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 01:20
Those 500GB Blu-rays you mention Paolo are way off yet before they become affordable at retail. Plus I believe I read they're primarily going to be used as PC memory and such.
Me, I got a PS3 in March. Am I going to replace my huge DVD collection with Blu-ray versions? Only the ones that are going to benefit from it. So superhero/sci-fi blockbusters yes, dramas and comedies no. New purchases however, are going to be exclusively in Blu-ray where the option is available from this point out.

67 rayhiggins
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 01:22
Oh and to all of you saying the future is downloadable, remember that not everyone has broadband. And I'll bet a very large proportion of regular film-watchers don't either.

68 Ayanna
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 02:09
Well for me, I do love Blu-Rays, though I've only collected 40 in the past year since I've had a blu-ray player. Which for me, isn't much. I tend to only buy Blu-Rays that are 'worth it'. Movies I seriously wanted to buy again at a higher quality, or certain newer releases. But for me, when it comes to older films, you can't get the same quality upgrade as you would a movie out in the last few years. So that is what makes me reluctant to buy most movies over again.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but I will continue to buy both blu-rays and dvds. And I would prefer that they would keep blu-rays and remove dvds than the other way around.

69 Tenacious P
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 07:10
I agree with many comments here that most of the HD transfers of films more than, say, 15 years old are just not up to scratch. I have titles such as Ghostbusters & Highlander and their picture qualities are shockingly bad, so I am now going to only buy newly released films that will obviously look good on the format. Such as big Hollywood action movies & CGI animations, so I feel these are the titles studios should be concentrating on. I mean, who wants to own Pride & Prejudice on BD??

Price hasn't been a major issue for me as there are plenty of titles in offers such as '2 for £25'.

But I think the real reason why Blu-Ray just hasn't taken off is because it hasn't replaced DVD. DVDs rendered VHS obsolete so we had no choice but to buy them, but the same has not happened here. If studios really want their BDs to sell then they have to stop releasing stuff on DVD, but then they just aren't going to be making the money the studios want for a long time.

It would also help if they actually released some of the films people actually want to buy; Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Alien to name just a few.

70 Helen OHara
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 07:22
swordsandsandals, I know. I feel a bit naked without footnotes. Would it help if I posted something about tennis so you know it's really me?*

For the rest of the people who say it's about price, the thing is that I remember buying DVDs for a full £20 - 25 each early on when they first came out, before I even had a DVD player (watched 'em around a friend's house, and figured since these were "limited editions" I'd better get them when the getting was good). So initially high prices shouldn't necessarily stop people buying; that was at a time when VHSs of the same films were comparably priced to DVDs now. So why isn't the same pricing model working this time?

*Just don't get me started on freakin' Soderling, the cartoon villain of the ATP tour, breaking Federer's semi-final streak. I'm still too upset.

71 smakris04
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 07:44
Blurays in Europe and I don't mean uk where you always have sales are very expensive and we don't get to have sales! Also blurays are always late here in Greece and with prices that start at 25€. The thing is the same title in uk is half the price And in USA. But they don't have greek subtitles. Even video stores don't have many blurays here

72 WesB
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 09:24
It's the types of films too. VHS is now obsolete, so of course everything has gone to DVD. But who the hell cares about having a romcom or indie drama on HD media? They're only worth it where the extra sound and picture genuinely adds to the film, which isn't a huge proportion of them. So people will get bluray if it's a film worth having, and stick to (the still much cheaper) DVDs for other stuff. Plus the price of TV series on bluray needs to come down. I'd rather have BSG in HD, but it's double the cost!
And yes, the extras need to be worth it too. There's potentially 50GB on a bluray!

73 angrytapes
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 10:12
the thing about blu ray is that when they were first announced they were big enough to stick all the bonds on one disc. yet now we have two disc sets- with not that many extras. and all of a sudden DVDs cant fit any extras on despite having had room for the last ten years.

I have stacks of DVDs - many 2 discers even though the only extras I watch are bloopers and that Indiana Jones extra disc that one time. I just cant be bothered to buy them all again, and im a massive film geek, I have so many ive not watched and 90% i've probably only watched once. I work in preojection so can full well see the quality of the newer formats, as I can see the quality of digital projection over 35mm.

most new films are barely worth the £3 they end up being on DVD let alone how ever much theyre knocking out bluray for.

I did see Avatar running in Tesco the other day though and got a little bit wet. Im just waiting until its all a bit like that holographic game Chewie plays in Star Wars.

74 rantbot66
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 10:47
Here's the thing.....

DVD is a highly matured format that has had a good 10 years to get itself established as the defacto standard in homes all over the world. It's cheap, meaning people have happily shelled out on buying copies, alongside renting, and landed themselves with nice little film libraries all their own at a relatively minor cost. The entry point for players is now ridiculously low (£20 for a player in most supermarkets) and, more to the point, the format translates admirably to peoples relatively new flat screen tellys (HD upscaling means the quality of most DVDs is great thank you). Add to that the explosion in home cinema systems, driven by a desire to have a "one box does it all" for peoples film and music collections.

Blu Ray isnt established as a format. It's just a few years shy of coming out of a major format battle with HD DVD, leaving a number of early adopters a little burnt in the process.

The players themselves, whilst now coming down in price dramatically, are still in flux, with only recent players having BD live capability, again leaving early adopters out in the cold with out of date kit.

The studios and manufacturers arent doing themselves any favours with talk about 3D Blu Ray (and TV), meaning those that have invested may have to face a costly upgrade as soon as next year, and those that havent made the leap holding fire until the whole thing settles down.

Finally, there's already talk of an even higher spec format (holographic something or other) in the specialist press, as well as the launch of Super HD standards (4 x higher resolution than the current HD 1080p).

The price of discs isnt the problem btw - these will gradually come down in price once the demand is there. This happened with VHS and DVD - Blu Ray will be no different.

DVD works for the majority, that's the truth of it. A new format requires investment, yet the current platform isnt in anyway broken. It's actually rather brilliant. People arent stupid...

75 valve90210
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 11:42
Peronsally my take on the situation is this:

The move from VHS to DVD was a huge leap, VHS with a standard player offered what can only really be described as ok picture quality, to get anything dsecent out of it you needed a really good player and even then the quality was limited.

DVD offered a MASSIVE increase in picture quality and indeed sound quality, it really was hugely better than anything your typical consumer had seen before. This for me represented a very worthwhile upgrade choice.

The move from DVD to Blu-Ray, while yes Blu-Ray is better than DVD, I think most consumers won't be able to see anywhere near as much of a difference between the two formats as they could between VHS and DVD. For most DVD to Blu-Ray is a fairly subtle upgrade where as VHS to DVD was a huge leap forward to a new and considerably better format.

76 wizardweb
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 11:46
I got my first DVD player in 1999. Since then I've built up my collection to number well over 150 titles. Yes, I now have multiple versions of Star Wars, Bladerunner on DVD and Blu-Ray and many other marvellous films but the thing I noticed about a year or so ago, was that I never watched them. They just sit there. After I got my first iPod in 2003, I transferred all my cd's to the unit and never used a CD from my shelf again, so I sold them for a tidy sum.

I thought I might do the same for my DVD's but it seems that a lot of them are only worth £1 on Amazon, (some are only 1p!) so where did my "investment" go? I've kept an eye on the market and something you bought for £11.99 a few months ago is now a fiver in the sales, so I could wait to buy them, but in that period of time, I've either lost enthusiasm for the movie, or it's been on Sky or wherever. Meaning now I don't buy movies. Why pay even more for a Blu-Ray when it's going to be next to worthless in a few weeks? Especially when most people can't tell the difference between a full HD Blu-Ray and an upscaled DVD.

I think the reason why I never watch the ones on my shelf is because I'm so used to just calling up a song on the PC/iPod, that I've become lazy with regard to perusing my shelves for a film. Laziness is the key to all progress, otherwise you'd never have dishwashers that clean dishes for you, or recorders that watch tedious tv for you. I like the idea of services on my PS3 such as Lovefilm or Mubi though. Although there's a monthly or per view cost, I don't end up with a stack of films I'll watch once and there's a greater choice than I could comfortably fit in my house. Conversely I don't like Sky movies because they endlessly repeat the same films over and over, which is one reason why I recently cancelled my subscription. That said, they're doing a online offering soon, so streaming is clearly the way to go. Blu-Ray has been a technically interesting, yet needless step.

77 pete_traynor
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 12:11
Anyone complaining about the price of a BD is clearly shopping in the wrong place. Granted, if you wander into your local HMV a new release can still set you back in excess of £20! A rip off, regardless of picture, sound and supplemental material quality. But most new releases can be had for £15 on play.com or amazon.com, and cheaper if you use their independent sellers. And with regards to the quality issue, anyone who buys on faith and is underwhelmed by the results has only themselves to blame. In a perfect world they should all look amazing but there are so many variables that impact on the final quality of a 1080p transfer. Original stock used, time and money available, condition of original reels etc etc blah blah. But if you check reviews on reputable sites like hddigest.com and bluray.com you will get expert opinions on all aspects of the disk’s output and if they rate it 4 or 5 stars (which a hell of a lot get) it is a glaringly obvious huge leap in quality from DVD. And another thing to remember is that the point of the format is to replicate the director’s original intention for the way a shot should look. See negative fan reaction to Saving Private Ryans transfer which was simultaneously heralded by expert reviewers to be one of the formats pinnacles. The palette is washed out and bleak because Spielberg intended it that way, not slick and popping off the screen as people seem to want. Want that then pop in a Pixar transfer (any one) and be simply astounded by the vibrancy and depth of field on display. Blu Ray is like every other thing on the planet, in that it has sub standard product under it’s banner (I’m looking at you LOTR) but look around and make sure the disk is ticking the boxes it should (picture, sound, extras, price) and you’ll never look back. I haven’t!

78 wizardweb
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 12:13
Oh, just to clarify, I haven't backed up my DVD collection before selling them, I figured if I'm not watching them, I'm not missing them. So off some of them went to new homes, a charity shop might get the rest.

Regarding the extras on a disc though, when I first got DVD's I'd religiously listen to commentaries and explore the features. That fascination left me though and I don't even look to see what's there now. I'm only interested in the film.

79 wizardweb
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 12:14
Oh, just to clarify, I haven't backed up my DVD collection before selling them, I figured if I'm not watching them, I'm not missing them. So off some of them went to new homes, a charity shop might get the rest.

Regarding the extras on a disc though, when I first got DVD's I'd religiously listen to commentaries and explore the features. That fascination left me though and I don't even look to see what's there now. I'm only interested in the film.

80 vader100
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 13:19
If you are paying more than £20 for Blurays, shop around a bit. I very,very rarely pay more than £10, only those titles that I really want, Avatar, Star Trek and the Dark Knight. Even then the most expensive was only £17.

All these people complaining about the price, how much were you paying for DVD's in 2000, 4 years after it's launch? £15 -20 for new releases.

The studios are not helping with the extras situation but the majority of people don't watch the extras. The double dip situation is the same as DVD, nobody is holding a gun to your head forcing you to do it. New Line are pushing things a bit with Lord of the Rings situation though as the Extended Editions are seen as the definitive versions for home viewing and to hold them back as a marketing ploy is damaging to the credibility of what is still a fledgling format.

I hate watching my DVD's now, especially the older ones, they don't have the impact now I know what Bluray can do.


81 hughjass
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 13:33
I have a PS3 (partly becasue of the Blu-ray) and when I go from watching one of the handful of BD I have back to DVD , there IS a noticeable difference between a true HD picture and an upscaled one.

Where I do have an issue - and why I havent replaced all my DVD's - is where the disc may be a premium price yet doesn't contain half the extras of the best DVD version. Given the storage capability of Blu-ray it is unexcusable.

There is also the inconsistent release pattern - Kelly's Heroes and Where Eagles Dare are slated for a two film on one disc release Stateside, whereas here it appears they are being released seperately. If older films aren't going to have shedloads of extras then it's a good way to release them. Yet not in poor old Blighty. Again - inexcusable imo.

82 spark1
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 13:44
also big deal break for some must be having to fork out for a HD ready or 1080p tv to handle blu ray when before all you needed was a scart plug to hook up your dvd player to your tv set.

83 pete_traynor
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 15:39

Yeah Spark1, that is a valid point no doubt. But it’s a lot better now than when I got my 1080p set. You can get really decent 40”+ sets now for £500 or so. Not ideal but it’s getting better as the market becomes more flooded. And it pays to wait until manufacturers unveil their new sets and the previous years models plummet in price. Mine had an RRP of 1,300 and I got it end of year for £715. But what amazes me is the sheer number of people out there with full 1080p screens who are just watching nothing but standard def output?!? Hell, you can get a free PS3 if you get your phone through Carphone Warehouse! That’s what I did. But for me the only thing lacking is the extras issue. Some smash it but not enough. And what has been shown to be achievable (the Watchmen interactive commentary! Wow!) is nothing short of amazing! All releases should contain this quality and thought! I also strongly believe that it should not be approved to be sold as a Blu Ray unless all extras are also presented in hi def (1080i minimum). The Blade Runner transfer is one of the best, hands down but feature length doc on disk 2 should have been in hi def. There are no excuses for standard def extras when a product is sold as a high def experience. Many do get it right but all should!

84 Andyrew5000
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 15:49
I think the thing that is stopping me going blu ray is the fact that I have a dvd player in almost every room in my house and a portable dvd player and a laptop, when I but a dvd I can watch it where ever I want, where as if I get a blu ray player I will be limited to the room with the biggest tv

85 coljohnmatrix
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 16:00
I think the answer is simple - the extra cost involved in "upgrading" to Blu-Ray (in terms of buying a player, a decent TV, the Blu-Rays themselves and possibly a new sound system) is not worth the relatively small increase in picture quality.

DVDs were a vastly superior format to VHS, so people were happy to splash out. Blu-Ray is more like a "DVD 2.0"...it's an upgrade on DVD, not something vastly improved, so it's less attractive, especially when we've all got less spare cash these days

86 skeletonjack
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 16:27
I mentioned earlier that I don't buy many Blu Ray discs because they cost too much. True they do come down in price and can be bought for around a tenner a few months after release, but by that time they're already showing up on Sky, and as many people myself included have Sky HD then there really is no point or reason to buy them (unless they are films I love in which case they will have been amongst the few Blu Rays I buy immediately). If the discs were cheaper on first release they would sell a lot more, in my opinion.

87 Garth_Marenghi
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 16:48
You're part of the way there, Helen, but it goes beyond the fear of double or triple dipping on the content, to the machines themselves. There's been a frustrating, shambolic, seemingling never-ending trudge towards settling upon a final specification - that's the problem with the format. Fearing another VHS Vs Betamax debacle, I waited until Blu-ray won, and then until 'final profile' machines were affordable. I spent a bit extra on a hardware-modified region free model and felt I could finally relax and start enjoying HD movies. Then a month later they announce a new HDMI profile for 3D, and that existing machines will not be compatible. Then a little while after that, they start rumbling about higher capacity discs arriving at some point (initially for archiving), which even the 3D-capable Blu-ray players won't be able to handle. It's not just about people not wanting to have to buy the same film three times, they don't want to have to keep buying new players every five minutes either! I bought one multi-region DVD player about twelve years ago, and it still plays any DVD from any region I can throw at it. As money gets tighter and tighter for all of us, if we're going to splash out on new hardware, we want it to be the last bit of kit we need to buy for years to come. Ironically, it's the complete lack of forward-thinking and future-proofing that has stalled this format of the future's progress.

88 eddc1990
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 17:30
I love Blu Ray, fair enough the films are a bit pricey compared to normal DVDs and it is an obvious choice 'why pay more for a film you can get cheaper at the expense of a bit of extra quality' but I think the films availiable have something to do with it, with the beefed up sound and picture quality the perfect films to own on Blu Ray are your films like Star Trek or Avatar, ones that really make the Special Effects explode in your face with every detail, yet they still insist on releasing films like High School Musical! Why? What person in their right mind would spend around $20 on a film like that?

Thats why sales aren't so great. Like many others i'm not gonna replace my entire DVD collection, i'm not even gonna buy every future film released in Blu Ray, even if i had the money! Because theres no point buying a Blu Ray unless the film your getting is worth actually being on Blu Ray.

Not to mention if you really want the best out of a Blu Ray experience you gotta go out of your way to buy a BIG HD TV, decent Surround Sound and a Blu Ray player/PS3 while all of these are rather cheaper now its still alot.

89 Elvine
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 17:50
The reasons I buy Blu-Ray
1. Picture quality
2. Picture quality
3. Picture quality

I suppose if you're watching a 32' ws, in an ordinary sized living room there is not much difference compared to dvd. But on my 66' projector screen (hd ready) the Blu-Ray picture just... amazing. Before I got the Blu-Ray-player I believed like someone above that you needed full hd to notice the difference, but that isn't true at all. I found a test somewhere around the interwebs which came to the conclusion that with the viewing distance of an ordinary living room you'd need a 100 + screen to tell the difference between full hd and hd-ready. In my experience that's absolutely true.

So, in response to the original question - get people to buy bigger screens.

90 wee_retty
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 19:20
For me it isn't the price of blu-rays or the worry of having to upgrade all my films from DVD (because I won't my DVDs are fine) but I simply cannot afford an HD tv and blu-ray player right now. My computer has a blu-ray drive and HD monitor, but I can't afford the stupidly priced software to make use of it. So when all the stuff you need to watch them comes down in price, then I'll start buying them..

91 odddaze
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 19:46
Everyone complaining about price needs to start shopping online, I worked at a Blockbuster where Blu-Rays were relatively cheap and I got 20% discount but it was still cheaper to go to hmv.com and buy a blu-ray, I've now got about 60 blu rays and I think the format is fantastic, bigger and better is the future.

92 rich
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 20:23
The problem that I usually find is that the quality improvement is only apparent when you compare them on before the other: when I first play a BD movie I usually think "isn't that what is always lookd like?" until I try the DVD and see the lower detail levels. That just isn't good enough considering the price you pay to invest in the format: it needs to jump right out at you.

93 dgjohnston
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 22:17
I've half decent DVD collection which I'm backing up in a number of hard drives. I recently tweaked my PS3 and my TV so that the upscale looks just as good as the Bluray. I'm sorry but I've compared older films through upscale, then Bluray and there isn't much of a difference. I really can't see much between Saving Private Ryan on either format. I've now made the decision to only buy the recent 'big' blockbuster on bluray and I'm more than happy to wait for the 'ultimate' editions. I do look out for bargains and have found a few on ebay or other online websites. I recently purchased Step Brothers on Bluray for only a fiver on ebay.

94 madina
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 22:53
Movie Industry taking us for fools... for way too long.
No wonder record amounts of people are using bit torrent sites.
You go to the cinema pay nearly £10 (They're empty most of the week) then pay about £15 for the DVD 6 months later. Then bring out some other technology a number of years later.

I think Downloads are the way forward internet is getting faster and faster iTunes or BitTorrent with an upscaling media player. I think the Movie industry will have to become more honest with its pricing of movies or offer alternative ways of watching movies to include adverts or something?

Were in a recession stop paying Actors/Producers/Directors so much and reduce the cost of the tickets price/dvd's/downloads etc. Get people back into your cinemas and make audiences love going to the movies again, rather than solely emptying our pockets.

95 skewiff
Posted on Wednesday June 2, 2010, 23:16
jesus. i was wondering how long it would be before a blu-rayer started bragging about the size of his projector screen **yawn**. to be fair 90 posts was pretty good going.

96 vader100
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 07:40
I wondered how long it would take for someone to moan that someone mentioned the size screen they have, **yawn** 6 posts pretty good going.

97 Elvine
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 08:17
re: skewiff

Jeez, I was trying to discuss how it's possible for some people not to notice the difference between DVD and Blu-Ray, while others (including me) think it's about the same quality difference between a good VHS and DVD as it is between a good DVD and Blu-Ray. Size does matter.

Although sometimes I think people are just blind.

98 granny
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 10:50
The price argument doesn't hold water any more especially if you're prepared to wait a few months or buy second hand.
I bought Frost/Nixon mint condition second hand for £4 the other day in Computer Exchange - less than most places were asking for the DVD and with loads of extras.
I agree however that being stingy on extras doesn't help

99 charliepitt
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 11:24
There is an alternativec view point on this that everyone is missing. You all mention about the waste of money, and the small leap from dvd to BD, but it's this talk that isbringing the format down.

Blu-Ray quality is without a doubt the best quality available..there is no argument...and I'm an absolute convert. Also, I have a huge dvd colleciton (about 600-700) and I am not willing ot replace them...so I won't. In fact, I stil lbuy dvds as well as Blu-Rays. My perspective on this is that I will always buy general films on dvd, but special and important films will be bought on Blu-Ray. And the beauty os, Blu-Ray players upscale the dvds you play on them, so they are even better than they normally are.

To summarise, Blu-Ray IS NOT A REPLACEMENT TO DVD...just an optional enhancement - you shold be able to buy either or...simples!!!

100 M.
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 11:27
This article is so correct. I don't own a blue ray player, and as long as my dvd player keeps on working I am not going to switch. The prices for Blue Rays are too high, and DVD quality is really good enough for me. Blue Ray came too soon - I'm not going to buy my whole dvd collection again.
I'm really getting annoyed though by the fact that some extra's or special editions can not be found anymore on DVD format, and only on blue rays. I mean come on, it's not fair to the people who bought DVD's all these years.

101 phil66
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 11:52
To skewiff-
Heheh, I notice this too, it's consolation that people who witter on about their huge projection screens (hd ready) all have tiny cocks. Including the women. It's the law.

102 pete_traynor
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 12:28
You most certainly don’t need anything approaching a 100” display to notice the difference. Not even close to that. Get above 37” and it’s glaringly obvious! Provided that you have invested in a proper transfer that the studio has done correctly. Another issue however is motion blur. My set is 2 years old as while it provides an amazing image it does ghost as it only refreshes at 60hz. These days some of them go up to 600hz or so! But even on 200hz the image is so smooth and sharp that any comparison to DVD (especially fake HD upscaling) really is a non starter. It is also worth remembering that sets out of the box or on display in shops are not set up correctly and do not do the technology justice by any stretch of the imagination. I was stunned by the difference a quick google search and 5 minutes adjusting the settings made.

103 RobbieB
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 15:14
I wish this was about Quality but it's not. I've bought 'Ferris Bueller's day off' on VHS then DVD as well as seeing it at the Cinema, I have paid for the film 3 times over. Why should I do this again?

I think they should give me a copy of the movie on Blue Ray for Free!

The only choice is not to Play the game.

104 ploppyx
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 16:30
It is down to the cost of buying the film which should be the same price as standard DVDs - maybe make them cheaper at the same time. I would pay £10 for a blu ray film that was a new release - certainly not £15 or £20.

I tend to watch films once which means if you spend £15 or £20 for your blu ray disk - it then sits on the shelf for the rest of eternity as you dont know anyone else who has a blu ray player to lend it to. I tend to sell it on ebay instead. It is a ridiculous waste of money. The players are still too expensive. Pricing them under £50 would be better and I want to be able to play standard region 1 DVDs on there too, making it a better investment. Why don't they do that?

105 djamesc
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 17:41
I agree. Why spend twice as much on a blu-ray that contains the same material as the DVD with a bit of a sharper picture? I appreciate it may cost more to produce but I resent paying twice as much for a disk that does not have twice as much content.

I bought a Blu-Ray player 2 years ago and since then I have amassed a grand total of 30 blu ray discs - half gifts and the others simply ones that I love so much and are so visually beautiful that they have to be seen in as much detail as possible - or simply ones that cram in so much that it justifies the price tag. When I bought my first DVD player I bought over 30 DVDs in the first 2 weeks because it was such a technological advancement with the extras and increased quality it fully justified the replacing the VHS. I half agree that there is a hint of truth to the fact that people are more careful with their money nowadays however people are not adverse to spending money on DVDs or Blu-Rays, they simply want content that warrants the pricetag and not to be treated as fools.

106 madina
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 22:05
Sorry watching a movie on Blu-Ray doesnt make the film better.
HD downloads/streaming movies is the future... internet speeds will be nearing 100mbs in a couple of years... Wont be long the way thing are going before Blu-Ray is Obsolete. It'll die quicker than betamax! sorry

107 jackcarter
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 23:20
regarding those upscaling DVD players you can buy - i read somewhere that even these are redundant now as an HD tv upscales any dvd you play on an ordinary non upsacle DVD player...

any truth to this?

108 Lemure
Posted on Thursday June 3, 2010, 23:27
As much as I hate to be the hippy in thie field, there's also the environmental impact. Charity stores across the country now have a stock of VHS big enough to start their own rental services, but nobody's buying them. So what happens to them? Landfill fodder. Fair enough, they were old, these things happen. DVD is barely ten years old and already Sony (yes, I blame them as they invented Blu-Ray) expect us to chuck all our DVD's away and buy Blu-Ray. And what happens to all these millions of DVD's? Yep, landfill. Perhaps if Sony thought of some way to recycle VHS/DVD they would not only be given the nobel peace prize (possibly), but also make people more affable towards them. And I'd also want a signed contract saying they wouldn't bring out "Blu-Ray-X" in five years to replace Blu-Ray.

109 coolblueheart
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 01:46
AS most people have pointed out the leap from VHS to DVD was a quantum leap in terms of quality and ease of use. No more rewinding tapes before sending them back to the rental shop!
But also, there was another reason why I was a very early adopter of DVD - subtitles. There were practically none on VHS in shops, or for rent - and being deaf that was a real drawback.
Watch films and TV series with subtitles? Yes please - it was a BIG BIG difference. I brought a multi-region DVD early on and never looked back - I could easily justify the £300+ expense as it meant there was loads of DVDs with subtitles I could pick and choose from, whereas its harder for me to make that same justification for re-buying the same stuff on Blu-rays. I already have most of the stuff I want, though I did make the exception for Firefly.

110 howiet1971
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 11:06
i won't be upgrading to Blue Ray; I am very happy wth DVD, and by the time DVD is no longer relevant, I'll have gone completely digital.

111 BengalsFan
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 11:14
I purchased a PS3 about 8 months ago and I haven't looked back on Blu-Ray. I had over 300 DVD's in my collection, and I have converted a lot of them to Blu-Ray. I can tell a huge difference in picture and sound quality from Blu Ray to DVD. However, I've just recently relocated here from the states and the thing that I've noticed is that Blu-Ray's are much cheaper in the states than over here, and I do think that's holding the format back.

HMV is very expensive on a lot of titles. In the states their prices are comparable to FYE, which is a chain entertainment store that sells most of their blu-rays from $29-$39 US dollars. No way I'm paying that. But we've got Best Buy and most of their blu-rays start at $24 US dollars and go down. They post sales every week and a chunk of their blu-ray stock can be had for $10-$15 US dollars, which is very resonable. Amazon.com is another great place for purchasing inexpensive blu-rays.

I'm getting a region two blu-ray player in the next week off of Amazon.co.uk for £119, which isn't bad. I think Blu-Ray will take off more once the costs come down a lot over here. I know Best Buy is coming here shortly so hopefully their pricing will force the HMV's to lower theirs.

112 badblokebob
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 13:28
I'm quite amazed anyone still considers the high street a viable place to buy DVD/Blu-ray. Most of the chains went out of business because they were overpriced; God alone knows how HMV have clung on. Why pay £20-£25 for a new Blu-ray when it's £15-£17 online? Are you barking? And most of the time, if you pre-order, it'll turn up before release date! (HMV's website, incidentally, is pretty excellent: competitively priced & one of the best for getting stuff out before release.)

As for the quality issue... I have a 37" TV in a normal sized living room. I can really see the difference between upscaled-DVD and Blu-ray. DVD's still pretty good, but when I watch a Blu-ray I can see the extra quality. My girlfriend, on the other hand, can only spot the difference if I point it out. I think this really is the key - as others have said, the difference between VHS and DVD was clear to all, but it just isn't as obvious from DVD to BD, particularly on a 'normal sized' TV. But the difference is significant if you can spot it, so writing it off as "hardly any better" (as some have above) is wrong. Not to mention that it improves colours as well as resolution, the depth and clarity of sound (I'm far from an audiophile and I can still hear an improvement), etc.

That's why most people haven't made the jump. For those that have, many discs are prohibitively expensive - but so were DVDs when they began. I wouldn't be surprised if BD sales are comparable to DVD at this point in its life - certainly, take-up of Blu-ray has been faster than DVD, despite what some naysayers would like us to believe. But already double-dipping is ludicrous, and releasing bad transfers (Gladiator, I'm looking at you) even worse on a format that is, really, *all about* image quality.

As a Blu-ray buyer, I like the prices being a little higher - I make less random purchases than I used to. It's saved me a bit of money on stuff I don't watch, especially as I still have 1200+ DVDs to get through anyway.

113 dansator
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 14:23
When I bought my first DVD player I slowly but surely rebought all my favorite films, because there was a big quality jump from VHS to DVD. But now, thanks to upscaling, there's no quality increase from DVD to Blu-Ray for pre-2000 films. Some Blu-Rays (such as "Basic Instinct") even look worse than the DVD version. As for new films, I'd dare to say that most people can't even tell the difference, whether it's because of their inferior hifi/television equipment or their poor perception.

Price, however, is a factor. The only way to push Blu-Ray sales is aggressive pricing. Blu-Rays have to be CHEAPER than DVDs to gain a market share. Last week I was standing in the store and was looking at "Hollow Man" on DVD for £3. A few feet away I saw "Hollow Man" on Blu-Ray for £17.50. Guess which one I bought.

114 Film Brain
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 16:44
I have a Blu-ray player. I bought that because I have a 14" HDTV and I figured it would be worth it for a few reasons:
a) It would be a good upscaler, and DVDs would look impressive upscaled on my screen.
b) I don't want to be stiffed by over-priced standard DVD releases that have compromised. (more on this below)

Now, my Blu-ray player meets these expectations. I've watched several films in HD (I have about 20 - compared to about 600 or so DVDs) and they do look great. And so do upscaled DVDs. I'm happy and very content with my Blu-ray player.

For those complaining about Blu-ray prices, you need to look outside the high-street stores. Believe me, Blu-ray movies have been falling in price for some time, particularly online. I got Gamer the other week for £5.99 from HMV online (and its that price on Amazon too) - at the time it was a pound cheaper than the DVD edition. Blu-rays are from £4.99 now.

However, I entirely agree also with the DVD consumers. There is no way I'm upgrading my collection, especially as many of them look perfectly fine upscaled on my screen. At the end of the day, a good movie is a good movie, regardless of whether its Blu-ray, DVD, VHS or Betamax.

My problem with Blu-ray is that means the studios have started using it as an excuse to start short-changing DVD customers. Now many have noticed that extra features on DVDs have started going missing, or, in some cases, been missing entirely. But they've started short-changing the customer on picture quality.

One of the titles that came with my player was Night at the Museum 2, which also contained the DVD version. Now, as you might expect, the Blu-ray version looked great, regardless of the poor movie. I tried out the DVD version on the same player and it was a different story. It looked blurry, as if it was out-of-focus. Remember that this was upscaled - the same upscaling that made other films look fantastic. (continued in next post)

115 stevee
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 18:30
Its a con.

How can anything warrent being twice the price? I was outraged at the price of DVD in comparison to VHS it wasn't justified. Then we had laser disk that didn't work so now we have Nlue-ray,

How long before the next big thing that costs £40 but is must have.

I think the true fan would pay if they felt it was worth it but now the majority understand that they are just cash cows to the technology companies.

Ever felt you have been cheated - Most of us do now.

116 ZakE94
Posted on Friday June 4, 2010, 18:39
They're too expensive, simple as that, and that is why they are not selling.

117 oddzag
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 00:19
Because the whole thing is fucking expensive.
HDTV's are fucking expensive.
Blu-Ray's are fucking expensive.
Fucking expensive things are things I can't afford.

118 marlowe9
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 14:13
I can get brand-new, cellophane-wrapped 2-disc editions of films on DVD for £2-3 from stores like Tesco, ASDA or (wonderment of wonderments) Fopp. Heck, even HMV sometimes. Failing that there's always Amazon or Play.com. This perfectly suits my low budget for 'pleasure-spending' that my modest income allows. My 500-film strong VHS collection is still only half-replaced on DVD, mostly because the remaining titles are still unavailable in Region 2. My DVD collection is now at least twice the size of my VHS collection. I have a DVD/VHS combi-player which was the last one available from my local tech store 5 years ago. To judge from my friends' Blu-Rays, Blu-Ray offers an undeniable but largely negligable picture and sound improvement on DVDs; extras-wise, the quality and quantity is as variable as DVD. To switch to Blu-Ray, I would need to buy an HD-TV, a Blu-Ray player (not PS3 - the family already has an X-Box 360), and, of course, Blu-Rays at a minimum of £20 a pop. None of this is cheap, or even affordable on my family's income. It's simply not financially viable to switch to Blu-Ray, nor is it essential for me to do so.

In conclusion then, I partially agree with Helen O'Hara about what needs to be done to make Blu-Rays a more tempting offer, but on the whole I think Blu-Ray is an inessential exercise in offering an alternative format of film-viewing and home entertainment: like taking a holiday abroad, it's nice if you can afford it, but no-one really needs to go there.

119 Imrahill
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 16:05
I agree with most of the posts that some blu ray discs are too expensive but the quality compared to DVD is far better on most films(not all) Zulu on bluray is a must see if you dont believe in Blurays the quality is unbeilievable compared to the DVD. The equipment is not expensive either you can get a 1080p tv and blu ray player for under £500 my first DVD player cost that and when DVDS fist appeared they were expensive aswell. The one thing that annoys me is the double dipping especially on older titles, you can understand it on new titles(no time to do commentries,docs etc) but on older titles there is no excuse, as for VOD in High Def this is at least 10 years away mainly due to the infustucture being substandard, but you will have the same problems with this equipment will be expensive and dont forget no matter the medium companies will still try to rip the public off!!!
P.s i own 1000+ dvds and 200+blu rays and the most i have paid for a blu ray was £25 for the godfather trilogy, if you shop around you will find that most blu rays are only £2-£3 more expensive than the dvd and considering the better quality are in my opinion a good buy(HMV in the high street should be avoided)

120 JagLover
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 18:31
The studios killed off the more consumer friendly HD format (with no region coding and a cheaper pricing strategy) and are now complaining that the format they picked isn't selling well enough.

What a surprise

121 ultimadream
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 19:46
I have 600+ DVD's so i don't have much enthusiasm to re-buy all of them in a new format. DVD's can look good on a HDTV, I use a Playstation 3 to upscale my DVD's and honsetly at times i cannot tell the difference between Blu-ray and DVD, While my 5 Blu-ray films are classic films (all 5 of Kubrick's which have been released) appreantly 2001:ASO is meant to be a good edtion, while the the quality is better it has not made DVD's redundant, unlike what DVD's did to VHS. In the end i dont buy Blu-rays becuase i dont think it's a step far enough yet and no doubt in 5 years time we'll have a new format so i just dont see the point. I am contempt with DVDs so i have no problem.

122 the_shakermaker
Posted on Saturday June 5, 2010, 21:02
Got to agree with the majority of people here, unless the film in question is an effects heavy visual spectacular (Avatar for example) then why bother, save yourself a few quid. Some stuff even looks better on the older formats. I still refuse to watch Evil Dead 2 on anything but VHS. Any other way would be sacrilege!

123 Loosecrew
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 00:17
Couldn't agree more. Picture is fantastic but I'm an extras nerd, give me some indepth, behind the scenes, marathon session viewing stuff!

124 laurel2348
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 00:40
I've plenty of DVD's but recently I've become rather useless at actually watching them. If there's a film I'm mad about at the cinema I'll go out and buy it, watch it, subject my friends and family to it, and then largely ignore it for potentially years at a time. While I appreciate that Blu-Ray is better quality, I can't quite bring myself to spent extra money on something I'm not consistently using. I also no longer speculatively buy movies I havn't seen. When LOVEFILM is so cheap and easy, why would you?

The effort of getting off the sofa, finding the DVD or Blu-Ray, unplugging the Wii from the scart plug and changing the input with one of four remote controls... it's forming an insuperable psychological barrier. I just can't be bothered. With a satellite subscription it's likely that most films will I love will come around eventually, in HD. I'd rather fluidly navigate around the Sky+. The improvements in TV has essentially lessened my consumption.

Today for example I read Empire and had a hankering for some vintage Christopher Nolan. But lo! rather than have to find the Prestige hidden in a card board box not yet unpacked from uni, Batman Begins is on ITV HD. Problem solved, or created, depending if you're trying to sell me a Blu- Ray.

125 angier21
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 06:14
We've just spent the last 10+ years switching out our videocassettes for DVDs, and now you expect us to buy something that performs the exact same function for a ridiculous amount of money?! The only reason I would buy Blu-Ray is if I can walk into Best Buy and exchange all my DVDs for free. Otherwise, I'm just gonna keep my 2-Disc special edition of 'L.A. Confidential' just the way it is, thankyouverymuch!

126 natman_begins
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 10:44
The simple fact is, not everyone can afford to buy the huge and expensive HD tv's and players required to get the best out of Blu-ray. The argument that theres not a big enough leap in quality is absolute rubbish, i have a PS3 and 40" LCD tv that was payed for witrh redundancy money. Had i not been fortunate enough to find a job straight away, i wouldn't of had the cash to buy my set up.
When i watch anything on standard definition now it becomes very obvious where the difference in quality of Blu-ray is. The depth to the picture on films like Avatar, Saving private ryan and No country for old men for example is unreal, the screen feels like your looking through a window rather than at a screen. The detail is enhanced to epic proportions giving the ability see the fine hairs and pores on peoples faces. The sound now feels like your in the movie instead of a living room.
Granted there has been a few lazy transfers on the format that dont come up to scratch but compared a DVD of the same film theres nearly always still an improvement and if you insist on buying only the best quality, there are several websites that offer an in depth review of most movies that have or are being released on the format.
If you can afford to upgrade your tv and player then i see no reason not to, especially when the discs have come down in price so quickly.

127 LAURA.TALLEN
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 10:46
MY LOCAL BLOCKBUSTER HAS A LOT OF THEM AT UNDER £12. ITS WELL WORTH A VISIT IF UR LOOKING FOR VALUE. BUT I DO AGREE ABOUT GENERAL OVERPRICING. ITS RIDICULOUS. x

128 saments
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 11:37
In a era where you can download a music file and then transfer it between laptops, phones etc i think dvds/blu-rays just seem a bit cumbersome now. I think the public are just waiting for the time when it is easily accessible to store movies on hard-drives and watch them in as simpler way as listening to music. Theres also the conveniance of tv i often find myself watching movies on sky that i already own on dvd just so i dont have to plug in the dvd player, find the remote etc. Sounds lazy i know. I have a fairly large collection of dvds and haven't decided to upgrade to blu-ray but im always impressed if im around a mates house and we watch a blu-ray movie. In terms of price, i watch a lot of films at the cinema (handy £13ish monthly cineworld card) then maybe buy the dvd six months after its release if i want to as i know it will then be 4.99 or less on Play or Amazon etc. Blu-rays seem constantly expensive in comparison regardless of how long theyve bben out. Btw HMV online is much cheaper than HMV's high street stores.

129 bungalow69
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 13:25
There is no doubt that the picture quality on blu ray's is amazing and i agree to have the kit to make the most of it can be expensive but i think there are some points people are forgetting.when DVD's first came out there was a slow uptake on the format but it stedily built and built.the thing is you had to upgrade because as we know you can't put VHS in a dvd player but you can put a DVD in a BLU RAY player and with upscaling the picture can look very good.so one benefit is you don't have to replace your whole collection.As for the pricing this is the biggest problem blu ray has and this just comes down to greed. The whole LORD OF THE RINGS rip off was a disgrace !!. But if you look around you can get great cheap blu rays,as already mentioned PLAY.COM HMV to name a few have great daels 2 for £18 or less than £10 even the new ones are cheaper. High street stores and supermarkets are the ones also ripping people off. AVATAR for £22 but when it first came out £15 and they are still making a profit !!!
The whole download service is a long long way of with the UK's limited broadband speeds and that's good and i don't know about you but i like to have a collection that you can see.

130 Jojo Steen
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 14:15
People are not buying it because it's expensive compared to a DVD, and the main consumers dont care much for HD because a) not everyone can afford a HD TV, and b) Blu-ray has not yet released the amoutn of films that DVD has

131 zimo5
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 17:26
I haven't as I don't own the means yet. But if they continue on the way their going I won't be Buying UK DVDS Any more sue to the exclusivity of special features on Blue Ray.

Taking extras off DVD Doesn't make me want to buy Blu-Ray in fact all it does is really fuck me off!

132 zimo5
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 17:27
due*

133 Kaplowski
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 18:21
I don't think Blu-ray has taken off for a variety of reasons. First, the technology is moving too fast - and is in a state of flux. Over the next 12 months we will see OLED and 3-D television sets. Which one to buy? Next, there is the question of 3-D. I haven't seen anything with 3-D yet, and feel that it is being forced upon us - the backlash of 3-D in movies has started already, some films applying for the sake of it (see Empire's review of Clash of the Titans). So I believe that people are applying that 'wait an see attitude', just to find out what is really going to take off. The third reason is that, whereas DVD made a massive leap from the traditional video, Blu-ray has just taken a few steps from DVD. I think the key to this is looking at how we listen to music nowadays - 1st there was the record player, 2nd we had the CD player and then we had the MP3 player. In between the latter two we had all sorts of hardware which never really took off - look at the DAT tape or the MiniDisc (these played an interim part until the next great technological revolution of the Ipod took over). I believe that Blu-ray, 3-D and OLED will not experience any great sales until the dust has truly settled and the next real way we experience home cinema becomes prominent. Additionally, I believe the physical disc system will be obsolete and it will be either streaming movies or downloading movies onto a dedicated hard drive hooked up to your future TV set (whatever that may be).

134 jimbosolo
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 18:22
Dont forget that they are starting to release 3d blu ray players and 3d blu ray films, and you need a 3d led full hd tv (lots of abriviations lol), 3d glasses, high quality hdmi cable, decent surround speakers. £3000 or their abouts and for what, to watch a 3d blu ray film which cost £35 or so.

What about those of us who have no depth perception, i can see the difference of hd content, but cant watch 3d.

Lets face it, the USA have had HD tvs since roughly 1998? in the UK 5 years maybe a bit older. However tv channels are still mostly standard defination, and even hd channels are are in 720p. Which on a 1080p tv can look bad, and now in september sky will be begining to roll out 3d tv channels. The technology maybe their but the media isnt and is several generations behind.

LED tv`s havent been out that long 2years or so? yet already theirs a push for 3d hardware. Sony will be releasing a 3d psp, Nintendo are releasing a 3d DS. Sony are releasing their Move for PS3 which is basically a PS2 eyetoy, wil remote with built in microphone and nunchuck attachment. Microsoft with natal which at least appears to offer something different, and they are supporting digital downloads on xbox 360, PC and Cloud.



135 jimbosolo
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 18:53
Just a quick thought about the HD-DVD/Blu Ray format war.

HD-DVD had a standard template from the very begining which Blu Ray never had, older blu ray players wont run all the features of modern releases such as blu ray live. Sony new they would lose if it was a straight fight because of the huge expense to make and financial loss. Sony`s trump card as it were was the ps3 their flagship cheap blu ray player, they new that people would by it just by name alone. Which is why hd-dvd lost.
But the ps3 trails behind sales of the x360 and wii.

136 sonicboome
Posted on Sunday June 6, 2010, 18:56
I whole heartedly agree with this, especially the alienation of fans with "double-dipping" (most recently being the £50 release of the ridiculously basic LOTR blu-ray box, and the studios accompanying comments that 2 - TWO! - more editions are yet to come). As well as the fact that blu-ray isn't as big a leap as DVD was from VHS, because most blu-ray players and PS3's have seriously good upscalers and still take DVD's, there's really not much point in replacing old titles. I used to spend a butt load on new DVD's, much to the chagrin of my wife, but with blu-rays there's really not much point unless its 1) an exceptional title (Batman Begins and Dark Knight i own on 1-disc, 2-disc and blu-ray) 2) a new release, which i then wait a few weeks for it to either come down in price or go into some kind of promotion.

HOWEVER - to all those who quote "price" as a problem - especially in a certain high street store - blu-rays have actually never been cheaper, and the price is coming down all the time. With the exception of a few, each weeks new release titles in said store are usually £16.99 blu-ray, £14.99 DVD. That's a 2 quid difference. Two. Quid. Some (The Box and Precious spring to mind) come out at £12.99 on DVD AND blu-ray. Add in to that promotions of 2 for £25 (including titles like Hurt Locker, Terminator Salvation, Public Enemies and Gladiator) which works out at only £12.50 each, price is rapidly becoming less of an issue.

Now don't get me wrong, they're still not the £3 DVD's in various sales, but personally I buy quite a few blu-rays from amazon and play and other internet sites, most of which are £4-£7 for these older titles. So if you want it, look for it. They're there. (Still gets me in trouble with the wife though).

Having said all that though, my MO is lovefilm, where I can get 3 blu-rays at a time, send em back afterwards and don't have to keep the duff ones (The Knowing and Fast And Furious i'm looking at you...damn your shiny boxes almost had me)

137 steinivalda
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 00:45
I'm more than your average movie fan, but I still haven't bought a Blu-ray player, nor do I intend to. I believe this format will never truly replace DVD's, it's more like what Laserdisc was to VHS. It's simply not that much better. Sure, it has the 5x better picture and everything, but to the masses it isn't that much different.

Further, to average movie watchers Blu-ray still has all the same faults as DVD; it's vulnerable, scratches easily, takes up shelf space, if you rent it you have to return it, etc. etc. The format I believe will be the real successor to DVD's is some kind of HD-Downloading, legal or illegal.

Why can't I already just flicker through my potentially awesome iTunes-like library of movies on my 42" television with a Wii-like remote? With no danger of scratching discs, losing them, or not having enough shelf space? With a possibility to reorganize my collection with a couple of clicks instead of hours of "manual labour"? This is what the future is, the studios just have to realize and play along. I belive most people would much rather like to pay for Hi-def movies with a mouse click rather than going to a store and picking up some plastic thing... Plus it's better for the planet :)

138 The Red Avenger
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 03:45
There is a sneaky trick that they've started with Blue Rays and that's only releasing the extended versions of films on Blue Ray. As seen from the recent releases of Watchmen and Terminator Salvation. You cannot get these on DVD, only the theatrical cuts. I personally thing that's bang out of order. If that trend continues then we we as film lovers will be forced into the blue ray market and I don't think that's fair.

139 Cameron1975Williams
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 09:42
The physical storage medium is dead, R.I.P. All content should be downloadable and obviously in the best resolution possible. The Studios need to get with the programme, shut down the expensive distribution arms of their companies and host one website where you can chose any film from their catalogue, download it and watch it only once for a fee. You must set-up a secure account in order to download and the film should be heavily encrypted. I don't ever wanna see a film that cost $500 000 000 be available in charity shop for 10p. Furthermore, films should be uploaded into Cinemas to be projected digitally. No more film. If Spielberg doesn't like it, then that's ok, he hasn't made a decent movie since Saving Private Ryan.

140 Crack D
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 12:27
BR is significantly better than DVD most of the times, but the average movie buyer still does not know that or does not even what exactly BR is.
So they are not gonna buy them if the price is unreasonably higher, which in most cases is the fact.
So educate the average byer and make the BR chepaer and than they will most definetely start to buy the the BR discs.
I am a fervent collector and allready bought a lot of BR's but to be honest i discovered downloading and if the quality and convenience keeps improving as it does I will probably stop buying any physical discs excpt for the absolute classics that come out in the Ultimate editions.
lets be honest DOWNLOADING or VOD is THE FUTURE one way or the other as much i love to hold a movie in my hand or look at my collection in awe or show it of to my friends, it is an expensive and space consuming hobby and if i can get the movie from home with the click of the mouse and for free or little money , there is slim to none chance i am going to the store and give them them all my money just so I can have something physical.

141 wizardweb
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 13:08
One thing to add, the main thing to be learnt from the rise of the MP3, is that the public will trade quality for convenience. CD's are better quality than MP3's, there's better quality audio than CD's but MP3's are prevailing because they are easy to download, store and of acceptable enough quality for the majority.

I know tons of people that have downloaded (or transferred via memory stick) a pirated divx version of a film that is in no way as good in terms of quality or sound as a DVD, yet they're happy enough with the copy if it's watchable and free. Yes, there's the various morals and legalities of that, not to mention reduced revenue for the industry, but the point is you can never underestimate the public's laziness and appetite for a freebee. A side effect is that downloading stops the money going to criminals - I haven't seen the Asian man with the rucksack of DVD's in the pub for ages now, so it's put him out of business too.

So to my mind there's two things going on here, the devaluing of movies as the expectation of the viewer will be that the product is free (or at least cheap in the sale in HMV only 2 months after the disc came out) and also the unwillingness of the public to pay out for a format that will have a very short shelf life, once streaming services like LoveFilm, Netflix or Mubi become the norm. Why have a bookcase full of things you pay for and probably only watch once or twice (save for a few cherished titles) when you can have a virtual library on-demand? Why go to the shop when you can simply sit on your sofa and press play?

142 spark1
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 13:12
downloading/streaming movies may become more prominent than buying dvds/blu rays but the formats still offer content in form of extras that aren't offered when you download.

143 boostergold
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 13:36
Half an hour ago I bought The Road on blu ray from Sainsburys for £6.50; it had been reduced to £9, it came out 2 weeks ago brand new and even then was only £11.99. The dvd was the same price then and I noticed today that they had reduced that to £9 too. I got a nectar reward off it which is why it was only £6.50. Fair enough new stuff like Ponyo or Alice is £16-£20 but you get the dvd in both of those aswell. I will be going back later for some more stuff; £7 to £12 quid for likes of Dark Knight, We Were Soldiers, Moon etc. Bourne trilogy only £20 and Band of Brothers for £19.99 is an absolute bargain, all on blu in full hd! You just gotta look around!

144 Rico rodrigeuz
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 15:38
If they want the blu-ray industry to survive they must not keep doing what James Cameron did with Avatar by holding the extras back so that they can make more money with a special edition. There is no other reason for this other than to make money. Its the same with the Lord of the Rings films.

Other than that I like Blu rays.

145 el croz
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 16:11
I'm not a happy bunny at all when it comes to Blu Ray...

I have a PS3 & HDTV & a reasonably good surround system and I want to embrace the format but two things have really 'got my goat up'.

1 PRICE

2 Watchmen... The US market had the Directors Deluxe edition and we Cornish had the Theatrical Release only for it to be released again 6 months later with all the extras we had hoped for. I'm not paying twice.

I will buy certain movies from online sellers at a reasonable price but I will not pay highstreet prices.

146 boostergold
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 16:34
Why not just import the US Watchmen like the rest of us then. Thats the other great thing with blu ray; around 70% are region free so you don't have to wait.

147 messiah1967
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 16:44
I do agree with the general thread above, but blu ray prices are comparable to dvd just 18 months ago (although I do really shop around!) I bought a blu ray player just after xmas and so far have 12 discs, I have only replaced two films from my dvd collection (the quality is superior on blu ray when playing the two together and hopping between them at the same point) and will only replace 2 more when I can get them for the right price. I bought an Eastwood box set yesterday on dvd for £10 because I don't think 30 yr old spagetti westerns will look any better on blu ray, so I guess if the film warrants it, get it on blu ray, otherwise dvd is just fine. Not sure about the whole download thing, did that 2-3 yrs ago with itunes and have subsequently bought all the music on cd, (guess it's just the geek collector in me), but I do think the download thing runs with the younger generation much more. If blu ray prices drop, we will probably see a higher take up, as happened with dvd vs vhs. As for the whole double dip thing, I personally just don't play that game, I got Avatar on blu ray, I won't be buying the 'collectors' edition, I rarely watch the extra's a second time anyway.

148 SUPER_movie_FREAK
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 19:04
Howdy,
I'm a massive movie buff and have hundreds (if not thousands of movies on DVD).
When Blu-ray first started appearing on the shelves in HMV etc I thought it was just a con and the picture/sound quality wouldn't be any better than DVD. I was wrong. The first Blu-ray I bought was the HMV Exclusive (Dr. Manhattan) version of Watchmen. The only reason I bought it was because Dr. Manhattan looked way cooler than the HMV Exclusive (Rorschach) DVD version (plus it hosted a lot more exclusive features the DVD did).
It was an absolute fortune for just one film (£24.99) but the increased picture/sound quality was enormous plus I had a load more special features I could watch (I'm a sucker for movies with the most special features).
After this I've continued to buy Blu-ray movies giving into the fact I must be fully Blu-ray converted now. I currently have over 25 Blu-rays myself.
However I do think it’s a load of utter bullshit that Hollywood is wringing us dry by bringing out every possible different combination for a movie. Special Edition, Limited Edition, Limited Collectors Edition, Ultimate Collectors Edition, Definitive Collectors Edition, Super-Duper Special Collectors Edition, No-Shit-This-Is-The-Final-Version-Edition. You get the picture. This is one thing I refuse to give into.
My solution: wait it out until they've rung it bone dry and can't bring out any more editions of the movie you want. Then buy it.
Finally I only buy a movie on Blu-ray if it’s really worth it. Does it have any exclusive features? Does the price reflect the amount of content your getting? Will the film look/sound better on Blu-ray or would it be just as good on DVD?
So when deciding whether you should get the Blu-ray or DVD, compare them! If the Blu-ray doesn't have any exclusive features and it's pricier than the DVD (most of the time they are) there's almost no point in getting it on Blu-ray. If it won't better from increased picture/sound quality don't bother, get the DVD.

149 boostergold
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 20:34
Just been thinking about prices and it dawned on me that we got our first dvd player on xmas day 2000 as our pressie from the mother-in-law. It was a bog standard Argos player which I know set her back £150 and she didn't get one herself for a couple more years. Anyway this made me remember the day I went into town around march/ april 2001 on a monday and spent £100 on FIVE dvds, yes just FIVE! I recall it because it was the day my favourite Bond had his 2 movies released for the first time ever on dvd and I had waited for that day (you know which guy I mean) the others were Ghostbusters, Independence Day and X-men. I reckon its a bit of a case of rose tinted glasses with dvd 'cos its still fresh to most people but to me that now seems a ridiculous amount of money, and another thing i've never and will not pay that amount for blu ray online or in store nowadays brand new or old. Oh and how come nobody has mentioned that its always the same shit thats 3 quid on dvd?!

150 evil bill
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 21:25
I've always believed the problem with Blu Ray is,it's not that much better than DVD,as compared to VHS Vs DVD.Plus now that a lot more people own Full HD TV's,they still opt for DVD with Upscaler rather than Blu Ray player.For three reasons;1.DVD's are still far cheaper,nearly half the price of Blu Ray;2.most folk have there favorite movies now on DVD,and see no reason why they should shell out for Blu RayIE what happened to Video CD,DAT,V2000,Laserdisc etc,people can not be fooled again;3.there's a lot of folk who would would rather download for free,and don't care about picture or sound,as long as it works.
Now for me i'm a convert to Blu ray ,some that know me on this form,will say about bloody time.Well it is better picture,but you need a good full HD TV like a 50'' Plasma,and a good sound system to hear how good it really is.After ignoring the wife's screams,and bending the plastic,i now have myself up to standard.That said only more recent remasters and new movies look that much better on Blu Ray,so i'm not a complete convert,i can see DVD hanging around for another 10 or more years.Can Blu Ray beat DVD or is it soon itself to be crushed by some new disc flying over from Japan,we the public have are doubts,and is why DVD has not lost it's grip.

151 hughjass
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 21:41
Why the hard-on for downloadable movies? I personally hate the thought of not having movies on a tanglible format. No extras or menus; a ruddy massive file clogging up my laptop which I'm unable to watch via an HDMI on my HDTV.

I would never buy another movie again if that were to be the way forward. I haven't even bought any from the PS Store on my PS3. Such a cold, sterile way to have movies imo.

152 michael donnelly
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 21:54
I wouldnt mind the price if they included a DVD version aswell as a Blu Ray one but i have invested too much money into my DVD collection to try and get Blu Ray versions. I only have 6 Blu Ray titles and over a hundred DVDs and the hassle of having to bring my PS3 downstairs and hook it up to my HD tv is not worth it.

153 jkemal
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 22:26
Surely Blue Rays should be cheaper, I thought one of the main benefits of Blue Ray was that you only need one disc for the amount of material which would normally take up two discs on DVD, while still leaving plenty of data space for improved HD picture quality - fewer discs + less packaging = low cost. Simples

154 BenTramer
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 23:06
Another thing is that the price of DVDs is still going down. I saw the "True Lies" DVD on sale in a high street shop for €4 and loads of other titles for the same price. I could get four or five DVDs for the price of one Blu-ray at those prices and 3-D is now breathing down Blu-ray's neck, so why bother switching collections yet again only to have to start from scratch?

155 evilweavill
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 01:43
The biggest problem by far is kit! With DVD's the difference between players was so slight only the most avid techs noticed but its a whole new game with Blu-Ray and we all had those dodgy cathode TVs.
My friend was adamant that the difference between DVD and blu-Ray wasn't huge.
The problem was he had a no make TV from a supermarket some 6.99 HDMI cable, a cheap player and an awful cinema system. We watched Hurt locker at his then took it to my place and he was sold! Mind you comparing price the difference all in is probably around £2500. The difference in televisions is so huge you almost need a degree to actually pick a decent one and many people think they have because the guy in store said 'I have this one its awesome' when infact its awful compared to the top models. IMO buying a cinema kit (TV, Player and sound system) is comparable to buying a laptop or PC. On the whole confusing for 90% of the people out there. 5 months i took to buy mine!
I remember when DVD arrived and coughing up the 16 to 20 quid for a new release and seeing VHS selling for £3-£9 a pop. Over the years i have collected literally thousands of DVD's my loft is kitted just to store them (Sad but true lol). There is no way i am going to replace them all that would just be silly. I have carefully targeted the best of the best and updated them only (for now anyway). When DVD's arrived people didn't sprint down the highstreet and buy 500 films at once it was over a slow period of time years and years. 2 DVD's for £15 was seen as a great deal in that three letter high street store for a very long time, in fact i still have DVD's with stickers stating 2 for £20 on them!! I have already seen Blu-Ray's on a two for £15 deal at a four letter supermarket!!!! It was limited but its a start!
This all seems to be about bargains....not all fims hit the bargain bin. Go to the highstreet and look through the A-Z in that three letter store and you will see single edition DVDs for 16.99, 12.99 etc

156 robswoosh
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 06:20
I just love Blu Ray but cannot help but agree with everyone about the price. It is a rip off with some stores adding an extra 10 to 15 quid on top!!!
The picture quality is fantastic and so is the sound. I would just love to have all of my DVD collection on the blue format. I have had a PS3 since launch day and have about 50 Blu Rays. i have had to be specific on what film i buy. There is no way i would buy a film that would not benefit from the upscale (however the wife does have Mama bloody Mia on the Blu). This format is the future especially with the 3D coming soon. The studios need to understand that there is a financial crisis going on and therefore drop the prices and also, these discs can hold over 50GB of info. Fill it with extras you tight gits. PS3 exclusive games are great with the extra features.

157 stevelills
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 14:08
I agree with quite alot of what has been written here but I think the major reason why people are not buying Blu Ray is the amount of crap transfer jobs being done. The studios are rushing out all there back catalogue films to mug off the customers and then release a special edition 6months later, its an absolute disgrace. The transfer is quite shocking on some Ive seen and after getting caught out once, I now always read reviews on any Blu-Ray release Im interested in before I buy. I also always buy my Blu-Ray dics on the web, how HMV can charge £24.99 in the high street and then £14.99 for the same film on the web is also a disgrace. People need to wise up, its the only way the studios might start to listen and do something about it. Im very picky with what films I buy, I own about 30 BR discs and last year bought a superb Blu Ray player which I think is a must to get the full benefit of the viewing experience on a HD TV. I just wish the studios would make the bloody effort, sort out transfers, sort out the unlimited editions and then just maybe, they will see more people buying them.

158 stevelills
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 14:08
I agree with quite alot of what has been written here but I think the major reason why people are not buying Blu Ray is the amount of crap transfer jobs being done. The studios are rushing out all there back catalogue films to mug off the customers and then release a special edition 6months later, its an absolute disgrace. The transfer is quite shocking on some Ive seen and after getting caught out once, I now always read reviews on any Blu-Ray release Im interested in before I buy. I also always buy my Blu-Ray dics on the web, how HMV can charge £24.99 in the high street and then £14.99 for the same film on the web is also a disgrace. People need to wise up, its the only way the studios might start to listen and do something about it. Im very picky with what films I buy, I own about 30 BR discs and last year bought a superb Blu Ray player which I think is a must to get the full benefit of the viewing experience on a HD TV. I just wish the studios would make the bloody effort, sort out transfers, sort out the unlimited editions and then just maybe, they will see more people buying them.

159 jokerevo
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 18:49
the price is the biggest problem.

i would replace all my dvd with blu-rays but there are tons of classic movies that aren't available on blu-ray and the rest tends to be cgi infested soulless tosh lmao.

also in general the layman cannot not only see the difference but doesn't in general appreciate good picture or sound and is not prepared to make that investment in kit just to achieve it. There is a palpable difference between DVD and BR PQ when you have a big enough screen to see it but as has been covered above, the transfers are so rubbish you can't tell the difference. Robocop...I am looking at you.

160 rogerb1859
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 21:53
Price of disc's is the Number 1 major issue, especially if you go to hmv. Amazing they sell any? I did read awhile back that in april just gone that blu rays and dvd's would start to be priced the same? some, not all of course however, it didn't happen !?
Number 2 the issue of constant downloads for software. If your 20 no big deal especially if you have a ps3. imagine your 40 - 50 or older a nightmare.
You come home with your copy of Avatar to find it won't play, you only bought the player the other week and the disc today is that acceptable ?
End of day a majority are only interested in watching the film. If they can't do that will they go back for more ?
I Know for a fact that alot of people find turning over to the HDMI input is too much !!
Number 3 awful transfers "gangs of new york" to name but a few, o.k they have brought out a new copy (u.s only)can you part exchange your copy ?
Number 4 the special editions ultimate editions etc,, a favourite i can see.
You do get what you pay for ! A £200 pound telly from asda and a £100 blu ray player is not gonna set the world alight or an all in one blu ray home cinema system for the same price you are not gonna hear or feel how good dts hd master is are you now. That is if it does it ofcourse.
My local cineworld charges £7 up to £9 odd, it has only one screen out of 6 with surround sound ! If i was to pay even £25 for a blu ray still better for me than me taking all my kids, 5 of them and wife to see anything and i get a much better sound by a long way better picture and i did say picture. I've seen brand new films on week one of release with picture blemishes. blu ray wins hands down for me.
The idea of selling dvd's with a blu ray copy is a good one saves having to buy again when you do upgrade.
I think technology is moving too fast, many are confused and unsure what to buy so they will stay where they feel safe VHS anybody!!!!

161 rogerb1859
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 21:54
Price of disc's is the Number 1 major issue, especially if you go to hmv. Amazing they sell any? I did read awhile back that in april just gone that blu rays and dvd's would start to be priced the same? some, not all of course however, it didn't happen !?
Number 2 the issue of constant downloads for software. If your 20 no big deal especially if you have a ps3. imagine your 40 - 50 or older a nightmare.
You come home with your copy of Avatar to find it won't play, you only bought the player the other week and the disc today is that acceptable ?
End of day a majority are only interested in watching the film. If they can't do that will they go back for more ?
I Know for a fact that alot of people find turning over to the HDMI input is too much !!
Number 3 awful transfers "gangs of new york" to name but a few, o.k they have brought out a new copy (u.s only)can you part exchange your copy ?
Number 4 the special editions ultimate editions etc,, a favourite i can see.
You do get what you pay for ! A £200 pound telly from asda and a £100 blu ray player is not gonna set the world alight or an all in one blu ray home cinema system for the same price you are not gonna hear or feel how good dts hd master is are you now. That is if it does it ofcourse.
My local cineworld charges £7 up to £9 odd, it has only one screen out of 6 with surround sound ! If i was to pay even £25 for a blu ray still better for me than me taking all my kids, 5 of them and wife to see anything and i get a much better sound by a long way better picture and i did say picture. I've seen brand new films on week one of release with picture blemishes. blu ray wins hands down for me.
The idea of selling dvd's with a blu ray copy is a good one saves having to buy again when you do upgrade.
I think technology is moving too fast, many are confused and unsure what to buy so they will stay where they feel safe VHS anybody!!!!

162 Goldie1980
Posted on Tuesday June 8, 2010, 23:06
Some of the comments I agree with here but come on people, I think it hasn't helped the fact that we have hit the worse recession since the 1930's! People don't have the extra money for a "luxury" like a Blue Ray Movie.

I personally think Blue Ray dumps over DVDs in terms of quality and sound, however, I own a fairly chunky collection of DVD's and will not waste money in replacing films I already own EXCEPT if the film is of exceptional visual quality and sound.

For example, most Ridley Scott movies are known for visual substance and I can assure you Bladerunner for example is absolute class in BlueRay (and I own the D and have compared) and so is Gladiator. I bought Avatar the other day on BlueRay and it looks and sounds incredible. To say there is no real difference between DVD and BlueRay is a load of Cow Dung.

Simply, ONLY buy BlueRays for films that will make the most out of the difference between DVD and BlueRay i.e VISUAL AND SOUND. There is no point buying a film like Paranormal Activity on BlueRay because its filmed from the perspective of a grainy video camera when compared to Avatar which is ideally meant to be played in HI DEF as the quality is incredible.

Buy from Amazon to get good deals, HMV don't even have decent deals on DVDs let alone BlueRay!

I am sure we will be having a similar debate when 3D becomes the next best thing and what an overrated pile of shite that is! Films cashing in on essentially a gimmick that adds no real value to what you are watching.

PS. AVATAR IS THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO QUALITY 3D FILMS and thats because Cameron broke the bank and spent Mutli Millions on perfecting the concept. All the other tosh like Alice in Wonderland is just dribble. DON'T BE FOOLE BY IT!

Give BlueRay a try and hold fire because retailers will start dropping the price. Remeber DVDs were expensive when they first came out!!






163 Middenway
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 07:05
I'm very patient when it comes to DVD and Blu-ray releases and always make sure I know if there is a better edition coming out in the future. That said, I shouldn't have to. Even still, I ended up having to buy Lilo & Stitch over when they released it properly several years after its original release. I was extremely annoyed about that.

164 Pineapples101
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 09:18
Price of Blu-Ray disks, that's what it all comes down to.
They are a rip off plain and simple.

You cannot tell me they cost more to mass produce than DVD, even the cases use less plastic, plus you never get any booklets in them and the inlay cards are noticably a lower gram-age than that of DVD.

In short, Blu-Ray disks should be cheaper, a lot cheaper.

165 tsen
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 11:16
This post's timing couldn't be worse. I am so worked up I have to regester just so I can say a few words.

Throughout the years I have spent quite a bit of money actually BUYING a physical copy of Empire Magazine monthly, which a lot of fellow University students simply wouldn't do (not that I have seen a worthy rival in terms of passion for films in any campus I've been in anyway). I do so very much enjoy the style of writing. The humour, and perceptive views... I think Empire actually played a part in shaping the way I speak and write English, being a non-native speaker.

Now the ugly part. I am getting kinda fed up with Empire regarding the following:

1. Empire is based in UK, right? You talk about Blue-Ray sales performances when your country's economy and way of life is virtually literally going to shit with the government making painful but necessary decisions? Can you be any less relevant? Seriously, can you?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. Empire seriously needs to cut down on their frivolous choice of words. How are Hitchcock's offsprings and loving fans supposed to take it when you compare one of his works to be his "ultimate fuck", that he was "spent" etc? To document on the master's possible impotency is one thing, to say the above is quite another. If this is Brit wit, then fuck Brit wit.

3. It is a nice touch when you first referred to Predator as a Vagina-mouth/Pussy-mouth. You do it 90% of the time after the first occasion, you are border-lining on being in bad taste.

I continue to enjoy reading Empire and base my decisions of cinema visits on its ratings. You know what, I even agree to most of the important reviews! But you seriously need to question yourselves, from editors to writers, in terms of just how light you intend to go.

I am so angry because you are so taking the piss. Shame on you, Empire.


166 hughjass
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 13:34
Dude. Seriously. Not the place for the rant. Your comments have nothing to do with the discussions. Last time I looked Empire wasn't a politics magazine but a FILM mag.

You might want to cut back on the caffine!
If you were going to rant on here then rant about the price of discs.

167 Djmonki
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 13:53
In response to Goldie1980 comment, I also agree with most of what he is saying. Here are my opinions:

- Yes, DVD's were expensive when they 1st came out; it has been about 12 years now. They originally just came with a few static screens of info and a few trailers, but we were amazed about the quality. Then slowly the extras were introduced, followed by the reduction in price. Now, here's the thing, the actual cost is no different for a DVD on initial release then it was 12 years ago, but the price drop happens earlier and that is what everyone is used to. In the early days, DVD’s like L.A. Confidential [which was one of the ultimate releases and really opened up the technology] actually stayed at full price for nearly 2 years [unless it was in a buy 2 for £xx offer]. So no different for the new Blu Ray format.

-In regards to the above, this does not however condone the behaviour of studios for catalogue Blu Rays. E.g. The Ipcress File, there is a fantastic remastered special edition DVD (2 discs, brand new extra's), the soundtrack cd, replica poster & original Len Deighton novel. The original RRP £30, most shops had a price of £23. This is still sold at a healthy £12 in most places. Now, the Blu Ray release, RRP was £20 and that's what shops were selling it for. What's on the disc, complete new re-master, which I must say is the best I have ever seen it, beautiful and more realistic. Extra's, absolutely nothing. Now the lowest price [internet and high street] is £12. Now, as much as I want it on Blu Ray after seeing the quality, I chose the special edition, package makes it one of my favourites to this day. So this is to the studios and it boils down to this: if studios want us to pay for a full price high definition upgrade to our films, and many of us are willing to do so, then they need to provide compelling reasons to do so. Carry on offering a shiny new box and a token effort inside at best, and those disc revenues will continue to disappoint.

168 icedude
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 14:36
Question- what will be the next big leap in the field?
It's all very well to say the picture and sound is 'slightly better' but until the future arrives and we start getting movie beamed directly into our brains, the steps will be little, A little better quality picture or sound, 3D is a fad that'll die out as quick as it started, surly the main reason blu ray is dead is downloads?, the boxes are funky an' all but when you can store thousands of movies on a harddrive the size of cigarette packet why give up the space? ad to that the other tech thats needs to catch up and the fact that no-one except warlords and dictators actully have 'extra money' to play with and theres you answer.

Questions?

169 el croz
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 16:24
boostergold
Posted on Monday June 7, 2010, 16:34
Why not just import the US Watchmen like the rest of us then. Thats the other great thing with blu ray; around 70% are region free so you don't have to wait.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point taken by should we have to wait?

Why does the UK market get Shafted more often than not?

170 boredbluekoala
Posted on Wednesday June 9, 2010, 22:42
2160p TELEVISION'S ARE ALREADY A REALITY, THIS MEANS THAT NEXT YEAR ALL BLU-RAY'S RENDERED IN 1080p WILL HAVE TO BE UPSCALED TO MATCH THE NEW RESOLUTION STANDARD. BLU-RAY IS THE LAST PHYSICAL FORMAT, FROM THIS POINT ON IT WILL ALL BE DOWNLOADS OR ON-DEMAND, AND WITH A MASSIVE LEAP FORWARD IN BROADBAND SPEEDS JUST AROUND THE CORNER, IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD TIME TO WAIT AND SEE.

171 Lord Byron Pitt
Posted on Thursday June 10, 2010, 02:04
This is all interesting stuff but for the most part as long as I can see what's happening and hear well enough I'm not TOO bothered. I like the transfer of the newer DVD discs and to be honest I'll be fine with the upscale ability when i pick up a PS3. A friend of mine always wants me round his to show off the fact he has a blu-ray. Problem is it's films I've seen and he lives on the other side of town. Like an Ipad, at times it feels like a techno penis extension more than anything else.

172 richCie
Posted on Thursday June 10, 2010, 11:31
My friend just bought A Single Man on Blu-Ray for £10.99. it was the same price as the DVD. (amazon by the way - superb film)
This is when people start buying Blu-Rays.
I personally aren't even close to being able to afford a HDTV and Blu Ray player so I will be a very late adopter.
But then I genuinely don't care - the difference isn't that astonishing to be honest. and value for money will always win when you're essentially getting the same product.

173 spark1
Posted on Thursday June 10, 2010, 13:41
the average punter could care less about transfer quality.
its all about how much the dics and players/hd tvs cost.


174 conradthebarbarian2
Posted on Thursday June 10, 2010, 16:00
I think the point about the VHS to DVD switch being a huge leap, and the DVD to Blu-Ray just not being nearly as noticeable is a great point. Thats all the difference for me. I remeber when first DVD's came out and how great it was to have SCENE SELECTION and not have to rewind anymore, now THAT's a big deal. A clearer picture and a few extra bonus features just isn't an epic advancement in technology.

175 wizardweb
Posted on Thursday June 10, 2010, 18:18
Ok, a lot of people here are concerned about quality of transfer, wanting to hold a copy in their hands, extra's, etc. But for the average punter - the people that make up the vast proportion of buyers, as Spark1 (177) says they don't give a monkeys about that. It's price and what the Blu-Ray offers over DVD.

To the average person a Blu-Ray does nothing different to a DVD. It has the film, it has extra's that you might watch once. Most people are happy with the picture on their TV. Even if they do appreciate that HD is better than SD, recession or not, they'll weigh up the price. Blu-rays can be cheap but DVD is even cheaper. Hence my point before about the consumer prefers convenience and price over quality. If that wasn't true then we'd all be buying Mercs rather than Fords, "taste the difference" food over regular or value.

Also although DVD has been around for 12 years or so, in peoples minds they have only just upgraded and now people are talking about VOD. So why upgrade again to something that in the eyes of the average consumer is about to be replaced already?

Sky are just about to do a VOD service as part of their movie subscription on HD boxes, Sony are (probably) going to announce either NetFlix or Lovefilm on PS3 next week. X-box has Netflix and Wii is getting it too. Virgin have their VOD service. You can get SKyPlayer and Lovefilm on the new Freeview boxes and lovefilm on internet ready tv's. Which for the average viewer who can sit in their armchair picking films at will, means they don't have to bother going to HMV, buy in Sainsburys or wait for Amazon postie. So that'll mean in a very short order of time, actual physical product will die.

I've got a friend who works for Blockbuster and she says they just rely on games for revenue now. Probably why that firm is in trouble...

176 mocfilms
Posted on Friday June 11, 2010, 10:52
Anyone that is paying £20+ for a Bluray is clearly shopping in the wrong place! I usually pick them up for £12 - £15.99 online (Tesco are usually pretty good too), which is only a few more quid than their DVD counterparts. Also, I purchased 30+ Blurays in the last year. Of course, I know people that only buy 1 or 2 a year, but they were exactly the same during the VHS days.

Bluray offers a massive visual upgrade to those with 1080p TVs. In fact, the improvement is incredibly noticable when I revisit an old DVD. The same movie part-timers that only just joined the DVD party will of course only move to Bluray when there stops being an alternative. Having already enjoyed the benefits of true HD movies for a number of years, I am now looking foward to 3D movies coming to Bluray, as the technology is being implemented in all of the latest releases. Although some lazy companies are simply post-processing their films which makes them look crap (*cough* Clash of the Titans)

I absolutely agree though that companies should stop re-releasing reworked versions of films to squeeze extra money out of their fans. I think some are becoming wise to this now though. I avoided picking up the vanilla version of Avatar because of the extended cut that is apparently in the works. I get a headache just thinking about all of the versions of Star Wars I will be tempted with in the coming years...




177 spark1
Posted on Friday June 11, 2010, 12:42
'A clearer picture and a few extra bonus features just isn't an epic advancement in technology.'

but the advanced interactive features for blu ray like the in movie option is an advance that the companies should be make a big deal about over picture quality.

178 Bigandyt
Posted on Friday June 11, 2010, 15:39
Anyone who says Blu ray is a waste of money hasnt got Blu ray!

Blu rays are the only way to watch movies, the quality the sound evrything them about looks amazing and makes dvd look like VHS is comparison

You dont have to own every film in blu ray just buy your favourite movies, but the one thing you have to do is buy Blu ray

179 Bighousewill
Posted on Friday June 11, 2010, 20:39
I have a small collection of Blu rays I mostly rent though now im not a collector and I only rent the films that my cinema never screened that I want to see preferably on blu ray for my Hi def tv. Im a keen cinema goer I love the big screen I hardly ever buy films unless I really love the film but do the cinema thing every week. Collecting films takes up space. And I dont even have the space for my own monster screen otherwise I might have a different attitude.

180 David
Posted on Saturday June 12, 2010, 12:48
The problem today is companies around the world are always looking for the next big thing. Blu-Ray fitted perfectly with that idea, High Definition has been talked about for many years now, it has only just become financially viable to mass market. Rather like when the original playstation came out, it was expensive at the time, now a PS3 costs as much with far superior technology. There is a HUGE amount of hype regarding HD much have this, remember we are switching to Digital soon don't forget your old telly won't be compatible, blah blah blah...
That is why LCD tellys are so much cheaper now.
I have been collecting films since I have been working, so thats 24 years! Bloody hell 24 years! Anyway, I started with VHS like most of us did, had a pretty substantial collection, then went to Laserdisc (remember that?!) then eventually got my own place and had NO room to store my 350 laserdiscs.
So I started a slow upgrade to DVD, I still have some laserdiscs as they are so much more collectable than DVD or Blu ray. Anyway, I have slowly started replacing my DVD collection to BluRay. Why? Well because the sound and picture quality IS worth the investment, the trick, is to NOT buy films on day of release in the shops as obviously you will pay more, instead I wait a few months then buy them online and save a fortune. All I have seen on here is people moaning about the cost, well don't buy immediately save your cash and buy it later. The recession IS a bitch, but don't use that as an excuse to moan, there are ways of buying stuff you want you have to know where to look. Also, when looking to replace the older films, check first if they have been upgraded/remastered if not then don't buy it. That is what causes double-dipping. I use a this site - www.findit-dvd.co.uk they find films in both DVD and BluRay cheaper so you can save money. Also a good site is www.blu-ray.com they review films released on BluRay and tell you if they have been remastered or not. Easy

181 tallaght24
Posted on Monday June 14, 2010, 09:15
I agree with what another poster said about 'double dipping', its greedy, and frankly uncalled for. Also bring the prices down of new releases, some of them are shocking. Cheaper options of blu-ray players also a must. I have a dvd player that cost me 19.99, looks like shit but does what it says on the tin.

One more thing, and this fucking goes for dvd's aswel. Make all dvd's available in all countries upon release. Example: Monster Squad is only available on region 1...WTF?!?! Why? Sort it out movie people! None of this region shite, make them work on any player, would do the knees of piracy, that's for sure!

182 spark1
Posted on Monday June 14, 2010, 12:56
'appolo 13' was released today on blu ray and is priced at £13.99 in store at hmv.
thats should be standard price especially as its not a recent on screen release.

183 spark1
Posted on Wednesday June 16, 2010, 13:44
in the end retail pricing will decide if blu ray takes a hold as dvd has done.

184 Gigolo Joe
Posted on Wednesday June 30, 2010, 19:19
I can't believe the article and virtually none of the posters mention one of Bluray's biggest problems, namely hit & miss picture quality.

I've returned plenty of Blurays due to the heavy Digital Noise Reduction & Edge Enhancement the studios are still using to sharpen old film transfers. It's a cycle of lack of effort in the initial release producing loads of complaints about 'graininess' (which is either how the original film looked, or a bad compression in the old transfer). Double dipping begins again when they bring out a Special Edition with all the grain and noise scrubbed out - along with all the detail.

Sometimes it gets really Bad! Check out the Predator "Ultimate Hunter Edition". The DNR is so heavy that it looks like the effect from "A Scanner Darkly" turned down a few notches. Why the fuck do they need to do this with 2 million pixels to play with?

Of course there are valid concerns about price and double/triple dipping, but this also applies to any other format - DVDs were £20+ when VHS was still around.

Before going further, if you haven't seen a decent Bluray film on a 1080p projector or TV over 40 inches then no need to bother following this thread. The 5x increase in resolution alone is enough to come close to what you see at the cinema (assuming you have a big enough screen).

The best Blurays are so good as to be almost 3 dimensional. The depth of field used by good photographers, as far back as Golden Age cinema, can give you this illusion grain and all. If you have a good enough screen. Check out the beautiful transfer done for Star Trek 2 (which always had a dull look before). Never knew that the glass circle behind Kirk & Spock at the beginning is actually a sphere! Sadly the same cannot be said for the other Star Treks. They didn't get the same treatment and look progressively smeared and waxy, with Star Trek 6 worst.

185 filmgeek555
Posted on Wednesday July 28, 2010, 07:22
Man, for one I can't believe that nearly every so called film fan, replaces their VHS collection in the first place. I would die before I threw out any of my old tapes, and there are thousands of films out there you still can't get on DVD let alone Blu-Ray. And they want us to make a switch in format, ya dreaming? Blu-ray is utilized for the manafacturing of contemporary, shit, CGI blockbusters.
Do ya really think their gonna bring out TV movies on Blu-Ray? or really obscure exploitation films that I still can't find on DVD? No way, of course they won't. It's just another money scheme that I'm not gonna fall for.
And this might sound really geeky, but that blue banner on the front of blu-ray covers, really annoys the piss outta me.
And another thing: I've always been in love with original poster art, and original front covers; especially Arnie on the Terminator poster. And now all of a sudden, their substituting the original covers, with crappy CGI covers, so that it fits in with the CGI trend. Do as ya please with the new shit, but leave the classics alone, please.

Finally, I really don't give a shit about clarity, because I still watch VHS. So, blu-ray will never claim me.


186 billy_costigan
Posted on Monday August 9, 2010, 13:11
Someone above mentioned that some movies that weren't shot on HD (before it was invented and available) are "retro-fitted HD" and not worth as much as films shot on HD... Celluloid resolution is massively superior to 1080p or i.
4k digital still cant capture the quality of the specific way that light exposes the silver halide crystals in the emulsion of the stocks of years past.

Just buy what you want to - Hollywood is a business, they're there to make money. If you don't want to buy a blu ray then don't. More for me.

Log in below, or register to post comments
Username:
Password:
Remember Me:

CATEGORIES

Empire States (440)

Under The Radar (335)

Infinite Lives (92)

Small Screen (57)

Words From The Wise (36)

Cannes 2011 (28)

Off The Wire (24)

Comic-Con 2010 (21)

Casting Couch (2)

Oscars 2011 (1)


RECENT POSTS

Screen To Stage: The Hobbit Stars
By Helen O'Hara

Screen To Stage: Shakespeare In Love
By Helen O'Hara

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
By Ali Plumb

Pete Docter And Jonas Rivera Talk Pixar's Inside Out
By James White

Miss Game Of Thrones Already? Here's The Solution…
By Dan Jolin

H. R. Giger: An Empire Tribute
By Ian Nathan

How Edible Cinema Finally Allows You To Eat A Movie
By Ali Plumb

Why Do People Think Captain America Is Boring?
By Helen O'Hara

Are iPads And Smartphones Changing The Face Of Filmmaking?
By Ben Kirby

Screen To Stage: Let The Right One In
By Helen O'Hara


RECENT COMMENTS

8 (Possible) Reasons John Carter Bombed At The Box Office
"The trailer gave me the feeling that this would be something of a 6+ family movie. And a guy on an e"  my5p
Read comment

Screen To Stage: Shakespeare In Love
"Have just re-watched this twice over the past few weeks and forgot how fantastic it was. I'm now des"  fire_and_water5025
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"This looks unbelievably good... wish I could afford to go!"  Roo
Read comment

Miss Game Of Thrones Already? Here's The Solution…
"Nice to know Martin enlisted another author to help in his world-building. Time to get acquainted wi"  Imperion
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"@Y2Nield.com The original Hogwarts section and what was duelling dragons (has now"  Sexual Harassment Panda
Read comment

Miss Game Of Thrones Already? Here's The Solution…
"Actually i recomend The Foucault Pendulum for several reasons, in the first place it explores the es"  andresfelipeurb
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"A great sneak peek, Ali. Aside from your confusion as to where Diagon Alley/King's Cross and Hogsmea"  bruciebonus
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"im due to go in October this year and having been before, i can honestly say i cannot wait. I agree "  kopite
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"still think it's a shame that they didn't make this in England. imagine getting the Hogwarts Express"  RX78
Read comment

9¾ Things We Learnt At Universal Studios Florida's Diagon Alley
"Were you actually there Ali? If so, surely you know that Marvel Land is Islands of Adventure and not"  Y2Neildotcom
Read comment


POPULAR POSTS

Movies’ Most Quotable Lines
566 comments

'It's Just A Bit Of Fun': Why Defensive Fans Are Bad News For Movies
361 comments

Competitive Geek Baiting: Or, How To Start A Fanboy Fight
338 comments

The Avatar Backlash: Evaluatin' The Hater-atin'
303 comments

The Complete List Of Tired Movie Cliches
286 comments

Your Favourite Animated Film
217 comments

Note To Hollywood: How To Get People To Switch To Blu-Ray
192 comments

Food For Thought
132 comments

The Ten Moviegoing Commandments
127 comments

Just The Facts, Ma’am
127 comments


BLOGGERS
Damon Wise (298)
Helen O'Hara (181)
James Dyer (86)
Amar Vijay (71)
Ali Plumb (56)
James White (29)
Phil de Semlyen (21)
Owen Williams (21)
Simon Braund (6)
Nev Pierce (5)
Ally Wybrew (2)
Ben Kirby (1)
David Parkinson (1)
Dan Jolin (1)
Ian Nathan (1)

SUBSCRIPTION OFFERS

SAVE UP TO 69% GET 12 ISSUES FOR ONLY £25
Get the best seat in the house by subscribing to the world's biggest movie magazine today. Save up to 69% and every month you'll get exclusive subscriber-only covers, access to the biggest stars and the best news, reviews and behind-the-scenes reports straight from the set. Click here to find the perfect offer for you


CURRENT HIGHLIGHTS
The Big 2015 Movie Preview
The biggest, best, brightest and sometimes weirdest films of the coming year

James Cameron Talks Tech, Terminators and Avatar Sequels
An extended version of our interview from our Peter Jackson guest-edited issue

Empire's Three Favourite Scenes Of 2014
A hat-trick of moneyshots from the last 12 months

The 32 Funniest Movie Moments Of The Year
2014's side-splittingest scenes

The 10 Best Games Of The Year
2014's top pixel-pushers duke it out for the number one slot

Dan Stevens: The Breakout Star Of 2014
We congratulate The Guest star on his year to remember

The 15 Most Memorable Character Deaths Of The Year
2014’s RIP honour roll

Subscribe to Empire magazine
Get 12 Issues Of Empire For Only £25!

Get exclusive subscriber-only covers each month!

Subscribe today

Subscribe to Empire iPad edition
Get The Empire iPad Edition Today

Subscribe and save maney on annual digital subscription

Subscribe today
Buy single issues

Get 12 issues of Empire for just £25!
Get exclusive subscriber-only covers each month Subscribe today!
Empire's Film Studies 101 Series
Everything you ever wanted to know about filmmaking but were afraid to ask...
The Empire iPad Edition
With exclusive extras, interactive features, trailers and much more! Download now
Home  |  News  |  Blogs  |  Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Interviews  |  Images  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  iPad  |  Podcast  |  Magazine Contact Us  |  Empire FAQ  |  Subscribe To Empire  |  Register
© Bauer Consumer Media Ltd  |  Legal Info  |  Editorial Complaints  |  Privacy Policy  |  Bauer Entertainment Network
Bauer Consumer Media Ltd (company number 01176085 and registered address 1 Lincoln Court, Lincoln Road, Peterborough, England PE1 2RF)