|
IUG posted:Is there a good RSS feed for new bluray / UHD releases? Maybe a feed for each format? Like for prices or? I just visit Blu-Ray.com w couple times a week for what’s new or upcoming.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Boywhiz88 posted:Like for prices or? I just visit Blu-Ray.com w couple times a week for what’s new or upcoming. Nah, I used to just got to BestBuy and Target for sales, but they've sucked for years. I noticed I was only looking at the new releases basically. Then I saw BestBuy isn't even listing music anymore, and figured there had to be something better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
I still like Best Buy because they regularly put out steelbooks for blu ray releases. Some of them end up looking like poo poo of course, but plenty of them look really good. Atomic Blonde, Bad Boys, The Last Jedi, It, and Rampage all got pretty nice looking ones that for me were worth going to Best Buy for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
This thread broke me and now I've got Indicator's Night of the Demon on the way, sight unseen (Because of the Blade Runner-ian amount of cuts). I'm excited!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Kino Lorber confirmed they were able to license 130 films from StudioCanal. This is gigantic news because other than a few films with dual ownership or special exceptions (like the Avco Embassy library or the Jacques Tati films), they've been at the mercy of Lionsgate in North America. In over a decade of having US rights to the library, they've released only about a dozen titles from a library of almost 10,000 films. Most notably Lionsgate forced Criterion to take dozens of films out of print due to insisting on exclusive rights - only for them to not even release their own editions of the majority of the films. Also, Kino confirmed that "two other labels" made smaller deals for foreign and horror titles, which has to mean Criterion and Shout/Scream Factory.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Kino Lorber confirmed they were able to license 130 films from StudioCanal. This is gigantic news because other than a few films with dual ownership or special exceptions (like the Avco Embassy library or the Jacques Tati films), they've been at the mercy of Lionsgate in North America. In over a decade of having US rights to the library, they've released only about a dozen titles from a library of almost 10,000 films. Most notably Lionsgate forced Criterion to take dozens of films out of print due to insisting on exclusive rights - only for them to not even release their own editions of the majority of the films. Neat. Do we know what the 130 films are?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Neat. Do we know what the 130 films are? 130 slightly different versions of ‘The Terminator’.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
I'm hoping Martin is in there but I'm not holding my breath.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Neat. Do we know what the 130 films are? They've only announced one so far, Rider on the Rain. I'm going to guess Scream Factory got the Hammer films and Criterion probably got most, if not all of the titles they had released on DVD (like The Tales of Hoffmann, The Third Man, Contempt, Ran, etc). CPL593H posted:I'm hoping Martin is in there but I'm not holding my breath. It's owned independently - same producer also owns Dawn of the Dead '78. A German label released a Blu-ray of Dawn from the 4K restoration. If you take away the stuff Criterion likely got, Kino probably got a lot of British films from the 30s through the 70s. For example, Criterion probably got The Small Back Room and The Tales of Hoffmann back, but Kino could have the lesser 50s P&P films like Oh Rosalinda and Ill Met by Moonlight (they did manage to get The Wild Heart/Gone to Earth by working with both iTV and Disney). Egbert Souse fucked around with this message at 00:20 on Nov 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:17
|
|
|
What Hammer films are owned by Canal?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:What Hammer films are owned by Canal? They technically own nearly the entire Hammer library as far as the UK and Europe are concerned, but the US rights are all over the place. Universal released a set with all eight they have US rights to, WB has released a few, and some of the Sony and MGM titles were licensed out. Anchor Bay released a bunch years ago that had lapsed US rights, so they were able to license from StudioCanal directly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
Ugh I just want a US blu of Curse of Frankenstein dammit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:
I howled in despair at reading this. This is the fucker that wants some ridiculous amount for any Dawn release so he can recoup the cost of the hideously expensive 3d conversion he made that nobody wanted, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Someone on blu-ray.com posted screenshots of the Blue Underground 4K restoration of Fulci's Zombie, and it looks fantastic. I just put in my preorder. Looks like an awesome release, and there are three covers to choose from: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=306721 The screenshots are on page 16 of that thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:the hideously expensive 3d conversion he made that nobody wanted if I'm remembering correctly, this isn't quite an accurate summation of what happened. iirc Anchor Bay commissioned it for a theatrical release, and then hosed him on actually releasing it or paying him for it, because by the time it was done the 3D fad had basically died (I remember they were planning a similar thing for Battle Royale that also fell through, though in that case the conversion was never actually made). this left him way in the hole financially, hence the current Dawn rights situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:if I'm remembering correctly, this isn't quite an accurate summation of what happened. iirc Anchor Bay commissioned it for a theatrical release, and then hosed him on actually releasing it or paying him for it, because by the time it was done the 3D fad had basically died (I remember they were planning a similar thing for Battle Royale that also fell through, though in that case the conversion was never actually made). this left him way in the hole financially, hence the current Dawn rights situation. I've heard it was the other way around, with Rubenstein being the prime mover for the conversion. I find it hard to believe that a seasoned producer like him would use his own cash to convert a film solely at the behest of another company without a written agreement for compensation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Flicker Alley just announced their next release: Melies Fairy Tales in Color - a collection of 13 restored hand-colored Georges Melies films https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=24214
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Flicker Alley just announced their next release: Melies Fairy Tales in Color - a collection of 13 restored hand-colored Georges Melies films Well poo poo, I'm buying that. I've seen most of those but I imagine the restorations will be incredible. Nice avatar btw.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Flicker Alley just announced their next release: Melies Fairy Tales in Color - a collection of 13 restored hand-colored Georges Melies films $27 direct from FA as a preorder too, which is a steal. Might finally pick up Man With A Movie Camera too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:$27 direct from FA as a preorder too, which is a steal. Might finally pick up Man With A Movie Camera too. Man with a Movie Camera is a clone of Lobster Films' French disc that has some very poor encoding. They crammed all 5 hours of content onto a single BD-50 and has a lot of macroblocking. I opted for the Masters of Cinema edition, which adds an interview and a considerable booklet (which is unfortunately OOP and replaced with a smaller booklet on current editions). Most of Flicker Alley's releases are top-notch. At least since 2016, they've been hiring Fidelity in Motion for encoding and authoring. They do all of the UK Indicator, Arrow, and MoC discs. Also, Flicker Alley has amazing customer service - I always get my discs ahead of time when it's a pre-order and they do everything at max. quality. Even use Criterion cases for the Blu-rays.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Someone on blu-ray.com posted screenshots of the Blue Underground 4K restoration of Fulci's Zombie, and it looks fantastic. I just put in my preorder. Looks like an awesome release, and there are three covers to choose from: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=306721 An instant preorder for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
So the big stopping block in getting a Blu-ray release of the unaltered Star Wars original trilogy was Fox having some piece of the rights to ‘A New Hope’ or something, right? Now that Disney owns both Star Wars and Fox, does that mean the odds of us getting quality home releases of the Star Wars movies are better? Or is it still a pipe dream? Like, my ideal release for the original trilogy would be like a 9-disc set, with three versions of each movie (original release, enhanced THX release, and special edition) and then a totally loving insane amount of supplementals. Like, Star Wars should be the easiest series in history to provide bonus materials and making-of stuff because it’s so well documented and preserved, and it baffles me that my copy of ‘Species’ has more extensive special features than loving Star Wars. poo poo, I’d drop $100+ without hesitation on an exhaustive release of the original trilogy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:So the big stopping block in getting a Blu-ray release of the unaltered Star Wars original trilogy was Fox having some piece of the rights to ‘A New Hope’ or something, right? Most people would. A OT box set like that would be like Disney owning the US mint in how much money it would print. There are some other issues with "Original Release," Lucas never stopped loving with the damned movies, but most changes were a lot more subtle before the special edition releases in the 90's. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_changes_in_Star_Wars_re-releases Don't get me wrong, I too would drop $100+ easy on a 4k version of Star Wars Classic, but I"m not going to hold my breath..
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
It’s a horrible pipe dream because Lucas is a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Now that Disney owns both Star Wars and Fox, does that mean the odds of us getting quality home releases of the Star Wars movies are better? Or is it still a pipe dream? When the deal closes and Fox has been digested, the only sticking point is how Disney wants to structure the extraction of money from wallets. That said, Turner still has the TV rights to 4-6; Disney would have to find something to trade them before they own EVERYTHING but the home video stuff will all be under one roof. Iron Crowned posted:There are some other issues with "Original Release," Lucas never stopped loving with the damned movies, but most changes were a lot more subtle before the special edition releases in the 90's. There are reference technicolor prints available, and Disney certainly would drop 10 million bucks to have a restoration team gin up the missing elements for a '77 cut. If fans can do a passable restoration, Disney certainly can. The question is if they wait for a 9-episode box set and make it exclusive to that, make it streaming-only on Disney+, or do any other consumer-hostile junk like the Disney Vault. xarph fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Nov 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Turner doesn’t own the original OT tv rights though. That could be Disney’s leg up. If they do make a OOT set, then all of this would be worth it and I can leave the SW fandom behind to eat itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:It’s a horrible pipe dream because Lucas is a gently caress. I thought I read somewhere that part of his deal w Disney was to disallow the pre-SE trilogy from being released ever. I also would buy a 4K OT in a heartbeat, it’s maddening that it probably won’t happen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
Get yourself the Star Wars Silver Screen edition which keeps all the 70s color timings and poo poo. Looks great. Image is a little soft sometimes but it's a small price to pay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
I won’t stop being frustrated with Lucas until the OT Blu Ray is in my hands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
xarph posted:There are reference technicolor prints available, and Disney certainly would drop 10 million bucks to have a restoration team gin up the missing elements for a '77 cut. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely down for a full restoration of the actual first theatrical release of Star Wars, but, I'm also convinced that that's not the "original version" most people are familiar with. What constitutes the "Original Star Wars," will be different from person to person, should it be the May 1977 version over the 1981, or the 1989, or the 1993 etc.? I honestly think at this point we all have a different "Original Version" so all of them will be wrong, and turbo nerds will make sure that it's well known. xarph posted:If fans can do a passable restoration, Disney certainly can. The question is if they wait for a 9-episode box set and make it exclusive to that, make it streaming-only on Disney+, or do any other consumer-hostile junk like the Disney Vault. With what, 20 years of people clamoring for a good version of the original, that would certainly create a much more toxic environment for Disney than would be worth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Most people would. A OT box set like that would be like Disney owning the US mint in how much money it would print. I think the only people who really care about this, especially enough to pay a premium for it, are nerds. The general public doesn't give a poo poo about which version of Star Wars they're watching and people in their 20s at this point have only ever seen the CGI Jabbas cuts. xarph posted:When the deal closes and Fox has been digested, the only sticking point is how Disney wants to structure the extraction of money from wallets. If by some miracle they finally put out the original versions of the movies I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeally hope you can just buy them individually instead of bundling them with all the other movies. Still, I'm not holding my breath.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
I hate the “but which one is the ORIGINAL HMM?” Argument because I would wager 99.9% of people just don’t give a poo poo about the tiny differences so long as no one was to ever hear Jedi Rocks again. Pick any version before 1997 and use that. Don’t give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:I think the only people who really care about this, especially enough to pay a premium for it, are nerds. The general public doesn't give a poo poo about which version of Star Wars they're watching and people in their 20s at this point have only ever seen the CGI Jabbas cuts. And that just makes me sad. But also nerds are the people who buy all the Star Wars, the casuals aren't really going to care if it's got a CGI Jabba, and those people will happily buy the DVD because it's got Yoda on the front. CPL593H posted:If by some miracle they finally put out the original versions of the movies I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeally hope you can just buy them individually instead of bundling them with all the other movies. Still, I'm not holding my breath.  CelticPredator posted:I hate the “but which one is the ORIGINAL HMM?” Argument because I would wager 99.9% of people just don’t give a poo poo about the tiny differences so long as no one was to ever hear Jedi Rocks again. I mean that's really how I feel too, but if you are going to do something as monumental as restoring something as beloved as Star Wars, it's definitely a big factor in how you go about doing it. Alternatively just do all of the versions, put out a big fuckall box for each of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Alternatively just do all of the versions, put out a big fuckall box for each of them. Why would you want this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
If that’s the way it has to be then so be it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:Why would you want this? I kinda wouldn't want 50 versions, but I wouldn't mind one that had say the original '77 and '89 versions, because it would be interesting enough to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
They should do a seamlessly branching collection with all the cuts so that people can watch them all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
xarph posted:like the Disney Vault. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu... Take home the original, unaltered trilogy in stunning 4k! Get it before it goes back in the Lucas Vault!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:If that’s the way it has to be then so be it. Yeah but then it's basically "Pay 200 dollars for a bunch of useless poo poo so you can get three movies you actually want." and that's a deal breaker for me. trdn89 posted:They should do a seamlessly branching collection with all the cuts so that people can watch them all. That would make the most sense but this is Disney so in this hypothetical event they're going to try and squeeze as much money of of this as they can, so I'm sure it would be an ultra mega deluxe 30 disc limited edition box set. Still I don't know why people who've been complaining since Bush was in office about not having the old versions of the movies would even want to watch the CGI Jabbas one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
trdn89 posted:They should do a seamlessly branching collection with all the cuts so that people can watch them all. The added disney-bonus to this approach is it would drive the makemkv users crazy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2018 20:40
|
|