I always get a little scared when the industry starts to make decisions for me. Let me explain: Paul McCartney recently released his collection of music videos, spanning about 30 years. This is great for me, as a fan since none of them have been available like this before in the best quality.
However, because the 'industry' are trying to 'please the consumer' as much as possible, they took the original full-frame videos (the way they were shot, intended for TV viewing) and CROPPED them to fit on widescreen TVs. ACK!
Like every TV and film collector, I want to see whatever it is I'm watching in the original aspect ratio. If it was a widescreen movie, I want widescreen, not pan-and-scan. And if it's a music video, I want the full picture and not some nitwits idea of "improving" it. Take a look at these:
(from user Plonka @ Amazon.com)
See? They took the same size picture and cut off 1/3 of the picture, in particular Linda's head in the second photo. Widescreen is supposed to show you MORE picture, not less.
What also terrifies me as a DVD collector is the recent annoucement from Warner Brothers that they will be no longer making HD-DVD releases, and exclusively Blu-Ray titles. According to them, they are doing it for the consumers, who bought $169 million worth of Blu-Rays and only $109 million for HD-DVDs last year. Therefore, they say Blu-Ray is the better format and its obviously the one we want.
WRONG.
(Ok, I should preface this argument by stating that I do not own either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player. History taught us from the VHS/Beta war that you should always wait at least 5 years for the Format Wars to settle down before making a purchase of a new system. But from what I've read, I'd go with HD-DVD if I had to make a choice.)
Back to the story....here's what's wrong with Warner's math: there are 4 major studios backing Blu-Ray and there were only 2 major studios backing HD-DVD. Now, if you break down the numbers, $169 divided between the number of studios releasing Blu-Ray titles, you get $42.2 million.
But $109 million divided by the two studios were releasing HD-DVD titles is $54.5 million. Now tell me again, which format did "we" choose?
Technicals specs on both formats also shows the difference: Blu-Ray can hold more information, yes. However, the average movie doesn't even use up the full capacity of a HD-DVD disc. So that argument that 'we have more room' doesn't matter when the studios are not taking full advantage of their creation.
Also, a Blu-ray disc is more complicated to produce than a HD-DVD disc is. To get the amount of room they are so proud of for a Blu-Ray requires a smaller laser, and more information packed together more tightly. This results in more playback and manufacturing errors.
Considering this is the same industry that invented the dual-layered double-sided DVD (one of the worst inventions in history) and they did not even fully perfect it before inventing new formats - you can imagine how trusting I am when it comes to Blu-ray.
And you know what? Virtually, I don't believe there to be any great improvement in picture in either one. And it all depends on the work the studios put into the releases, not to mention the age of the movie. For example, "Casablanca" was not shot intended for HD screens, so it's not going to look that good no matter what you do to it.
Meanwhile, buyers of the "Frighteners" Blu-Ray were disappointed to learn the studio didn't bother to clean up the film grain...and that movie isn't that old! Nothing like seeing that dirt as clear as possible. I'm sure movies like "I Know Who Killed Me" look great in Blu-ray and HD-DVD, but why would want to watch that?
But it all doesn't matter because now Warners has gone the Blu-ray camp completely - for the consumers, effectively killing the HD-DVD format.
Well, I feel sorry for the consumers who now have NO CHOICE when its comes to HD format, and also for those who probably got HD-DVD home theaters systems for Christmas at ridiculously low prices. Nice timing.
And why? My theory...and this is just my own theory...is that the studios are *knowingly* backing an inferior format because they *like* it when you have to keep buying the same thing over and over.
"Introducing the latest SelectaVision! No, scratch that...the BETA! No, wait here's the VHS! Hold on, here's the LASERDISC! Oh, now you gotta buy the DVD! Oh wait we screwed up the colouring on that one, you gotta buy the SPECIAL EDITION DVD! And for those who want all the 4 hours of extras, you gotta buy the DELUXE COLLECTORS DVD BOX SET! And now you can buy the HD with not-as-many-extras-as-the-DVD! Oops, sorry. We no longer support HD. But take a look at this totally awesome SUPER DELUXE SPECIAL COLLECTORS BLU-RAY version! Whaddya mean it's missing 2 minutes? Oh! That wasn't the directors cut, was it?"
Besides, since the Blu-ray costs more for them to produce it, it costs more in the stores. And everyone knows the more something costs, the better it is. Right?
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for A Cosmic Christmas on DVD...uncut.
