Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Incredibly low Blu-Ray disc prices

This is topic Incredibly low Blu-Ray disc prices in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000690

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 01-14-2009, 04:50 PM:

I thought perhaps a thread pointing to unusually low prices on popular BR discs might be useful. For example two weeks ago - for one day - the Die Hard Collection was only $46.95 on Amazon. Next day it was $81.99 again. At the same time both Kill Bill discs were only $9.95 each at Amazon (Canada). Even with shipping it was more than $10 cheaper than any US supplier. Same time Best Buy had a few nice 2-fors as low as $22.99.

Currently "Reservoir Dogs" and "Terminator 2" can be found at Amazon for $10.49 each. Also there is a B2G1 free deal there with some good titles - many at under $20. For individual titles I would think under $14.99 for recent releases or $12.99 for catalog might be a good deal to report.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-14-2009, 05:55 PM:

Wal-Mart and Sam's Club have a number of movies on Blu-ray for $10 each, or just a little more than $10. I mentioned this in another thread, but I guess it's worth repeating here.

Wal-Mart has Reservoir Dogs, Crash, Young Guns, the first three Rambo movies (and perhaps a couple others I'm forgetting) for $10. I've seen Terminator 2 for $11 or $12.

Sam's has movies like The Road Warrior, Bullitt, A Clockwork Orange, The Searchers and maybe a few others for just under $11.

I bought a copy of The Searchers. At a price under $11 it's quite a bargain for the good image quality (this 1950s classic was filmed in VistaVision) and extras on the disc.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 01-15-2009, 10:34 AM:

SAW - Amazon has a special on the first four through the end of January including I & II on BR for $10.49.

I had seen The Searchers on HD-DVD from Netflix and was impressed. I will probably pick that up. Already have Rio Bravo and that looks great too. Thanks.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 04-18-2009, 11:25 AM:

Amazon is offering a "Buy Two, Get One Free" sale on certain DVD and Blu-Ray titles until April 24.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 04-21-2009, 10:47 AM:

Star Trek TOS - Season One on Blu-ray is coming in the next couple of weeks. It is extremely reasonably priced at $72.99 at Amazon. It includes all 28 (?) season one shows in either the original or enhanced-special effects versions and with the original mono or new DTS-HD 7.1 audio. Initial reviews are linked below. The DVDBeaver review has lots of screen caps. Looks like a no-brainer for fans.

Digital Bits Star Trek TOS Review

DVDBeaver Star Trek TOS Review

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-16-2009, 09:28 PM:

Boy. There's quite a few VERY GOOD DEALS on Blu-ray movies lately.

Last week, new BDs of Up, Monsters Inc. and Heat arrived in the mail. I paid an average of $16.50 for each movie.

I just placed an order at Amazon for Fight Club and Leon: The Professional, costing $16.99 and $15.99 respectively.

The new release of Star Trek (which I don't plan on buying) will be priced just under $20 for the Blu-ray and just under $15 for the DVD. Apparently this pricing will be common at many retailers if a commercial I just saw on TV is any indication.

Amazon has the pre-order price of The Hangover Blu-ray set at only $16.99. And that price could actually drop a buck or two between now and Dec. 15.

The widespread price cuts could be seen as an indication Hollywood studios are finally positioning Blu-ray as a mass market item rather than a premium priced high end product. We saw this before with DVD between its 3rd and 4th year on the market.

The price cuts and steadily improving quality control on how movies are mastered for Blu-ray make for a really positive combination. I really need to get more serious about selling many of those old DVDs I have while they can still be sold for at least a couple bucks!

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 11-16-2009, 11:47 PM:

In my neighborhood 7-11, the cashier's station has a P.O.P. display with major studio Bluray at $9.99

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-23-2009, 08:36 PM:

Amazon.com current has the Blu-ray versions of Up, Cars and Monsters Inc. offered together as a 3 title package for just $30.99. That's just a little over $10 per movie, two of which are new releases with multi-disc packages.

I also noticed a pretty good number of catalog titles on Blu-ray at or below the $10 level. Amazon has lots of BD titles near the $15 level.

This online push has me wondering what some of the retailers (such as Wal-Mart) will be doing with Blu-ray pricing specials on Black Friday and on through the holidays.

I hope some store, whether it is an online merchant or a retailer like Target, has the Blu-ray version of Band of Brothers on a low priced special. It would be great to get that box set at or below $30.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-23-2009, 11:16 PM:

I saw the 5th Element at Wal*Mart for $13. Not sure if that is a good price or not. I'm still not sure if it is even a good movie or not. It seems to have an identity problem because it doesn't seem to know what kind of movie it wants to be.

quote: Bob
Amazon.com current has the Blu-ray versions of Up, Cars and Monsters Inc. offered together as a 3 title package for just $30.99.

That would be a good deal if Cars was not included. What a shitty movie that was. It has absolutely no right to exist. I think Pixar should be fined by the New World Government for having made it.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-23-2009, 11:44 PM:

Amazon has another deal with just Up and Monsters Inc. for $26.48 -roughly $13.24 for each 4-disc package.

Edit: a little update from stuff I noticed at the top of the Blu-ray.com website (which shows the most popular BD deals at Amazon), Amazon has the BD of Raging Bull on sale for only $8.99.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 11-24-2009, 11:53 AM:

Best Buy has the HBO mini series JOHN ADAMAS on sale now for $24.95 but when I had learned about it and called the store, they were all sold out in my area. I understand it is available at Amazon at about the same price plus shipping.

-Claude

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-26-2009, 10:08 PM:

Amazon.com currently has nearly 200 movies on Blu-ray listed in its Black Friday special. Many of these movies are priced below $10. A few dozen are priced at only $7.99.

Obviously, this is a better deal than what Wal-Mart is offering (30 selected BD titles priced at $15).

Best Buy has nearly 100 Blu-ray titles available at its website for under $10. Best Buy stores may also have similar pricing for the same Blu-ray movies during Black Friday.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 12-08-2009, 10:05 AM:

All seasons of Lost are on Amazon's Deal of Day. I got all 5 seasons for $108 on Bluray. DVD deal is around $75.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-10-2009, 10:26 AM:

Below $20 pricing helped Terminator: Salvation set a new record for Blu-ray market share for opening week. According to VideoScan 42% of the discs sold for Terminator: Salvation during its opening week were on the Blu-ray format. That beats the previous opening week BD market share record of 38% set by Star Trek.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-14-2009, 09:24 AM:

Today only (December 14) Amazon is offering the Blu-ray version of the acclaimed HBO mini series Band of Brothers for $39.99. That's $60 off the MSRP.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 12-31-2009, 02:55 PM:

Not sure how ling this will last. Today I ordered "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" on BR from Amazon for $19.99. This is the 30th Anniversary version with all three versions via branching and the full second disc of extras.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-31-2009, 03:31 PM:

Joe,
I sure wish you could be here in Hawaii so I can take you to the Costco Store in my home town so you can buy the three versions of CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE 3RD KIND in a box set for $14.95. They had it on sale since Black Friday with lots of copies but they now have only about five when I was there last night. I really scored last night when I purchased YEAR ONE & YEAR TWO of the HARRY POTTER Ultimate Editions in Blu Ray for$26.95 each. Amazon has them for about $32.00.

The only added cost to the prices Costco and other retailers charge in Hawaii is a 4.7 state sales tax. This tax is about Sixty Two Cents for CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and $1.12 I paid for each of the Harry Potter sets. Although Amazon's prices does not include and state sales tax you still have to pay for shipping if you want the discs sent to you by first class. Amazon free shipping is only for purchase over $35.00 and it is "Snail Mail" that that takes forever for a shipment to arrive.

-Claude

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-31-2009, 10:03 PM:

CLaude, I think that 14.95 price is chainwide at Costco. The one in Bakersfield is charging that. Unfortunately, I paid quite a bit more. It was in the first batch of BD's I got when I bought my machine.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-01-2010, 03:47 PM:

Yes, I know that Paul but not all stores carry the same product. They do have all of the new stuff but the stores in my area does not have the same catalogue titles. There are four Costco stores on the island of Oahu. The main store is in Honolulu and another one is at Hawaii Kai. Two others are in Leeward Oahu where I live. One is at Waipio and the other one is at Kapolei. I have been to the the store in Honolulu, Waipio and Kapolei during the Christmas shopping season and only the Waipio has it, The other stores never carried it.

Like you, I bought the BD of CEOTTK shortly after I purchased my player. I thought it was a terrific bargain at Walmart when it was on sale at $29.95. It was selling at Best Buy for almost fifty dollars at that time so I bought it at Walmart. I guess the old adage "All Good Things Comes To Those Who Wait" is certainly true in this case.

-Claude

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-01-2010, 04:51 PM:

Amazon still has a lot of titles offered at steep discounts. I don't know how long the sale will last.

I noticed the "digibook" version of Dirty Harry priced at only $9.99. Normally I see that one sold for $24 or more at retail stores.

Amazon also has season 1 of the HBO series True Blood on sale for $24.99. That one normally costs over $40.

Of all the movies discs of District 9 sold in its first week of release, over 40% were Blu-ray. It nearly matched the market share record of Terminator Salvation. I'm sure the below $20 pricing at many places ($17.99 at Amazon) has something to do with that.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 01-03-2010, 09:23 PM:

Amazons free shipping offer is for orders above $25, not $35.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-03-2010, 10:31 PM:

Sometimes it takes more than a week to receive an Amazon order via their free super saver shipping. If you order an item not in stock it may take a couple weeks or more. I currently have an order placed that isn't scheduled to ship until the middle of January.

However, when the items are shipped they tend to move fairly quick. At least that's the case in the mainland 48 US states. I've received orders via free shipping in as little as 2 days from when the order was placed.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 01-04-2010, 12:25 AM:

Same here... my order of the Lost seasons 1 to 5 blu ray deal arrived 3 days after I placed the order.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-04-2010, 09:21 AM:

To add to the note, I often receive my shipments from Amazon via UPS. Sometimes they use USPS. Either method moves just as fast and has tracking info.

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 01-05-2010, 08:55 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
However, when the items are shipped they tend to move fairly quick. At least that's the case in the mainland 48 US states. I've received orders via free shipping in as little as 2 days from when the order was placed.

Not in my case. It's more like a week to a week and a half. Stuff seems to travel the country in a meandering fashion before it gets to me, and the tracking thingie has been unreliable at best.

I'm trying Prime this year. USPS has become far too frustrating to me.

One of the things I like about it so far is you get two "1-click" buttons on Prime-eligible purchases...the second being a $3.99 next-day shipping option.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 01-05-2010, 09:35 AM:

Once shipped I get most "free shipping" items in two days anyway due to the proximity of the typical shipping location. Of course it could take them a week to get it out the door. I signed up for the free trial of Prime but don't intend to keep it.

I wonder if the items I ordered while on the trial and remain on backorder get the Prime treatment or revert to another shipping method once I cancel the service.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-07-2010, 08:28 PM:

Wal-Mart added a few more Blu-ray titles to its $10 bargain bin. I picked up a copy of Die Hard there for $10 last night.

The first time I saw Die Hard, a 70mm show in NYC, the 20th Century Fox logo was horizontally stretched on the print. Never saw that repeated on home video until now. The Blu-ray version has that same horizontal stretch applied to the logo.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-07-2010, 08:41 PM:

To repeat what I had posted on another thread, I was able to buy all four DIE HARD movies in Blu-Ray that was in a set for $29.95 plus a 4.7% Hawaii sales tax just before Christmas from Costco. So far I had watched #2, #3 and #4 but have not watched the first movie in the series yet. It was one of the best deals last year. Getting the first two Harry Potter Ultimate editions for $26.94 from Costco was not bad either

-Claude

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-07-2010, 09:29 PM:

quote: Bobby 'ask me about trajan' Henderson
The first time I saw Die Hard, a 70mm show in NYC, the 20th Century Fox logo was horizontally stretched on the print. Never saw that repeated on home video until now. The Blu-ray version has that same horizontal stretch applied to the logo.

The 35mm versions were the same. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-07-2010, 09:30 PM:

I don't think Costco has any locations in Oklahoma. Maybe there's too many Sam's Club stores in the Sooner state for Costco to bother. Didn't like any of the Die Hard sequels enough to buy them, so $10 for the original movie is just fine by me.

Amazon is currently offering Mel Brooks' sci-fi spoof Spaceballs on Blu-ray for just $8.99. I watched that movie in 70mm just a couple or so years ago.

quote: John Wilson
The 35mm versions were the same.

That figures. What's odd is the two DVD versions of Die Hard had a proper looking 80's version of the 20th Century Fox logo in a 2.39:1 frame. Oh well, I can't complain too much. It's actually kind of cool to see the logo treated in the same wrong manner as it was during the original Die Hard theatrical release.

Anyone remember how the 20th Century Fox logo was botched even worse on prints of The Abyss? They just cropped the living freaking hell out of the logo. You could read part of the "20th" element in the logo but much of everything else was deleted.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-07-2010, 09:31 PM:

$8.99 is way too much for that movie.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-07-2010, 09:40 PM:

I know certain collectors who would disagree with that. After all, they made 70mm blow-up prints of that movie! It's gotta be good if they're going to do that!

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-08-2010, 01:35 PM:

I am one of the collectors that will have to disagree with John Wilson's comment that $8.99 is too much to pay for the first DIE HARD film. As Bobby had pointed out, the film was released to theatres in 70mm. The film was so successful, it became a franchise and three more film were made. The 2nd DIE HARD film was also shown in selected 70mm venues and I saw both films in that format at the Coronet Theatre in San Francisco on my way home from a business trip. As to my willingness to pay $8.95, hell Yes! Since the time DIE HARD had become available on home video, I shelled out $40.00 for the laserdisc and almost $50.00 for the DVD collection of the first three movies. As I had mentioned in another post about Christmas time, I bought it again in Blu-Ray and this time as a collection featuring all four movies for about $30.00.

-Claude

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-11-2010, 01:59 PM:

Target had SPEED on sale in Blu-Ray for about $9.95 a few weeks ago and by the time I got to the store to purchase a copy, they were all sold out. I was able to get a rain check good until the end of this month but I will not need it anymore because Best Buy had the movie on sale yesterday for the same price. I was able to get my hands on a copy when I bought the last copy of LOST in Blu-Ray. I watched the movie last night and I have never seen SPEED look that good even in a theatre. For a movie that is about fifteen years old, the PQ look like it was a brand new release. I have always been impressed with the laserdisc and the DVD of the movie I had previously purchased but the BD has them beat in spades. Not only is the image quality superb, the sound is just as equally excellent. It is too bad I am not yet set up for true DTS HD Master Audio with a receiver that could reproduce the sound but when I do, I will try to watch SPEED first just for the sound.

-Claude

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-11-2010, 05:07 PM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I am one of the collectors that will have to disagree with John Wilson's comment that $8.99 is too much to pay for the first DIE HARD film. As Bobby had pointed out, the film was released to theatres in 70mm.

Actually John was talking about Spaceballs as being a movie on Blu-ray not worth $8.99. Like Die Hard, Spaceballs also had some 70mm Dolby magnetic prints available during its original theatrical release.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-11-2010, 05:09 PM:

Yeah, you watched one.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-11-2010, 05:34 PM:

Right you are. I was just being a little discrete about just where I watched the 70mm show. Heh heh.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-11-2010, 07:56 PM:

You watched it at the mighty Madstone Tamarac Square that I toured you through! No need to feel ashamed.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-11-2010, 07:58 PM:

I agree Spaceballs wasn't much of a film - 70mm presentation would not help it, and I know I have no plans to buy it on Blu-ray no matter the sale price. But (or as Phil would put it, "Butt!") as one reviewer at the time put it,

quote:
Mel Brooks running at half-speed is better than no Mel Brooks at all.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-11-2010, 08:44 PM:

Sorry Bobby for not reading your post carefully when you referred to SPACEBALLS rather than DIE HARD on sale at Costco for $8.99. As far as I am concerned about SPACBALLS, JOHN Wilson is correct because I would not buy that movie even at that price. I like Mel Brooks films but I did not like that movie at all.

-Claude

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-11-2010, 11:16 PM:

It might be worth mentioning I watched Aliens in 70mm at the same venue.
[Razz]

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 03-29-2010, 08:30 AM:

Picked up the "Wizard of Oz" 3-disc "Emerald edition" Blu-ray at Costco for $12.99 over the weekend. Yikes. Did WB print way too many of those or something?

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-09-2010, 09:57 PM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I am one of the collectors that will have to disagree with John Wilson's comment that $8.99 is too much to pay for the first DIE HARD

Sorry, Claude...I was referring to Spaceballs, not the wonderful Die Hard. I think Bobby may have added to his post after I wrote what I did, otherwise I would have been more specific.

quote: Bobby Henderson
After all, they made 70mm blow-up prints of that movie! It's gotta be good if they're going to do that!

It was a marketing ploy...See It In 70mm! Many films were blown up to 70mm that simply did not deserve the treatment. This was just another one that happened to be one of the last. I can't remember even laughing once in that film...yet I still laugh at Blazing Saddles anytime I have the good fortune to see it.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-09-2010, 10:15 PM:

Lionsgate released JADE AND RELIC, two more films they had licensed from Paramount Pictures this past week. I saw both of the movies at a theatre and enjoyed them very much. Imagine my surprise when they were both on sale at Wal Mart for $10.00 each when I bought them.
Picture and sound quality was very good and RELIC is in 7.1 DTS HD Master Audio.

By the way, the new Blu-Ray of APOLLO 13 will be on sale at Best Buy for $18.95 on Tuesday. This disc has received excellent reviews so far.

-Claude

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-01-2011, 02:59 PM:

All five of Clint Eastwood's DIRTY HARRY movies on Blu-Ray were on sate at Sam's Club at Christmas time for $25.88 and I bought a copy the next day. After I bought mine, there were four copies left but when I was there again yesterday morning, they were all gone. All five movies were on separate discs with a lot of bonus features and came in a nice slip case. After noticing the Dirty Harry movies were all sold out. there were many other Warner Brothers BD on sale for $12.98 including TWISTER. I was waiting for the price to come down on that title and it finally did and I bought a copy.

All three discs that were in the GONE WITH THE WIND box set are now available in tri bd case with a slip cover and selling for $12.98 at Costco. I was hoping Walmart would have had this at the time the box set first went on sale but all they had was a movie only copy so I bought the box. Had I known Costco would sell it for such a low price after almost a year later, I would have waited. Costco also had the five disc BLADE RUNNER movie for the $12.98 a couple of months ago and I got it.

I guess the old adage 'All good things comes to those who wait" is something I should have kept in mind.

-Claude

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 01-01-2011, 03:40 PM:

Cheap blu rays have less to do with the format and more to do with the title that is being released

Honestly, will anyone pay more than $6.99 for Stallone Lock on DVD? Well if they won't pay that much for the dvd, then why would they pay more for the Blu-ray.

I saw Lock Up for $6.99 today.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-01-2011, 08:53 PM:

What you said is absolutely ridiculous, Tom

In addition to GONE WITH THE WIND, CASABLANCA is also on sale at Costco for $12.98 in addition to other WB catalogue titles such as TROY and SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION.. Are you trying to say the reason these movies are priced so low is because they are not worth more than what they are selling for on sale?. Before GWTW was first released on DVD a couple of years ago, one was never able to purchase the movie on VHS for less than $60.00. Are you also trying to tell me the five DIRTY HARRY movies I just bought on Blu-Ray for twenty five dollars plus change was only due to the movies not worth more? For your information, Smarty Pants, this was not the first time I bought the Dirty Harry movies on video. Before I got into Blu-Ray, I bought the Dirty Harry collection on DVD almost two years ago when Warners issued them in a special collectors edition in a box set with booklets and collectables and I paid over fifty dollars for it. I felt I got a bargain at the time I purchased the collection and I only bought them again without the extra stuff because I wanted the movies on Blu-Ray because the price was very reasonable.

-Caude

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 01-01-2011, 09:21 PM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
In addition to GONE WITH THE WIND, CASABLANCA is also on sale at Costco for $12.98

Well, would you pay $13 for Casablanca on DVD? Not me, maybe $9.99. With DVD still around, how can one honestly command more that $20 for a blu-ray classic?

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
Are you trying to say the reason these movies are priced so low is because they are not worth more than what they are selling for on sale?.

Seriously? Who would pay more than $15 for Troy Or Shawshank.

I paid a $1 for my Shawshank Laserdisc

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
For your information, Smarty Pants, this was not the first time I bought the Dirty Harry movies on video.

Look Smarty Hat, even Criterion Blu Rays are having a hard time commnanding top dollar. The days of paying more than $20 for a movie are done.

With DVD still aroumd, blu ray, on line streaming, redbox, and mail ins, it really is hard to command a lot for a title.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-01-2011, 09:47 PM:

If you were collecting movies on videos from the very beginning with the introduction of the Beta format video tape recorder and laserdiscs when just ordinary movies on tapes were selling for almost a hundred dollars and anywhere from $35.00 to $40.00 and even more on laserdiscs, you should understand why I get excited about movies priced very low on Blu Ray. When Blu-Ray was introduced, titles were selling for more than $30.00. It was not until the format became more mainstream did prices start to drop. Laserdisc never became mainstream and that is the reason the prices always remained high. You were only able to get SHAWSHANK for a dollar only because that is what it is worth now since DVD killed the format and it was discontinued. The STAR WAR collection I bought on laserdisc cost me about $250.00 when it was first released but I would be very lucky if I can get only a few dollars for it now.

-Claude

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 01-01-2011, 09:57 PM:

Well Claude, the Star Wars box set is one of the more collectable laserdiscs as they contain the unaltered theatrical versions. Every theatrical cut (the one George hates) DVD to date is mastered from them.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-01-2011, 10:05 PM:

Damien,

That might be true but do not think I get much for it because a lot were sold and there are many copies out there. If you know anyone who is interested in my copy, let me know because I still have it and it is in mint condition.

-Claude

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 01-02-2011, 05:58 AM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
The STAR WAR collection I bought on laserdisc cost me about $250.00 when it was first released but I would be very lucky if I can get only a few dollars for it now.

I paid $3 for all three of the originals from the early 90's version, $3 for the three "faces" editions and recently $5 for the Definitive Edition CAV uber box set.

Laserdiscs are worth nothing!

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 01-02-2011, 09:14 AM:

One day our Blu Rays will be worth pennies, so it makes sense to buy them as cheap as possible. [Smile]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-01-2011, 03:30 PM:

The other factor driving the price of 'legit' retail media down is illegal copying: be that 'rent, rip and return' copying from the likes of Netflix, or illegally downloading ISOs from dodgy torrent sites. I'm not suggesting that the practice is morally or ethically acceptable; just noting that it happens, and on a vast scale. The fact that the price of pre-pressed movies on BD is following the price of blank BD media down (this time last year, a 50gb double layer BD-R would cost you £20; now you can get brand name ones for £3 and no-name ones for a quid) is no coincidence, IMO.

Specialist DVD/BD publishers like Criterion, Milestone, the British Film Institute etc. are playing a clever game, I think, by including chunky booklets with some decent articles in them, nice packaging and all sorts of other stuff you won't get if you acquire the disc itself through a rent, rip and return. Combined with the fact that their target audience are committed film buffs who are much more likely to object to copying on ethical grounds, they're providing a carrot as well as a stick when it comes to buying a legit copy.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 03-03-2011, 12:42 PM:

Increasing the value of ownership is one big aspect of the lost opportunity that studios are ignoring with the BD-Live functionality.

They could be providing something to those that buy and hold on to those movies, but they often don't. When studios do use BD-Live, it's merely to get you onto the TV equivalent of a marketing web site.

To their credit, they've tried director chats, user-submitted video commentary, group viewings, and at least back in the HD DVD days, they even had custom clips of the movie from the director/stars where they had short comments about their favorite scenes or group of scenes.

Nothing has stuck, but they shouldn't stop trying. If Webkinz can make a kid really happy that Mom & Dad bought them a $13 stuffed animal that would otherwise cost $5 by offering an online component that is compelling (for them), you would think all these creative types in the industry could figure something out that would strike a chord with audiences.

For example, if it were announced that there was going to be some very cool, but exclusive, ongoing content related to the last Harry Potter movie, but it's only available via BD-Live that's on the other Harry Potter releases, how many people would buy a copy of the disc instead of renting it?

Another example would be the Hobbit movies coming up. How about a weekly or monthly video blog from Peter Jackson that is accessible when you put in the Blu-ray for the LOTR movies? If he's too busy, then get the guys that are building the content for the inevitable Blu-ray extras for the Hobbit movies. Some quick and dirty editing of their footage, and they have exclusive content that fans would eat up, and it would whet their appetites for the extras that will appear on the Blu-ray releases when the time comes.

As a way to encourage purchases, the Netflix and Redbox copies of the movies would not have the BD-Live component, or it would be stunted so that only purchasers would benefit from a full experience.

Network connectivity is a huge feature, and so far, it has not been used anywhere near its potential.

If this were done, I would buy many more Blu-ray releases. Given Netflix's tendency to love streaming, as well as their pricing that has been rising, I'd be willing to make more purchases if there was more value to the purchase over the one-time rental.

With prices for new releases finally reaching sub-$20 levels, I'm not at all complaining about the cost of the purchases. For the movies that are worth buying, the pricing is acceptable to me. But a lot of people choose to rent and/or stream instead of purchase. The only way to turn that around is to add more value to the purchase.

Posted by Mike Rivest (Member # 5500) on 10-18-2011, 04:14 PM:

I bought 7 James Bond movies at no more than $10 each, six at HMV and one at the Masion Sony in Montreal, They are the first four and last three. That is the cost of the paperback books.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-18-2011, 08:44 PM:

quote: Scott Jentsch
if it were announced that there was going to be some very cool, but exclusive, ongoing content related to the last Harry Potter movie, but it's only available via BD-Live that's on the other Harry Potter releases, how many people would buy a copy of the disc instead of renting it?

Not many. Almost nobody cares about the extras on disks (just ask Joe Redifer). That attitude has only been increased by the current economy. I would guess that most people would get a movie from Netflix for a dollar rather than spend $20 or more for a bunch of extras they won't watch -- or will watch only once.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-19-2011, 09:55 AM:

I think the relative quality of movies (with so many of them being re-makes, sequels, etc.) is a big part of what's driving down the prices. Too many have the stink of corporate board room "play it safe" blah quality. With a lot of these movies if you watched the movie trailer you pretty much watched the movie itself. Most new movies just don't stand up to repeat viewings, which basically makes them worthless as something to buy. Why buy a mediocre movie if you're only going to watch it once?

Even at low prices, the topic of this thread, why buy if the movie is only going to gather dust on a shelf? I was in Wal-Mart the other day and saw an end cap display with a bunch of Blu-ray movies for just $8. Unfortunately nearly all were either old movies I had already seen many times previously or newer shittier ones I didn't want to waste my time watching. In the end either choice would equal a disc taking up more space in the house yet not being used. I guess I'd rather spend that $8 elsewhere.

Honestly, Hollywood studios need to work on their A game seriously. In past decades (20 years or more earlier) feature film was pretty much the only outlet for uncensored, more mature story lines. Today, "R-rated" content can be found in numerous places on cable TV and even the Internet. In at least some cases the TV shows are doing a better job than Hollywood is managing in creating creative story lines. The TV series format isn't bound to the 2 hour limit and isn't quite so badly infected with corporate meddling that demands 100% happy endings and every loose end tied up in a nice sanitary way.

Various TV series could probably do better with Blu-ray sales if it weren't for the ease in which people can watch previous episodes through other outlets. Most premium cable networks have their own on-demand systems with various cable providers. Lately they have been moving things to the Internet (HBO Go, MAX Go, etc.) in order to provide alternatives to Netflix. I could watch every episode of The Sopranos uncut on my computer or Android phone if I wanted. Only seasons 1 and 6 are available on Blu-ray ($50 and $100 respectively at Amazon).

As for extras on Blu-ray helping sell the movie, I think that only works when the movie itself is great and/or does extremely well in theatrical release. Naturally there's going to be more interest in "making of" content with a ground-breaking blockbuster than in the average throw-away movie Hollywood is releasing today. I've been willing to watch how they did "bullet time" in The Matrix. I'm not very interested at all in watching some stuck up actors kiss each others' asses in the typical movie marketing puff piece.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-19-2011, 02:25 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I've been willing to watch how they did "bullet time" in The Matrix. I'm not very interested at all in watching some stuck up actors kiss each others' asses in the typical movie marketing puff piece.

Therein lies the real issue. Typical EPK puff pieces don't have value to anyone except the people who created them and the people who approved them. The in-depth behind-the-scenes stuff appeals to the true die-hard fans of the show or of the technology, but probably not many others.

There are many movies that aren't worth the print run of discs; I will definitely agree to that. Movies like that are ideally suited to streaming where the costs are low and one viewing is all you need.

It might be fashionable to say that all movies are crap and don't deserve anything beyond streaming, and many find it fashionable as well to say that no one cares about extras on the discs. The truth is that there are enough movies released each year that a significant percentage of people are interested in. If there wasn't, there would be no home video market.

I believe that enough people must find value in the extras that are put on discs, because if market research and analysis suggested that such materials were not necessary to sell discs, they wouldn't be made or sold. Enough titles have been sold as dual inventory of bare-bones discs and combo packages that the data must be conclusive.

My sense is that people that don't find value in any of the extras are the prime market for disc rentals and streaming. Basically, one-time consumption. Those people probably have a very low purchase price threshold, one that is so low that selling a disc at that price is not a viable market.

However, there is also a portion of the rental/streaming market that rents/streams because of convenience or because they aren't sure that a title is worth purchasing. Say I rent a copy of the first Sherlock Holmes (w/ Robert Downey Jr.) and I like it enough to peruse the extras on the disc. Because I've got a rental copy, the BD-Live feature shows me that there are lots of extras on the purchase disc, and there is additional exclusive content being added weekly about the upcoming "Game of Shadows" installment if I purchase the first movie on Blu-ray. Maybe I could enter my E-Mail address to get a discount coupon off the purchase.

There's an incentive to purchase the full disc as opposed to just renting it. Converting the customer at one price point into spending more is what marketing is all about. To accomplish that conversion, additional value needs to be perceived on the part of the customer, and that's the part that's mainly lacking in the approaches by most studios so far.

I've gone and gotten on that soapbox again, dangit...

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-19-2011, 10:19 PM:

I think it has less to do with things like market segments and such and simply more about the need for movie studios to try a lot harder with each movie.

Customers really can't be pigeon-holed into categories such as always rent, always stream or always buy. I'll buy movies I think are worth buying. Unfortunately I don't bother with a lot of new movies even when they finally show up on cable. If it weren't for live sports and certain original TV series I'd get rid of cable altogether.

I have a decent number of movies in my collection that were commercial failures. For example, I really liked the movie Magnolia, but it tanked at the box office. Nevertheless P.T. Anderson and New Line took some serious chances in making the 3-hour long, uncoventional movie and were proud of the result. New Line Cinema did a great job with its Platinum Series 2 disc DVD. There was a lot of interesting behind the scenes stuff on the 2nd disc that wasn't EPK puff piece bull crap. Some of the extras even covered the movie's commercial failure in theatrical release. Warner Bros. didn't do any more than they had to in porting the same movie to Blu-ray. So I haven't bothered buying it. I suppose there is some outside chance a specialty company like Criterion might pick it up and give it the Blu-ray release it deserves on day.

To me, the situation is pretty simple. The movie studios simply need to be making a better product. They've gone into the zone where American car companies were in the 1970's before the Japanese started kicking their asses all over the place. American movie studios and American music producers are asking for the very same kind of ass kicking. They know they have this marketplace ass kicking coming. So what do they do? Get globally gigantic and attempt to monopolize the distribution channels. Sounds like a good plan, but the problem is the customer must still be willing to buy the shitty product. I've gotten to the point where I'm not willing to buy.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 10-19-2011, 10:36 PM:

Well guys, here's where we part company. I can find anything I want on DVD and have a perfectly good DVD player. I can't see spending more money on another player simply because the techno-geeks say BR is far superior to DVD and they can be played when you're on the move. It's a bit like digital cinema. BR simply costs less to make and distribute. They can do it without me thank you.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 10-19-2011, 10:46 PM:

Functioning eyes and ears are all you need to tell that blu-ray is better than DVD. It doesn't take being a "techno-geek."

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-19-2011, 10:48 PM:

You're wrong on a couple of counts here Robert.

BR doesn't cost less to make. In quantity it costs about the same as DVD.

You can watch DVD on the move too -- that's not an advantage of Blu-Ray.

The biggest advantage of BR is the picture quality, but you can only really see that to best advantage on a bigger TV. Anything under about 20", including all portable devices, the regular DVD will look just fine to the vast majority of folks. Hence the slow adoption of BR by the masses.

Another advantage of BR is there is more room on the disk for extras and things like alternative camera angles, etc. but these features don't seem as if they're really being capitalized on, at least not yet. Which goes back to my previous point that very few people (I shouldn't have said "nobody" before) care much about the extras.

Posted by Ron Funderburg (Member # 4561) on 10-31-2011, 10:34 AM:

DVD is projected to not be around in 7 more years but then maybe BR won't be as a disk format either. They are saying we will download everything in 10 years but I rather doubt it. I think people like owning the disk, I think there is something real to it when you have something to look up in that big cabinet with the br or the many shelves of DVD. We are possession driven society. We love things we can touch, feel, and show off! Just my humble opinion!

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 10-31-2011, 05:09 PM:

quote:
They are saying we will download everything in 10 years but I rather doubt it. I think people like owning the disk,

Yes we will be downloading everything in about ten years. Apple TV is so much more convenient than renting or buying the movie. Little kids now who will be much older in 10 years will not care or even know what having a giant library is like. Apple TV and watching movies from your computer is so much more effient than buying the actual disc.

There might still be some blu rays at the stores but that won't matter all that much. Just look at some of the prices now, $5 for some Blu-ray movies.

The studios are already getting people hooked on digital downloads as a copy of digital download is usually avaiable in many discs.

I just recently bought the blu ray of Walking Dead for season one, while it worked just fine...the Season Pass Download from iTunes is so much easier at better.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-31-2011, 06:08 PM:

quote:
I think people like owning the disk,

I think old people like you and me, like to own the disk but there is an ever-increasing number of people that is happy to just keep everything in the cloud. Eventually those people will be the majority and then physical media will get a lot more expensive, or disappear completely.

Take "Green Acres" for example. It's one of my favorite old TV shows and I would gladly buy all the DVDs if they were available. But, only half of the seasons (the first 3) have been released. However, you CAN watch the rest of the seasons for free on Hulu.com, or you can buy downloads of them for a Tivo or other device from Amazon.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-31-2011, 09:14 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
The studios are already getting people hooked on digital downloads as a copy of digital download is usually avaiable in many discs.

You're confusing the so-called "digital copies" with digital downloads. Downloads are something you actually download from Al Gore's internet. As for those things that come with Blu-rays and DVDs, you're simply copying a local file with some shitty encryption to get in the way of everything. They SHOULD come with a code so you can download the movie because I don't like having the useless extra disc. I have never used a "digital copy" and am not sure why I ever would (I hate traveling so there would be no use for it in that situation). I'm perfectly happy with the, um, analog copy that is on DVD and Blu-ray.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 10-31-2011, 09:25 PM:

If I'm going to be watching in the comfort of my living room with my 50" TV and BluRay player, I definitely want the disk. But I load the digital downloads on my laptop so I can have them on the road when I would rather not deal with packing disks.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-31-2011, 10:30 PM:

Movies on Apple TV are 100% SHIT. 720p resolution at extremely severe data compression ratios (far worse than how SD DVD is encoded). Only lossy DD audio. Like I said: SHIT.

Blu-ray is only always better than the crap Apple is selling despite the Holy God Al-Mighty friggin' fashionable Apple brand.

Anyone picking movies via Apple TV over that of Blu-ray is either an Apple fanboy whore, an Internet forum troll or a flagrantly stupid idiot.

quote: Justin Hamaker
But I load the digital downloads on my laptop so I can have them on the road when I would rather not deal with packing disks.

It's less of a pain if you have a notebook that can read and write Blu-ray discs, as well as play Blu-ray movies. Unfortunately, Apple is all about seeing things in only one skewed perspective (the so-called cloud). So they deny their customers from using what is BY FAR the highest quality movie playback format in favor of chasing after a philosophy that honestly is 10-15 years before its time. News flash: the Internet and its bandwidth (especially here in the friggin' United States of America) still SUCKS REALLY REALLY BAD. And that in turn MAKES THE CLOUD SUCK REALLY BAD. Just a tiny slight clue to those in that Apple "cloud" camp. The cloud sucks.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 10-31-2011, 11:02 PM:

Allow me to rephrase that: I download the digital copies that come with BR discs to my laptop. That way I have movies available to watch whether I have an internet connection or not.

I do not subscribe to or use Apple TV, so I don't know how good it is or is not. However, I do use Netflix streaming and Hulu. Given a fast enough connection - which I have at home, the video quality is very good. It may not make me say "wow" the way the best BluRays do, but it doesn't make me feel like I am watching an inferior product. I would put it about on par with DVD quality.

Most internet connections I've encountered in hotels are not even worth using. While they may start out as high speed, there are so many users that it's worthless for anything requiring any kind of bandwidth.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 10-31-2011, 11:39 PM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
I do not subscribe to or use Apple TV, so I don't know how good it is or is not. However, I do use Netflix streaming and Hulu. Given a fast enough connection - which I have at home, the video quality is very good. It may not make me say "wow" the way the best BluRays do, but it doesn't make me feel like I am watching an inferior product. I would put it about on par with DVD quality.

Like so many have said, it does not make a difference if you watch HD 720 on a small screen. I have a big screen but dont always watch it, I use my laptop a lot. Apple is so convienient and easy.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-01-2011, 04:56 PM:

I am an Apple user and even I refuse to get the shitty Apple TV. Even if it were 1080p, the compression ratio is just shit. The box is not versatile. I use my PS3 for streaming 1080p content downloaded to my Mac. I do use Netflix streaming, but only to watch movies I wouldn't otherwise buy or can't find a Blu-ray of at Redbox. There has been more than one occasion where I watched a movie on Netflix and then bought the Blu-ray.

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 11-01-2011, 06:42 PM:

Joe,

What Media Server are you using to stream to the PS3 from the Mac? I could never get the PS3 to work properly without jitter and freezing. What file formats can you stream? MKV?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-01-2011, 06:52 PM:

I'm trying to figure out how to get the PS3 to work properly with my Win 7 notebook via WiFi. It sees the folders I've shared but doesn't want to "see" much less even play the media files in those folders despite the fact it will play the same files when a FAT32 formatted external hard disc is attached directly to the PS3.

Obviously I've missed some sort of simple detail.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 11-03-2011, 04:26 AM:

Bobby - Under the network and sharing center on your laptop, go to the advanced sharing settings. Make sure that "Media Streaming" is enabled for your current profile.

Apologies if you have already checked this.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 11-03-2011, 08:09 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Movies on Apple TV are 100% SHIT. 720p resolution at extremely severe data compression ratios (far worse than how SD DVD is encoded). Only lossy DD audio. Like I said: SHIT.

Blu-ray is only always better than the crap Apple is selling despite the Holy God Al-Mighty friggin' fashionable Apple brand.

Anyone picking movies via Apple TV over that of Blu-ray is either an Apple fanboy whore, an Internet forum troll or a flagrantly stupid idiot

quote: Joe Redifer
I am an Apple user and even I refuse to get the shitty Apple TV. Even if it were 1080p, the compression ratio is just shit. The box is not versatile. I use my PS3 for streaming 1080p content downloaded to my Mac. I do use Netflix streaming, but only to watch movies I wouldn't otherwise buy or can't find a Blu-ray of at Redbox. There has been more than one occasion where I watched a movie on Netflix and then bought the Blu-ray.

You both are missing the point of Apply iTunes and TV especially you Joe, to call people who like Apple Tv idiots or trolls. Most people do not care about 1080p, 720 is good enough for the Apple user. The whole advatantage of why iTunes is so great is that you can download and receive the product so fast.

I am watching season 2 of the Walking Dead right now, three shows are available so far with the fourth being available next week. The blu ray on the hand will come out after season 2 ends blah blah blah.

Am I seriously going to wait for the program to come out on 1080p after the season ends when I can watch it right now?

You both have missed the point...keep spewing your 1080p talk

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-03-2011, 08:59 AM:

It took you four days to come up with that?

BTW, yes, I'll call you a "troll" for throwing Apple TV flame-bait into a thread whose topic is Blu-ray. The "troll" label fits you well since you habitually toss argumentative statements into many topics. Most of us prefer real 15/70 IMAX, so you start pushing fake "digital IMAX" as being better. Movies shot on film look better, so you root for shitty looking video-based stuff like Black Swan to win the best cinematography Oscar instead of a movie (Inception) that was shot on 35mm anamorphic and 5/65mm. You're pushing a lot of this crap just to annoy the hell out of many long-time F-T forum members such as myself.

As far as Apple TV goes, it is indeed shit or at least irrelevant. In terms of movie streaming services it sucks compared to the alternatives. Apple is just trying to leverage iTunes to force people to use that crappy product. Worse yet, they won't offer full Blu-ray functionality on Apple-branded computers because they're more interested in pushing Apple TV. So I'm really going to hate on them for that. In terms of speed Netflix is every bit as fast, but priced better. Streaming services like VuDu offer superior audio/video quality, better prices and it works on a variety of TV sets and gaming devices. Apple TV only works on that little Apple-branded device.

quote: Tom Petrov
I am watching season 2 of the Walking Dead right now, three shows are available so far with the fourth being available next week. The blu ray on the hand will come out after season 2 ends blah blah blah.

I can set my DVR to record the whole season in 1080i HD. Granted, I have to have cable/satellite TV to do that. OTOH, just a little web searching will find sites where you can watch/download the episodes for nothing. I could connect my computer and TV via HDMI and start watching that way.

quote: Tom Petrov
You both have missed the point...keep spewing your 1080p talk

This discussion thread is about Blu-ray, dumbass. 1080p is very relevant here. Get your head out of "the cloud" already.

***

Next topic:

quote: Anslem Rayburn
Bobby - Under the network and sharing center on your laptop, go to the advanced sharing settings. Make sure that "Media Streaming" is enabled for your current profile.

Yes, "media streaming" was already enabled. I thought that and entering in the PS3's MAC address under network devices would be enough to do the trick. I keep thinking there's some other third party piece of software from Sony I need to install on my computer.

Another possible wrinkle: use of external hard discs. Much of my music is on those things rather than the local hard disc. The Windows Media Center hooks in the PS3 show the media folders on the external hard disc, but just don't want to show the content (lots and lots of CD quality WAV files).

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 11-03-2011, 09:09 AM:

BTW, Black Swan wasn't exclusively shot in "video." It used some 16mm... But I'm just meaning this to stir up an already angry argument. [Wink]

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 11-03-2011, 03:46 PM:

Bobby, you are too sensitive sometimes, enjoy your 15/70 and blu-ray.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Most of us prefer real 15/70 IMAX, so you start pushing fake "digital IMAX" as being better. Movies shot on film look better, so you root for shitty looking video-based stuff like Black Swan to win the best cinematography Oscar instead of a movie (Inception) that was shot on 35mm anamorphic and 5/65mm.

Bobby, you need to relax on this 15/70 stuff vs digital. Black Swan was nominated for best cinematography, I am assuming you disagree with it? The fact that a film was filmed "IN FILM" or "15/70" makes no difference if the film should win the Oscar or not.

quote: Bobby Henderson
so you start pushing fake "digital IMAX" as being better.

To me, for Hollywood motion pictures, I prefer IMAX Digital over 15/70. My latest experience with Tron 15/70 showed a scratch and you could hear the projector ever so slightly through the port glass. I have never ever had an issue with IMAX Digital and I seek it out even though there is a 15/70 across the highway from it. You can spew all you want about technically superiority of 15/70 all you want, all I have to add is that when I watch TRON/SUPER8/IAM4 in IMAX Digital, I didnt have no stupid green scratch running the whole movie.

Posted by Danny Baldwin (Member # 6553) on 11-03-2011, 05:36 PM:

Bobby, the vast majority of Black Swan was shot on Super 16 -- only the rehearsal scenes and the subway scene (where they couldn't get permits for proper filming fast enough) were digitally shot. So much for attention to detail...

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-04-2011, 06:36 PM:

More scenes than that were filmed using a Canon EOS 7D DSLR camera. Nevertheless, the movie overall was not a great example of cinematography. I think the notion that some of it was shot "guerrila style" made it more fashionable to some voters. Thankfully, Inception won the Oscar. It was far more worthy.

quote: Tom Petrov
Bobby, you are too sensitive sometimes, enjoy your 15/70 and blu-ray.

Tom, you too much of a turd to participate in a discussion thread without trolling for arguments. And this particular thread IS ABOUT BLU-RAY. If you don't like Blu-ray, then get the fuck out of this thread already. Asshole.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-05-2011, 01:33 AM:

quote: Tom Petrov
720 is good enough for the Apple user.

Expect less, pay more, eh? I guess Apple user's standards aren't very high and Apple shouldn't worry about pushing any envelopes since they've already achieved "good enough" status. Anyway as you are probably not aware, the Apple TV has not exactly set the consumer market on fire. Most people simply use their PS3s or Xbox 360s to accomplish the same task but with greater capability and more versatility than an Apple TV.

For TV shows like Walking Dead, I really don't care what resolution I watch them in. They're TV shows. Though Top Gear (UK version) sure looks nice in 1080i on Sunday nights.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 11-05-2011, 02:07 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
For TV shows like Walking Dead, I really don't care what resolution I watch them in.

For the record, I bought Walking Season 1 for $16.99 used and watched it in 720p on my small HDTV, I liked the show so much that I purchased the seasons pass for Walking Dead Season 2 on iTunes for $23.99 in standard def.

Resolution is less important than convienience which is why blu-ray is good, but the Apple is more efficient.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-05-2011, 05:59 AM:

That is a lot of money just to watch one TV show that you can't keep forever (and only in SD)... especially when there are so few episodes in a season of the Walking Dead.

Walking Dead is pretty good, but I am beginning to tire of the zombie fad already.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 11-05-2011, 09:26 AM:

Joe-it has nothing to do with keeping the show or watching it again. It has everything to do with convienience, I am not going to wait 3 months after the shows have played on tv to finally go out to the store, buy the blu ray and come home and watch it in TrueHD master audio.

With iTunes, I simply purchase the season pass, watch the show as the become available and I am set. I could of purchased the HD verion if I wanted to. I dont have cable and don't need a PVR. I should mention that I only choose iTunes because I have been using it for many years now.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-21-2011, 07:16 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
It has everything to do with convienience, I am not going to wait 3 months after the shows have played on tv

That's not convenience, that's impatience. Maybe you should ask for a dictionary for Christmas.

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 12-21-2011, 09:44 PM:

A thesaurus to go along with said dictionary to aid in finding the right word would also be nice. Often these are sold in sets with a dictionary.

Posted by Steven J Hart (Member # 2340) on 12-21-2011, 10:48 PM:

Back on topic for a moment if I may.
I recently made a trip to Canada (Winkler MB to be exact) and was surprised to see many Blu-ray titles at a Walmart-like store (Real Canadian Superstore) priced under $10.00 In fact, we picked up three disk sets of Star War's ep 1-3 & 4-6 for around $21/set. We were then surprised again by being charged $.05 apiece for plastic grocery bags to carry our purchases out of the store...

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-22-2011, 03:18 AM:

I, recently, went on a BluRay buying binge...the qualifications...the disc had to be one I was interested in, first and foremost and the second qualification was it had to be priced around the $10.00 mark. You'd be amazed at how many titles met those two criteria. I think the Cinema Paradiso in BluRay was more like $5.00. I got them on Amazon and received free freight too.

-Steve

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 11-01-2013, 12:10 PM:

It has been 680 days since the last post.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-01-2013, 12:10 PM:

Alien Anthology on Blu-Ray for $19.49

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 11-10-2014, 11:07 PM:

It has been 374 days since the last post.

Posted by Steve Matz (Member # 1890) on 11-10-2014, 11:07 PM:

If your WALMART Stores are anything like ours. They have a BLU-RAY Bin next to the $5.00 Bin. All the BR'S are $7.00 and there are probably a couple hundred titles at least. Have Gotten Really Nice Blu-Ray Titles from a Local Large Pawn Shop Dealer for 3 bucks a piece;bunch of them still in Shrink Wrap...

Posted by Frank B. McLaughlin (Member # 6683) on 11-11-2014, 09:19 AM:

Which brings up the obvious: there is an incredible amount of product out there. The vast majority, it seems, care more about content rather than quality and price (or the lack of it) appears to be the prime consideration.

Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 11-11-2014, 12:14 PM:

Frank, the quality of Netflix or iTunes is good enough for most people. I have no problem with it. I would hardly say it lacks quality. You have to take into account the cost factor of watching the movie or Netflix compared to purchasing a disc.

The blu-ray disc is still the best but I hardly ever need to watch the blu-ray unless its something that will really benefit from the sound.

Posted by Timothy Eiler (Member # 383) on 08-13-2015, 01:24 PM:

quote: Steve Matz
If your WALMART Stores are anything like ours. They have a BLU-RAY Bin next to the $5.00 Bin

In our area its now $3.74 bin

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-13-2015, 06:50 PM:

I guess if you have to sell crap, the only way is to lower the price.