Blu-ray Disc Releases : Blu-Ray is a waste of money

I can definitely tell a difference. But I will buy the dvd still if it's a lot cheaper.

I remember this I luv apple fool. Yet he'll blow money on a new iphone every year

---

Bing.. Wobbledy wobble, wo-wo-wobble, wobbin'
https://vocaroo.com/1hz4nrSop8zd

Big difference between Blu-ray and DVD

Like what?

---

"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

Sharper picture

Meh.
I'm not that picky.

---

"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

I can't remember the last time I purchased a physical copy of a movie.

I'm definitely selective about which Blurays I purchase. I do defer to dvd more often than not, but if it's a movie that really requires that extra visual or audio uumph, then I'll go with Bluray.

---

Satan is a little man.

I have old VHS videos that have better picture than dvd and blu ray.

high def looks good on big cinema screens but if you're talking small screen then it's overrated. I still own & collect dvds and blu rays. Won't get 4k uhd or whatever.

Blu Ray will trump standard dvd and vhs ANYTIME.

Might all depend on the quality of your tv too.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Maybe it's better for movies made in the post 80s classic era, but I got the original Terminator on blu ray and michael biehn's skin looks like rubber, in fact all the actors look like damn mannequins in the blu ray. Checked out my vhs copy to confirm they looked human before. T2 blu ray, picture has a deep blue tint, like everything's god damn blue like that fuckin 'I'm Blue' song from the 90s. Got the Superman movies on blu ray and Superman's suit is no longer deep blue but teal! Wtf.

Have you checked out this website?

Blu Ray.com

It will give you an indication of picture and audio quality. With blu ray being a new technology in the late 00's, DNR was applied to many titles to clean them up, but many older titles lost the organic filmic look. They overdid the HD aspect. Predator and Patton were prime examples of this.

It depends on the edition you buy. It is still superior HD quality compared to dvd and vhs and any tech expert will argue this point with logic.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Yeah in the predator blu ray, during the pre mission briefing scene at the beginning, arnold's skin looks like mahogany wood haha. It's a disgrace how bad it looks. I heard they cleaned it up for subsequent releases which is good.

That makes sense about the DNR. I will check out that site. I tend to only buy blu rays of films i don't already own on vhs or dvd, but unfortunately there's not as many films on blu ray as dvd & vhs.

The site refers to the excessive DNA applied to films like Predator and the first release of Patton as having a waxy look. The second release of Patton got it right.

They gave The Terminator 5/5 B's for its filmic quality in one edition.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Sucks to buy crap versions before they re-release them with corrections, though. Ripping off fans. I think Cameron went back and changed the look of his films & Lucas did the same to the original star wars trilogy. They need to stop fucking changing shit.

It could be because Blu-ray required that movies be transferred from a copy of the film with less generation loss, ideally the original camera negatives. The potential problem is that when movies were printed from the negatives, colors and contrast could be manipulated in the lab process (by adjusting the length of time the film spends in each chemical bath, hence "color timing") in accordance with the director's wishes. If the Blu-ray transfer isn't digitally processed to duplicate those effects, or someone thinks they know better than the director, you get a Blu-ray with colors that don't match the theatrical presentation or previous video releases.

I've seen some DVDs that look almost as good as Blu-ray because they were derived from the Blu-ray transfer, and others that were clearly made from analog videotape and/or from an old cinema print ("cigarette burn" spots are a dead giveaway). With some movies no better version exists, but more often it's laziness or unwillingness to spend money. And then there's the non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs that end up framed with black on all four sides on a widescreen TV, and movies with hard subtitles. There's just no excuse for that.

someone thinks they know better than the director, you get a Blu-ray with colors that don't match the theatrical presentation or previous video releases.

I've heard this. I've not been impressed with Blu Ray. I got the breakfast club on blu ray and the colors looked so dull compared to my old vhs copy.