Paramount are treating HD-DVD like crap!

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 04 Jan 2008, 00:28

Been very disappointed in Paramount since they went HD-DVD only.where are the catalogue titles

when they were dual format we were getting great releases like The Warriors, Untouchables etc. now we are just getting the odd blockbuster movie.Transformers-not bad but who wants to pay a premium for Shrek 3

i think they've just took the microsoft money and ran with this exclusive deal and it's doing HD-DVD damage! looking at release schedules they have Zodiac this month, 2 titles in Feb and 1 in March! i don't want them but where is Star Trek movies,Godfather etc. Get your finger out Paramount. 8)

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2008, 00:31

Paramount have always been shit. They're easily the worst of the big DVD companies too. They think the odd 2 Disc SE (like Transformers and Face/Off) will make up for all the rest of the crud.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 04 Jan 2008, 00:50

i get the feeling microsoft paid them more to stop releasing blu-ray rather than release hd-dvd titles

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 04 Jan 2008, 00:59

I'm rarely ever impressed with Paramount.

They're the only company who regularly remaster movies and make them look worse.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2008, 14:22

Face Off HD was a shit set of dvds anyway, the extras are pants and the actual Transfer sucks balls bad! the dirtiest print I have ever seen on HD, by a light year! black specs rain down all over the screen, shocking they never cleaned it up. Piece of shit.

Apart from Transformers they aint done much I feel like getting, still MI3 is a belting transfer and set of extras, but I guess it aint exclusive. Unlike shitfest Face Off.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 04 Jan 2008, 17:32

Also M:I3 ain't much good.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 04 Jan 2008, 19:31

Babel is worth getting.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Jan 2008, 04:07

Markgway wrote:They're the only company who regularly remaster movies and make them look worse.

Their Breakfast at Tiffany's is much better. I hear their China Town is too.

romerojpg wrote:Face Off HD was a shit set of dvds anyway, the extras are pants and the actual Transfer sucks balls bad! the dirtiest print I have ever seen on HD, by a light year! black specs rain down all over the screen, shocking they never cleaned it up. Piece of shit.

Get the BD then? Oh wait it's worse. Enough said, moving on. I'm sure the HD-DVD rocks, most reviews say it's decent. Maybe not perfect but things rarely are.

Markgway wrote:Also M:I3 ain't much good.

Agreed it sucks. Easily the worst of the three.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 05 Jan 2008, 14:24

bradavon wrote:
romerojpg wrote:Face Off HD was a shit set of dvds anyway, the extras are pants and the actual Transfer sucks balls bad! the dirtiest print I have ever seen on HD, by a light year! black specs rain down all over the screen, shocking they never cleaned it up. Piece of shit.
Get the BD then? Oh wait it's worse. Enough said, moving on. I'm sure the HD-DVD rocks, most reviews say it's decent. Maybe not perfect but things rarely are.

Errr OK, its shit you aint seen it so dont comment. Most reviewers are pathetic and do not even notice the noise reduction hell of the transfer. In fact most reviewers aint got a clue at all about HD tranafers and should not be reviewing them as they are blind idiots.

Some people gave Face Off high marks for picture, anyone doing that is stupid and very very blind.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 05 Jan 2008, 15:27

I've seen a few Paramount remasters that are softer than the original transfers and have that plasticky look.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 05 Jan 2008, 17:52

The plasticly look on HD can be worse, the digital noise reduction makes everyone look like plastic as you say, it is well distracting sometimes. Yet some people have no idea what they are doing reviewing and do not even notice it, morons.

Some people I see giving HD transfers full marks for picture, and they honestly need a public flogging for being so blind, or basically telling lies to everyone. Its subjective yes, but some people just aint got a clue.

Stil Paramount have really released such a small number of HD titles that I guess they are either saving them all up for this year (Indy films surley soon!) or they are just not bothered and are going Blu Ray

Either Paraount annouce some major titles soon for HD DVD, or HD DVD is finished even quicker.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 05 Jan 2008, 18:16

I think it's safe to assume that the HD Indiana Jones films will be out this year.

Either in May (in time for the theatrical release of Part 4) or in time for Xmas (when Part 4 itself can be included in a set).

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Jan 2008, 18:27

I'm sure I read that the upcoming Indiana Jones film will be coming out on Blu-ray anyway (as in, when the DVD comes out).

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 05 Jan 2008, 18:27

They are Spielbrg films, so they may not come out.

Spielberg films are under his own banner, Paramount or not, Spielberg seems to have final say when they come out and what the Discs consist of. So no one knows what may happen, Paramount will want to cash in and make cash obviously, Spielberg may be too busy making the new film to care about the films on HD and they may not come out at all.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Jan 2008, 18:53

Don't forget that Close Encounters of the Third Kind came out on Blu-ray.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 05 Jan 2008, 19:02

Yup that seems to be the oddball one, never did find out why that came out. Never even heard a statment from Spielbergs peeps either (there may have been one I guess).

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 05 Jan 2008, 19:24

As Close Encounters was a very early Spelberg film he may not have had much control over what format it got released on.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Jan 2008, 19:35

All the Paramount HD-DVD Press Releases did say Spielberg films were the exception. Romero is right he has extra control.

romerojpg wrote:Errr OK, its shit you aint seen it so dont comment.

I don't need to have seen it to know you're uber fussy and even then I think we can safely say the UK BD is worse to the USA HD-DVD.

Shall I start a poll?

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Jan 2008, 21:33

saltysam wrote:As Close Encounters was a very early Spelberg film he may not have had much control over what format it got released on.

I think it's quite the opposite, and that he chose to release it. Apparently he wouldn't let them ruin the cover with loads of Blu-ray shite as well

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 06 Jan 2008, 00:01

The uk BD of Face/Off is cut,which disallows it from consideration anyway

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 06 Jan 2008, 00:25

Except for Romero as the HD-DVD sucks balls and is the dirtiest print he's ever seen.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 06 Jan 2008, 00:35

As you aint got HD you wont know for quite a while.

It is the dirtist HD print by a mile, and I own plenty of old films on HD that look far superior to 10 year old Face Odd. Raining black specs is unforgivable for a new film, they are so distracing its a joke. Pathetic in fact, the amazing thing is anyone would release such an uwful print of any film, never mind a big budget 10 year old film.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 06 Jan 2008, 00:52

I was being sarcastic

I seriously doubt I'll have an issue with it though. Virtually none of the DVDs you've complained about I've had an issue with.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 06 Jan 2008, 00:57

Ahhh

some things do stand out once in a while, black rain spattering on the screen just killed me watching the film.

Still the film also bugged the hell out of me, the stunt doubles ruined the entire film, you notice them even more in HD. Awful direction. Its one film that every time I see it, goes down a notch.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 06 Jan 2008, 01:27

Did you see the oh-so obvious wire when the guy gets pulled backwards in the hangar, Romero? (When he gets shot)