Warner Catalog Titles on BD/UHD

[yoloswegmaster]

Wouldn't Boogie NIghts be #12?

That's only been announced for the 100-film blu set and nothing has been said for a future 4K release.

[ntnon]

The 100 film boxset looks to be split into 4 different collections:



The films included in each set:

SpoilerShow

Are there any noticeable absences?

Bullitt's there twice (though the second listing makes it film #26 and a presumably-clear error), and Risky Business is spelled wrong... ominous or oversight?

[ntnon]

I'm more interested in knowing if all the titles included are being sourced from new restorations, especially with Boogie Nights and Seven being included in the set.

I also went back to the Deadline article from December and I noticed that they said that WB were planning on releasing a dozen titles on UHD for the first this year. We know that they are releasing the first 4 Superman films (with both cuts of Superman II included)..

But how many cuts of The Movie? One, two, three, more..?

(I'm also counting 16/25 of the "Fantasy, Action and Adventure" box are DC adaptations. That seems high. Are there no other FAA titles in the WB library..?)

[ntnon]

The Maltese Falcon Steelbook:

SpoilerShow

Special Features:

Commentary by Bogart Biographer Eric Lax
Featurette The Maltese Falcon: One Magnificent Bird
Breakdowns of 1941: Studio Blooper Reel
Makeup Tests
Becoming Attractions: The Trailers of Humphrey Bogart
Warner Night at the Movies 1941
Short Subjects Gallery
Newsreel
Musical Short The Gay Parisian
2 Classic Cartoons: Hiawatha's Rabbit Hunt and Meet John Doughboy
Trailers of This Movie, 1941's Sergeant York and 1936’s Previous Falcon Movie Adaptation Satan Met a Lady
Audio-Only Bonus: 3 Radio Show Adaptations - 2 Featuring the Movie's Original Stars, Plus Another Starring Edward G. Robinson

Trailer only for Satan Met a Lady..?

[SeizureMilk]

But how many cuts of The Movie? One, two, three, more..?

(I'm also counting 16/25 of the "Fantasy, Action and Adventure" box are DC adaptations. That seems high. Are there no other FAA titles in the WB library..?)

I'm guessing this to make it so that it's more marketable, especially considering Warner's stance on physical media for pre-late seventies/early eighties titles being to release what they think the masses would want, that being the superhero movies of DC Comics characters, plus with the whole controversies of the recent DCEU semi-reboot, the execs are probably either setting themselves for a flop or banking off the recent attention of "The News". Plus a lot of the other titles aren't nearly as off the yellow brick road, The Neverending Story is a bankability for the nostalgic people of the 80s, Lethal Weapon is fairly mainstream with some very quoted lines ("I'm too old for this shit."), Twister kinda obvious since it's fairly popular in the home media market (if I remember correctly it was one of the first if not the first DVD release along with being in the now defunct HD DVD release along with some Blu-Rays though surprised about a lack of a 4k as of now, Ocean's Eleven is very popular amongst both sides of the movie-going coin, The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship (if they had to choose one, might as well go with the first), Pan's Labyrinth is not only another well liked release but also it's one by a Best Picture winning director, 300 is technically a Dark Horse Comics release so that's 17 comic book adaptations, and Fantastic Beasts is an adaptation of a J.K. Rowling book so there's some pluses and minuses PR-wise. So, in short it's just a matter of mainstream consumption if want more action look at Vol. 4 and if want more obscure stuff, find something on Warner Archive (most likely on DVD) and watch it till it's disc rots, thank you for reading.

[Close The Door, Raymond]

"Celebrate 100 years of Warner Bros." with some films from MGM, UA, RKO, New Line Cinema?

As mentioned, "Bullitt" is listed twice. The films are listed in chronological order, so its listing in Comedies, Dramas and Musicals is out of place. "Bullitt" was released in 1968 but is listed between "Little Shop of Horrors" (1986) and "Empire of the Sun" (1987).

Why "Children of the Damned" instead of "Village of the Damned"?

[SeizureMilk]

I think the idea of Bullitt being listed twice if not a design error, is most likely to give this feel that it's more crowded and has a wider selection. The different years are probably intention to make it so people think that they're different movies, and you know, most people aren't gonna bother to look it up because the titles alongside it are more likely to peak someone's therefore even if they do question it, who cares? Classic cinema fans get 42nd Street, Doctor Zhivago, and Singin' in the Rain (which are technically very mainstream), middle aged people get a fair dose of 80s shit, and the younger gents, like myself, will go for the mid 90s comedies, rom-coms, and some of the more kiddie stuff like Iron Giant or The Goonies (both are great just saying). Point is why bother checking if a film's in a set already or not, it still counts under the criteria of both sets, just consume the products with your hard-earned money. Also the inclusion of Children of the Damned probably is to trick more casual movie fans that this set is worth it for this super obscure-ish movie (that's already released on Blu-Ray) that very few outside the die hard Blu-Ray fans care to get it. There's already a great video by "Boutique Blu-Rays with Elliot Coen" that brings up the point that a some of these 4K restorations so far are really only in this set, which I believe is to draw collectors to buy it, it's like the Columbia sets where a lot of cuts of films and extras are only in their Classics line, for example the From Here to Eternity mini-series or the theatrical cut of The Last Picture Show. It's all just a ploy and a scheme for people to buy these expensive sets for something like Grand Hotel or Key Largo in new restorations, although until I get screencaps I'm just not wasting my time and well-deserved money on them. Thank you for reading.

[ntnon]

For a 100th Anniversary set, there should really be one film from each year.

I was moderately pleased to see that the overlap with the WB90 Boxset is not total, but it's still considerably similar. Who will be buying these sets that wasn't also part of the target audience of that one..?

[Stefan Andersson]

Any indications as to whether the 4k box sets will include blurays taken from the 4k masters?

Upgrading Maltese Falcon, Rio Bravo and others to UHD-on-blu would be attractive for us not yet set up for UHD.

Or perhaps these films will get released separately later on, as remastered blurays?

[ryannichols7]

Any indications as to whether the 4k box sets will include blurays taken from the 4k masters?

Upgrading Maltese Falcon, Rio Bravo and others to UHD-on-blu would be attractive for us not yet set up for UHD.

Or perhaps these films will get released separately later on, as remastered blurays?

Singin' in the Rain and Wizard of Oz reused their old BDs, I can't remember for Casablanca or Giant, hopefully someone can fill in. but either way, not likely unfortunately

[Drucker]

Giant doesn't come with a blu-ray at all.

[FrauBlucher]

The bluray that comes with the Casablanca UHD disc is the older version from the 2012 70th Anniversary release

[tenia]

Warner originally was doing remastered BDs along their UHD upgrades. They then stopped for a time, but it seems like it wasn't definitive since Lost Boys and Poltergeist got remastered BDs.

[Matt]

I’ll be very cross if they don’t include a Blu-ray of the restoration of Rio Bravo with the UHD. The transfer on the existing Blu-ray is already, I believe, a not-very-good reused DVD master that’s 16 years old. Though if anything would get me to upgrade my system, it’s probably Rio Bravo in 4K.

[FrauBlucher]

Max Fleischer's Superman bluray coming in May

Special Features and Technical Specs:
NEWLY RESTORED
Max Fleischer's Superman: Speeding Toward Tomorrow - intense action, noir filmmaking, a heroic soundtrack, Max Fleischer's Superman changed the world of superhero storytelling forever - Featurette
First Flight: The Fleischer Superman Series - Featurette
The Man, The Myth, Superman - Featurette
Optional English SDH, Spanish, and French subtitles

[knives]

All the films were previously released on blu as an extra on the Superman features collection. Are these new scans?

[EddieLarkin]

They featured on the Blu-rays, but they were not in HD, and were very old looking scans even for SD.

Since they're now getting a dedicated Blu-ray release, they surely must be in proper HD now (hence, NEWLY RESTORED). They will also be included in the upcoming UHD box set.

[Cash Flagg]

Is there a list somewhere of all of the previous extras that have been dropped for this upcoming Superman UHD box set?

[FrauBlucher]

Not good as expected…bluray.com
Max Fleischers Superman

[FrauBlucher]

Max Fleischers Superman.... Highdefdigest.com...video 2 out of 5 stars

[Rayon Vert]

I'm not the clientele for this product but I really feel for the consumers and fans. The comparison shots between the featurette and blu ray are brutal.

[FrauBlucher]

A reviewer on the Max Fleischer Superman over at HTF....

While it is fair to say that these shorts have never looked better, something definitely went wrong somewhere between the remastering process and encoding these shorts for Blu-ray. Yes, these are free of dirt and scratches, and colors appear to have been corrected and brought back to life. However, nearly all film grain has been scrubbed from these new transfers, also scrubbing away most fine detail from the intricately animated cels. Although encoded with the AVC codec, the average bitrate for these shorts is around 12 Mbps, relatively low when you factor in that the disc has been pressed on a BD50, has a runtime of 146 minutes (not including the special features), and only uses 26 Gb of its available 46 Gb (after formatting). It is the low bitrates that likely contributes to the occasional banding and other compression artifacts.

....I'm going to take a pass and hope that WB corrects this

[tenia]

The low bitrates don't help, but the banding also is likely to come from the heavy DNR and the removal of grain that would otherwise had acted like dither.
But I suppose Warner put the encode on Auto and, well, the encoder found that smooth as it was, the picture wasn't requiring more than 12 Mbps.

[FrauBlucher]

I have to vent... So, over at the HTF some of their members that have purchased the MF Superman have given it positive reviews, while others have not. Much of the discrepancy has been about the lack of grain. From screen caps I've seen it doesn't look awful but it definitely has a smoother look than the DVD.

Here is my issue. Robert Harris an archivist and someone that has been involved in restorations and has reviewed many a bluray and now UHDs, was asked by a member what he thinks and his response was I’ve decided NOT to step into this fray. WTF is that! All of a sudden he doesn't want to share his opinion. Is he a boot licker for the the restoration team over at WB? He should be more responsible to the folks that are going to spend money on this release. How could anyone take any of his reviews seriously if he wants to avoid other reviews because he doesn't want to offend the studio he has connection to. What a jack ass!

[unclehulot]

I have to vent... So, over at the HTF some of their members that have purchased the MF Superman have given it positive reviews, while others have not. Much of the discrepancy has been about the lack of grain. From screen caps I've seen it doesn't look awful but it definitely has a smoother look than the DVD.

Here is my issue. Robert Harris an archivist and someone that has been involved in restorations and has reviewed many a bluray and now UHDs, was asked by a member what he thinks and his response was I’ve decided NOT to step into this fray. WTF is that! All of a sudden he doesn't want to share his opinion. Is he a boot licker for the the restoration team over at WB? He should be more responsible to the folks that are going to spend money on this release. How could anyone take any of his reviews seriously if he wants to avoid other reviews because he doesn't want to offend the studio he has connection to. What a jack ass!

Jackass? Strong language for what is complete speculation as to his reasons. There are a lot of moving parts to professional relationships… I would respect that over your wild conjecture and obnoxious characterization.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk