Criterion and Dual Format

[rspaight]

Paramount fits six discs in the same width case that Criterion uses:

[felipe]

BD cases use less materials than DVD cases.

One type of case can be purchased in greater quantities leading to reduced cost per item rather than two different types of cases. Economies of scale come into play when streamlining production in this way.

I guess they'll need an even larger variety of cases now that we'll be so many seeing two-disc editions, tree-disc editions, four-disc editions, etc...

[Moe Dickstein]

Yes but each RELEASE will only be ONE sort of case - so they can buy more of that ONE type of case and not half one sort of case and half another for that release.

[Vegeta84]

Why are DVDs even made anymore? The solution here is for Criterion to just sell the SD versions on iTunes or stream them via Hulu. Problem solved.

Well, because in most cases DVDs are still selling higher numbers than their BD counter parts.

[Yaanu]

Why are DVDs even made anymore? The solution here is for Criterion to just sell the SD versions on iTunes or stream them via Hulu. Problem solved.

Well, because in most cases DVDs are still selling higher numbers than their BD counter parts.

Pretty much this.
DVDs are to BDs what VHS tapes were to DVDs. They kept selling VHS tapes for almost ten years after DVD's introduction. It's easy to assume that DVD will slowly peter out as the technology to handle BDs properly (HDTVs, BD players, audio systems, etc.) becomes cheaper.

[MichaelB]

Why are DVDs even made anymore? The solution here is for Criterion to just sell the SD versions on iTunes or stream them via Hulu. Problem solved.

...and another problem created for those living outside the US who haven't gone HD.

(Although I obviously appreciate that Criterion only has the north American rights.)

[felipe]

Yes but each RELEASE will only be ONE sort of case - so they can buy more of that ONE type of case and not half one sort of case and half another for that release.

I don't think they have to buy a limited number of cases every time they announce a film. The same dvd case is used in about 30 releases a year, so they could just buy a load of them and use for all the upcoming releases.

[jindianajonz]

Why are DVDs even made anymore? The solution here is for Criterion to just sell the SD versions on iTunes or stream them via Hulu. Problem solved.

Well, because in most cases DVDs are still selling higher numbers than their BD counter parts.

Pretty much this.
DVDs are to BDs what VHS tapes were to DVDs. They kept selling VHS tapes for almost ten years after DVD's introduction. It's easy to assume that DVD will slowly peter out as the technology to handle BDs properly (HDTVs, BD players, audio systems, etc.) becomes cheaper.

There are some significant differences. Jumping from VHS to DVD offered a variety of benefits (lower production costs, no rewinding, scene selection, special features, smaller packaging), while the jump from DVD offered considerably fewer benefits. I wouldn't be surprised if this made the full adoption of DVD go much faster than the eventual switch to entirely blu.

[MichaelB]

There are some significant differences. Jumping from VHS to DVD offered a variety of benefits (lower production costs, no rewinding, scene selection, special features, smaller packaging), while the jump from DVD offered considerably fewer benefits. I wouldn't be surprised if this made the full adoption of DVD go much faster than the eventual switch to entirely blu.

There's also the fact that a lot of people became DVD-compatible quite by chance (since most new computers had DVD drives after 2000), whereas going Blu requires the purchase of a large flat-screen television.

Which is why very very few of my friends have done it, and many realistically never will.

[rrenault]

Except that HDTVs and blu-ray players aren't exactly luxury items anymore, unless you want a TV that's at least 50 inches. But 32-inch 1080p TVs are fairly affordable nowadays. Even on a 15-inch laptop screen I can distinguish between HD and SD.

[MichaelB]

Except that HDTVs and blu-ray players aren't exactly luxury items anymore, unless you want a TV that's at least 50 inches. But 32-inch 1080p TVs are fairly affordable nowadays. Even on a 15-inch laptop screen I can distinguish between HD and SD.

Yes, but while this is of crucial importance to the likes of us, the vast majority of people simply don't care - or care enough. My wife would never have bought a Blu-ray player off her own bat, and although I have a very large extended family I can think of just two people who are Blu-ray compatible.

The jump from VHS to DVD was enormous (not least in terms of sheer convenience, which I think made a bigger difference than the quality improvement), but the jump from DVD to Blu-ray only really matters if you care about picture and sound quality. And what does the vast popularity of MP3 downloads and the increasing popularity of streaming services tell you about that?

[matrixschmatrix]

It's also worth remembering that every single blu ray player in the world plays DVDs as well, which wasn't at all true of VHS- and there's a tremendous amount of stuff on DVD that almost certainly will never be on blu. I've been blu capable for years and I still have at least twice as many DVDs as blus- and I still have a number of situations where a DVD is nice to have.

[rrenault]

It's also worth remembering that every single blu ray player in the world plays DVDs as well, which wasn't at all true of VHS- and there's a tremendous amount of stuff on DVD that almost certainly will never be on blu. I've been blu capable for years and I still have at least twice as many DVDs as blus- and I still have a number of situations where a DVD is nice to have.

Well 4-5 years ago people were probably thinking something like Close-Up or Marketa Lazarova would never have been released on blu-ray. But yes, as for people not caring, I can only think of one blood relative who's blu-ray compatible, and that's my mother, but I was still living under her roof when she went blu-ray, and that was June 2010 I believe (I'm currently in my mid-20s btw). The main reason being she was planning on purchasing a new HDTV set along with an actual DVD player, since the only DVD-compatible object she owned up to that point was a computer/laptop, but with some nudging from me she opted for a blu-ray player when she saw a few for the price she had initially intended to spend on a DVD player. Now, in my studio apartment, I don't have a TV, but my 15-inch laptop has 1080p capability and BD drive already installed, so I'm hanging in.

[Arrow]

Most people I know are switching directly from dvd to streaming. The only non cinephiles I know that care about picture quality only watch sports.

[EddieLarkin]

There will never be adoption of Blu-ray that is comparable to DVD. DVDs successor will be streaming (if it isn't already), whilst Blu-ray and the 4K format will hopefully be around for decades, side by side, for the more discerning consumer.

[hearthesilence]

The jump from VHS to DVD was enormous (not least in terms of sheer convenience, which I think made a bigger difference than the quality improvement), but the jump from DVD to Blu-ray only really matters if you care about picture and sound quality. And what does the vast popularity of MP3 downloads and the increasing popularity of streaming services tell you about that?

Absolutely. It caught on for the same reason CD's killed off vinyl as a mass market format. The quality over VHS was merely a bonus, but really, DVD was just more convenient on so many levels.

For most people I know, streaming in HD is good enough if they want HD, but otherwise, buying a Blu-Ray player when they don't need a new physical media player is a waste of money. To them, Blu-Ray is just DVD with better quality, and again they feel like they can get that through streaming services that they already use. I obviously don't agree with their assessments, but it is what it is. Blu-Ray may maintain a significant demand to sustain itself for years, but it will never be the mass market format DVD once was, not by a long shot.

[Moe Dickstein]

But when you replace a broken DVD player at this point it makes sense to get a Blu machine even if you don't have an HD TV, you're simply ready for the new TV when you get it

[tenia]

Wow.
The DF switch is a move I thought would never happen for Criterion, and it probably means that they are selling less DVDs than in the past or, at least, not enough anymore to justify having separate releases.

I admit I'm a bit in the middle about DF, now. It has its pros and cons, but being HD-equipped for some time now, I think the pros now outweights the cons. It still feels for me as gettings free DVDs I don't have any use, kind like MoC sent me a free BD I already own. I just feel like saying to them "Please, save some money, just save it", but it's a logical move to make people who stick with DVD being closer and closer to BD. On the other end, it also feels like forcing DVD-buyers to put a bit more money to buy their releases, because "hey, it's with a BD now !".

For BD-buyers, it's fine, but for DVD-buyers, it might be hard to swallow.

Then, there is the discussion about price, packaging and all. It seems to me that even the uselessly loaded Zatoichi boxset (I mean, come one, 18 extra DVDs ?!) doesn't get any price increase. It's pretty neat from Criterion, and I hope it will stay as such.
From a packaging point of view, I'm quite sure there are plenty of possibilities to put 3 disc in the current case dimensions. As pointed above, you can fit 6 discs in a simple Amaray case, so I don't see how 3 discs + booklet will be an issue. MoC, Arrow, BFI have done it before, Criterion shouldn't have too much problem. My main concern would be on boxsets as BBS or 3 colors but looking how they fit 2 DVDs in the Lola Montes digipack case, I also think it should be fine.

In the end, the only thing left for me to wait for is this, and I'm quite surprised it has been lost within the discussion :

I think we've seen the end of $29.95 Blu-ray releases, though.

[Yaanu]

Personally, I don't think we've seen the last of the $30 BDs. There will still probably be movies out there with as few bonus features as a trailer and an interview, like Ministry of Fear. They can't all be loaded to the brim.

[tenia]

Personally, I don't think we've seen the last of the $30 BDs. There will still probably be movies out there with as few bonus features as a trailer and an interview, like Ministry of Fear. They can't all be loaded to the brim.

But will they keep this price now ? Or will they use the argument of being DF to put it at a regular price ?

[Yaanu]

Personally, I don't think we've seen the last of the $30 BDs. There will still probably be movies out there with as few bonus features as a trailer and an interview, like Ministry of Fear. They can't all be loaded to the brim.

But will they keep this price now ? Or will they use the argument of being DF to put it at a regular price ?

After the backlash they received when they put I Married a Witch and The Uninvited at regular price, I wouldn't be too surprised they cut their losses and keep with the usual pricing scheme.

[movielocke]

no I think they'll go back to they way things were at the launch of the DVD format, every release priced at 39.95 regardless of feature set. Though naturally they'll preserve the 49.95 price for two disc bluray releases like On the Waterfront (this would be a five disc set dual format?)

If you consider inflation, the fact that Criterion's price has stuck at 39.95 since 1998 has significantly lowered the 'hit' that I perceive buying one of their releases.

[David M.]

For most people I know, streaming in HD is good enough if they want HD, but otherwise, buying a Blu-Ray player when they don't need a new physical media player is a waste of money. To them, Blu-Ray is just DVD with better quality, and again they feel like they can get that through streaming services that they already use. I obviously don't agree with their assessments, but it is what it is. Blu-Ray may maintain a significant demand to sustain itself for years, but it will never be the mass market format DVD once was, not by a long shot.

Some people I know who were into streaming and "less than savory" downloads surprised me by buying Blu-ray players. The reason: cheaper discs and the fact that they can get an HD movie without taking up hard disk space or eating into their monthly bandwidth (for those of them on bandwidth-capped ISPs).

But yes, the people upset that Blu-ray hasn't achieved DVD levels of "day and night" are forgetting how bad VHS was and how many takedown attempts it survived.

[zedz]

What if you couldn't by a large tv set without receiving a smaller one as a bonus?...A sofa without a comfy chair to go with it?

That sounds fantastic!

Yeah, and don't forget that the 'evil Criterion' analogy means that all these things would be FREE!

[Moe Dickstein]

Don't forget there are already 3 disc Amarays, like used for Science is Fiction.