Are You Disappointed With UHD Release Selections? (1 Viewer)

[Number 6]

Is it just me or are the UHD releases so far pretty underwhelming? I would have thought that 4K disc releases would focus on movies with obvious examples of excellence in cinematography and/or classic cinema, but, instead, we seem to have narrowed the field down to mostly poorly reviewed recent releases. The promise of Apocalypse Now or Lawrence of Arabia, for example, in UHD sounds tantalizing, to say the least. Or, for that matter, even sumptuously photographed modern movies like Midnight In Paris, for example, seems like a good choice.

Instead, the choices we have so far seem pretty paltry and, in my opinion, kind of lame. I mean, Battleship? Really? Keeping Up With the Joneses? (And the like.) These are the movies that people want to see in 4K? These are the movies you invested (probably) a lot of money for your setup? These are the movies that you want to see in their most pristine and perfect cinema experience?

Don't get me wrong; I'm sure folks want to see these movies and, yes, I think all releases should, ideally, be released on the best format possible, but, seriously, where are the movies that will really make you feel justified for buying that 4K TV?

So far, it seems that, beyond a few releases like The Revenant and the remastered UHD of Goodfellas, this UHD rollout has been pretty much like putting a silk dress on a pig.

 

[gadgtfreek]

No. I've been all in since March and its getting better to where I can get the new releases (except Disney) that I want mostly. The catalog titles that are coming are nice too, eye candy ear candy stuff. It's not even the first full year yet.

 

[Cranston37+]

Aside from the Samsung, which was a poorly reviewed unit that many passed on, players didn't really start getting into people's hands until June/July. This is a site for enthusiasts and many here don't even have one yet.

Patience...

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

It always seems like classic large format films and Disney are always last to get released on a new format. Feels like it takes years. I still don't own a 4K UHD player and won't until the second OPPO player gets released I think middle of this year?

I dont own a 4K tv yet and I'm in no rush to get one I love my Panasonic plasma but will upgrade players so I can play titles that have Atmos exclusive audio tracks and just deal with the video 1080P downgrade. I'm still not happy with any 4K tv on the market all I see in stores are blocky looking blacks on upconverted video. (Could just be their settings but still it looks bad)

I think WB is offering an interesting mix with a release like Goodfellas and SONY with original Ghostbusters.

As far as eye and ear candy goes I personally would like to see Speed Racer in true 4K with an Atmos audio track. (The BLU was DD 5.1 only!!)

 

[Number 6]

It always seems like classic large format films and Disney are always last to get released on a new format. Feels like it takes years. I still don't own a 4K UHD player and won't until the second OPPO player gets released I think middle of this year?

Interesting. I waited until Oppo released their first 4K player (the 203) being that I had an excellent experience with their 103 player for many years and a DVD player from them before that. So that got me into real 4K player in December (I've had a 4K TV for a few months before this.) I uncharacteristically didn't do a lot of research on 4K titles beforehand and am, frankly, baffled by the (in my opinion) weak selection. I should have done my homework before diving into buying a player.

The selection is, plainly put, ridiculous. I mean, c'mon, I'm expected to pay a premium price for absolutely mediocre movies like Morgan, Underworld, Smurf 2, Spiderman 2, Chappie, Exodus--Gods and Kings, Scorch Trials... the list of mediocrity goes on and on and on, yet nowhere are classic cinema or impressively reviewed, serious modern cinema titles to be found. I mean, Sausage Party in UHD. Really? (And before anyone thinks I don't like Sausage Party because it was 'offensive', let me clear this up: I disliked it because it was poorly written and constructed. Heck, it might not have been offensive enough for my tastes. This was just a poorly executed movie that is, right now, taking the place on the UHD shelf that some other more deserving--yes, more deserving--title could be occupying.)

I get it; new formats take time to get off the ground, but that doesn't explain the lopsided crap-to-gold ratio we have on display with UHD titles--not at all. And it just seems so absolutely counterintuitive--or just plain dumb. The folks that invest in the highest level of projection and sound of their video/audio material at home are enthusiasts of the medium and, while I'm not saying that these folks might not also watch this movie, I'm pretty sure that Warcraft is not on their lists to showcase this enthusiasm and interest. It doesn't make sense.

I'll gladly pay upwards of $50 a title, as long as it's something worthwhile. The Searchers in a format that provides an experience that is probably better than it has ever been offered? Yes, please. I'll gladly pay that. The Godfather? I'll double my offer. Without hesitation. But you're expecting me--someone that has spent the money, time, and research to install the very best audio/visual format in my home--to be interested in paying top dollar (or interested at all, for that matter) for Now You See Me and the like? So far, it seems like I have ended up with a very expensive Blu-ray setup. And that's about it.

 

[Mike2001]

Reminds me of the first few years of blu-ray. The relative diversity of titles on HD-DVD was one of the reasons I went that way back then.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Reminds me of the first few years of blu-ray. The relative diversity of titles on HD-DVD was one of the reasons I went that way back then.

Yep!

And to be honest, I don't plan on replacing a blu-ray with a UHD version. At least most of the new stuff I want (Mag Seven, Sully, Accountant, Deepwater, Inferno, Jack Reacher, etc...) to buy is coming in UHD. I'd love for my Marvel UHD movies though...

 

[Alan Tully]

Yes lots of catalogue titles (good, great & classic) have had the 4K treatment, the studios need to trot some of them out in UHD, especially some of the big event films, the selection so far is not really cinema at its best. I'm sure some classics will be released this year.

 

[gadgtfreek]

And then stuff like Labrynth do not need UHD LOL. It was good, but that was too much detail for that films fx.

 

[rsmithjr]

I have a second system with UHD (waiting for a UHD projector for my main system), and have been a big supporter with other people (bought two UHD systems as gifts). So I like the technology.

I am very disappointed with the content so far. Mainly films that I didn't want to watch theatrically. I am especially interested in seeing classic "big negative" productions brought to perfection instead of more modern CGI monstrosities.

The standard argument is that the studios have to make UHD a hit and build a base before they release more "marginal" films like Vertigo and Lawrence of Arabia, but this is an argument that I personally don't like.

I am here now as a customer and want to be served. I am tired of being an excellent customer over the last four decades but treated like I don't count at all.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'm a classic film lover, but I understand why recently made films are getting 4K/UHD releases. As a retired manager, I agree with their business strategy. With that said, Battleship?????

 

[rsmithjr]

I'm a classic film lover, but I understand why recently made films are getting 4K/UHD releases. As a retired manager, I agree with their business strategy.

Yes, I UNDERSTAND their business strategy and see exactly why they are doing it. I can imagine their Excel spreadsheets that justify this strategy.

Most of the beautiful old theatres in the US were destroyed because of this strategy, and many of our classic films have been allowed to rot because of this strategy.

As a truly excellent customer of the studios and electronics companies, I want some more attention to my needs.

We are not in the majority but there are a lot of us and we can have some influence as well.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yes, I UNDERSTAND their business strategy and see exactly why they are doing it. I can imagine their Excel spreadsheets that justify this strategy.

Most of the beautiful old theatres in the US were destroyed because of this strategy, and many of our classic films have been allowed to rot because of this strategy.

As a truly excellent customer of the studios and electronics companies, I want some more attention to my needs.

We are not in the majority but there are a lot of us and we can have some influence as well.

If there were so many of us then our influence would be more than it is now.

 

[Martin Henry]

No, I'm disappointed with the amount of 'no 4K intermediate no buy' assholes, peddling their ill-informed shit across the internet and beyond.

 

[Malcolm R]

Isn't that the way each new format is introduced? We get the new releases and a slew of mid-level, mediocre catalog titles. I don't remember any format launch where the first releases included Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jaws, The Wizard of Oz, and Casablanca.

Seems counter-intuitive to me. I'd think the studios would want to put out their most popular catalog titles first, in order to drive format adoption. Many people aren't going to make the jump for Battleship, but they might for Indiana Jones.

 

[gadgtfreek]

No, I'm disappointed with the amount of 'no 4K intermediate no buy' assholes, peddling their ill-informed shit across the internet and beyond.

LOL, true.

 

[DavidMiller]

I have been very happy with the releases so far. I have been buy a lot more then I thought I would even. There have been a few amazing reasons to jump into the water.

 

[rsmithjr]

I have been very happy with the releases so far. I have been buy a lot more then I thought I would even. There have been a few amazing reasons to jump into the water.

I jumped into the deep end of the pool and am now waiting for the water.

 

[Number 6]

I'm just trying to figure out who the customers for these lame releases in 4K are. Wouldn't someone that's interested in owning--owning, not just watching!--something like Battleship be more than satisfied with basic Blu-ray? And let's not forget that you can own the Blu-ray versions of these titles for a fraction of the cost of the UHD versions.

When I first learned that they were developing 4k UHD I thought that, wow, they were really going for the super-enthusiasts, those folks that not only want cutting edge new movies as good as they can be presented, but also for those interested in classic film and 'large format' shot films--folks like me; filmmakers, classic cinema enthusiasts, etc. Folks that would actually notice and appreciate the difference from 1080p, particularly with large format pictures like Lawrence of Arabia or the like.

I just can't, not for the life of me, figure out who--and in large enough numbers to satisfy those aforementioned studio spreadsheets--would buy up Smurfs 2 or Fantastic 4, or any of the other lower tier titles that make up the bulk of the 4K releases so far. I get the argument that the studios will release 'popular' titles and then release the classics, but really? Can anyone actually point to these pretty lame movies and say that these are, by any definition, popular? Really, that stupidly terrible Independence Day sequel is a 'popular' title? How about Warcraft? What about Joy?!! These absolutely pathetic releases don't support that argument. Not in the least.

 

[DavidMiller]

Some of us don't have the same bar to cross to be entertained. I guess. If I only watch those high and mighty movies you would watch what 5-6 movies a year? I have lots of the movies you mentioned as well as several others you would consider not very good. Not everyone's taste is the same and obviously they are doing pretty well since they are outselling the launch of Blu-ray.