Disc Specs

  • Region:
    -
  • Released:
    Out now
  • Country:
    United States of America
  • Running Time:
    119 minutes
  • Screen Format:
    2.39:1 / 1080P / VC1
  • Discs / Type:
    1 / HD30
  • Soundtracks:
    English DD-Plus 5.1
    Spanish DD-Plus 5.1
    French DD-Plus 5.1
  • Subtitles:
    English SDH
    Spanish
    French
  • Special Features:
    - Audio commentary with writer/director Joss Whedon
    - Deleted scenes with optional commentary by Joss Whedon
    - Outtakes
    - Future History - The Story of Earth That Was featurette
    - What's in a Firefly featurette
    - Joss Whedon introduction
    - Re-lighting the Firefly featurette
  • Distributor:
    Universal

Film Specs

  • Certificate:
    PG-13
  • Released:
    2005
  • Country:
    United States of America
  • Director:
    Joss Whedon
  • Starring:
    Nathan Fillion
    Gina Torres
    Alan Tudyk
    Morena Baccarin
    Adam Baldwin
    Jewel Staite
    Sean Maher
    Summer Glau
    Ron Glass
    Chiwetel Ejiofor
  • Genre(s):
    Action
    Film
    Live Action
    Science Fiction

Serenity

16-07-2006 20:00 | 21507 views  |  Michael Mackenzie  |  Show Backlinks  |  Other "Serenity" Content

Note: the screenshots featured here are taken from the player's downscaled standard definition output and should not be considered in any way representative of the actual quality of the transfer.

Joss Whedon's portfolio as a screenwriter is decidedly chequered. Throughout the 1990s, he made something of a name for himself doing uncredited rewrites on everything from the lamentable Twister to the phenomenally successful X-Men, as well as contributing to the screenplays for the wonderful Toy Story and the embarrassing Titan AE. Despite his feature writing credits, however, he is still best known as the creator of cult TV hits Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel, and, more recently, the short-lived Firefly, a "Sci-fi Western" series that was cancelled by producer 20th Century Fox mid-way through its first season, with many of the episodes that had been filmed eventually only surfacing on DVD.

And yet, Whedon and his creations seem to instil a level of fervent fan loyalty that is virtually unprecedented outside a handful of established franchises like Star Trek and its ilk. As such, while the notion of rusurrecting a failed TV show as a feature film might seem like commercial suicide (which, judging by the eventual box office gross, is not too far off the mark), this film was always guaranteed to eventually find its audience, however miniscule it might be. Even so, Serenity's existence is something of a miracle, not just because it got made at all, but because it seems to have been made entirely as a love letter to the small but fiercely dedicated army of Firefly fans (known as "Browncoats", a reference to the leather trenchcoats worn by the group of renegades around which the series revolved). And yet, despite seeming to aim for such a specific audience, Serenity stands on its own feet and can be enjoyed greatly by those who didn't follow Firefly (a group to which I belong, despite my affection for Buffy and Angel). And enjoyable it is: Serenity doesn't attempt to re-invent the wheel, but it is a witty, engaging and occasionally powerful piece of filmmaking that possesses in spades just what has been missing from so many recent action blockbusters.


As with Firefly, the plot takes place five hundred years into the future, and focuses on the crew of Serenity, a ragtag bunch of rebels led by Captain Mal Reynolds (Nathan Fillion). Earth as we know it no longer exists, and Serenity's crew find themselves caught between the governing Alliance and the vicious Reavers. Also aboard the craft are 17-year-old River Tam (Summer Glau) and her doctor brother Simon (Sean Maher), who, it turns out, are on the run from the Alliance after Simon rescued River, a psychic, from a laboratory in which she was subjected to all manner of horrifying experiments. The action kicks of when Mal brings River along on a raid, the events of which trigger in her a wave of unexplained memories and latent aggressive tendencies. The Alliance, it soon becomes clear, are desperate to capture River, and have dispatched a nameless Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor), who is willing to use any means necessary to reclaim her.

Given my lack of knowledge about the universe in which it takes place, I was surprised by just how quickly I felt at home aboard Serenity. The film, like the series, is very much an ensemble piece, with a diverse cast of characters, many of whom have pasted shrouded in mystery, and yet it never feels crowded or bloated. More to the point, all of them are likeable to a degree. Whedon has a knack not only for crafting great dialogue but also for creating characters whose motives are believable and understandable, whether they are the hero, villain, or somewhere in between. Case in point is the Operative, a ruthless zealot who is completely devoid of compassion and who, like many of the villains who appeared in Buffy and Angel, is clearly intended to resemble a religious fundamentalist. The backdrop against which the action unfolds is impressive in its scale, and one gets the sense that there is infinite scope for stories and characters in this franchise.


And yet, despite the larger scale of the production, it doesn't lose any of its creator's special touches. There are plenty of little Whedon-esque moments peppered throughout the film, from the dry humour to the one continuous shot that plays out behind the opening credits. The latter, especially, is a gimmick that Whedon has been trying to perfect since the days of Buffy, and it really pays off here in this, its longest and most complicated incarnation yet. It also carries on the various stylistic traits of Firefly - namely the blending of Science Fiction, Western and Eastern motifs - except on a larger scale. Before seeing the film, I had serious doubts that Whedon would be able to pull off the transition from directing television to directing a feature film, but, looking at the final product, you would never think that it was essentially helmed by a first-timer. True, there are few, if any, moments that will wow you, but the execution is consistently slick and professional, with just the right level of grit that a post-apocalyptic tale such as this demands. Cinematographer Jack N. Green's framing is at times inspired, while the computer-aided effects, provided by Whedon's old Buffy collaborators at Zoic Studios, are for the most part subtle.

At the end of the day, Serenity is highly unlikely to change the world of sci-fi for ever. I also find it difficult to not feel slightly resentful towards it, since it was because this project was greenlit that Whedon was unable to write and direct th final episode of Angel. (Not that this affected my overall scoring, though!) However, as someone for whom the science fiction genre holds little interest, I was surprised by just how much I engaged with the film. True, its television origins occasionally show themselves in the form of its less than feature-calibre performers and the nagging sensation that this is an individual episode of something bigger rather than a stand-alone story. Otherwise, though, this is a fine film: engaging, entertaining and, frankly, just plain fun, it will hopefully be the first of many accomplished feature productions for its director.


HD DVD Presentation

I have now seen four HD DVD releases - two from Warner and two from Universal, and, so far, the latter have consistently delivered a superior product. Presented in its original aspect ratio of 2.39:1 at 1080p, Serenity on HD DVD is literally the home video title I've been waiting for since the inception of the DVD format. Those who have read any of my reviews will know how picky I am when it comes to image quality, so you can rest assured that, when I say Serenity looks amazing, it looks really amazing.

"Flawless" is not a term I like to use when discussing transfer quality, since, no matter what format you are using to encode it, it is always going to end up being compressed. The degree to which the compression is visible is down to the constraints of the format and the skill of the technicians responsible for creating the disc, and so, to say that this title is perceptually flawless is not something I undertake lightly. And yet, despite pressing my nose against the screen and staring hard at it for an extended period of time, I would be hard pressed to point out any flaws whatsoever. The image is beautifully rich and detailed, with smooth, natural colours and excellent shadow detail. Even more impressively, the edge enhancement and noise reduction problems that were present on the two Warner HD DVD titles I have viewed - Million Dollar Baby and Constantine - are completely absent here. Seriously, there is no edge enhancement whatsoever. This has got to be something of a minor miracle given the extent to which this infuriating and pointless piece of digital meddling ruined most DVDs. Add to that some wonderfully untampered film grain, and it really does feel as if Universal have struck gold.

So yes, Serenity looks amazing - perfect, almost - and while watching it on a 32" LCD display cannot hope to match the experience of seeing it projected theatrically, it certainly conveys the sensation of being at the cinema. By that, I mean that it looks and feels like film rather than video, and as such accomplishes everything that I could want from a transfer.

There you go. I don't normally gush about image quality, so savour it.


Audio options consist of English, Spanish and French tracks, all in Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1. Like the image quality, the sound is stellar. Indeed, the extent to which it sounds better than the average DVD soundtrack caught me off guard. I certainly wasn't expecting the depth, bass and clarity on offer here, and once again I am hard pressed to find any faults whatsoever. Bearing in mind that I don't have a Dolby Digital-Plus compatible audio decoder, and am instead relying on my Toshiba HD-A1 player to convert the audio to a DTS stream, it is entirely possible that I'm missing out on the full capabilities of this new audio format, but, regardless, I am very, very impressed by what I'm hearing.

Subtitles are included in English, Spanish and French. Unfortunately, they are the usual Universal type that are positioned creatively around the screen in order to clue the audience in to who is speaking, rather than being placed in the bottom centre of the frame. All of the extras, apart from the audio commentary on the deleted scenes and film, are subtitled in all three languages.


Extras

All of the bonus features included with this release are replicated from the standard definition version, and as such are presented in plain old 480i. Switching between them and the film itself certainly gives something of an idea of just how much of a phenomenal improvement HD DVD is.

The main extra, perhaps unsurprisingly, is a feature length audio commentary by Joss Whedon. Those who have listened to his excellent commentaries on Buffy and Angel will know what to expect here: an informal, highly informative and often self-deprecating overview of pretty much every aspect of the production. At times, he is a little too liberal when showering praise on his actors - from what he says here, you'd think Nathan Fillion was the single greatest actor who ever lived - but it's all done in good humour, and his passion for his creation shines through at all times.

This is followed by around 15 minutes of deleted scenes, with Whedon once again weighing in for optional audio commentary. By and large, these additional snippets take the form of incidental exchanges or extended takes of conversations that made it into the final. Broadly speaking, they help flesh out the characters a little more, but their removal is understandable, as they would probably have bogged down the running time of a film that revels in its sprightly pace. These scenes will definitely be of interest to Firefly fans, however, who will undoubtedly have a far stronger attachment to the characters than audiences meeting them for the first time within the film. Around 6 minutes' worth of outtakes are also provided.

Future History - The Story of Earth That Was is a 5-minute featurette providing a very brief overview of the origins of the Firefly universe. It's interesting as far as it goes, but tantalisingly brief. A much more in-depth look at how the series came into being would have been much appreciated. The same is true of What's in a Firefly, which provides a 6-minute look at the use of visual effects in the film, both practical and CGI.

More interesting than these brief featurettes is a 4-minute introduction to the film by Joss Whedon. This piece, clearly recorded for an audience about to see an incomplete advance preview of the film (he mentions that some visual effects and music cues are missing), is an amusing affair in which the director stresses how much the film's existence owes to the tireless campaigning of Firefly's fans (which, he surmises, means that, if it's because of them that it's a success, then, if it fails, it's all their fault). This is a great little piece, and I for one am glad that it is accessed from the Extras menu rather than playing at the start of the film, as is so often the case for directors' introductions.

The final extra is a 10-minute piece entitled Re-lighting the Firefly, which focuses on the campaign to get the film off the ground following the series' cancellation. Of the various featurettes, this is probably the strongest, if only because it affords an opportunity to witness, first-hand, the sheer force to be reckoned with that is an auditorium of rabid Firefly fans.



Overall

Shoddy cover art aside (download a far superior custom design here), Serenity on HD DVD is a magnificent package, and indeed is a strong contender for the best release I've seen on this format so far. Fans of the film who are capable of playing HD DVDs are well advised to throw their grotty old DVD copies on the scrap heap and invest in this absolutely magnificent presentation of a fun, highly engaging sci-fi romp.

About My Equipment:

The HD DVD reviewed here was played on a Toshiba HD-A1 player outputting the video in 1080i mode. Two displays were tested: a 1366x768 Sony BRAVIA KDL-32V2000 32" LCD TV connected via HDMI, and a 1680x1050 Sony MFM-HT205 20" LCD monitor connected via component. Audio was output to a Creative Labs Inspire 5700 5.1 audio setup with an onboard Dolby Digital/DTS decoder. Because my hardware does not support the new Dolby Digital-Plus format, the HD DVD player automatically converted the audio stream to DTS.

Please help support DVD Times by purchasing this title or any others through our affiliate links...

DVD Times Ratings

  • Film:
    8
    8 out of 10
  • Video: 
    10
    10 out of 10
  • Audio: 
    10
    10 out of 10
  • Extras: 
    7
    7 out of 10
  • Overall: 
    9
    9 out of 10

Reader Ratings

  • Film 
    7.7
  • Video 
    10
  • Audio 
    10
  • Extras 
    7
  • Overall 
    9

Comments

#1 Posted: 16-07-2006 21:22
Hanzaki
Member
Posts: 14

Report this post
Well this is the lamest thing in this "format war". If you choose blu-ray, you couldn't buy this film because Universal is a hd-dvd studio (the ONLY exclusive hd-dvd studio...). and I'm a big Firefly fan... :(
If you choose hd-dvd you will miss lot of other studio's releases: Sony, Fox (Star Wars...), Disney (Pixar movies...) etc.
This is soo stupid :mad:
Quote this post
#2 Posted: 16-07-2006 21:24
Aretak
Grieve for the Skies
Posts: 276

Report this post
Quote:
the embarrassing Titan AE

I thought it was a rather good film myself.

Quote:
(download a far superior custom design here)

Bleh... I've never liked that cover design. The US DVD cover is very nice in my opinion, despite all the whining people do about it. It certainly looks better than the characters just standing there posing, spaced far apart and with a stupid explosion behind them (the exact same stupid explosion used on the UK cover for Lord of War I believe).

Still, good review. Not enough to convince me I need HD-DVD, but I can certainly accept that it is better.
------
Take my love. Take my land. Take me where I cannot stand.
I don't care, I'm still free. You can't take the sky from me.
Quote this post
#3 Posted: 16-07-2006 21:37
Scaramanga
Member
Posts: 127

Report this post
This may very well be a very, very stupid question, but to date I haven't been able to find an answer for it: the transfer has an aspect ratio of 2.39:1 ... does that mean the image is letterboxed in a 1.78:1 frame ?

The obvious answer would seem yes ... but you never know ... maybe they actually made the new piece of software and hardware intelligent ? Also makes me wonder how they'll handle 4:3 footage (and matting is NOT an option)

BTW. Titan AE embarrassing ? That's blasphemy young man !
:p :D Seriously though, I rather liked it :)
Quote this post
#4 Posted: 16-07-2006 21:50
napalm68
Member
Posts: 285

Report this post
RE Edge Enhancement: "This has got to be something of a minor miracle given the extent to which this infuriating and pointless piece of digital meddling ruined most DVDs."

Amen to that. I'd like to smack silly the mothers who continually ruin DVDs with this. Especially the new Bond transfers - from reviews on Australian sites, a lot of these have been ruined by this:rolleyes:
Quote this post
#5 Posted: 16-07-2006 22:11
R-T-C Films
One of the living undead
Posts: 207

Report this post
Still, my Australian 2-discer has more special features....
------
Mondo Esoterica - my cult film and DVD blog.
Quote this post
#6 Posted: 17-07-2006 00:16
mcjw_serenity
Member
Posts: 91

Report this post
I would rather wait until one official high-definition disc format (be it either HD-DVD or Blu-ray) wins out before upgrading my copy. I haven't seen such a glowing review of a DVD since your R1 review of "Underworld" and the R2 review of "The Incredibles".

By the way, what would be your rating for the audiovisual quality of the standard-definition R1 copy? Just wondering.
Quote this post
#7 Posted: 17-07-2006 06:38
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
Quote:
This may very well be a very, very stupid question, but to date I haven't been able to find an answer for it: the transfer has an aspect ratio of 2.39:1 ... does that mean the image is letterboxed in a 1.78:1 frame ?

The obvious answer would seem yes ... but you never know ... maybe they actually made the new piece of software and hardware intelligent ? Also makes me wonder how they'll handle 4:3 footage (and matting is NOT an option)

Yeah, it's letterboxed within the 1.78:1 frame. And the 4x3 materials - bonus features etc. - have so far all been pillarboxed, a bit like what Anchor Bay often does with their 4x3 materials on DVDs that are otherwise in widescreen.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#8 Posted: 17-07-2006 06:40
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
Quote:
I would rather wait until one official high-definition disc format (be it either HD-DVD or Blu-ray) wins out before upgrading my copy. I haven't seen such a glowing review of a DVD since your R1 review of "Underworld" and the R2 review of "The Incredibles".

By the way, what would be your rating for the audiovisual quality of the standard-definition R1 copy? Just wondering.

I don't actually have the standard definition release to hand, so I can't provide anything in the way of a serious comparison between the two. (Serenity was actually one of the first titles where I decided to wait for the HD release rather than buying the DVD.) Most of the reviews I've seen of it have been pretty favourable, and I get the impression that many of the criticisms made, both of it and of the HD transfer, have related to stylistic choices that are completely intentional - grain, darkness, pumped up contrasts, etc.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#9 Posted: 17-07-2006 07:00
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanzaki:
Well this is the lamest thing in this "format war". If you choose blu-ray, you couldn't buy this film because Universal is a hd-dvd studio (the ONLY exclusive hd-dvd studio...). and I'm a big Firefly fan... :(
If you choose hd-dvd you will miss lot of other studio's releases: Sony, Fox (Star Wars...), Disney (Pixar movies...) etc.
This is soo stupid :mad:

The studios will go where the customers go, not the other way round. If HD DVD's sales continue to outperform those of Blu-ray to the extent that they are just now (and Blu-ray's cause is not going to be helped by The Matrix, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and Batman Begins all being released on HD DVD by the end of the year), then the studios wil have no choice but to jump ship or go dual-format. There are already some rumblings that Disney are considering supporting both, so, of the majors, I think that only Fox and Sony are going to be a problem. As someone said on another forum, "Dear Sony, when are you going to start making HD DVDs like you did with VHS?" :D

This article, which points out that upscaling a standard def DVD in an HD DVD player gives image quality roughly comparable to that of Blu-ray (no joke), provides a pretty good summary of the situation as it stands. Can't get Spiderman (or whatever) on HD DVD? Not a problem - upscaling it in the Toshiba HD-A1 is ulikely to look too different from a native Blu-ray release!
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#10 Posted: 17-07-2006 10:49
bradavon
Banned
Posts: 2907

Report this post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanzaki:
Well this is the lamest thing in this "format war". If you choose blu-ray, you couldn't buy this film because Universal is a hd-dvd studio (the ONLY exclusive hd-dvd studio...). and I'm a big Firefly fan... :(
If you choose hd-dvd you will miss lot of other studio's releases: Sony, Fox (Star Wars...), Disney (Pixar movies...) etc.
This is soo stupid :mad:

You sound surprised? Right now you just have to buy two players. I'm waiting. I can't see either dying any time soon (if at all) but can see dual supporting players coming at some point. I can see the likes of Pioneer giving us this.
Quote this post
#11 Posted: 17-07-2006 13:28
ray butts
Member
Posts: 6

Report this post
I can't believe the HD release has so few extras. i expected all from the R4 2 discer & more, thats disapointing. hmmmm can you say double dip ...in a few yrs they'll release a better AV version with all new extras just like early DVDs being updated later :rolleyes:
Quote this post
#12 Posted: 17-07-2006 13:33
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
The HD release has the same extras as the US standard definition release. I don't know about you, but I expected nothing more and nothing less. I would have been extremely surprised if they'd ported over extras that are unique to the Australian release.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#13 Posted: 17-07-2006 16:14
staffyman1
Member
Posts: 67

Report this post
Wow, so this one really is “The Look and Sound of Perfect” then? ;) :D
Quote this post
#14 Posted: 17-07-2006 18:26
Scaramanga
Member
Posts: 127

Report this post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
Yeah, it's letterboxed within the 1.78:1 frame. And the 4x3 materials - bonus features etc. - have so far all been pillarboxed, a bit like what Anchor Bay often does with their 4x3 materials on DVDs that are otherwise in widescreen.

Thanks for confirming what I have suspected for a while now :)
Quote this post
#15 Posted: 17-07-2006 19:08
Ardvark
Ardvark
Posts: 99

Report this post

Thanks Michael,

Also for linking to that article (now I finally know what to say to people who keep going on 1080p on BluRay).
------
" I can resist anything except temptation"
Quote this post
#16 Posted: 21-07-2006 21:20
Graham Nelson
Contributor
Posts: 35

Report this post
Personally, I'm really not enticed by either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray as a medium for heavily encrypted discs; I'm not about to buy a special TV that will check my fingerprints, access the Internet to verify my license, etc. The restrictive behaviour of ordinary DVDs is grotesque enough already - why can't I put a disc into the machine, press "3" and have title 3 start playing, for instance? Why must I sit through animated menus, adverts, irritating and largely untrue featurettes about the awfulness of Piracy, copyright declarations for all of the ten distributors involved, little snippets to tell me that Dolby is great, etc., before being allowed to see the movie I bought? And then there's region control, and above all, there's the use of licensing laws to suppress all innovation in the design of players, so that manufacturers are required by law not to provide features we might actually want. The whole business of Hollywood studios threatening to revoke the decryption keys given to specific manufacturers in order to deactivate their machines, as a sanction for any consumer-friendly misbehaviour, does not encourage me to think that HD-DVD will be any more fun.

Oh, well, excuse me. It's just that I think I want both of these formats to fail. Unfortunately, I think that the movie companies want this too, but for the opposite reason: they believe allowing consumers to have the discs at all gives us too much control, and that we should only be allowed to stream video on demand. I rather suspect that they will not be displeased if HD-DVD and BD-DVD go the way of DVD-Audio and SA-CD; it will buy them time for the Internet to get fast enough for the model they actually want. (Don't get me wrong, though: Blu-Ray is going to be an excellent backup medium for computers, so I'm looking forward to that side of it. Why, a blank BD disc will hold six or seven ripped DVDs - maybe as many as sixty if they're compressed.)

The _actual_ comment I intended to make was about Joss Whedon's career - people tend not to mention it much, but Whedon spent a couple of years early on as a writer and story editor for the sitcom Roseanne, which can look a little tame now but was ground-breaking for the time. I'm perfectly sure that's where Whedon learned his trade in writing ensemble character pieces with a happy-go-lucky "we're all in this together" sort of mood and an undertone of bad choices having bad consequences - which is what he's written his whole career, Serenity included. (Which I really liked it at the cinema.)
Quote this post
#17 Posted: 21-07-2006 21:31
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
Graham, I don't disagree with you regarding your fear of loss of control, but I think you're blowing things out of proportion. Region coding, for example, is currently not part of the HD DVD spec, to the extent that the current players do not recognise region flags on HD DVD discs at all (standard definition DVDs are another story) - so even if region coding is implemented further down the line, the current crop of players will be immune, and as region coding is not built into the AACS system, so it's not the kind of thing that can be sneaked in via a forced firmware upgrade at a later date. And as for the studios wanting these formats to fail - sorry, but I think that's a pretty crazy conspiracy theory. The studios are pouring millions of dollars into these formats. HD DVD's "The Look and Sound of Perfect" advertising campaign alone cost $150 million. Something tells me they're not just throwing away all thay money for kicks.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#18 Posted: 21-07-2006 22:47
Graham Nelson
Contributor
Posts: 35

Report this post
Perhaps the studios are indeed seriously backing HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray, and want them to be big. Perhaps. Certainly major industry players on the manufacturing side very much want this to be the next big thing, and to recoup substantial development costs. But I don't see signs of the content owners rushing in. The number of films being offered is low - okay, perhaps it might be said that it's early days: but it's early days partly because the content owners have been so reluctant to push the pace, and especially reluctant to sign off at any particular level of "security". I think they're just frightened of all computer-related distribution mechanisms, at the moment, and I doubt if the "Sony rootkit" fiasco encouraged them any. Public anger at being treated shabbily clearly caused a fairly minor security threat to be blown out of all proportion, and I suspect that small defects in the operation of AACS - as with Windows Genuine Advantage - will provoke similarly un-objective backlashes.

There are, I suppose, signs pointing the other way. Some movie companies appear to be tentatively saying that they don't like the idea of forcibly lowering resolution on output to an "untrusted" device, and may not use it. But I don't see any sign of a broadly acceptable compromise emerging any time soon, in which both content owners and consumers accept the deal on the table. We'll see; high-definition video is undeniably beautiful to look at, whereas high-definition audio doesn't sound that much better than the regular sort, so it may be that consumers will swallow the pill with video in a way which they didn't with audio.

Whatever happens, I do think we need some physical medium of distribution of video, if only to ensure that it survives and can be archived by libraries. The combination of rapid obsolescence, and legal sanctions on obviating encryption, mean that it's almost impossible for (e.g.) the British Library to make any credible attempt at keeping e-books for posterity. I can see plenty of TV and minor-league film being lost forever, little by little, if there is no physical copy distributed any longer - the distributors go bust, the last digitised copy disappears from the last server farm without anyone noticing, distribution contracts mandate that files are deleted after a set period, etc. - and that really would be a shame. With as little as a few thousand physical copies in existence, the chances are much better, whatever criminal sanctions may apply to their use.
Quote this post
#19 Posted: 22-07-2006 09:25
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
Regarding image downscaling, I believe that an unofficial "goodwill" period has been agreed on, and that we're unlikely to see downscaling being enabled until 2010. I have a feeling that, by that time, a lot of people will have replaced their TVs anyway.

I'm also not sure I agree with your comment about a lack of titles. It's true that the studios haven't exactly been offering triple-A titles as of yet, but as far as I'm aware there are actually more titles on shelves at the moment than there were for DVD when it was at this stage. In any event, as I pointed out in another thread, summer is traditionally not a particularly lucrative period for home entertainment sales, so it doesn't surprise me that they're keeping their premium titles for the Christmas rush. According to Warner, The Matrix trilogy, The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Batman Begins and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire will all be on shelves before the end of the year - and if these aren't premium titles, I don't know what is.

Finally, I do agree with you that it is important to be able to own physical copies. It's for that reason that I think it's important for HD DVD and/or Blu-ray to succeed, rather than end up with the studios forcing some sort of streaming format on us.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#20 Posted: 22-07-2006 17:49
J.O
Seth Cohen wannabe.
Posts: 190

Report this post
Personally I've never had any particular problem with the R1 Serenity artwork - it's not perfect but neither is it the worst I have ever seen.

What I do dislike is the makeover the HD DVD release (and presumably all HD DVDs) has gotten so as to not confuse people looking for the regular DVD. I know that this is necessary just as it was necessary for DVD cases to be significantly different from CD cases but at the moment it just looks like a really bad budget PC game! There's a chance I'd be put off adopting either format simply on the basis of the fact that the standard HD DVD branding consumes space that ought to be for propper artwork.
Quote this post
#21 Posted: 22-07-2006 20:53
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
[quot
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.O:
There's a chance I'd be put off adopting either format simply on the basis of the fact that the standard HD DVD branding consumes space that ought to be for propper artwork.

That's about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#22 Posted: 24-07-2006 18:06
J.O
Seth Cohen wannabe.
Posts: 190

Report this post
Quote:
That's about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.


Fair point, not sure why I said that! I've said stupider things though, you've just not been around to hear them!

To be honest I'm put off by the fact that HDTV is way out of my price range and there's no way I'll be able to afford to make the shift to either format in the next few years. Thus I can make stupid statements like that because the entire format may as well not exist for all the difference it makes to me.

That said I stand by my criticisms of the branding design - it looks less like the future of home entertainment than it does something you happened to find on a 3 for £18 offer. By the time I can afford HDTV I'm sure that won't be the deciding factor over what format if any to go for but with a standard design like that it's hard to imagine any future HD DVD collection taking pride of place on my shelves the way my current DVD collection does.
Quote this post
#23 Posted: 24-07-2006 19:21
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1651

Report this post
J.O - don't get me wrong, I agree that the branding is far from ideal. I just don't consider it to be a deal-breaker, that's all. Apologies if I came across as a dick in the previous post.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#24 Posted: 24-07-2006 21:50
J.O
Seth Cohen wannabe.
Posts: 190

Report this post
That's alright - feel free to point out my utter stupidity anytime I make a comment like that!
Quote this post