Superman & Superman II (Donner Cut) in November - BD Art added
27-10-2006 11:27 | 14054 views | Dave Foster | Show Backlinks
Warner Home Video have announced the HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc release of Superman: The Movie and Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut for 28th November 2006 priced at $28.99 SRP each. The original movie and the new Richard Donner cut of the second will arrive on both HD formats alongside the standard definition offerings in November.
Both will be presented in 1080P Widescreen with the former offering English and French 5.1 audio, the latter just English 5.1 audio (Dolby Digital-Plus on HD DVD, Dolby Digital on Blu-ray), and both of course will feature optional English, French and Spanish subtitles. The bonus materials for Superman: The Movie (2000 Expanded Edition with 8 minutes of footage integrated into the film)) include commentary by Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz, two featurettes: Taking Flight: The Development of Superman, Making Superman: Filming the Legend, Superman Screen Test, music only track and trailers. All bonus materials on the Standard Definition version of Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut will be included on the HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc versions.
Both will be presented in 1080P Widescreen with the former offering English and French 5.1 audio, the latter just English 5.1 audio (Dolby Digital-Plus on HD DVD, Dolby Digital on Blu-ray), and both of course will feature optional English, French and Spanish subtitles. The bonus materials for Superman: The Movie (2000 Expanded Edition with 8 minutes of footage integrated into the film)) include commentary by Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz, two featurettes: Taking Flight: The Development of Superman, Making Superman: Filming the Legend, Superman Screen Test, music only track and trailers. All bonus materials on the Standard Definition version of Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut will be included on the HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc versions.
Comments
Banned
Posts: 2907
I do find it worrying that Mono/Stereo is not considered on HD releases. Sure include the 5.1 remix but I've always said if it's a remix give us both!
I wonder when we'll see 4:3 HD content too. It's great there is no Superman Returns Full-screen HD version (like there is for DVD) but I'd say older films which are shot in 4:3 could get something out of HD.
Administrator
Posts: 2301
Member
Posts: 91
BTW, are you guys sure that the HD-DVD of Superman: The Movie will contain all the extras from the four-disc edition? :confused:
Member
Posts: 519
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by DaveF:
Warner have already released The Adventures of Robin Hood on HD DVD and that's 4:3 with Mono audio (Details here).
Cheers but unless I'm missing something how can 1080p be 4:3? Unless it's a 4:3 frame inside a 1920×1080p resolution.
Which doesn't sound nice at all. Unless it's the same as DVD where 704×480/576 is 4:3 but it's also for 16:9, except the pixels aren't square. I don't believe this is the case for HD when WS is very much at the forefront of it's inception.
Still it's good to see Robin Hood is Mono, shame more aren't. It seems they're continuing the trend followed on from DVD where if it has Mono on DVD it will HD and visa versa.
Originally Posted by DaveF:
but it's looking like it may only included the Expanded Version, which is only available in 5.1 on the DVD release.
Fair point.
Originally Posted by mcjw_serenity:
BTW, are you guys sure that the HD-DVD of Superman: The Movie will contain all the extras from the four-disc edition? :confused:
Good question. I guess won't find out until closer to launch. In theory it could mean just a 2 or 3 disc release but 4 HD-DVDs will probably make it sell more.
Contributor
Posts: 1651
Cheers but unless I'm missing something how can 1080p be 4:3? Unless it's a 4:3 frame inside a 1920×1080p resolution.
Yes, it will be pillarboxed, so the effective resolution will be 1440x1080. In what way doesn't this "sound nice", though? I can't think of any other way of them doing.
------
Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site
Banned
Posts: 2907
Why does HD have to be WS? Surely a 4:3 native 1440x1080p resolution would also work.
To the point where I'd stick with the DVD version, the black bars would be huge and make it unwatchable. The DVD version would have much lower resolution but it would still look much better.
I hope they're not permanent black bars (i.e - like non-anamorphic WS) so I can switch my DVD player and get rid of them. Like I can on TV where they sometimes show 4:3 content in a 16:9 frame.
Contributor
Posts: 1651
Why does HD have to be WS?
Because, in case you haven't noticed, widescreen is the direction in which the industry is headed.
I have to ask: do you stretch 4x3 material to fill a widescreen TV? I can't think of any other reason why you'd have a problem with this method. In any event, I would have thought that 4x3 HD displays would be fairly uncommon.
I'm not sure whether or not the black bars are permanent, though. It may be that the material will simply be encoded at a 1440x1080 resolution, which I understand the spec supports. Presumably you can have the vertical bars cropped off if you only have a 4x3 TV, though, by telling the HD DVD player that that's what you've got in the setup menu.
------
Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
Because, in case you haven't noticed, widescreen is the direction in which the industry is headed.
Of course but 4:3 content isn't Widescreen now is it.
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
I have to ask: do you stretch 4x3 material to fill a widescreen TV?
Of course. I have to ask: Do you like huge black bars? :D (which take up at least 1/3 of a 16:9 screen). I never use my 4:3 mode on TV and never will, it looks awful. If I had a 4:3 TV then fine but I don't.
I'm willing to bet most people view 4:3 content this way tbh, sure many not AV enthusiasts but the general public for sure.
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
I would have thought that 4x3 HD displays would be fairly uncommon.
Displays yes (I'd say non-existent), content no (thousands of films and TV shows are in 4:3).
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
Presumably you can have the vertical bars cropped off if you only have a 4x3 TV, though, by telling the HD DVD player that that's what you've got in the setup menu.
I hope so. It's what you have to do when Sky think it's a good idea to put black bars on the sides of many of their football matches (which gets worse when they're a "lovely" silver graphicy effect so not black at all).
Contributor
Posts: 1651
Of course. I have to ask: Do you like huge black bars? (which take up at least 1/3 of a 16:9 screen). I never use my 4:3 mode on TV and never will, it looks awful. If I had a 4:3 TV then fine but I don't.
:confused: I'm speechless, I honestly am. Do you also stretch 2.35:1 movies vertically to fill your screen? If not, then I can't understand why you do this with 4x3 content, as it's exactly the same sort of thing. Whatever floats your boat, I guess, although I can't imagine watching such a distorted image.
You'll no doubt be disappointed to learn, therefore, that a lot of TVs prevent aspect ratio adjustment with HD signals, so you simply have to put up with what the player sends it. Sorry. :)
------
Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site
ISF Certified
Posts: 356
Of course. I have to ask: Do you like huge black bars?
Not really, but I don't really like the wallpaper I have behind my TV much either so I don't watch either of them. The black bars aren't part of the active picture area.
For me one of the best parts of LCD and Plasma screens was the flawless picture geometry (ie no bending or warping on straight lines like on CRTs). Each to their own, but I'm amazed that people would want to make the entire picture one big geometry error! I'd rather have black on the screen than have everyone look fat (or skinny).
Member
Posts: 519
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
:confused: I'm speechless, I honestly am. Do you also stretch 2.35:1 movies vertically to fill your screen?
I presume you mean non-anamorphic 2.35:1 and yep I would but seeing as this always looks only minutely better than leaving it letterbox I make a point of not buying non-anamorphic WS period. It's THE reason I've not gone for the new Stars Wars DVDs, if they'd been the exact same master but anamorpnic (of course properly done, not fake) then I'd have picked them up.
AFAIK I thought virtually everyone zoomed/stretched non-anamorphic WS films. Whenever a non-anamorphic DVD is discussed someone brings up how it looks zoomed/stretched.
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
Whatever floats your boat, I guess, although I can't imagine watching such a distorted image.
Agreed but for me at least (and like I said I'm willing to bet most other people) it's the better of two evils. Sure those same people think a full-screen image shows more picture detail but that's another topic entirely :D
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
You'll no doubt be disappointed to learn, therefore, that a lot of TVs prevent aspect ratio adjustment with HD signals, so you simply have to put up with what the player sends it. Sorry. :)
Why? Aspect Ratio adjustment is one of the nice things you can muck about with on WS sets.
Originally Posted by James Lee:
I'll take black bars over cropping or distortion.
The distortion isn't ideal but the cropping is minor.
Thankfully in the days of anamorphic DVDs and Digital TV I don't watch much 4:3 TV at all.
Contributor
Posts: 1651
I presume you mean non-anamorphic 2.35:1 and yep I would but seeing as this always looks only minutely better than leaving it letterbox I make a point of not buying non-anamorphic WS period. It's THE reason I've not gone for the new Stars Wars DVDs, if they'd been the exact same master but anamorpnic (of course properly done, not fake) then I'd have picked them up.
No, I was referring to anamorphic 2.35:1, which will still have black bars at the top and bottom of the image unless you stretch it vertically.
------
Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
No, I was referring to anamorphic 2.35:1, which will still have black bars at the top and bottom of the image unless you stretch it vertically.
Well no but anamorphic WS in any aspect ratio at most has tiny black bars compared to non-anamorphic. Massive difference.
The black bars on 2.35:1 anamorphic add to the look, they make it look more epic.
It will be interesting to read HD-DVD Robin Hood reviews when the disc comes out. The point is pillerboxing isn't necessary on DVD (and VHS) so why is it on HD? Native 1440x1080 please.
Contributor
Posts: 1651
Well no but anamorphic WS in any aspect ratio at most has tiny black bars compared to non-anamorphic. Massive difference.
They'll still be about the same size as the vertical bars on a pillarboxed 4x3 image.
The black bars on 2.35:1 anamorphic add to the look, they make it look more epic.
You must hate watching them at the cinema, then, where there are no black bars. :D
The point is pillerboxing isn't necessary on DVD (and VHS) so why is it on HD?
Because, as been stated before, HD is inherently a widescreen format whereas standard definition is not inherently widescreen (it is only "faked" with anamorphic material by horizontally stretching a pre-distorted image).
------
Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site
Member
Posts: 1817
Originally Posted by bradavon:
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
I have to ask: do you stretch 4x3 material to fill a widescreen TV?
Of course. I have to ask: Do you like huge black bars? :D (which take up at least 1/3 of a 16:9 screen). I never use my 4:3 mode on TV and never will, it looks awful. If I had a 4:3 TV then fine but I don't.
I'm willing to bet most people view 4:3 content this way tbh, sure many not AV enthusiasts but the general public for sure.
No! No! NO!!!! If most people do watch fullscreen content stretched to fit their widescreen TVs, it's surely only because the TV does it automatically. Why would anyone choose to do that? Why would you want to watch a distorted picture?
So when you play a fullscreen film on DVD, which should automatically show in 4:3 mode, presumably you take the trouble of "stretching" that as well? I'm dumbfounded.
Originally Posted by bradavon:
To the point where I'd stick with the DVD version, the black bars would be huge and make it unwatchable. The DVD version would have much lower resolution but it would still look much better.
Why will the black bars be any more distracting on HD than on SD, and why will the picture (in between those black bars) look worse on HD than on SD? How else would you propose to display 4:3 films on HD??
You've really lost me here, Bradavon. :confused:
Administrator
Posts: 413
Originally Posted by bradavon:
Originally Posted by Michael Mackenzie:
I have to ask: do you stretch 4x3 material to fill a widescreen TV?
Of course. I have to ask: Do you like huge black bars? :D (which take up at least 1/3 of a 16:9 screen). I never use my 4:3 mode on TV and never will, it looks awful. If I had a 4:3 TV then fine but I don't.
Member
Posts: 430
AFAIK I thought virtually everyone zoomed/stretched non-anamorphic WS films. Whenever a non-anamorphic DVD is discussed someone brings up how it looks zoomed/stretched.
Appropriate to use this on a Superman thread: WROOOONG!
Sorry. I still respect your opinion though.
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by Phil Q:
Why will the black bars be any more distracting on HD than on SD
They wouldn't but if pillerboxing is enforced on HD (i.e - a 4:3 frame inside 16:9) whereas on DVD it's not (4:3 plain and simple). That's the difference.
Currently on DVD and VHS (although I see Mike's point of HD being inherently WS) the aspect ratio of 4:3 material is 1.33:1 with no bars being forced or otherwise if what we propose turns out to be true where you have burnt in bars or machine forced bars (for want of a better phrase) it will result in a 4:3 aspect ratio inside a 16:9 aspect ratio.
The former you have the choice to watch in in 4:3 on a 16:9 set, the latter you do not (probably). Give people the choice.
Both the WS TVs I've owned to have a WS mode designed for 4:3 material. Where the left/right is of course stretched but the top/bottom is too slightly to compensate for the fat head syndrome. It does mean minor cropping but this IMO is better than a square inside a rectangle :D
I am surprised so many of you watch 4:3 material the way you do on a WS TV. I know I'm not alone in watching it using the 4:3 Widescreen Mode (again for want of a better phrase) though.
Originally Posted by Phil Q:
and why will the picture (in between those black bars) look worse on HD than on SD?
I never said it would? Of course it will look better, it's HD. I said to me the bars would make the film unwatchable, because they'll be to distracting.
Member
Posts: 1817
Originally Posted by bradavon:
Originally Posted by Phil Q:
and why will the picture (in between those black bars) look worse on HD than on SD?
I never said it would? Of course it will look better, it's HD. I said to me the bars would make the film unwatchable, because they'll be to distracting.
I understand now, you mean HD will be worse because you won't be able to use your picture-stretching technique anymore!
I still can't believe that a man who spends so much time pondering the intricacies of audio formats like uncompressed PCM, Dolby Digital-Plus, Dolby TrueHD or whatever the hell they're called can have such a cavalier attitude about video formats! ;) If I try to imagine Citizen Kane all stretched out like that it just fills me with horror...
Administrator
Posts: 2301
Member
Posts: 119
Member
Posts: 448
(Although how come you are the only site to report this! :confused: )
Banned
Posts: 2907
Originally Posted by RisingSun:
(Although how come you are the only site to report this! :confused: )
Others are bound to follow.
Page: 1, 2