Pre-ordered the steel, but jesus £24.99 is steap!

What s**tty artwork. The posters for this hilm were so so so disappointing.

Pythonofdoom wrote: So, when does the US get this?

Blu-ray.com: ... the release date has been set for Thursday, April 22 (Earth Day). In a first for a major theatrical release on Blu-ray, the studio will go Superbit on James Cameron's megablockbuster and release it without any special features of any sort, in order to maximize audio and video quality. A DVD will be included with the BD.
Jon Landau (Avatar Producer): we wanted to do something really special and reach for the best presentation of any film in the history of the format...Everything that is put on a disc takes up room – the menus, the extras, the trailers and studio promotions – and we got rid of all of that so we could give this movie the best picture and sound possible.
blu-ray.com: Extra time and care have been devoted to this project, with the video compression sessions taking six weeks, as opposed to the usual two weeks for a typical theatrical release.

Release dates:
    * Belgium: April 21
    * France: April 21
    * Netherlands: April 21
    * Spain: April 21
    * Brazil: April 22
    * Canada: April 22
    * China: April 22
    * Russia: April 22
    * Germany: April 23
    * Japan: April 23
    * Mexico: April 23
    * Switzerland: April 23
    * UK: April 26
    * Denmark: April 27
    * New Zealand: April 28
    * Norway: April 28
    * Sweden: April 28
    * Australia: April 29
    * Finland: April 30
    * Italy: May 6

legalbeagle wrote: I'm with you on that one Andy... As long as PQ/AQ are top notch then features are pretty unimportant to me.
They're 2D releases though!

I dislike the trend of releasing a bare-bones version whilst telling us there'll be a Special Edition down the track. Why can't they wait just a little longer and release one definitive version and be done with it?

I also find it exceptionally disappointing that Cameron used this movie to build a buzz for 3D and now he says it won't be out on 3D Blu-Ray until at least next year because Fox wants more 3D hardware penetration in the market first. Thanks a lot Jimmy.

So what, we're gonna see 3 separate Blu-Ray releases for Avatar?

I'm so sick of the excessive milking that goes on and the consumer being treated with such disrespect.

Jon Landau (Avatar Producer): we wanted to do something really special and reach for the best presentation of any film in the history of the format...Everything that is put on a disc takes up room – the menus, the extras, the trailers and studio promotions – and we got rid of all of that so we could give this movie the best picture and sound possible.

"The menus"  So does this mean there will not even be a menu on the DVD/Blu-Ray because I don't really see how that would work?

How are Fox ripping anyone off by publicising that this release will not have extras? You have a choice whether to buy it or not. If they wanted to rip you off they would have kept quiet about the future releases with extras. The artificially inflated RRPs on the other hand, they are a joke. It's the most successful film of all time - let add a fiver to the RRPs!

Anyway, the release will have menus of some description, even if they are the simple interactive menus for audio/subtitles. All they mean is that it won't have fancy Van Ling style menus that eat up loads of disc space.

dvdtakeaway wrote: BIG FAT JUICY BLUE CON.  

20TH Century Fox deserve people to boycott this release - it's contemptable.  They're just a bunch of greedy b***ards who want to rip off the consumer.  I hate piracy, but b***cks to it - I say rip it off the net, until they release one proper version.

I wouldn't worry too much about Fox getting theirs.  Market Research shows that, in general, the second "bite" at the apple does not sell nearly as well as hoped, and the later Special Editions are particularly suffering in the declining DVD sales market.  Furthermore, a second BD release of Avatar would be a "Catalog" release on Blu-ray, which is just a horrible market right now.  Catalog BD's simply do not sell, which is why we have seen such rapid price markdowns on them in recent months.

Not saying Avatar won't sell a billion units (I have learned to NEVER bet against Jim Cameron when it comes to finances), but the odds are certainly stacked against.

Awesome movie!!!! EPIC! Truly. The Hurt Locker deserved all the Oscar wins though.

"I see you"

Does anyone really want a 3-D version of this at this stage? Blu Ray 3-D thus far has been pretty poor... Coraline & My Bloody Valentine were ruined in "3-D" on Blu Ray with those awful Red/Purple glasses... At least they were short movies! 2 hours plus with those c**ppy cardboard glasses on & I think it'd bring on a stroke!

I'm happy with 2D until proper 3-D Blu Ray surfaces...

On the plus side, a DVD copy is included with the BD when in the past you would have had to pay the cost of the DVD as well if you wanted a copy that could play in other rooms where a BD player wasn't.

Still looking forward to this. I'm really interested in seeing making of content but it'll come. As I've said on a different thread, there's tonnes of making of featurettes on the internet and UTOOB if you want it. After seing all that stuff I kind of feel I've seen all that I want to see really for now anyway. The November BD will just be a higher quality version of those featurettes bringing them all together in one place.

Strangely, I don't feel ripped off over this release at all. We've been given the facts. It's up to us. Even when the November BD comes out, this bare bones release could still be of value in that it'll be (for a year or two at least) the definitive version of the theatrical cut. The November release may have both theatrical and extended cuts on it along with all the other bells and whistles so there will inevitably be more compression applied to the feature as a consequence. Not noticable compression to the vast majority but I think this April release still has value to fans of the film and assuming people shop wisely, it won't be a waste of their money.

Not having seen any 3D demos (of the new type 3D) on TV's, is 3D really worth the cost on TV's under 50" for example. My TV is 37" and when I look at it I do wonder if seeing a film in 3D (even the most fantastic 3D reproduction) will be effective. 3D in a cinema is different due to the size of the screen and depending where you like to sit the screen may be in your peripheral vision giving you that immersive sensation. I don't know that looking at a regular distance at a screen in the corner of a room (where it's viewing size can be a couple of feet at best in my current set up) will give the same results for the money invested.

For the record, I'm not anti 3D and I'm not moaning cos I ain't got the money for a fancy new TV. That is true but this it just an honest musing. Anyone else seen a 3D TV in a reasonable approximaton of what would be a home situation. Was it an immersive experience viewing the TV from about 10 feet say? Is there a minimum screen size to make it worthwhile? Are the demos at shows like CES conning people a little as people tend to be stond a few feet away from the screens there which might tend to be larger than they would probably choose for themselves?

Discuss. Or Not.

Okay, the Cameron/Landau camp are starting to lose a fan here.

First there was the spin that a bare bones DVD and BD was going to be good for us, technically speaking.

Now, after moaning about Hollywood converting 2D films to 3D as being 'wrong' cos they are rush jobs, they're now bigging up their decision to convert Titanic to 3D. And what separates their conversion job? Time.  Their conversion will be much better because they will take 12-18 months to do it. Now it is fair to say that spending time on something will yeald a better end product but it's still an after the fact 3D conversion. I won't slag off these types of conversion until I've seen one but based on my experience seeing 'Up' last year, I'm not that impressed so far.

Does this issue of taking time seem like utter PR booyah or what though? It took 4 years to make Avatar and now, in amongst all the other projects Cameron potentially has lined up, he's going to find the time over the next year and half to personally oversee the conversion of his 13 year old movie? Wouldn't it be more likely that he'll be farming it out to his people to do the job with him looking in from time to time. Either way 18 months is a long time to devote to a process Cameron very vocally disagrees with artistically.

Maybe Cameron is just a little pissed at him spending 4 years making a 3D film when others, the makers of 'Clash of..' and 'Alice' seemingly banged out their 3D in 2-4 months during post.

I'm not saying the 3D effect of the last two in anyway come close to overshadowing Avatar's but it must be annoying to Cameron if the public fail to differentiate between the two processes. I hope people will see the difference but even more than before, I'm starting to lean into the anti 3D camp. Adding 3D to some of the upcoming films will inevitably end up like polishing the occasional turds.

The clamour by the studios to cash in on the inflated 3D ticket prices seems ridiculous to me as well and I'll explain why. While its true that the amount of digital screens have increased over the last 2-3 years, not all of them are 3D capable due to the costs involved in adding the circuitry and 3D processing. We've seen multiplexes struggle to keep Avatar in 3D screens once Alice in Wonderland was released as evidence of this. So come this summer and winter when virtually all the major blockbusters have been converted to 3D there'll be a massive bottle-neck of movies all trying to get into the 3D screens and stay there. They'll potentially only have a couple of weeks in there though before they get downgraded to a 2D screen. None of the upcoming blockbusters can hope to have the clear 3D run that Avatar did during its release so is it going to be a false economy to convert just about every major event picture?

3D screens will continue to come into play over the next 12 months but multiplexes are going to have to throw some serious money at expanding the number of 3D screens if they are to benefit from any of this and not see their conversion costs go down the river.

Hmm, I know it. Buy this version now and get milked a few months later for the 3D version.

Now will this 3D version be Dolby3D or RealD or other? Personally I’m rather impressed with Dolby3D when I saw Toy Story at the Empire Leicester Square , last year.

Too bad they didn’t get Avatar booked in Empire 1 for the Dolby3D JBL 56KW THX experience.

This Bluray better have perfect spot on colour balance on par with Star Trek which is the only Bluray that I have out many others that are fit for the cat to c**p on!

If I see or get a hint of any (green smearing) on “Avatar” Fox is going to get steaming phone call from me!

(The Abyss Terminator 2 Titanic True Lies) looks just dreadful on DVD and Bluray! Yuck enough of the piss poor colour balance James Cameron! I want to see a mirrored cinema colour balance of Avatar on bluray!
 
Mind you the standard plastic case looks reasonable priced at Play.com for under £15.00 which mind you would be near to the cost of cinema ticket at Leicester Square, London. Now then!

I’ll buy the 2D version just in case they can’t figure out how to put 3D version on bluray and please (no red and blue filter glasses) they are total YUCK!


I’m better Fox screw me for dtsHDMA what ever happened to fairness for the paying consumer, who might want DolbyTure!

Every cinema in the West End sems to have its own resident nutter. Are you Empire's?

The Empire Scr 1 is better now that they've got digital presentation and a sound upgrade but prior to that it was at the bottom of the pile in the Square as far as A/V presentation went. Prior to the upgrade it was a nice looking room with duff/muddy sound. All style and no substance. But hey, it's all better now.

What is all this 56KW nonsense anyway? I'm in the 'exhibition' industry and I could give a stuff about what speakers(model or serial number) a cinema uses. As long as they're not blown and the theatre gets an EQ every few months, (which the Empire will do routinely due to Premieres and Press Shows) that's all you need worry about. The digital projectors take care of the lamp light level so chill whoever you are, Empire56KW.

As for Avatar, you don't need to watch a film that closely. Take a step back fella. See the film not the pixels. If you are an employee over there then you should know ranting at Fox down the phone is the best way to get your ass fired or at the very least ignored and if you are just a punter, you need to get out more. Or at least try some different cinemas.