Coming in 4K - Star Trek's 1-IV??

[Vger23]

Well that could also mean the Indy Jones set has a higher MSRP. But sure, I'm not in the business so what do I know? It just honestly feels like a waste and I'm not convinced they labels are gifting me free copies. It costs money supply the discs, insets and cases. They'd save themselves a ton by not providing them, especially since they're selling the Blu Rays struck from the 4K prints separately anyway. They would be biting into their own bottom line.

The cost to manufacture the extra discs, cases and artwork is either written off (doubtful) or added to the price (more likely).

Even if it's only an additional $10.

From what I understand, the costs to manufacture BR disks and the associated casing is almost negligible for these companies. The technology exists to just stamp 'em out and package them up very cheaply and quickly. You're paying for the movie itself (and any of the processes associated with remastering, etc) when you buy a disk, not for the physical material itself.

And the good news is that these are indeed vastly improved versions of the BR disks that were previously released, in that they are all full remasters and look gorgeous in comparison. In fact, if you look online at comparisons some YouTubers have done, there's not a huge difference between the new BR remasters and the 4K disks, but there is a huge difference between the new release and the old release.

 

[Bad Robot]

The level of snark on this board really jumped recently.

It's half of the contents of the box. If I get rid of the Blu Rays, I have a half empty box on the shelf. I actually like the box.

Everyone I know who wanted the movies on BD already has them. I'd sooner give them the code for the digital copy since most "normals" tend to stream anyway.

What makes you say that? You really think they don't use these to jack the price up on the sets? They're just generously gifting them to consumers? "Hey thanks for buying the 4k, here are some free duplicates to give to your friends?" That's not how the force works. Take away the 4 blu rays and I can guarantee there's a price drop, even if it's only ten bucks. A 4K disc with "bonus" Blu Ray and DVD copy, etc. for $30 a pop isn't a case full of freebies.

The point is that there's no need for it other than to drive up the MSRP.

Obviously the box would be of tighter dimensions without the BD keepcase. If you like the box for decorative purposes, I think I'd just accept the BDs as being part of that pkg.

Better people have already replied about the Blu-Rays, but it's commonly agreed the 2009 issue ones were mostly denoised, overscrubbed garbage. Because Paramount at the time wanted them to appear consistent as a set rather than respect the image quality of the films individually (that was also why the generic font and the TNG films suddenly being numbered). You would find plenty of takers for the new BDs if you didn't prefer to keep the box. I've purchased the box for friends who, like myself, don't even have 4k.

I don't acknowledge "normals" tend to stream everything, I will never acknowledge that. If they do they're getting quality that's not much better than the old BDs, I don't care if it is 4k (not that I think most streamers can even tell, with confidence, what resolution they're getting screwed with from one second to the next).

Yes, I really do believe, perfectly straight face, you wouldn't be paying any less for the 4ks. The standard price for a 4k movie is $30, that's just what you would pay. It used to be $40. It's going to be more than the Blu-Ray edition, and deserves to be. It wouldn't require a bonus BD disc to justify it.

You're right to by cynical of capitalism, however you're missing the trick. The 4k consumer gets his complimentary disc at no extra charge. The combined SKUs are to make it easier for late adapters to decide they might as well upgrade. I got the set for the remastered BDs, not for the 4ks. I missed that they were releasing the BDs separately because they barely mentioned it and certainly didn't advertise any artwork for them (you can go back through my comments on this thread). And then I had plenty of time to cancel the set (remember how slow Amazon was in delivering it?) but didn't.

I also got the SW movies in 4k because I wanted the remastered Blu-Rays. If you bought the Disney BDs separately (as I already had) movies 1-6 turned out to still be the 2011 FOX pressings (for all I know the DVDs are still the 2004 pressings). I wanted the latest versions of the films, I wanted every version to have existed. I wanted "McClunky" on standard Blu-Ray and bought the 4k for it. I'm the sucker who's paying extra but didn't complain. Paramount needed to remaster those Trek BDs and they never would have justified it to themselves without 4k. The crappy digitally-scrubbed BDs were "good enough."

 

[shapeshifter]

Yeah, trickle down video. I have a BD system but buy sets with DVD included when I can find them then pass them to my, stuck in the DVD age, acquaintances.

I just bought my first 4K 4 film Trek set with BD included. I don't yet have a 4K player or TV though, someday though...

 

[Kor]

I wish this were the norm in the states. I really don't understand why they bother putting in the standard Blu Rays. If I'm buying 4K then I wouldn't need the Blu Ray. if I don't have a 4K player, then I wouldn't buy the 4k discs.... It's even worse when upgrading some films, like the James Bond pictures. I got the Daniel Craig 4K set which came with standard blu rays - which I already had in the 24 film box set. So now I have two sets of blu rays of his films in addition to the 4k. What a waste. Worse, when I got Die Hard in 4K they included the old blu ray, not even a BD copy of the new transfer. WTF???

When I got the Indiana Jones 4K box set, I was beyond thrilled they didn't include the standard blu rays.

With 4K discs, it's still at a stage that's comparable to when blu-ray was newer. In those days, a blu-ray always came with the same movie on DVD. And back then I never liked that, because the DVD didn't serve any purpose for me.

That being said, there are certain 4K releases that only have the 4K disc and no regular blu-ray. Arrow Video does this with most of their stuff.

I just thought of something; having the blu-ray is useful if I take the movie over to somebody else's house to watch there, or let them borrow it, and they only have a regular blu-ray player and not a UHD disc player.

Kor

 

[Tomalak]

I just bought my first 4K 4 film Trek set with BD included. I don't yet have a 4K player or TV though, someday though...

I think this is the main reason BDs are included - to encourage buyers on the basis they can watch now but may intend to upgrade in the future, and therefore buy more UHD discs. It was common when BD was launching to include DVDs,

 

[DrBeverly]

So if I just want the blu-ray, am I as well off buying the 2016 version as getting the new one? Or is there any difference between the two blu-rays?

 

[Bad Robot]

So if I just want the blu-ray, am I as well off buying the 2016 version as getting the new one? Or is there any difference between the two blu-rays?

Of what, The Wrath of Khan? That's the only (classic) TOS movie Blu-Ray that got released in 2016.

The 2009 issue Blu-Rays I would avoid altogether at this point.

Yes, I would go for the current set.

If you're positive you'll never want the 4k discs, you should buy the movies 1-4 separately and save $20. And back to TWOK, yes I would buy the current release so as to have packaging artwork continuity with movies 1 and 3-4.

https://smile.amazon.com/Star-Trek-...fd550&pd_rd_wg=ReDl7&pd_rd_i=B098GMDC2G&psc=1

TheDigitalBits believes we "may" be close to hearing about 4k remasters for the remaining films as well. and those too would have Blu-Rays made of the new remasters.

 

[Grant]

When did the digital bits comment on the new Star Treks that may be coming? I read him all the time and I never saw that mention

 

[Bad Robot]

It was barely a footnote, and speculative at that. The story was that the 4k set we purchased in September is being re-solicited in February (presumably because Paramount's had trouble so far keeping it in stock). And even the story itself was barely a footnote.

 

[Vger23]

So if I just want the blu-ray, am I as well off buying the 2016 version as getting the new one? Or is there any difference between the two blu-rays?

The newest releases have been remastered and are a vast improvement over the older releases, even just comparing blu-ray to blu-ray.

If you enjoy the visual aspect of movies, I highly recommend them to any fan. The sound mixes are basically the same as the old releases.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I wish this were the norm in the states. I really don't understand why they bother putting in the standard Blu Rays.

It's a transition thing. People want the 4K for future use, but don't yet have a 4K screen. Meanwhile, they can use the spare Blu-Ray.

I have had a few instances of a Blu-Ray disc developing a crack near its centre, making me glad that the package came with a bonus DVD.

You really think they don't use these to jack the price up on the sets? They're just generously gifting them to consumers?

Check out prices. Sets with bonus discs are not much different to sets without. Often no price difference at all.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I... do not have a 4K. And it kinda took me until the pandemic hit to get a Blu-Ray.

 

[Indysolo]

I... do not have a 4K. And it kinda took me until the pandemic hit to get a Blu-Ray.

It looks like it's going to be awhile so by the time it ends, maybe you'll be ready to take the 4K plunge.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

It looks like it's going to be awhile so by the time it ends, maybe you'll be ready to take the 4K plunge.

We'll see. I'm making plans to get a new TV finally. My current setup is a Vizio from... 2007...

 

[Tomalak]

We'll see. I'm making plans to get a new TV finally. My current setup is a Vizio from... 2007...

I think you deserve an upgrade! Our TV died last year, and was about the same age, maybe 2009. 4K HDR is quite literally an eye-opener.

 

[fireproof78]

I... do not have a 4K. And it kinda took me until the pandemic hit to get a Blu-Ray.

Good for you. I still don't have a Blu-Ray player. I have a decent TV that I barely use.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

Good for you. I still don't have a Blu-Ray player. I have a decent TV that I barely use.

I certainly use my TV still. And the Blu-Ray is quite nice.
@Tomalak: The pictures on a modern smart TV do look a great deal better. The TV my Vizio replaced was a VHS combo TV...

 

[fireproof78]

VHS for life.

 

[Turbo]

Have there been any rumors or news about a second and third set of 4K restorations (aside from TMP DE)?

 

[Grant]

Rumors yes. The same rumor from last summer that there would be an additional two sets of 4K Restorations on both UHD and Blu-ray discs. The rumor is that the sets would either comprise Star Trek five six and seven in one set and then the three remaining Next Generation movies in the final set. Or a box set of Star Trek 5 and 6 and the four next Generation movies in the final set. Zero confirmation of any of this from Paramount. But this last February 8th few days ago they re-released the first set with slightly altered Packaging. Instead of two sets inside of a box one containing Blu-ray and the other containing UHD the new set is 1 giant plastic case containing all eight disks with a standard slipcover instead of a slide in box. It is assumed that it was re-released because supplies had been short on the first release. It's possible that re-releasing the first set to make sure all the fans had the first set possibly delayed the second set because they know how Star Trek fans are sometimes completist. So perhaps they wanted to make sure everybody had the first set in their collection before they released the second set.