Choice of 53 Blu-ray films, £6.99 each at HMV - loads more from £7.99+
624°Expired

Choice of 53 Blu-ray films, £6.99 each at HMV - loads more from £7.99+

£6.99
30
Found 4th Sep 2009Made hot 4th Sep 2009
HMV have a massive sale of Blu-rays for example a choice of 53 films at £6.99 each!
50 more titles at £7.99!
57 titles at £8.99, then a huge selection of sale blu rays at £9.99+ , looks like blu rays are getting to a more affordable price Woohoo!

here is a selection of the £6.99 ones..
Cliffhanger
Rambo 1
Rambo 2
Rambo 3
Total Recall
Night of the living dead
The fog
Day of the dead
Diary of the dead
Halloween
Hellraiser
Basic Instinct
Dirty Dancing (20th Anniversary Edition)
Evil dead 2
Evil dead 3
Bank job
Bloodrayne 2
Dead space downfall
Eden Lake
The Eye
Elite Squad
Escape from New York
Donkey Punch
Earth
Chocolate
Condemned
ForbiddenKingdom
Host
Good Luck Chuck
Resevoir Dogs
Saw 3
Saw 4
Stargate (Special Edition)
War
Welcome to the Jungle
Days of Glory
Assembly
My name is Bruce
In the name of the king
My Blueberry Nights
Repo a genetic opera
Storm warning
Thick as Thieves
manchester United: Champions League Final
W
Young Guns
Monkey Magic
Beowulf & Grendel (£4.99)
All the boys love Mandy Lane


all the best jake 1983

30 Comments

Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just trying to shift older non-hd films that look ok, but not blu-ray quality.

But still top price if you want to convert some of your old dvd/vhs films on to blu-ray.

I don’t think you can say whether a film is ‘non-HD’ with any degree of certainty. Even old films shot on 35mm stock or above (70mm in some cases) can resolve many times more resolution than Blu-Ray is capable of (remember they were designed to be blown up to enormous sizes). By all accounts, 2001:A Space Odyssey (shot in 1968) looks far better on BD than a more recent film such as Gladiator due to better care and attention being played to the transfer.

I guess you just have to check out individual reviews.

Quoted from Filmschoolonline

"Film is analog so there are no real "pixels." However, based on converted measures, a 35mm frame has 3 to 12 million pixels, depending on the stock, lens, and shooting conditions. An HD frame has 2 million pixels, measured using 1920 x 1080 scan lines. With this difference, 35mm appears vastly superior to HD."

yeah, it's got nothing to do with quality, as a movie like gone with the wind can look amazing in HD. "film" was not a digital format, and didn't comprise of lines made up from analogue video sources. "video" sourced material can be filtered and played about with, but you can't increase the resolution, so anything shot on video, which is mainly TV shows and music videos, is restricted by the technology to clean up the image. "film" on the other hand is an analogue source, like tape, and the higher rate you "sample" or scan the image, the better quality you can get. there are also techniques to clean up the film, remove scratches etc, so you can view old films in better quality than they have ever seen before. films shot in "technicolour" used 3 rolls of film as colour film wasn't invented back then, they used a prism in the camera that split the red, green and blue to seperate black and white film, and played back through special projectors. through the years when colour film was invented, new colour masters were created so the colour films could be played on the new standard projectors, and many dvds came from those masters, but warners in particular were going back to the original film and cleaning up from scratch. by comparing the three seperate films they could tell if something should be in the movie or is dust or a scratch

to me, the reduction in price seems to be an attempt to get bluray down to similar back catalogue pricing as dvds, as many of those titles could be had for about £5 in virgin and hmv before bluray took off. also, many titles have been flogged to death, so there will be limited customer interest. most of the titles don't interest me at all, especially not after the £3 hd-dvds

reservoir dogs is okay, but i've seen it a hundred times, donkey punch is okay, but not really a keeper, the rest are mostly crappy horror films. i'll probably wait till basic instinct comes down to £5 as i already have the american dvd with icepick, and i'm not as anxious to zoom into sharon stones snatch in HD on the plasma these days

bank job isn't a bad movie if you haven't seen it. whilst i love gangster flicks, it's not a keeper in the same way as some of the other british classics

i'm not voting hot or cold as these films have been this price on HMV for donkeys

d_dixon50;6202669

Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just … Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just trying to shift older non-hd films that look ok, but not blu-ray quality.But still top price if you want to convert some of your old dvd/vhs films on to blu-ray.


That's what bluray.highdefdigest.com/ was invented for :-D

d_dixon50;6202669

Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just … Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just trying to shift older non-hd films that look ok, but not blu-ray quality.But still top price if you want to convert some of your old dvd/vhs films on to blu-ray.



You can convert DVDs to hard disk and play on many media players, saves paying for the movie twice, or 3 times in some cases. Shame we couldn't send DVDs back and get the Blu-ray version for a couple of quid.

Banned

d_dixon50;6202669

Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just … Heat added some great prices but I do get the impression they are just trying to shift older non-hd films that look ok, but not blu-ray quality.But still top price if you want to convert some of your old dvd/vhs films on to blu-ray.


I think you need to do some reading up on what HD is :w00t:

Film has a far higher resolution than blu-ray

Gold Feet;6203394

You can convert DVDs to hard disk and play on many media players, saves … You can convert DVDs to hard disk and play on many media players, saves paying for the movie twice, or 3 times in some cases. Shame we couldn't send DVDs back and get the Blu-ray version for a couple of quid.



That won't improve the quality any. By "converting" to Bluray he means getting a higher quality copy.

Compatibility isn't an issue, if you're not bothered about quality then DVDs play just fine on a Bluray player (it makes the technology upgrade from DVD to Bluray much more palatable than VHS to DVD).

csiman;6203443

I think you need to do some reading up on what HD is :w00t:Film has a far … I think you need to do some reading up on what HD is :w00t:Film has a far higher resolution than blu-ray




Yes, Logically the bluray discs have been mastered from the original film which must have an equal or greater resolution than the bluray anyway. Sometime in the future another even higher definition format is likely to supersede bluray and that format will still have be mastered from the original film,and as mentioned, just sampled at a higher resolution.

uni;6202965

to me, the reduction in price seems to be an attempt to get bluray down … to me, the reduction in price seems to be an attempt to get bluray down to similar back catalogue pricing as dvds, as many of those titles could be had for about £5 in virgin and hmv before bluray took off. also, many titles have been flogged to death, so there will be limited customer interest. most of the titles don't interest me at all, especially not after the £3 hd-dvds



I have to agree and it was an obvious move for the studios to make.

This gives them a third (VHS/DVD/BD) or fourth (VHS/DVD/DVD SE/BD) bite at the cherry with these films. And also gives them the opportunity to encourage takeup of the format by having low headline prices.

Anyone know if these deals are instore too?

ivordeal;6203685

Anyone know if these deals are instore too?



No chance, you'll be shocked how much they want in store for them :w00t:

topdealman;6203767

No chance, you'll be shocked how much they want in store for them :w00t:



I know what you mean!! Some of the films are £20, £25 or £30 each!! That's even without the buy one get one free!!! Daylight robbery!! :x

Original Poster

ivordeal;6203865

I know what you mean!! Some of the films are £20, £25 or £30 each!! Th … I know what you mean!! Some of the films are £20, £25 or £30 each!! That's even without the buy one get one free!!! Daylight robbery!! :x



yeah they take the mickey, what i find funny is they have to pay for postage when we buy them online which eats in to more of their profit!

i guess the costs of keeping the shop open force them to charge so much instore!

Jake1983;6203927

yeah they take the mickey, what i find funny is they have to pay for … yeah they take the mickey, what i find funny is they have to pay for postage when we buy them online which eats in to more of their profit!i guess the costs of keeping the shop open force them to charge so much instore!



HMV business strategy is very strange - even if they put blu-rays at £10-£15 instore they will attract more customers as a lot of people like to actually purchase the items in person - even if they are a few quid dearer (I know I do).

It wouldn't surprise me if in a few years HMV will go bust!!

Kieran_John;6203548

That won't improve the quality any. By "converting" to Bluray he means … That won't improve the quality any. By "converting" to Bluray he means getting a higher quality copy. .



Well no, the OP was doubting the 'HD' quality of some of these films, and he is partly right as not all Blu-rays are equal. A quick visit to the likes of AVforums should reveal the production quality of the popular ones.
I can see why people call it a rip off, but then that's what these forums are for, to fight the industry who have a history of price fixing and dodgy practices :thumbsup:. We are drip fed technology to maximise their profits. Sony is is behind high licensing fees for Blu-ray, hence the high costs, I wouldn't mind so much if a spinnng optical disc was actually cutting edge.

Gold Feet;6204274

Well no, the OP was doubting the 'HD' quality of some of these films, and … Well no, the OP was doubting the 'HD' quality of some of these films, and he is partly right as not all Blu-rays are equal. A quick visit to the likes of AVforums should reveal the production quality of the popular ones.I can see why people call it a rip off, but then that's what these forums are for, to fight the industry who have a history of price fixing and dodgy practices :thumbsup:. We are drip fed technology to maximise their profits. Sony is is behind high licensing fees for Blu-ray, hence the high costs, I wouldn't mind so much if a spinnng optical disc was actually cutting edge.



get your facts straight before blaming companies.

fees aren't that much.. for an exsiting blu-ray publisher, the fees are something like 4 cents per disc printed (plus a one charge of $500 per title).

so on a large print run the fees are basically 4 cents a disk which is hardly a lot of money.

i.e. the bulk of the pricing decision is down to the studios.

furthermore since many of the studios are part of the blu-ray consortium the fees they pay are also massively discouted.


blu-ray.com/new…027

csiman;6203443

I think you need to do some reading up on what HD is :w00t:Film has a far … I think you need to do some reading up on what HD is :w00t:Film has a far higher resolution than blu-ray



I'm not stupid! I know about film I was just trying to point out without going in to geek mode that a lot of blu-ray converstions are bad regardless of what uber film it was shot on! :whistling:

anh_duong;6204420

get your facts straight before blaming companies.fees aren't that much.. … get your facts straight before blaming companies.fees aren't that much.. for an exsiting blu-ray publisher, the fees are something like 4 cents per disc printed (plus a one charge of $500 per title).so on a large print run the fees are basically 4 cents a disk which is hardly a lot of money.i.e. the bulk of the pricing decision is down to the studios. furthermore since many of the studios are part of the blu-ray consortium the fees they pay are also massively discouted.http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3027



Oh you again, the blu-ray defence force :-D

The only facts I need to know as a consumer, is that the new Blu-Ray films are too expensive and optical spinning discs are becoming more and more undesirable to me.

Fees arnt much you say?
$3000 per year just to use the logo.
$3000 one off fee is still $500 installments according to your link for DRM (already hacked) + appros another $1600 per project?.
$40,000 for Sony Blu-print
+ Disc production fees much higher than DVD

so you think that's attractive to indie movie makers?

Gold Feet;6204551

Oh you again, the blu-ray defence force :-DThe only facts I need to … Oh you again, the blu-ray defence force :-DThe only facts I need to know as a consumer, is that the new Blu-Ray films are too expensive and optical spinning discs are becoming more and more undesirable to me.Fees arnt much you say? $3000 per year just to use the logo. $3000 one off fee for DRM (already hacked) +another $1600 per project.$40,000 for Sony Blu-print+ Disc production fees much higher than DVDso you think that's attractive to indie movie makers?



you are the one obsessed with sony because everyone including their dog knows that blu-ray isn't just sony. Blu-ray is a consortium made up of tens of companies the fact you singled them out means you don't understand how blu-ray works.

firstly, are you kidding me?? $3000 a year is not a lot of money. that is just over 2000 pounds a year. how much do you think a film cost to produce these days??? i couldn't even get leonardo di caprio to move his left leg for that much.

add all your numbers together - which i think are outdated anways. you will find that the cost of authoring a blu-ray is insignificant when compared to the cost of making a movie - especially considering that most of these fees are one off.

it is the studios that ultimately determine the prices of the the blu-ray - not the license fees. the sooner you understand this the better you understand the video distribution market.


EDIT:

i had a feeling you were using old data.

Gold Feet;6204551

Fees arnt much you say? $3000 per year just to use the logo. now only … Fees arnt much you say? $3000 per year just to use the logo. now only $500/year for small indie developers$3000 one off fee for DRM (already hacked) +another $1600 per project. fee is now actually $500/per additional project - you didn't read my link did you?$40,000 for Sony Blu-print you don't have to buy sony blu-print since there are many other blu-ray authoring software on the market - furthermore Blu-print is a one-off license fee for a professional industry piece of software+ Disc production fees much higher than DVD this is not a licensing fee and manufacturing fees are decreasing rapidly as new manufacturing facilities are built

I know this has been gone over before, a bazillion times, but...

Blu ray gives you the chance to watch a film in a higher resolution than DVD. Of course, you must have a full HD tv with a good screen to fully make use of this.

All Blu ray films are 'encoded' at different qualities, meaning that you could pick up a blu ray version of Ghostbusters and a blu ray version of the shining and the quality on Ghostbusters wouldn't be as good.

Think of it like giving the same printed photograph to two people. One with a costly scanner and one with a cheap brand scanner. They both email you the scanned in picture and the one off the cheap scanner looks dark and grainy whereas the one off the good scanner looks clear and sharp.

It's a little like that. Some studios just dump digital versions they have of films onto blu ray which were originally made for DVD. They just digitally upscale them which is pointless. A good studio will get a print of the film and re-scan it properly and take care over it and this makes for a pretty good Blu ray movie experience.

What I do before I buy a Blu ray which I really want, I check on line reviews about the quality of the transfer. Then I know if a studio has released a title worth getting on Blu ray. For example, in my miniscule collection, I have the Shining and 2001 space oddesy which are brilliant transfers from originally good film. I have ghostbusters, which yes, technically is HD but it's grainy and looks pretty pants in some places. Terminator 2, nice sound and not bad picture, although, nothing to write home about. No country for old men, really good transfer!

Anyway, unfortunately, with Blu ray comes more stuff we have to look out for. it's not a dumbed down science, of 'buy it, it'll be better' it's one of those things that if you really want good, you just need to understand it a bit more.

I always remember going to my friends house one christmas and seeing his son play on his present. A brand new Sony PS3 hooked up to a brand new HD television. It was connected through the component socket! and everyone was "ooh, look at the graphics, it's the bee's knees!"

The joke of it is is that they would have got better looking visuals had they connected it to a normal TV because all that was happening was that the images from the PS3 were being scaled up to a large 42" screen and it looked pants.

It took them a year before they eventually listened and connected it via HDMI which made them realise what HD actually was.

The way I see it, the only way to experience this rubbish they feed us in adverts about HD is...

1) Get a FULL HD television - not HD ready, but full 1080p

2) Get a television with a good screen and colour engine

3) Get a PS3 or a really good blu ray player (I say PS3 because it is generally renowned as the best Blu ray player you can buy due to firmware updates and the fact that it's DVD upscaling technology is second to none. Plus that and it's an internet browser, bbc iPlayer, games console and so forth, but that's secondary to viewing HD films)

4) connect the two with HDMI

5) Play Blu ray films which have been converted really well and score hi on online reviews for quality of transfer

Then and only then are you truly getting the full experience. If you have a 'HD ready' tv and have an upscaling DVD player, your no-where near close to HD.

Sales people and business men have a lot to hide behind when it comes to HD, it can be a mine field and it is definitely one of those things where you get what you pay for.

Gold Feet;6204551

Oh you again, the blu-ray defence force :-DThe only facts I need to … Oh you again, the blu-ray defence force :-DThe only facts I need to know as a consumer, is that the new Blu-Ray films are too expensive and optical spinning discs are becoming more and more undesirable to me.Fees arnt much you say? $3000 per year just to use the logo. $3000 one off fee is still $500 installments according to your link for DRM (already hacked) + appros another $1600 per project?.$40,000 for Sony Blu-print+ Disc production fees much higher than DVDso you think that's attractive to indie movie makers?



As a rough calculation lets round your figures up to $50,000 and assume they apply to every project for simplicity. Over a run of 1,000,000 discs, that equates to $0.05. Now lets say a BD costs $2 to make, to avoid any arguments. This brings the total cost to $2.05 per disc. To further simplify things, lets say a DVD costs nothing to make, so the extra cost attributed by the BDA/Sony is $2.05.

Even taking those excessive figures, it hardly supports your argument that Sony (or more accurately the BDA) and their charges/licensing fee's are the key driver of higher pricing of BD's.

Mentos;6205086

As a rough calculation lets round your figures up to $50,000 and assume … As a rough calculation lets round your figures up to $50,000 and assume they apply to every project for simplicity. Over a run of 1,000,000 discs, that equates to $0.05. Now lets say a BD costs $2 to make, to avoid any arguments. This brings the total cost to $2.05 per disc. To further simplify things, lets say a DVD costs nothing to make, so the extra cost attributed by the BDA/Sony is $2.05.Even taking those excessive figures, it hardly supports your argument that Sony (or more accurately the BDA) and their charges/licensing fee's are the key driver of higher pricing of BD's.



absolutely, it is the studios and retail channel that is responsible for higher bd prices. the cost of bd license fees is marginal compared to the studios and retail chain mark up.

the fact that hmv instore prices>>hmv online prices is a great example of retail premia attached to blu-ray. stores are selling blu-ray at a very high markup compared to dvd.

Yous lot bore the pants off me. Think you are all some experts in the field. Sorry dream on........
We all have a Full HD TV, We all have a PS3.

Lets decide whether all the films are good or not !!! Thats open to interpretation and personal choice.

Lets get back to the deal or no deal situation.
has the OP a hot deal or not. Probably not due to some of the titles.

End of........ :?

ivordeal;6203865

I know what you mean!! Some of the films are £20, £25 or £30 each!! Th … I know what you mean!! Some of the films are £20, £25 or £30 each!! That's even without the buy one get one free!!! Daylight robbery!! :x



Daylight robbery!! can u get that on blu ray too ?:p

Some really poor titles in there! Probably wouldn't watch never mind record if they were on TV! I would recommend Assembly though. For info, Diary of the Dead was £8 in store the other day - still more expensive but better than £35 they have been charging for the Disney BOGOF promotion.

Gold Feet;6203394

You can convert DVDs to hard disk and play on many media players, saves … You can convert DVDs to hard disk and play on many media players, saves paying for the movie twice, or 3 times in some cases. Shame we couldn't send DVDs back and get the Blu-ray version for a couple of quid.



That is the future. Blu-Ray will not replace DVD in the same way that DVD replaced VHS (although people who have invested in Blu-Ray like to think so) . Media Players will replace BOTH

melmation;6204729

I always remember going to my friends house one christmas and seeing his … I always remember going to my friends house one christmas and seeing his son play on his present. A brand new Sony PS3 hooked up to a brand new HD television. It was connected through the component socket! and everyone was "ooh, look at the graphics, it's the bee's knees!"The joke of it is is that they would have got better looking visuals had they connected it to a normal TV because all that was happening was that the images from the PS3 were being scaled up to a large 42" screen and it looked pants.It took them a year before they eventually listened and connected it via HDMI which made them realise what HD actually was.



Component technically displays at HD. Some HD tvs can take a 1080p signal over component whereas all (pretty much) can take a 720p signal. Plugging it in to a normal tv would have just given them 480p. In fact the earlier 360s could only output over component (and VGA) for HD signals.

Unless of course you meant composite, in which case you're right and I'm being a pedant for no reason I remember when I got my PS3 I didn't have a spare HDMI cable kicking around and I could barely stand to play it via composite! Motorstorm was just a blurry, muddy mess!

melmation;6204729

I always remember going to my friends house one christmas and seeing his … I always remember going to my friends house one christmas and seeing his son play on his present. A brand new Sony PS3 hooked up to a brand new HD television. It was connected through the component socket! and everyone was "ooh, look at the graphics, it's the bee's knees!"The joke of it is is that they would have got better looking visuals had they connected it to a normal TV because all that was happening was that the images from the PS3 were being scaled up to a large 42" screen and it looked pants.



You do have to understand that everything is relative to ones previous experience.

For example if they'd previously had a PS2 connected to the same TV, the PS3 games would look better even if connected through composite/scart.

However, I do agree with your overall point. Unfortunately they way HD has been sold in the market leaves alot to be desired. I've even seen a Sky HD install connected by scart, and that comes with a HDMI cable in the box :roll: (assume the installer couldn't be bothered to run the HDMI cable for the poor guy and he didn't know better.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text