Universal announced today that it will release the Bourne films on “flipper” discs that have Blu-ray on one side and regular DVD on the other. Universal says the discs are aimed at people waiting to upgrade to Blu-ray players or people who have both standard and Blu-ray options in their homes. Yes, the departed HD-DVD did the same thing once upon a time.
Still, sounds good, right? A lot of people hate pulling the trigger for a new format, even if we think, ultimately, that Blu-ray might take over. The idea that we can still put off buying new hardware without screwing ourselves too bad is pretty appealing. Plus it’s priced at $29.98, which makes it a little cheaper than regular Blu-rays, though still more expensive than most DVDs.
The big issue, though, is that people don’t want Blu-ray discs badly enough — they’re still way more expensive than regular DVDs, and it turns out lots of average consumers just don’t care about the better picture quality. Blu-ray still seems like a luxury upgrade, not necessarily the soon-to-be-standard modern format. Will this bridge the gap, PopWatchers? Or have you already crossed over? Is double-dipping the way to go?
Comments (1-15) of 90 Add your comment
Blu-ray is better! and it’s not that expensive! i’m practically poor and yet i still have 3 players (one of which i won). and smart shoppers will notice that some new releases are actually CHEAPER on blu-ray than their 2 disc special edition dvd counterparts. the hangover is listed on bestuy.com for $15.99 how much less do you freaking want it to be? SO THERE!
If you go to WalMart the first week of the release, you can get almost any Blu-Ray for$19.00. I got Transformers 2, X-Men Wolverine, and StarTrek all for $19.00 the first week.
And, then, just for fun, I got Wanted, too!
ur lame
Most Blu Rays are more expensive. While you can get good deals now, if you are not a week 1 purchaser you will probably pay way too much for a Blu Ray.
Most films that come to the format are also films that are really not that impressive on it.
I choose to buy most of my movies on DVD, and only buy Blu Ray on select films that need the added quality- like the new Harry Potter and District 9.
Not a bad idea, but this won’t get people buying the Blu-ray instead, I feel. They’ve been including the DVD copies with Blu-rays for a while now (mostly kiddie movies like “Up”) and that hasn’t started much of a commotion. I doubt this will either
Up isn’t a “kiddie movie.” Just because it’s an animation doesn’t make it exclusive to children.
I completely agree. I understand that UP wasn’t exactly the discussion that started this thread, but still – that movie has more adult themes than 90% of the garbage that’s in theaters right now.
Oh and by the way, people should shop on Amazon for Blu-rays. I haven’t payed more than $20 for a single new Blu-Ray from that site. Even stuff like “Watchmen: the Ultimate Cut” sells for 40-50% off the MSRP.
You hit it right on the nail Vince. Amazon is were I mostly shop for new blu rays. Best Buy to because the may list for a little more than what I find it at Best Buy but if you figure in the cost of shipping from amazon it ends up a little more than Best Buy so Ill buy it there then I won’t have to wait for it to ship out. But if your looking to get older titles you have on DVD over to blu ray, you can’t beat Amazon. I found oler titles as low as 10 or 12 bucks.
i’m still waiting until blu-ray comes down a bit before jumping on board. but i’m sure something else will come along bigger! and! better! than blu-ray one of these days.
For the last 6 months… I’ve paid between $9.00 and $14.00 for numberous blurays… Frys and Best Buy always have a large selection on sale…!
“Plus it’s priced at $29.98, which makes it a little cheaper than regular Blu-rays, though still more expensive than most DVDs”
Yeah, I don’t know where this article writer gets its info. Most Blu-Rays are in the $25-$29 range
i think she’s referring to the MSRP. So obviously 29.98 won’t be the “actual” price, just the suggested retail price.
Blu-ray can’t be played on a lot of computers. Until that changes…
I play Blu-ray through my 2 year old Media Center PC hooked to a TV. The only computers that can’t play blu-ray are old. You can pick up a blu-ray reader for less than $50 for a PC.
Your comment on people not wanting Blu-Ray enough without some numbers or facts to support it is a bit weak (sounds like opinion). In the first week of sales for Star Trek – 1.1 million blu ray copies were sold. While still well short of the DVD version (another 4.6M or so) – for discs costing twice as much that’s a heck of a lot of people wanting blu ray discs (especially considering the number of blu-ray players compared to the number of DVD players – the percentage is amazing)
I’m interested to see if Blu-Ray will take. The way I see it, consumers do not care how “clear” something is. Look at how people watch media: ipods, phones, PSP’s, Hulu, portable DVD players, Youtube… I simply do not think Blu-Ray give such an improved difference to regular DVDs (like VHS to DVD) to make the masses want it. We’ll see…
I agree I dont see blue ray expanding beyond a niche market, and by the time it really would catch on and fully replace dvds most will have moved on to digital downloads. Its a case of convenience trumping quality.
Except for the fact that the growth of the blue-ray market surpases the growth of the dvd market on the same time-scale. The blue-ray takeover is inevitable. Heck, look at your local Target store. They sell more blue-ray discs than dvd. In fact, besides for new releases and tv on dvd, they don’t even sell dvds (other than the $5-$10 clearance rack). Also, with tv finally making the change to an hd format, and most tvs being hd ready, it’s only a matter of time. 1-2 years and dvd will be outsold by blue-ray.
Skip, that’s not true, at least for the Target I work at. We offer a lot more DVDs then Blu-Ray discs.
I hated when HD-DVD did this, especially when some of these combo discs caused read errors that normal discs didn’t. Please don’t do this, Universal!
It will inevitably take a few years for blu-ray to happen. I looked at buying a blu-ray player but all the reviews are so mixed. I have a rule never to buy something electronic until it has been out a couple of years to allow some quality and price control to kick in.
Buy a PS3 and save yourself the hassle. Even if you don’t use it for it’s gaming capabilities, it’s still one of the best blu-ray players on the market. Plus with the ability to upgrade it via the internet and with it’s new price point of $299, you can’t beat it.
Blu-ray has already been out for more than “a couple of years.” But I will agree that playing a BD can be challenging, and the basic players don’t have the bells & whistles of even cheap DVD players. Pix quality is much better, but most DVDs look very good upconverted to 1080p
Being a gadget lover, I have to say I really love my Blu-Ray discs/player but I can see how the average joe won’t really care or notice the difference in picture quality.
Not sure how you can say people don’t want blu-ray. Blu-ray adoption is ahead of where DVD was after the same amount of time.
Yay facts and data! I don’t see why there is even a discussion if blue-ray will last. It’s here to stay.
Now that you say that, I see it. DVDs are older than people than think. I think PS3s really helped the acceptance of it.
Honestly, I am just so tired of upgrading. I still have some VHS tapes, though we only have DVD players in the home! I have accepted DVD, but my family’s money is too precious to spend on another upgrade right now.
Not to mention, there are still quite a few movies only available on VHS that were never released on DVD.
Who freakin cares! The reality is, that HDDVD was the more logical marketing step. Sony tries to control every aspect of the consumer technology market. Brilliant company, crappy business practices. Proprietary crap. I mean, how freaking gay is Blu-Ray? HDDVD should have been the choice. That would have fallen right in line with the HDTV thing.
Again, and much more importantly, WHO GIVES FLYIN’ CRAP!? Don’t any of us have anything better to do than contribute to the Google grabbing content of this pathetic website? Please don’t call my name out in a reply. Once I leave this message, there is a good chance that I will never be back here again. Pathetically written, None Givens
I’ll reply anyway to Mr. Grumpy-Gus. He’s right about HD-DVD. I don’t know about “better,” but the players were cheaper than Blu-ray. I think the nail-in-the-coffin of HD-DVD came when Disney announced exclusive Blu-ray. Am I right, here?
Actual is was when Warner Bros, which supported both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray decided to drop HD-DVD. That left HD-DVD with just Paramount and Universal and not enough to survive
I love my Blu-rays, but I do like when people package a DVD disc in w/ the Blu-ray package. Up and Harry Potter have done this recently. Much better than having a two-sided disc. I think those would be scratched too easily.
I agree about the discs becoming scratched easily. I thought the reason Disney was packaging the Blu-ray & DVD together was so that families could use the Blu-ray in the house & the DVD in their portable units in the car.
I hate that people believe that the main reason is that the IMAGE should be clear in HD. HD should present a film in a film like manner, usually showing film grain if ti contained it etc. Some films should look clean but some film do contain film grain and they can look like actual film projected depending.
The issue over the double sided discs is the fact they cause playability issues and can become more scratched etc… single sided discs are the best. I don’t need a DVD copy of the film I own on HD.. I will NEVER watch it. Same with digital copies why watch something sub par if you have the HD version.