Look out Universal is looking to leave HD has been the rant for how long? No it turns out that blu is losing support not the other way around. That is tooooo funny. Win, win for HD-DVD supporters.

HD may be a win win in the USA, but it is a lose lose in other countries, like Asian. Besides, I've read the blockbuster is filling their in-store outlets with blu-ray and not hd.
Paramount is just paying back Sony for the money they lost in UMD for the psp.
These are the reason I prefer Bru-ray: large storage capacity, extremely high quality in visual and audio, and longevity from STuDIP a** scratches. Why would I want to spend extra money on a second copy of 300 HD when the first copy was on HD, too. HD is a first generation DVD.

If Michael Bay is serious about this, then he's lost all respect as far as I'm concerned. Last I checked directors didn't own the films they make, at least not in this case. Perhaps there should be a vote for who the next director of the series is?

My pick is good ol' Stevy Spielberg.

You know I was thinking it was all about the money when I first heard this but the interview linked below actually gives some pretty logical reasons why they made the move.

http://www.pcworld.com/a.../id,136253/article.html

Basically if your to lazy to click the link, its because the BD spec keeps changing and its in a situation right now that if they make a disc that uses the feature set of the newest players the older players wont be able to take advantage of them while HD-DVD has always had their standards well planned since day one, and a few other reasons. believe it if you wish seems to make sense to me.

Well, considering I grew up in 80's, and waiting for what seemed like an eternity for a live-action Transformers movie, and when it finally did make it to the big screen and the decision was made to use the original Transformers... and upon leaving the theater thinking I should have just taken that $8.00 and wiped my a$$ with it, for it would have been put to better use that way...

No Transformers 2 directed by him might be a blessing. Regardless, I love the rest of his movies.

Want some whine with that cheese?

Hey Blu-Ray / Stepford wives, your cronies at the "official" BD forum were all applauding jagoff Michael Bay's forst idiotic comment.

Now that he retracted it and was quoted saying "Idrank the KoolAid hook line and sinker" and "I saw 300 on HD-DVD, it rocked" that sounds like a great endorsement for HD-DVD vs a childish drunken post.

You all wet your pants at his original post and are now boycotting all of his films. You jagoffs crack me up, the emotional highs and lows you sad sacks of sh!t go through over something so stupid shows your stupidity.

Dave / Steve / Ray / Benjamin, you are the king of emotional BD lemmings. Too bad you cant afford a decent combo player or you probably wouldnt be so angry.

BTW. I think Warner Brothers is going to jump ship next and they will anounce it after CEDIA.

I'm turning the obnoxious switch to 11 for the next couple days because I will be in Vegas for an imaginary bachelor party with imaginary freinds I dont have and will be back on Sunday.

'm turning the obnoxious switch to 11 for the next couple days because I will be in Vegas for an imaginary bachelor party with imaginary freinds I dont have and will be back on Sunday.

Were you in Minneapolis last weekend? Or are there just lots of drunk dudes talking to themselves around here lately? :p

Paramount doesn't care about quality in picture and sound. There more interested on profits. The less cost to produce their movies on any media would be the best course. And because mission impossible 3 didn't make that extra 150-200 million dollars. Why not which from blu-ray to hd-dvd for 18 months.
But, I personally believe Blu-ray DVD's will be here for the next 20-40 years. HD-DVD's shouldn't last more than 10-15 years. That's because company's like TDK (who has just develop a Blu-ray DVD with 200GB data on single side) and RITEK(develop 250GB data disc on a 10 layer Blu-ray DVD) will become the pioneers.
Although, most major fortune 500 companies already uses 4 layer@12cm Blu-ray DVD's(double sided will 100GB) and the 4 layer@8cm mini Blu-ray disc(double sided will 30GB), to record personal data. And once 50-70 years have past ODVD's(organic-DVD, surfaced by protein, 80GB per layer.) will come to lite.

Wow, you sound like Dave with yet another username.

Just incase you're not him, you are absolutely retarded with those statements. BD will be around for 20-40 years....... BWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Paramount doesn't care about quality in picture and sound."

Yeah, sure... because everyone knows there's practically a night-and-day difference in quality between the two formats. *eyeroll*

20-40 years??? Okay, I'm thinking back to '87... now I'm thinking back to '67. Now I'm thinking of all the technical advances in data storage during that time. Now I'm thinking of all the advances made during just the last 5 years... even the last 1 year.

Now I'm trying to imagine what Blu-ray's future is for the next year... whoa, got a pretty big giggle out of that one. I'm afraid to extend the timeline any further than that...

"But, I personally believe Blu-ray DVD's will be here for the next 20-40 years."

LMAO!!! Are you kidding me!!! Obviously you haven't been following technology have you? They already have a format being developed to replace both of those called the Holographic disc. At the rate HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are getting adopted they are going to get replaced before they ever get out of the gate!!!

that's it enough already. I am gonna make my own format and I'll add beer and hookers. In fact forget the format....

Ok Bender. But it's actually Blackjack and hookers ...... forget the blackjack.

This idiot alread back tracked and said he over reacted.

BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Another nail in the BD coffin.

By the way, now that my username is copyrighted, no one can even use *he who must not be named* without incurring a lawsuit.

Why does he care anyway? I think feeding my family comes before making some stupid statement about a format that won't even matter soon. The dual players are here, and given a year or two will outsale all the rest. The guy paying 2000 bucks for a tv won't mind 500 bucks for a dual format player, that will eventually go to 200 bucks as well - especially when mass produced by Chinese slave laborers.

This whole entire debate is pointless, there isn't enough media for either to really take off right now, so once the dual players hit the right price, the media may finally be there for everyone.

People, there aren't even that many movies available on either format to win.

BTW, I have an HD DVD drive for my xbox, but I tend to watch all my movies on my HD DVR from the pay stations verizon fios offers. I don't have to worry about either format, and I enjoy all my movies (old or new) in HD. I actually have much more content this way!

Unless you have some LARGE stock in one or the other, please just shut up!

Actually he has since retracted his brattish idiotic statement.....maybe someone reminded him that they don't actually need him to make Transformers 2?

It's not as if he has a great rep anyways.

Somebody call the Blu-ray camp a waaaaaaaaahhhmbulance.

LOL. So Toshiba paid them $150 million to go HD-DVD for 18 months.

Did not realize HD-DVD was so desparate. Well, it is the inferior format so they need to do something since they can not compete on technology.

"LOL. So Toshiba paid them $150 million to go HD-DVD for 18 months"

- Prove it.

Then try thinking about this and wake up some......you're not going to convince anyone but the most terminally stupid that $150 million is a lot of money to the movie industry, least of all some one like Viacom/Paramount.

The idea that $150 million could or would 'buy' a studio's support is about the most laughably desperate rumour the BD fanclub have put out yet.

Still, it saves the blinkered BD fanclub members the bother of actually giving any serious consideration to what Paramount themselves actually had to say on the matter, eh?

150 Million is pocket change to a Movie Studio.

Considering that Transformers and Shrek will both be released before the holiday season, and atleast 1 of them is a guaranteed HD Blockbuster(Transformers) wouldn't it have been prudent to keep going dual format, since you would most likely make up that 150million you mention from sales of movies on BluRay this holiday season? Unless there are other reasons to make the move, like the reasons Paramount has expresed in public statements.

I think that pretty much covers it.

whoops, wrong post

They sure did Stave / Dave / Ray / Benjamin / pitdingo / Metfatant / fernz33 / did I miss any?

Go log out and back in under a new username you whining little jagoff.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. MICHAEL BAY BACKTRACKS and becomes HD-DVD CONVERT!!!

Heres the new post he made on the same website were he said No blu-ray no Transformers2.
"Last night at dinner I was having dinner with three Blu-ray owners. They were pissed about no Transformers Blu-ray, and I drank the Kool-Aid hook, line and sinker. So at 1:30 in the morning I posted -- nothing good ever comes out of early AM posts, mind you -- I over reacted. I heard where Paramount is coming from and the future of HD and players that will be close to the $200 mark which is the magic number. I like what I heard.

As a director, I'm all about people seeing films in the best quality possible, and I saw and heard firsthand people upset about a corporate decision.

So today I saw 300 on HD, it rocks!

So I think I might be back on to do Transformers 2!"

heres the link ... http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/

Lol...Looks like somebody forgot to look before they leaped. I feel for him though. Poor guy fell for $ony's brain washing. It happens a lot as you can see on this site lol.

So I think I might be back on to do Transformers 2!

Damn. And here I thought it might actually be good.

For all the sheep out there, applauding Michael Bay, and criminalizing Paramount for going Exclusive HD-DVD, I hope to see you protesting Blu-Ray exclusive Studios for not being Format Neutral.

Does anyone really think that any of the Execs at Paramount will lose sleep over this? There are quiet a few directors who could probably do a much better job making the Sequel(Which btw will be a lot tougher as far as Storyline goes) than Bay.

haha! come on HD-DVD...defend yourself....the directors are PISSED....and I thought HD-DVD had better specs than Blu-Ray?? I guess Hollywood doesn't know as much as he thinks he does...oh and also....

http://store.aetv.com/ht...t/index.jhtml?id=101540

its only 18 months of exclusivity anyways

Right on Michael Bay!!
At least one person in Hollywood is not a sellout!

Sellouts like Paramount need to learn to stay nuetral in these types of squabbles and LET THE CUSTOMER DECIDE!!!

loved the transformers movie, but I can be patient too.

"Right on Michael Bay!!
At least one person in Hollywood is not a sellout!"

- Yeah right up until someone pointed out that they don't actually need him for Transformers 2.

Then he retracted his statement.

Now he is supporting Paramount's move.

You mean sellouts like all of the companies that have been backing $ony all this time. Hate to break it to you, but they didn't go exclusive without getting a little padding in their pockets. With $ony swirling in the toilet right now, they are losing the ability to keep that padding($$$) in their pockets.

I guess he should cancel all of the standard DVD releases for Transformers as it's not the best possible format.

Jagoff.

Who the heck is Michael Bay??

Apparently, he's the guy who thinks they could never make a Batman without Adam West. Or a Star Trek without William Shatner. Or a James Bond without Sean Connery. Or a Three Stooges without Curly.

Remember the guy who stopped 4 tanks in Tiananmen Square by walking alone into their path? Time Magazine later named him one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century. He was a protester. Michael Bay is just a joke.

By the way, I'm a Blu-ray fan. Blu-ray is going to win, but not because of Michael Bay refusing to make Transformers 2.

Uh, he was the director -- not an actor. That would be like if Lucas said there wouldn't be another Star Wars movie, or if Peter Jackson said there wouldn't be another LOTR movie....

Not like Jake Lloyd saying there wouldn't be another Star Wars movie, or Harrison Ford saying there wouldn't be another Indiana Jones movie...

At least know whether you're talking about a star or a director before you go off on some strange rant, seriously.

star wars and LOTR > transformers
that was a horrible comparison

My vote goes to Bryan Singer if Michael Bay wants to be a d!ck about it. Bryan Singer has made some kicka$$ movies.

So, did he whine and stamp his feet while making this childish threat? I don't care which format anybody wants, acting like this is just silly.

Lol ok then bye bye. Probably several others that would love to take your place, and probably do as good or better of a job.

It's obvious the BD brainwashed are going out thier minds with this Paramount coup.

I'm just having a great time watching you guys go crazy over something so stupid.

He must have an ego the size of a continent if he thinks he owns the movie and can decide that there will be no sequel. I think he'll be in for a wakeup call when they fire his stupid a** and get another (better) director.

You might be surprised by what clauses someone like Michael bay can have put into their contract. He may very well have a clause that allows only him to handle the production of any future Transformers films.

George Lucas totally owns Star Wars because FOX didn't want to take the chance on the film. Fox owns distribution rights and nothing more. Lucas owns all film rights, all merchandising and controls the entire thing.

Be sure of your statement before you post a message like that. You could easily be proven wrong.

For all we know, he wasn't ever going to direct Transformers 2. And he may already know that.

It is too bad Bay was ever involved with Transformers. It could have been much better. Looking at his filmography on imdb leads me to believe Transformers 2 would be much better off without him.

Apparently, he is not alone. Speilberg is also enraged that Vaicom have done this.

yesterdays backing of the lame and ailing HD DVD by Vaicom, could eventually be the downfall of the company.

They must already be in trouble, to have to take Microsoft's dirty money.

ATTENTION RAY Microsoft is ONLY backing the format they could care less which format wins as they stated if need be can make an add-on for blu-ray, they are only supporters of the format.

its funny how you contradict yourself in your own posts. if they are backing the format then they have money invested in the format.. not disputable. So yes they have interest in that format prevailing.

"Speilberg is also enraged that Vaicom have done this."

- Says who.....the Blu-ray fanclub?

Yeah right.

"Enraged"

As if, LMAO.

"yesterdays backing of the lame and ailing HD DVD by Vaicom, could eventually be the downfall of the company."

- You ought to be on the stage with cracks like that.
Wake up Ray, your blinkered Blu-ray fanboyism is getting really silly now.

"They must already be in trouble, to have to take Microsoft's dirty money"

- First up..... prove it.

Then come back and explain how $150 million is supposed to be such a massive amount of money to Vaicom/Paramount.

This idea is ludicrous for anyone prepared to give it a moments thought.....but sadly the BD fanclub will clutch at any idiotic straw/rumour so as not to have to actually think about what Paramount actually said, eh?

he's just doing his best to keep those paychecks rolling in

They can back a format doesn't mean they have to "throw money at it" His comment as always implies that MS is the sole person behind HD-DVD and even created it as he has been saying the same thing for the past few months.

Microsoft stated if hd-dvd were not to make it adding a blu-ray drive wouldn't be an issue and windows supports both formats.

Since MS and Sony are rivals its pretty obvious they wouldn't be using Sony's format.

and which has been stated before seriously 150 mil is what convinced paramount to sign a deal for 18 months? That makes no sense it would have needed to be a lot more money then that as transformers alone costed 150 mil to make.

Microsoft was behind playsforsure but they didn't like where it was going and tried to go on their own, granted it was not 100% successful but if a format fails or there is no other choice MS has no problem walking away from it.

This might be Michael Bay's biggest publicity stunt of recent. However if Michael Bay does actually drop the ball and he decides not to direct the next installment of Transformers, someone else with great vision will replace him so fast megatron would come back from the depths of the ocean. Perhaps we should give the position to Eli Roth (Hostel 1, 2).. We would finally get to see the first gory robot movie.. hehe

Did he just say "...Blu-ray sucks!"?

Do you understand english?

"For them to deny people who have Blu-ray... sucks"

Only a Hollywood Director would be arrogant enough to say that "his" movie is just so important that he thinks it can tip the storage battle. Sorry, arrogant one, this will be solved by customers, since your studios couldn't figure it out. If you're pissy about it, talk to your studio and ask why they couldn't get a format worked out about 3 years ago.

No big deal, they will get someone else to replace him, and before you know boom Transformers 2.

It won't be as good, though.

It won't be as good? He's not the only director who can make good action movies. Get Peter Jackson to direct it or something. It's a sad day when a big time Hollywood director has to use his personal log to pout about a movie studio's decision.

He's not the only director who can make good action movies.

Wait, he made a good action movie? When?

Like you said, Jackson could do it. Probably better. With one hand tied behind his back and a lobotomy...

You don't know that. People were concerned about the Lord of the Rings because the director for that was questionable and look what was made. A lot of people didn't even know who he was before that was produced.

For fast paced mindless and inconsistent, he does well in the action sense. other then that not so much.

It was an extremely formulaic "end of the world meets boy meets girl" suckfest. The Transformers played a bit-part.

Aside from the novelty of seeing them in "live-action" on the big screen, it had absolutely no value whatsoever.

If you want mindless action, check out 300, The Bourne series, the Die Hard series.... Transformers doesn't hold a candle. It tried to be a love story, a comedy, a thriller, and an action movie...and it failed at all of the above.

Won't be as good...

Couldn't really have been worse. I suppose if they'd done it using stop-motion and clay...

Yeah but the original honestly wasnt much better, plot holes you could drive a truck through, storylines that went nowhere, characters randomly appearing. Humans played a big part in the cartoon remember sparkplug and uhm billy? or something, I don't remember the kids name. I liked it because it had giant robots and prime's original voice.

PS: they are releasing it again to theathres sept 21 to imax with additional scenes.

ROFL!!! The movie was good, but not what I would call great. Well it was great, but not because of anything he did. Megan Fox = Mmmmm.

they are releasing it again to theathres sept 21 to imax with additional scenes.

...rah...

What a retard. I've seen HD-DVD do just as good if not better than Blu-Ray in lots of tests.

Who cares if it has more storage. The movies fit fine on HD-DVD. I can't believe someone would be so ignorant.

Paramount is taking sides and choosing the more economical format.

BlueRay = BetaMax

It doesn't matter how much "better" it is in some theoretical world, if it's not economically practical it will die.

Maybe the reason Paramount took the money was to pay Mr. Bay to make Transformers to start with. From everything I've read about this guy he's a jerk anyways.

"For them to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks! They were progressive by having two formats."

Read his statement. He's upset that thousands of people who purchased Blu-Ray players won't be able to purchase HiDef content from Paramount. Meaning, that by choosing sides, they are alienating a large group of customers.

Anything else, such as saying one side is better, or other tech comments were absolutely not uttered by him. Please read his statement before commenting on it. He said straight out "THEY WERE PROGRESSIVE BY HAVING TWO FORMATS", come on guys... take a break from trashing people and comprehend the statement.

He's upset that thousands of people who purchased Blu-Ray players won't be able to purchase HiDef content from Paramount.

...which is the curse of early adoption of unfinished specs or warring formats. Most of them have learned to live with it.

It's pretty typical of the hollywood types to pity the poor SOB's who paid thousands for their setup and now have to pay another couple of hundred on a new component.

If he had any understanding of the current market for these devices at all, he'd shut up and do his freaking job.

The early adopters are familiar with the risks involved. They'll deal with it.

Heh typical arrogant arse letting his personal opinion get in the way of a format war.. The only thing he should care about is the movie on the screen in the theater... Who is he to dictate what format I watch it in?

PC_Tool is dead on, hes trying to impose his *will* on the market.. How much you want to bet that Sony or Toshiba will lace his pockets with cash for an "Exculsive", no different than a video game format contract

Can you read? He's defending your right to choose the format you want to watch.

Amazing!

No, he's trying to impose his will upon the market. Let the market decide.

Universal has decided, for good or bad.

Having 2 competing formats is *not* a good thing. It simply means that anyone who wants exclusive titles from both camps will be forced to buy a combo or 2 players. This forces the consumer to pay an added expense to prop up two formats most people don't care enough to even begin to tell the difference between.

Indeed it was a STUPID move from Paramount, all this for money from the HD-DVD group. Micheal has a point, most high-end players out there are Blu-ray not the 1080i crap that most HD-DVD plaeyrs are, Blu-ray can hold the full uncompress audio and video due to the extra space, Paramount has no legit excuse besides cheaper players which Blu-ray is slowly catching up.

Paramount lost Tom Cruise not too long ago, I can foresee them losing Michael and Steven Spielberg for their greed.

Tom Cruise is nuts these days, I doubt they're depressed about it.

Just to clear some myths in any case: HD-DVD supports a loseless audio codec. That means no quality is lost, even though it's "compressed". Think BMP vs PNG24 roughly speaking. PNG24 preserves all detail, it just does it in less space.

Secondly, the video codecs used on both formats are identical - and certainly not uncompressed.

Lastly, most - if not all - HD-DVD movies released so far have been 1080p encoded too. It's well on its way, with the second gen players.

You do realize, that whether the de-interlacing (which takes it from 1080i to 1080p) happens in the player or in the television, it doesn't matter? A 1080i HD DVD player using the 1080p television to de-interlace will look exactly the same as a 1080p player sending the signal to the TV already de-interlaced.

And uncompressed audio is a joke. Do you see 2MB bitmap files on the Web for full color graphics? No, PNG is used. Lossless audio means that no sound quality is lost in the compression. There is absolutely no reason to use uncompressed PCM audio except to fill up the extra space on Blu-ray discs and trick potential buyers.

And no, Blu-ray does not have "uncompressed video." It uses the same codecs as HD DVD.

For more information on 1080i/1080p, read below:

http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/

There Is No Difference Between 1080p and 1080i

My bold-printed, big-lettered breaker above is a little sensationalistic, but, as far as movies are concerned, this is basically true. Here's why. Movies (and most TV shows) are shot at 24 frames per second (either on film or on 24-frame-per-second HD cameras). Every TV sold in the United States has a refresh rate of 60 hertz. This means that the screen refreshes 60 times per second. In order to display 24-frame-per-second content on a display that essentially shows 60 frames per second, you need to make up or create new frames. This is accomplished by a method called 3:2 pulldown (or, more accurately, 2:3 pulldown). It doubles the first frame of film, triples the second frame, doubles the third frame, and so on, creating a 2-3-2-3-2-3 sequence. (Check out Figure 1 for a more colorful depiction.) So, the new frames don't have new information; they are just duplicates of the original film frames. This process converts 24-frame-per-second film to be displayed on a 60-Hz display.

It's Deinterlacing, Not Scaling

HD DVD and Blu-ray content is 1080p/24. If your player outputs a 60-Hz signal (that is, one that your TV can display), the player is adding (creating) the 3:2 sequence. So, whether you output 1080i or 1080p, it is still inherently the same information. The only difference is in whether the player interlaces it and your TV deinterlaces it, or if the player just sends out the 1080p signal directly. If the TV correctly deinterlaces 1080i, then there should be no visible difference between deinterlaced 1080i and direct 1080p (even with that extra step). There is no new information—nor is there more resolution, as some people think. This is because, as you can see in Figure 1, there is no new information with the progressive signal. It's all based on the same original 24 frames per second.

In the case of Samsung's BD-P1000 Blu-ray player, the player interlaces the image and then deinterlaces it to create 1080p. So, you get that step regardless.

nate, you mostly correct but there are some new tv that have 120Hz refresh rates, mostly tv's with hdmi 1.3.

As long as he gets his paycheck he should care less. The politics of the formats is a joke. The director gets paid to let me see, direct.

The director gets paid to let me see, direct.

..and apparently to share their political and technological expertise with us all...

I'm so tired of "artists" spouting off on politics, technology, and a whole slew of issues they know next to *nothing* about. Opinions are great, but these twits think fame=instant "expert" pundit.

Opinions are like buttholes: everybody has one, and they all stink.

Just like a conservative — "No one gets an opinion unless I GIVE it to them!" It burns.

His opinion is *fine*, jackass. His attempt to sway the market by sheer force of ego is laughable.

If he'd just spouted off his opinion, this wouldn't even be a story.

Typical liberal response though, add nothing of value and bash conservatives. You could be the next Hillary Clinton.

Cool! Maybe a better director can do Transformers 2! Ridley, you out there? :)

Hear, hear!

This pompous windbag can do whatever the hell he wants. If the studio wants another Transformers movie, they'll get it.

What a joke.

Either way, everything will probably end up on one format or the other in the long run.

What a F&^KTARD!

Oh here we go...