DVDizzy Forum

yamiiguy wrote:

SWillie! wrote: Yes, it's been pretty much confirmed that it's a one disc blu-ray. People got angry, and have hopefully calmed down since, realizing that Disney can easily fit more onto one bluray than they have been doing.

I think people are underestimating the capacity of BD and just thinking about how they used to get 2 discs with the DVD. Pinocchio only took up 22GB and that is roughly the same length as The Lion King. I'd say that The Lion King will be 25-30GB max leaving 20GB for extras. Let's not forget either that although Pinocchio took up 22GB Disney only used 28GB of the disc, leaving 12GB empty...

Snow White used 73 GB over 2 discs.

Toy Story 3 used 80 GB but had the movie again on the second so it really used 60GB which is still above 50GB.

Beauty and the Beast used 40 GB in 1 disc without Beyond Beauty and the Classic DVD Bonus features.

Bambi's pathetic slate used 40 GB.

So, really, all is not looking well for The Lion King.

ajmrowland wrote:the 16 minutes actually includes the 8 minutes so it's just under 3 hours.

A BD-50 can have like 10 hours of HD video

I have NO IDEA where you got that idea. But a single 50GB Blu-ray disc can not hold 10 hours of true HD footage.

3 hours is about the cut off.

OH WAIT!

There is some hope yet!

Disney, after forcing us to buy Blu, according to this site , is now forcing us to buy 3D which honestly is more of a farce and something to be pissed off about than "going Blu".

Why? HD is everywhere in the US already so all you actually have to do is buy a player and with PS3s everywhere, well that's not much then.

For 3D, you have go buy all the frakkin equipment and once you're done, guess what selection you have? Purely animation and Avatar unless of course you want to indulge in post-converted non-existent crap like Alice and Clash and Airbender or cliched and desperate horrors and slashers. Fact of the matter is, there is no catalogue for 3D. So, if they are pushing us to buy it, then, f*** them. I'm sorry, but I couldn't care less for 3D in theatres now, so much less at home where I still have to wear goddamned glasses? LOL thousands of $$$$ to watch Alice in Wonderland? Even TS3, Tangled, every other animated 3D movie, is just as good in 2D and without muted colours, may be better. So waste more money on half-baked technology, but don't force people when the foundations are so weak and flimsy.

/end rant

This might be a stupid question, but how do you find all that info about how much disc space is used, BK?

I'm gonna be so happy to finally have this release in my hands! I just hope they stick the the original theatrical cut as much as possible. BatB came close, but not quite. Let's hope TLK does better!

BK wrote: Snow White used 73 GB over 2 discs.

Toy Story 3 used 80 GB but had the movie again on the second so it really used 60GB which is still above 50GB.

Beauty and the Beast used 40 GB in 1 disc without Beyond Beauty and the Classic DVD Bonus features.

Bambi's pathetic slate used 40 GB.

So, really, all is not looking well for The Lion King.

If you're only talking about the presentation of the movies, then Yamiiguy is very much correct. Both Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Bambi are rougly the same size. That one has bonus features in HD and the other doesn't, doesn't make the latter pathetic. Like I said earlier, I'd rather have them replicate the bonus features from a Laserdisc or DVD (that tend to be superior most of the time) than making new features just for the sake of having them in HD.

JDCB1986 wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:the 16 minutes actually includes the 8 minutes so it's just under 3 hours.

A BD-50 can have like 10 hours of HD video

I have NO IDEA where you got that idea. But a single 50GB Blu-ray disc can not hold 10 hours of true HD footage.

3 hours is about the cut off.

That's not true, Criterion's the Thin Red Line has roughly five hours of content on a single disc and looks absolutely amazing. Warner's release of Gone With the Wind looks great too. Anyway, this discussion shouldn't matter, since no Disney animated movie is that long, so there's plenty of room for a movie (and even many supplements in HD) on the disc.

BK wrote:OH WAIT!

There is some hope yet!

Disney, after forcing us to buy Blu, according to this site , is now forcing us to buy 3D which honestly is more of a farce and something to be pissed off about than "going Blu".

Why? HD is everywhere in the US already so all you actually have to do is buy a player and with PS3s everywhere, well that's not much then.

For 3D, you have go buy all the frakkin equipment and once you're done, guess what selection you have? Purely animation and Avatar unless of course you want to indulge in post-converted non-existent crap like Alice and Clash and Airbender or cliched and desperate horrors and slashers. Fact of the matter is, there is no catalogue for 3D. So, if they are pushing us to buy it, then, f*** them. I'm sorry, but I couldn't care less for 3D in theatres now, so much less at home where I still have to wear goddamned glasses? LOL thousands of $$$$ to watch Alice in Wonderland? Even TS3, Tangled, every other animated 3D movie, is just as good in 2D and without muted colours, may be better. So waste more money on half-baked technology, but don't force people when the foundations are so weak and flimsy.

/end rant

I don't understandh ow they are forcing you to buy anything when they have a DVD, Blu Ray, and 3D copy of the movie avaliable?

^ exactly. If you don't like something, don't buy it. Especially when the alternate is available.

I know this has most likely been answered already, but does this Blu-ray included the additional footage "Morning Report" and the altered animation in later scenes like "I just Can't Wait to be King" - or is it the original theatrical version?

Also, I was watching the Special Edition DVD the other day on an HDTV and just thought 'how can this get any clearer, crisper, brighter?!'

I think it has really held up as one of the best looking DACs, even though it has always been one of my least favorites.

To be hoenst I'm sure it does include the new animoationa nd I've all been about changing things and adding to make it better, but geeze the morning report is AWFUL.

Human again was a much better sequence.

Blu-ray.com has the release date for the 2D combo pack listed as 10/4/11. Is that a confirmed/announced date or just speculation?

Whether that is the official release date or not I am not sure, but there is also a question of whether the 2D and 3D combo packs will be released on the same day. I don't see why not, as that was the case with Tangled, but a few people were discussing that on the Blu-ray.com message boards. I think it mostly stemmed from the fact that they list 10/4 for the 2D edition, but for the 3D is still says "Fall 2011."

SWillie! wrote:This might be a stupid question, but how do you find all that info about how much disc space is used, BK?

A site called CinemaSquid lists some of them.

CampbellzSoup wrote:I don't understandh ow they are forcing you to buy anything when they have a DVD, Blu Ray, and 3D copy of the movie avaliable?

3D Blu is pricier than 2D Blu, there are no coupons across the Atlantic or anywhere else for that matter.

So if they have exclusive extras on the 3D Blu, well, that is forcing you to buy it if you want it and since you need 3D equipment to see the movie in 3D you're basically paying more for something that has already been included in every other release.

And lastly it's not about having the special features in HD or SD or whatever, it's the fact that there is not much space for them. There may be different encodes or bitrates or whatever that makes Disney's releases take up more space than Thin Red Line, I don't know and if they let Snow White have say 30 GB for the movie, but Lion King only 20, well surely they have compromised something.

But it's not like there's anything you'd be missing out on if you bought the Blu-ray / DVD combo pack as opposed to the four disc 3D Blu-ray DVD combo pack, aside from a 3D Blu-ray I assume you don't want and a digital copy that you could do on your own. So isn't it cheaper still to just buy the two disc version anyhow?

BK wrote: 3D Blu is pricier than 2D Blu, there are no coupons across the Atlantic or anywhere else for that matter.

So if they have exclusive extras on the 3D Blu, well, that is forcing you to buy it if you want it and since you need 3D equipment to see the movie in 3D you're basically paying more for something that has already been included in every other release.

Well, that's not forcing you to do anything. If there are special feares on that 3D disc that you really want, buying it is up to you.
Frankly, I don't get what Disney is doing here, since 3D can be compatible with 2D. They can both fit on the same disc. But I guess people then would get confused or something.

BK wrote: And lastly it's not about having the special features in HD or SD or whatever, it's the fact that there is not much space for them. There may be different encodes or bitrates or whatever that makes Disney's releases take up more space than Thin Red Line, I don't know and if they let Snow White have say 30 GB for the movie, but Lion King only 20, well surely they have compromised something.

That was the point I was trying to make. There is plenty of room for bonus features on the same disc.
But who's to say they will compromise something? Bambi, which according to you is "compromised" is 15 GB. Snow White is 19 GB. Dumbo is 18.5 GB. With the big difference that Snow White got an extra disc for the HD features, while Bambi's were put on the same disc (again, there's plenty of room). Sleeping Beauty and Alice in Wonderland both are around 17 GB, yet one has all of the features on the same disc, and the other doesn't.
And for the modern movies the size is higher, but not that much. I can only find out what Beauty and the Beast's disc size is (not the size of the movie, since there are other features on it as well) but movies like The Princess and the Frog only takes up 26 GB of space. Even graphically more complex movies like the Toy Story movies don't take up more than 30 GB of space (respectively 21, 24 and 29 GB). So my point is, none of it matters. As long as there's a decent amount of space available, then they can fill the rest with a lot of bonus features, either in SD or HD.
But anyway, all of this is practically moot, since the disc hasn't even been released yet.

BK wrote:

SWillie! wrote:This might be a stupid question, but how do you find all that info about how much disc space is used, BK?

A site called CinemaSquid lists some of them.

CampbellzSoup wrote:I don't understandh ow they are forcing you to buy anything when they have a DVD, Blu Ray, and 3D copy of the movie avaliable?

3D Blu is pricier than 2D Blu, there are no coupons across the Atlantic or anywhere else for that matter.

So if they have exclusive extras on the 3D Blu, well, that is forcing you to buy it if you want it and since you need 3D equipment to see the movie in 3D you're basically paying more for something that has already been included in every other release.

And lastly it's not about having the special features in HD or SD or whatever, it's the fact that there is not much space for them. There may be different encodes or bitrates or whatever that makes Disney's releases take up more space than Thin Red Line, I don't know and if they let Snow White have say 30 GB for the movie, but Lion King only 20, well surely they have compromised something.

...we are talking about the film not the bonus features, and you have plenty of options your logic is just whining.

Am I the only one who's buying a movie for the film, not the extras? I really don't care if there's a lot of extra footage on it, I never watch those specials more than one time anyway. So I'm going to buy the DVD, since that one is the cheapest and all my Disney's classics are DVD's.

Mmmadelon wrote:Am I the only one who's buying a movie for the film, not the extras?

Kind of yes LOL cause most of us have the movie already, though it's HD this time (can't wait!)

I think Alice in Wonderland shows us we have nothing to fear from a single BD release. I do think Disney however are missing a beat, because from a perception point of view, 2 discs sounds better than 1.

I suspect the bulk of the special features for TLK will be presented in a "Through The Keyhole/Inside Walt's Story Meetings" type of way. And even then we can still have an extra hour or so of HD content and probably 2 or more hours of additional SD content. Any why not? I'd rather have that than the disorganised mess that was the DVD release's special features.

You know what? Disney should have saved the Virtual Vault experiment for this release, rather than the Fantasia releases, because I can honestly say, hand on heart I don't want to see any of the "classic" bonus features again!

But I would like to see deleted scenes in HD, the galleries in Disney's new interactive viewer, trailers in HD (of course) and the TV special in SD. In addition perhaps Disney can commission a new HD celebration of the stage show?

I really can't think of anything else - a interactive "Maximum Movie Mode" type presentation would essentially be a full-length "making of" (with the TV special as an archive Making of), the publicity will be present and there would also be an overview of the film's success once it left cinema screens. And I think all of that is perfectly capable of fitting on one BD.

JDCB1986 wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:the 16 minutes actually includes the 8 minutes so it's just under 3 hours.

A BD-50 can have like 10 hours of HD video

I have NO IDEA where you got that idea. But a single 50GB Blu-ray disc can not hold 10 hours of true HD footage.

3 hours is about the cut off.

*googles capacity*
wrong! It depends on the bitrate.

Obiously it depends on the bit-rate, but it also depends on the soundtrack(s). Lossless soundtracks (even compressed) take more space than lossy soundtracks. There's plenty of discs out there with around 5 hours of HD content - typically 2-2.5 hours of movie with at least one lossless soundtrack and 2-2.5 hours of "extras" with simple lossy soundtracks.

There's no reason for any of the HD supplements on The Lion King to have anything more complex than a (relatively) low DD 5.1 bitrate. Most could even be in DD 2.0.