In a review of "Raging Bull" on Blu-Ray, posted today, Maltin added the following footnote:

i don't buy DVD's, so i pretty much stay out of these type conversations, but as a casual observer i definitely see a correlation between the marketing of DVD's and the SACD-DVDA-dualdisc fiasco.

the industry is always looking for ways to get people to re-spend their money, they found a goldmine in CD's when all the album people started re-buying their collections and they have been looking for a way to do more of the same ever since. i see blu-ray as the same thing....how much better can it look? just like how much better can it sound?

CD's were leaps and bounds better and more durable than vinyl, the public went for them hook line and sinker. until they find something that is exponentially better than CD's and DVDs' it will continue to be hit and miss.

This, 100%. BD is "nice" and all, but it's only a slight evolution, not a revolution.

It's certainly not worth a premium at retail.

Someday I'm going to buy every HD-DVD release at $2 each, then rip and convert them all. I've already done so with BREAKFAST CLUB and it looks spectacular.

While I did re-buy the Godfather collection on blu ray, I don't intend to rebuy my collection of DVDs like I did with CDs. I will buy new titles (and ones I haven't picked up) on Blu ray, but that's going to be it. Re-buys will be few and far between.

What's annoying is that some of the Blu-ray reissues of previously released titles lack the bonus features the original DVD had! (John Carpenter's The Thing is a great example of this. The UK Blu-ray carried over all the bonuses; go figure.) Obviously a future double-dip will happen for these titles, which makes it all the more aggravating.

I choose Blu-rays carefully compared to how I treated DVD, which was to buy almost everything.
DVD can look real good with a solid upsampling DVD player like a PS3 or a Denon 3910.

I got on my son for buying Blue Rays instead of DVDs. He can play those on his game system, but not on any of the DVD players throughout our house.

Blue Ray is a sucker bet, plain and simple.

Blu-Ray no way.

I love Blu-ray (loved HD-DVD even more) but I can see why some people refuse to upgrade to the HD product. I see the difference on my system but I have a 55" SXRD.

You can see the difference even more in a digital projection on an 119" screen.

Leonard Maltin's comments are meaningless, until he completes filling out his equipment profile

Seriously, there are so many intangibles in the equation, that there might not be a noticeable difference between DVD and Blu-Ray in certain cases. We don't know what kind of setup he is using, he could have crappy composite video cables connecting the players to the TV rendering even the best digital source poorly, or (as John G suggested) his blu-ray player may be upconverting the DVD signal to near-digital quality. For that matter, many older films have a grainy quality that even 1080p won't make look any better. And frankly, people often see what they want to see, and denial is not just a river in Egypt ...

The point is, nobody is being forced against their will to buy Blu-Ray at this point in time. People who find the video upgrade worth their investment are no different from serious music lovers who justify spending money on their passion. And since Blu-Ray players will still play regular DVD's, I don't see how anyone is required to re-buy their entire video collection for the new platform.

My HD-DVD of Breakfast Club looks amazing, but the source is still very grainy and filmlike. I wonder if it was never remastered?

That's inexcusable, with the increased storage capacity of Blu-Ray disc over conventional DVD.

My problem is basically the opposite, where many new releases are putting the lion's share of bonus features on the Blu-Ray platform, and only a portion of the bonuses on the simultaneous DVD release. So, if the extras are important enough to a consumer, they are going to pay the extra for the Blu-Ray

I have to wonder if a golden age of DVD extras (if there ever was one) has passed. The novelty of deleted scenes has certainly worn off, special effects aren't really all that special in the age of CGI, and the lion's share of commentary tracks these days are downright tedious to listen to. Is it even possible for a Blu-Ray package to generate the sort of buzz that early DVD titles such as "The Matrix" and "Austin Powers" caused? The sets I gravitate towards these days seem to be the ones specifically geared towards collectors rather than renters--the recent chronological "Three Stooges" sets, for example.

I don't own BR. My opinion is that if prices keep following, blu will gradually replace dvd due to the backwards compatibility. If prices don't continue to fall, Blu will go the way of the dodo bird (oops, I meant betamax!).

Not sure how much I trust Leonard Maltin. He also says Gregory's Girl is "slightly overrated."

What about Jessie's girl?

He wishes he had her.

Where can I find a woman like that...?