Music has been proven to be indistinguishable. Not the same for video.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tom Hanks Discusses 'Heartbreaking' Shift of WWII Film Greyhound From Theatrical Blockbuster to Apple TV+ Exclusive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure what theater you are going to, but I can't even remember the last time I so much as saw a baby in a movie theater, much less heard one crying. If this happened people would complain and the theater staff would ask that person to take the baby out. I'm not aware of anywhere this would just be allowed to go on and disturb a show.
It’s the opposite he invested a lot of money in this film and couldn’t release it wide. Apple was the highest bidder. Apple is the most valuable company in the world. Tom Hanks helps Apple but he’s far from make or breakk
A basic 4K HDR TV is not remotely equivalent to the experience Hanks is referring to, even if the home environment does have certain advantages for some. We all know that most people who watch this film will watch it on screens that pale in connection with cinema screens, and with highly suboptimal sound. Equally important from an artistic perspective is the fact that people tend to watch movies at home with interruptions, side discussions, pausing/unpausing, changing the volume during the film, etc. No one is suggesting they shouldn't be allowed to do those things, but I don't think it's unreasonable for Hanks to be disappointed that his film won't get a theatrical run that minimizes this sort of thing.
As an aside, I don't think Apple was wrong here, and I don't read Hanks as asserting otherwise. Right now, sending films straight to streaming makes sense from a public health perspective (and probably from a financial one as well). I interpret his comments as simply grieving that his film didn't get the theatre run that it deserves, and I think his disappointment is more than justified, even if Apple made the right call.
Last edited:
“For example, Apple original "See" is streamed at the highest bitrate on the platform, at an average of 29Mb/s video bitrate and a 41Mb/s peak. That's almost twice the video bitrate of a typical HD Blu-ray disc and around half of a typical UHD Blu-ray disc.”
How to Change Apple TV+ Streaming Quality on iPhone and iPad
Apple TV+ has been praised for offering content in the highest streaming quality provided by any video streaming service. The only problem is that...
www.macrumors.com
So video stream quality lies right between that of HD Blu-Ray and UHD Blu-Ray quality. That would still seem to lend itself to excellent PQ.
"... “an absolute heartbreak. I don’t mean to make angry my Apple overlords, but..."
disney+ is kicking atv+ in the rear - atv has nothing compelling for me to pay for
tom hanks is a good guy and his movie looks good
too bad atv+ is directing hanks to sit in front of a blank wall - it should be the other way around
i'll keep on with disney+ and free roku tofu
go mandalorian, marvel, star wars, etc.
disney+ is kicking atv+ in the rear - atv has nothing compelling for me to pay for
tom hanks is a good guy and his movie looks good
too bad atv+ is directing hanks to sit in front of a blank wall - it should be the other way around
i'll keep on with disney+ and free roku tofu
go mandalorian, marvel, star wars, etc.
That’s the thing with having money: you’re not allowed to have problems anymore.
he’s clearly passionate about his work and from what we’ve heard about him he’s humble and hard working. I know that anyone in that industry is a movie theater purist. Which makes sense. He’s bemoaning the fact that this is happening for a film he’s passionate about. I get it. I also get that he has a pretty cushy problem free life but I get his point
It will be a long time before I'll be entering a movie theater with many hundreds of people around me.
Question for those calling Hanks a whiner- have you ever poured 10 years of your life, heart, and soul into a project only to have it come to a fizzle? That’s the fear for Hanks. For any artist, the end goal is not the finished art product—it’s the sharing of the art, the experience of it by others, and the impact that it makes in their lives. When it risks passing into obscurity unnoticed (by the many who don’t have Apple TV+ or don’t pay attention to streaming movies), and for those who do watch it, it will be under-experienced (the overwhelming majority don’t have theater-level setup—and let’s be real, many if not most will watch it on a mobile device), how can that not be a heartbreak? It’s like a chef making a beautiful meal and half of it never makes it to the table and the other half gets over salted, but multiply that times 10 years’ worth. Pandemic or no pandemic, 10 years of your heart is a lot to lose. For someone like Hanks it has little to nothing to do with money.
Also, he merely mentions how he feels almost in passing as an answer to a question in an interview. It’s not the desperate cry to the world for pity that some are making it out to be.
Also, he merely mentions how he feels almost in passing as an answer to a question in an interview. It’s not the desperate cry to the world for pity that some are making it out to be.
Last edited:
Thank you for getting it.
I work in Hollywood and most people don't understand the amount of work and collaboration takes to make a movie. Heck, even certain advertising commercials are huge endeavors.
I don’t work in Hollywood but I run my own motion graphics business and the amount of dedication that goes into advertising is hard enough but I have a lot of friends who work on movies (mainly UI screen graphics) and they put in crazy hours and the main joy for them is when they see their work on a big screen.
You folks are reading far too much negativity into his comments. He spent 10 years on the project. He is disappointed that events like a Global Pandemic moved its' release from the Big Screen theaters to the generally less impressive home screen. A reasonable, but above all, honest response. Don't forget, he had to sign off on the deal. I guarantee you he doesn't need the money. A real egotist, which I am sure he is not, could have rejected the streaming deal.
I'll have to disagree there, can't be a rip-off since it's free.
Plus, let’s get real. If somebody is jealous over something as preposterous as a TV setup and equate ownership to “being lucky,” they probably have bigger underlying issues. #triggered
Sorry but ‘heartbreaking’ and they way he is acting about being asked to be against a clean background is slightly silly.
People have real issues, as I’m sure he does himself; so really this should be put into perspective.
Plus ATV+ (awful name) is only £4.99 a month, anyone can easily see this movie. More then going to the cinema!
If Apple are going to make these huge deals I hope they spin ATV+ into its own app, work on a better UI and finally.. change the name. In its current state, it’s not working.
People have real issues, as I’m sure he does himself; so really this should be put into perspective.
Plus ATV+ (awful name) is only £4.99 a month, anyone can easily see this movie. More then going to the cinema!
If Apple are going to make these huge deals I hope they spin ATV+ into its own app, work on a better UI and finally.. change the name. In its current state, it’s not working.
Right, so compressed and visibly so.“For example, Apple original "See" is streamed at the highest bitrate on the platform, at an average of 29Mb/s video bitrate and a 41Mb/s peak. That's almost twice the video bitrate of a typical HD Blu-ray disc and around half of a typical UHD Blu-ray disc.”
How to Change Apple TV+ Streaming Quality on iPhone and iPad
Apple TV+ has been praised for offering content in the highest streaming quality provided by any video streaming service. The only problem is that...
So video stream quality lies right between that of HD Blu-Ray and UHD Blu-Ray quality. That would still seem to lend itself to excellent PQ.
I hope Apple can learn from this experience. They are still very young into the game, and by showing more respect to the creators, they might invite better opportunities in the future and better relationships with the movie industry.
Tom Hanks can afford to say these things out loud. Not all people in the industry can.
Tom Hanks can afford to say these things out loud. Not all people in the industry can.
Your opinion is as valid as anyone's, but at the moment, today, there is no choice. If it were up to the "masses" to delay every blockbuster until things return to "normal", or accept the best AVAILABLE alternative today, what do you think would be the answer?
With all due respect to Mr. Hanks, I would prefer to stay home and watch movies on my 4K 60-inch flatscreen, with my Dolby stereo headphones on, rather than sit in a theater with people munching away on their popcorn, whispering and farting all through the movie. It has just become too expensive and the experience just isn't what it used to be.