Charles de Lauzirika wrote:Kipple wrote:I believe because the footage used did not meet the standard. It wouldn't improve the presentation, being in HD.
Not true.
Everything was shot in HD or transferred to HD for the supplements. The problem was, the Warner pipeline required that we deliver HD content a solid month or so ahead of our planned delivery date. I felt it was more important to make the content as great as it could be than to rush it in order to make the HD date. I'm sure some might disagree with me, but I'd rather have great extras in SD than so-so extras in HD.
I wouldn't disagree. I think that's why hollywood puts out total crap, in some cases. If the time wasn't taken to make a good quality documentary, who cares what it looked like in HD? It would have been crappy. Garbage in gets garbage out. This would be HD garbage, though. I'm glad you took the time to make a quality documentary instead of rushing it out to meet a deadline.