Spider-man 3.1 finally?!

[ItchyWebShooter]

Sony really sucks, don't they?

Indubitably.

 

[Krystal]

Indubitably.

"...as coroner I must aver I thoroughly examined it and not only does Sony merely suck it really quite sincerely sucks."

 

[henzINNIT]

So we're talking what, a 0.2% chance this is happening by now? The source that started it all has gone back and erased it. I used to wonder how something so specific could have been put up by mistake, but there is no question that someone has deliberately scrubbed it now, and that can only mean it was incorrect.

I'd love to know how this happened, however I don't imagine Sony will even release any kind of statement on these now that we're looking at just another repackaged cash-in. At least Sony are still failing with the response to that god awful Emoji movie. That studio should die already.

 

[Krystal]

Well, the actual Sony site still lists it a part of the "Legacy" set. If that means it really exists or not I don't know, but the way they have (mis)-handled the release announcement is just pathetic.
Tomorrow being 26 days from release and to ignore the fans frustration about the lack of details of the contents of the sets is disgusting.
And if they are truly unaware that anybody is confused or annoyed at the lack information -- that's even worse. That would show complete incompetence of how to handle a home video release in 2017.

Seriously, Blu-rays and DVDs are announced usually 5-8 weeks before street date. Did some dudes
"List of things to do -- release announcement for new Spider-Man sets"
-- get coffee spilled on it and throw away?

 

[henzINNIT]

Well, the actual Sony site still lists it a part of the "Legacy" set. If that means it really exists or not I don't know, but the way they have (mis)-handled the release announcement is just pathetic.
Tomorrow being 26 days from release and to ignore the fans frustration about the lack of details of the contents of the sets is disgusting.
And if they are truly unaware that anybody is confused or annoyed at the lack information -- that's even worse. That would show complete incompetence of how to handle a home video release in 2017.

Seriously, Blu-rays and DVDs are announced usually 5-8 weeks before street date. Did some dudes
"List of things to do -- release announcement for new Spider-Man sets"
-- get coffee spilled on it and throw away?

You mean this link?

http://bd-dvd.sonypictures.jp/fr/fr/displayGoodsDetail.do?goodsCode=BPBH-1154

Cause it's gone from here too. There will be no announcement. It looks extremely likely that this re-release will feature nothing new but a Homecoming fluff piece with Stan Lee.

 

[Krystal]

Thanks for finding that out.
If it ever existed -- they probably pulled it until next year when the solo Venom movie comes out.

 

[Ivan Drago]

RIP Spider-Man 3.1.

 

[Krystal]

Actually it appears the timeline may have been altered and it never really existed. In some alternate universe you can watch 3.1 and then pop in Spider-Man 4.

 

[PeterBenParker]

[YT]GxBdINABv0s[/YT]

To drive it home further..

 

[The Joker]

^ Lol that's the guy who threatened to sue this forum a few years ago.

 

[carpenter82]

[YT]GxBdINABv0s[/YT]

To drive it home further..

As far as this video is concerned I'm more upset about the fact that Sony replaced the font of the Raimi trilogy to look like The Amazing Spider-Man films. Other than that I agree with you guys. How do you get something so specific wrong? Get it together Sony.

I'm one of the few fans of the film, and I honestly don't see a new cut making the film any better. Having said that, I do have problems with it. However, those issues are so integral to the plot that I don't see them ever being removed in any new cut.

 

[Dominate426]

[YT]GxBdINABv0s[/YT]

To drive it home further..

Doesn't really mean anything since Spider-Man 2.1 is left out as well.

 

[hbenthow]

It looks extremely likely that this re-release will feature nothing new but a Homecoming fluff piece with Stan Lee.

That page at least describes the discs as containing some extras that were on the DVDs but weren't present on the Blu-ray releases (such as "Interwoven: The Women of Spider-Man", listed on that page as "Women Who Loved Peter").

 

[ItchyWebShooter]

The nerve of Sony to slap that TASM font on the Raimi Trilogy. Ugh.

Overall, I think we can all agree... SUCK FONY.

 

[Dominate426]

I really wish Sony would just come out and say if we're getting 3.1 or not. This is getting extremely frustrating.

 

[PeterBenParker]

Doesn't really mean anything since Spider-Man 2.1 is left out as well.

It's not, at least on physical disc. 2.1 is included on the Spider-Man 2 disc. The Spider-Man 3 'extra' disc is just bonus features.

 

[Krystal]

It's over.

 

[Dominate426]

It's not, at least on physical disc. 2.1 is included on the Spider-Man 2 disc. The Spider-Man 3 'extra' disc is just bonus features.

I was talking about the video where the guy basically jumped to the conclusion that there won't be no Spider-Man 3.1 since it wasn't included in the Legacy Collection on Vudu even though Spider-Man 2.1 isn't included in the collection as well (I don't even think 2.1 is available on Vudu at all).

 

[DocLathropBrown]

It's over.

As Rocky Balboa said: "ain't nothin' over 'til it's over."

Yeah, they altered the specs to remove mention of 3.1--but the fact that it made it into an official product description to begin with is significant. That can't happen by mistake.

There's two options--either it was going be included and it was yanked at the last minute, or it is going to be included and they decided to lock up the spoilers. We won't know for sure until, perhaps, the discs are in our hands. The running time is still 660 minutes. That still includes the reputed 137 minutes of 3.1.

To begin with, it was listed as a bonus feature on Spider-Man 3, and not hyped. Who knows why. This situation may be why we haven't gotten the US press release yet--maybe it was going to be included and they got a last minute injunction from Sam Raimi or something, who refused permission to market his involvement? Who knows.

But like I said, to have been written into an official product description doesn't happen on accident or by foul play. Something strange is going on here, and whether we get 3.1 or not, this is proof that it exists... even if it isn't finished or is never seen.

 

[Krystal]

IT IS OVER. Do we need a certified letter explaining it?
Ok. It probably exists, but it's not coming out. So big deal.

 

[henzINNIT]

As Rocky Balboa said: "ain't nothin' over 'til it's over."

Yeah, they altered the specs to remove mention of 3.1--but the fact that it made it into an official product description to begin with is significant. That can't happen by mistake.

There's two options--either it was going be included and it was yanked at the last minute, or it is going to be included and they decided to lock up the spoilers. We won't know for sure until, perhaps, the discs are in our hands. The running time is still 660 minutes. That still includes the reputed 137 minutes of 3.1.

To begin with, it was listed as a bonus feature on Spider-Man 3, and not hyped. Who knows why. This situation may be why we haven't gotten the US press release yet--maybe it was going to be included and they got a last minute injunction from Sam Raimi or something, who refused permission to market his involvement? Who knows.

But like I said, to have been written into an official product description doesn't happen on accident or by foul play. Something strange is going on here, and whether we get 3.1 or not, this is proof that it exists... even if it isn't finished or is never seen.

This is the thing that will haunt me. Such a low-key, bizarrely specific "error" just HAS to mean something. At this point, it can't help but feel like we're never going to know happened, let alone get the mythic 3.1 cut. Maybe it's an epic troll on the 20 or so people who noticed. If that's the case, I don't understand Japanese humour.

Regarding the 137... Is there anything else that could add up to? Maybe it's the combined bonus feature length or something. I dunno.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

IT IS OVER. Do we need a certified letter explaining it?

So you have the set in your hands and can confirm it?

Beside that, it's just a movie, dude. Calm down. If we get it, cool, if not, oh well. You can't deny anything I said in my previous post, either. I'm dealing in logical analysis--I'm not saying it IS coming, I'm merely raising the point that there is NO confirmation.

It doesn't look likely but it still ISN'T confirmed. Do you need a certified letter explaining that?

 

[DocLathropBrown]

This is the thing that will haunt me. Such a low-key, bizarrely specific "error" just HAS to mean something. At this point, it can't help but feel like we're never going to know happened, let alone get the mythic 3.1 cut.

Regarding the 137... Is there anything else that could add up to? Maybe it's the combined bonus feature length or something. I dunno.

A set's listed running time is only including the movies, not bonus features. The runtime listing for the Spider-Man 3 bonus disc (given since it's a disc of its own) is still listing 486 minutes--which the Japanese press release explicitly said included the 137 runtime of Spider-Man 3.1.

This reads like a backpedaling to hide the inclusion of 3.1, since the numbers still suggest it's being included. If it really isn't coming, then expect the runtime numbers (660 minutes and 486 minutes for the movies and bonus disc respectively) to change also. But they haven't yet.

 

[Krystal]

LOL. Yeah, relax. It's a 10,000 to 1 it's going to come out on June 13.

I don't need it in my hand to know the odds are astronomical against it. And yes, it probably exists and they pulled it for some reason -- most likely to save for the Venom movie release.
So we can get excited again maybe next year if that movie gets mde and they use it to promote Venom.

Yesterday Sony announced Trainspotting 2 for June 13 release and a few days before, they announced they announced Leon, the Professional and the Fifth Element re-releases for JULY 11.
They are already announcing movies that are coming out a month later.

Maybe they will announce it tomorrow or Monday or next Tuesday or next Wednesday but it 's not going to contain something as compelling as a recut of SM3 and be treated that way.

 

[Dominate426]

Something that doesn't sit well with me regarding Spider-Man 3.1 (besides the lack of info) is that 137 running time. That's gotta be a typo or something and they meant for it to say 157 Minutes. Spider-Man 3 had 17 minutes cut from the actual movie and 139+17=156 with it rounding out to 157 since movie studios like to add another minute onto the movie's run time on the back cover on the DVDs/Blu Ray (ex: The Blu Ray/DVD back covers say that Spider-Man 2.1 is 136 Minutes even though the actual movie clocks out at 135 minutes and the original Spider-Man 2 DVD says 128 even though it's 127 mins). As for the 660 Minutes, anybody could've came up with that after adding all the run times for 1/2/2.1/3 and 3.1.