Finally Starting to Break Down...

[Angrboda]

I think upgrading your TV was likely prudent. A few years ago, my A/V receiver which was over 30 yeasr old went belly up. There was a tight fit between its connection types and the rest of my equipment, and I found that trying to remain backward compatible would have cost me money that would have been better spent upgrading the other equipment, so that I could benefit from less expensive modern equipment. The one thing I would caution is to make sure that your new TV is capable of displaying in 1080p and that you are actually getting that resolution with your combination (there's usually an "info" function in setup or on the remote that will display the info, sometimes labeled "display"). A lot of the smaller flatscreen televisions (40" and under) have a maximum resolution of 720p.

I would have inclined toward Philips, as I've had excellent experience with multiple Philips DVD players, combining rich feature sets, compatibility, and bargain price. Samsung is a good name, too, though. My aim when I went to purchase a Blu-ray player was to spend a little more than the cheapest, but I didn't follow through. I recently looked at cheap players to buy one for the bedroom, and my impression was that all the bargain players that I looked at had hidden gotchas that could only be discovered by a thorough reading of the reviews or personal experience. So I would recommend if you don't keep the Samsung, spend a little more than necessary, and get one with wifi built in. (Your Smart TV probably has Netflix built in, but Best Buy is selling the Google Chromecast HDMI dongle, with a $35 Netflix credit, for $35. Unfortunately, they sold out rather quickly, but might restock.)

I've built up a fairly good sized Blu-ray collectuion, but in my opinion, few titles command a premium over the cost of the same title on DVD, perhaps only 1 in 10 prospective titles, or less. (Checking half.com for used copies of BDR/DVD titles frequently yields good bargains.) That being said, titles I'd recommend are: Marvel Avengers, Iron Man 2, The Matrix, Jane Eyre (2011), No Country For Old Men, Serenity, and Rashomon (I haven't actually watched the Rashomon Blu-ray yet, but they made the Blu-ray off a specially chosen print and did substantial work in the conversion; I've seen screen caps, and they are a substantial improvement over the 2002 Criterion DVD release). Again, I haven't watched them, but the David Attenborough documentaries "Planet Earth" and "Blue Planet" are supposed to be excellent (see half.com; don't get the one narrated by Oprah). I own "Planet Earth" but haven't watched it. I've also seen his "The Life Of Mammals" and highly recommend it, though it doesn't appear to be on Blu-ray. I also have some "background" Blu-ray discs such as ocean reefs, HD train documentaries, aquariums, and HD fireplaces. The fireplace one is a favorite.

One thing that I've found is that many inexpensive Blu-ray titles are little more than upconversions or lazy conversions which don't result in improved quality, and in some cases actually make things worse. An example is the original Terminator Blu-ray. The quality is fine, but the print they based it on was significantly degraded in places, resulting in the type of noise and specks you might see in an old print being viewed in the theater. I've also picked up things like a double title of "The African Queen"/"Casablanca" and the African Queen in this copy is no better than the DVD copy. The same with my (older) copy of Top Gun. I think the most impressive thing in Blu-ray, to me, is the improved sound on many newer titles; unfortunately, on cheap conversions, the sound is the same as on DVD. On the other hand, there are some surprises; the Blu-ray of Hitchcock's Rebecca reveals a wealth of detail and nuance to the acters' performances which isn't present in the DVD copy.