Anyone here succumbed to 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray?

[Jay 37,281]

He's talking about the film, not the score

[JoeinAR 1,949]

4 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

It's not the worst score to own two copies of!

4K not score. And I double checked. I do not have it.

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

3 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

4K not score. And I double checked. I do not have it.

 

 

Then I recommend getting the score.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

My score buying days are few. I will get Indy 5 assuming John or Harrison live to finish it. I will buy JNH's Beasts three. I will be open to Brian Tyler and Ben Wallfisch scores.

[rough cut 1,714]

Amateur philosophy hour... Help me to get clarity on a thought about streaming vs physical media, and why physical media is dying.

 

"Streaming is more convenient" you say. Yes, but is there more to it? Has that convenience also changed our pattern for what we want to watch - especially if you have grown up with streaming?

 

Do growing up with availability and abundance of content affect the desire for repeat viewings? Do growing up with access to streaming libraries diminish the desire to buy physical media?

 

I get that convenience and availability is a big part of the success of streaming. We don't "need" to buy movies anymore. It's all online! So naturally, a shift in the market has changed the consumers' behavior. Nothing new under the sun. But just for fun, I started to thinking about the mechanics behind our behavior of "needing" (or "not needing") to own a physical movie. Or rather, to "return" to a movie we've already seen.

 

How has the shift from physical to streaming actually changed that "need"?

 

Some background...

 

I have Netflix, HBO, Disney+ etc... and I love the sheer magnitude of the content available. Although it can be frustrating sometimes when I movie I want to watch isn't available, we've gotten so used to everything being just "a click away". So for that I have my physical movies at hand. Even so, I wouldn't want go back to living without streaming media.

 

There are certain movies I can go back to again and again. Predator, Alien, Deep Blue Sea... It's like a visit from a good friend. For those of you who know what I'm talking about, insert yout own favorites here, you know the drill.

 

So, even though I enjoy streaming, I still haven't given up buying movies on disc. I'm wondering if it is because I am a child of my time (the 80s) - and more specifically if my behavior (to want to buy movies) is a function of the environment I grew up in. And I'd like to be a little specific. What behavior? What environment?

 

As all good behavior theories, we have to go back to the childhood - so to draw a conclusion I want to compare how I grew up with how kids today grow up.

 

Growing up, "good" televised content was sparse and I guess I just watched what I had available on VHS. I'd watch my favorite movies over and over. I have probably seen Star Wars and Superman over a hundred times each due to those circumstances.

 

And going back to movies that I enjoy is a behavior I still exhibit today.

 

So the hypothesis is this:

 

Probably, that behavior comes from having grown up with only two (!) channels and a limited VHS-collection of movies, of which almost all were recorded from the TV. Kids growing up today will never understand the lack of content. There's always something "on". So I guess that kids growing up with streaming doesn't have need to "go back", it has been replaced by "what's new".

 

Correct?

 

And if that's the case, that change in the environment (due to the change in the market) has affected our behavior which could explain why physical media dying off in a deeper way, rather than just saying that "streaming is convenient".

 

Why watch a movie that you've already seen?

 

And running with that thought, it makes you wonder if there'll be less "classics" in the future, if repeat viewings of a single film becomes a less frequently exhibited behavior.

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

Now say that in ten words or less.

[rough cut 1,714]

Yeah sorry, it became a bit long 😂

 

Um, skip the middle I guess?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

1 hour ago, rough cut said:

Yeah sorry, it became a bit long 😂

 

Um, skip the middle I guess?

A bit?

 

I want physical media. i am tactile forward person. 

The joy of a movie is more than the movie itself. There is more to the story. Tell me physical media does that in one easy package. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

52 minutes ago, rough cut said:

So the hypothesis is this:

 

Probably, that behavior comes from having grown up with only two (!) channels and a limited VHS-collection of movies, of which almost all were recorded from the TV. Kids growing up today will never understand the lack of content. There's always something "on". So I guess that kids growing up with streaming doesn't have need to "go back", it has been replaced by "what's new".

 

Correct?

 

 

Sounds plausible. I know when I was a kid, movies were a luxury that often weren't easy to get to see. That made them into something special.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

 

1 hour ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

Sounds plausible. I know when I was a kid, movies were a luxury that often weren't easy to get to see. That made them into something special.

 

This is true. Cinema just doesn't feel special any more. Even seeing films in the cinema isn't what it used to be b/c of their ubiquity in so many other formats.  Everything is on demand and it's just an endless wall of "content".  When you were a kid, the scarcity is a big part of what made it special.

 

There’s also the fact that pretty much every film and song ever made is available instantly, but part of it is that Hollywood just forgot why people went to movies in the first place. When a depressing as f*ck film like Nomadland wins best picture in a pandemic year when all people want is escape, you know Hollywood has lost their way.

 

 

[Chen G. 3,943]

2 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

When a depressing as f*ck film like Nomadland wins best picture in a pandemic year when all people want is escape, you know Hollywood has lost their way.

 

Dunno if "escape" is necessarily right, either.

 

Truly great movies go through depression to finally provide transcendence.

[rough cut 1,714]

31 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

A bit?

Yeah, sorry ‘bout that. 

 

31 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

I want physical media. i am tactile for person. 

I’d say there are more pieces to the puzzle than what I’ve written, both for keeping up buying physical as well as for stopping.

 

Otherwise it’d be even longer. 

 

Just thought it might add an interesting dimension to the discussion of why/why not.

 

19 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

Sounds plausible. I know when I was a kid, movies were a luxury that often weren't easy to get to see. That made them into something special.

 

Yes, exactly. However, I guess the vast majority is happy with streaming - obviously, otherwise we wouldn’t see the market shift - and that means most people (70s-, 80s- and 90s-gen:era included) are happy with it, even though sometimes they aren’t able to find their “favorite” movies online and available.

 

I guess that’s what separates an old school movie buff from the general public.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

I remember as a kid watching the Oscars the night Braveheart won, and then later Gladiator and Return of the King. That was pure magic, and it made the people who made those films seem like magicians. 

 

Now instead of reaching for the stars, we've got a face in the mud. 

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

5 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Truly great movies go through depression to finally provide transcendence.

 

Yeah, we've all seen Braveheart.

[Chen G. 3,943]

24 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Yeah, we've all seen Braveheart.

 

24 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

I remember as a kid watching the Oscars the night Braveheart won, and then later Gladiator and Return of the King.

 

One of the greatest examples of this ever.

 

Braveheart is not an escapist film by any possible stretch of the imagination. Never in watching it do I say "I want to live in that world." Rather, I'm constantly aware that the lives these characters live are terrible, full of opression, pestillence, death, brutality, corruption, grime, cold and whatever else, and it all just goes from bad to worse. But then AT THE END there is triumph. Both the triumph of Wallace's will, and then the triumph that he inspires the Bruce to lead his compatriots to.

 

That's EXACTLY the kind of thing people need to get through tough times: not to escape to a place where bad things don't or rarely happen, only to then be flooded back with the same bad things once you leave the cinema; but to go to worlds where bad, indeed terrible things DO happen, repeatedly, but are endured and ultimately surpassed.

 

Our contemporary movies either forget to put the triumph bit into the film (hence just being depressing) OR they forget to (or don't have the guts to try and be) depressing for a major part of their runtime.

 

24 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

I remember as a kid watching the Oscars the night Braveheart won, and then later Gladiator and Return of the King.

 

And Titanic! And I would even suggest that The Silence of the Lambs belongs here; not a big spectacle, certainly, but still very much a working-class man's film, with gunshots and horrors and thrills. Not some muted artsy drama film for the people in their ivory tower to savour.

 

Braveheart and The Return of the King are perhaps the most astounding winners of the bunch. The latter, for being a serialized fantasy film; the former, for being a 90s summer action film. I mean, it has everything: an revenge plot, the sidekick, the comic-relief, the female hostage, the evil villain - thus far it reads like Die Hard. By comparison, Gladiator is a bit more stately, and it was a Christmas release.

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

30 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

This is true. Cinema just doesn't feel special any more. Even seeing films in the cinema isn't what it used to be b/c of their ubiquity in so many other formats.  Everything is on demand and it's just an endless wall of "content".  When you were a kid, the scarcity is a big part of what made it special.

 

I guess it's still scarce some places. Everyone who longs for that special feeling should relocate to North Korea.

[rough cut 1,714]

Nah, nothing wrong with nostalgia.

 

It’s good for you (look it up). 😊

[Chen G. 3,943]

I'm not a particularly nostalgic person.

 

I do think our blockbusters just don't have the nerve to be sad enough for long enough. The sad moments in our blockbusters are just that: moments, that come and go. Its not the heartbreak of Murron's death, or the sheer depression of the loss at Falkirk.

 

Our movies are too gooddamn lighthearted!

[rough cut 1,714]

Too long, too woke...

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

5 minutes ago, rough cut said:

Nah, nothing wrong with nostalgia.

 

 

I know.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Almost all film is escapism, Braveheart included.

 

@Thorand I settled this a few years ago.

[Chen G. 3,943]

To me, escapism is a "I wish I was actually there."

 

You can get that in lighter fare: much of Star Wars is kinda that; Willow, Indy, too; most the MCU; certainly, the Shire and Rivendell parts (or the Erebor prologue) of the Middle Earth films, although not much else.

 

I never get that in Braveheart; I barely get it in Gladiator. You get that in Titanic for the first half, and then it turns on itself (literally).

 

I suppose a better way to put it is that all (good) films are transportative, which is not the same as escapist.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

1 hour ago, JoeinAR said:

A bit?

 

I want physical media. i am tactile for person. 

The joy of a movie is more than the movie itself. There is more to the story. Tell me physical media does that in one easy package. 

 

1 hour ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

Yeah, we've all seen Braveheart.

No we haven't

 

Willow no....ugh

[Koray Savas 2,251]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

To me, escapism is a "I wish I was actually there."

 

You can get that in lighter fare: much of Star Wars is kinda that; Willow, Indy, too; most the MCU; certainly, the Shire and Rivendell parts (or the Erebor prologue) of the Middle Earth films, although not much else.

 

I never get that in Braveheart; I barely get it in Gladiator. You get that in Titanic for the first half, and then it turns on itself (literally).

 

I suppose a better way to put it is that all (good) films are transportative, which is not the same as escapist.

Escapism is literally wanting to “escape” your reality through entertainment or fantasy. Any movie can be escapism if it achieves that end goal. 

[Chen G. 3,943]

Escape your reality would imply escaping into a better one; a more fanciful more, more fantastical, more eventful, perhaps.

 

Very few of us indeed live in a reality that isn’t better than the reality of Braveheart or Gladiator. They’re transportative, not escapist.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

3 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Escape your reality would imply escaping into a better one; a more fanciful more, more fantastical, more eventful, perhaps.

 

Very few of us indeed live in a reality that isn’t better than the reality of Braveheart or Gladiator. They’re transportative, not escapist.

That’s simply not the definition of the word. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Director’s Edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture  set to be Fully Restored.

 

Quote

The film will be prepared for presentation in 4K Ultra HD with Dolby Vision™ high dynamic range (HDR) and a new Dolby Atmos® soundtrack. The restoration is expected to take 6-8 months and will launch with an exclusive window on Paramount+.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the SFX for the Director's Edition were originally rendered in SD, so I imagine they'll need to completely redo those. Will be fantastic to see the best Trek movie and Persis Khambatta's (RIP) sexy bald head in 4K HDR and hear the best Trek score in Dolby Atmos.

[Jay 37,281]

They don't have to be recreated actually, they were originally created in high def but only rendered in SD; they finally found the data again they thought they had lost and can now re-render them in 4K.

 

See here:

 

 

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Motion_Picture_-_The_Director's_Edition_(DVD)

 

Quote

A high-definition Blu-ray version of the Directors Edition was reported on 30 April 2013 for release. The announced release date proved to be premature though, as it turned out that Paramount Pictures had failed to maintain ownership over the CGI elements that were added to the Director's Edition. Former employee Adam Lebowitz of Foundation Imaging has reported that all these elements were left on the company servers when they were auctioned off after the company went out of business shortly after having completed the Director's Edition commission, which would mean that the studio has to painstakingly recreate all these elements.  Still, his former Foundation colleague, Robert Bonchune, strongly indicated that these elements are still in existence, as some ex-employees had made backups, including Bonchune, of all the Star Trek files on their own computers, and could be made available to the studio if they were so inclined.

 

&

 

Quote

In 2017, it was one of the co-producers of the Director's Edition, David C. Fein, who has confirmed Bonchune's assessment – incidentally having already mentioned it in the 2007 StarTrek.com podcast – , by stating it was he who still had all the original digital effects elements available for remastering to Blu-ray standards. "We have all that we need. Would I like a few more pieces... sure. But we have everything we need," stated Fein, "All of the shots in the film were created with HD in mind so the quality of the models and elements were much higher than the SD renderings. We have everything, and when the time is right, we'll use them. Again, there is no truth that anything is missing." Fein also confirmed that a Blu-ray release was put on the backburner as "Paramount has yet to green light the project. We've had some discussions," adding that "it'll happen, the only question is when are we going to go ahead with it". As of 2018 though, the status of a Blu-ray release remained yet unknown, and as a result, only the original, theatrical version has seen release in high-definition versions. Nonetheless, preliminary talks were reported by both Trekcore and TrekMovie.com to have resumed in July 2019 for a remastered release, albeit for a 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray one.

 

&

Quote

On 7 July 2021, it became clear that the talks had been concluded, when a 4K UHD of the "Director's Edition" was officially announced for a 2022 release exclusive to Paramount+ for a period of time. The original Fein, Matessino, and Dochterman restoration team were again signed for that project's oversight.

 

[Holko 9,499]

9 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

and hear the best Trek score

Careful with that.

 

1 minute ago, Jay said:

They don't have to be recreated actually, they were originally created in high def but only rendered in SD; they finally found the data again they thought they had lost and can now re-render them in 4K.

That's pretty cool!

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

7 minutes ago, Jay said:

They don't have to be recreated actually, they were originally created in high def but only rendered in SD; they finally found the data again they thought they had lost and can now re-render them in 4K.

 

See here:

 

 

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Motion_Picture_-_The_Director's_Edition_(DVD)

 

Ah OK. For years it had been reported that only SD renderings of those SFX had been available. I wasn't aware that had changed, so that's a surprise (though a welcome one to be sure).

 

 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Nick is correct. STTMP is the best trek score. MG are the worst. Horner's is 2nd best. 

STTMP is simply one of the all-time great film scores. 

[Jay 37,281]

12 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Ah OK. For years it had been reported that only SD renderings of those SFX had been available. I wasn't aware that had changed, so that's a surprise (though a welcome one to be sure).

 

I never knew until yesterday either!  It's great news.

[A24 4,326]

 

Are they really that good?! (the PQ, of course)

[crocodile 7,983]

3 hours ago, AC1 said:

 

Are they really that good?! (the PQ, of course)

There's so much doubt in you, my child. Why are you punishing yourself this much. Accept the lord into your heart as he can't do wrong. 

 

Karol

 

[A24 4,326]

Interestig about the reviewer is that TDK is his least favorite and I can't disagree with him.

 

 

Alex - opening a can of worms

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

Haven't seen any of them.

[A24 4,326]

Have you seen anything outside Jurassic Park and sequels?

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

Haven't seen most of the sequels.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

2 hours ago, AC1 said:

Interestig about the reviewer is that TDK is his least favorite and I can't disagree with him.

 

 

Alex - opening a can of worms

 

I agree with both of you. I much prefer the character driven approach of Batman Begins & The Dark Knight Rises to the plot-driven middle film.  Definitely a minority opinion, since most people seem to regard TDK as some kind of masterpiece.  I like it well enough, but rarely return to it.

 

In any event, yes the 4K's look fantastic.

 

Nick - who prefers opening Pandora's box to a can of worms.

[Jurassic Shark 12,024]

With a can of worms you can at least catch fish.

[Holko 9,499]

23 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

I much prefer the character driven approach of Batman Begins & The Dark Knight Rises to the plot-driven middle film.

I didn't watch TDKR but I sure preferred BB over TDK.

[A24 4,326]

BB is the least preachy and moralistic of the bunch. 

[rough cut 1,714]

I also agree that BB > TDK.

 

Maybe it wasn’t such a can of worms.

[rough cut 1,714]

Some time ago there was a discussion regarding the cover for Jaws 4K.

 

On 4/24/2020 at 9:56 AM, JTWfan77 said:

A better artwork choice for Spain at least:

 

 

I came across this photo by a guy called Euan Rannachan.

 

 

I almost wouldn’t mind if over the one we got.

 

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

So apparently Kurosowa's masterpiece Ran is getting the 4K treatment. Let's hope this leads to the Japanese master's other classics getting the same. Let's also hope Kurosowa didn't use black bars when filming this.

 

 

[crocodile 7,983]

I'll have it this afternoon. It's out for fir delivery. 

 

Karol

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Just now, crocodile said:

I'll have it this afternoon. It's out fir delivery. 

 

Karol

 

You sir are a man of impeccable taste.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

On 7/14/2021 at 9:40 AM, AC1 said:

BB is the least preachy and moralistic of the bunch. 

ie: worst.

 

The cgi is not good.

[A24 4,326]

A lot of the effects aren't even CGI. Nolan doesn't like to overuse it. Anyway, the SFX of BB are good enough for me. When I think of the best Nolan Batman, I don't even think of SFX. 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

When I think Batman I think Micheal Keaton