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

[pete 907]

I barely succumbed to VHS

[Jay 37,369]

On 15/11/2023 at 1:18 PM, filmmusic said:

I will wait for screenshots because I don't trust Cameron (these could be a DNR mess like T2)!

 

It has now been revealed that the DNRed 4K of T2 was a mistake.  They accidentally put the version that was DNRed to turn into a 3D version on disc, instead of the intended version.  A new edition is forthcoming.  See here.

[filmmusic 1,832]

4 hours ago, Jay said:

 

It has now been revealed that the DNRed 4K of T2 was a mistake.  They accidentally put the version that was DNRed to turn into a 3D version on disc, instead of the intended version.  A new edition is forthcoming.  See here.

Yes, I have seen that but....

Quote

With respect to Bill Hunt, he has been claiming for years that the T2 disc is wrong based solely on that title card, which ignores the numerous interviews Cameron did where Cameron specifically stated that he wanted T2 to look the way it would if he had shot it digitally today, and that’s what it looks like.

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/community/threads/bvhe-press-release-the-abyss-true-lies-aliens-titanic-avatar-and-avatar-the-way-of-the-water-4k-uhd-blu-ray.380981/page-7#post-5282137

[Jay 37,369]

Interesting! 

[crocodile 8,017]

Watched both Barbie and Oppenheimer today on UHD discs. Both are exceptionally looking discs, although from (obviously) different points of view.

 

Nolan's film definitely holds up upon rewatch, by the way. I've seen it only once at the cinema and my experience at home was just as impactful. Love or hate him, but he did exceptionally well this time, right on the heels of his worst failure (Tenet). It's not the kind of film you will watch often but it is a high mark in his resume, for sure. Definitely among his finest.

 

Karol

[Brando 1,864]

Tickets for the Abyss are now on sale! https://www.fandango.com/the-abyss-special-edition-2023-234225/movie-overview?date=2023-12-06

[1977 1,743]

Would have loved for The Abyss to have gotten a 3D transfer.

[Bayesian 1,363]

Wow. The details about the James Cameron 4K releases are a lot to take in. (After LLL's BF drop, I'm going to have to wait until well into next year to buy any of these releases, so I'm hoping they pressed a damn bunch of them.)

 

True Lies is the one movie in the group I don't think aged very well. It's also uncomfortably sexist in parts, if memory serves, so I'm ok skipping that one. Abyss, Aliens, though, are straight-up sci-fi classics and must-owns, and the Abyss 4K trailer makes the restoration look amazing.

 

Titanic... man, I dunno. I don't know how many more times in my life I'd feel the need to watch that movie. During its initial theatrical release, Titanic had an incredible scale, a vastness, that I remember had me spellbound both times I saw it on the big screen. However, a big part of that was the film grain, or filmic "look," that simply vanished after the movie got upscaled or restored or whatever for blu-ray. Suddenly, the mesmerizing pan from stern to bow of the sinking ship, with people running away from the freezing water in real time, no longer looked as impressive. It looked instead like it was shot on a set. And the upward pan and pause on a frame filled with hundreds of doomed people flailing in the sea after the ship has disappeared into the inky abyss and the camera has pulled back away from Rose... that moment, in the theater, hit me like a ton of bricks. In the cleaned-up, higher def version, though, it's just not as impressive. If the 4K brings back the filmic look, I'd be tempted one day to get it mostly for the bonus material.

 

Avatar and Avatar 2... well, here's another couple of examples of "how often am I really going to want to rewatch this?" On the other hand, I desperately want to see any and all deleted scenes showing life on dystopian Earth, and there's at least one such scene in the forthcoming 4K. My interest in this may seem weirdly specific, but I always like seeing realistic or thoughtful portrayals of potential futures (e.g. Minority Report) and obviously Cameron would have done his portrayal as plausible as possible. Also, given the lead time to make Avatar, it's likely that any such scenes were storyboarded or visualized in 2006 or 2007, meaning we're now approaching twenty years since this visioning occurred. It's a little bit like a time capsule, a nugget of futurecasting from the Inconvenient Truth era.

[GerateWohl 4,370]

12 minutes ago, Bayesian said:

True Lies is the one movie in the group I don't think aged very well. It's also uncomfortably sexist in parts, if memory serves, so I'm ok skipping that one. Abyss, Aliens, though, are straight-up sci-fi classics and must-owns, and the Abyss 4K trailer makes the restoration look amazing.

Watched True Lies again two days ago and became aware again, that you very clearly see, that in about 60% of the movie Schwarzenegger is replaced by a stunt double. I guess, in a 4K version this becomes even more obvious. So, I don't think, that this movie will benefit from a 4k edtion.

 

And the movie has less sexist than rather racist issues. It was obviously a time, when it was fun to kill arabs on screen.

[rough cut 1,714]

@Bayesian Is this a review of the 4K trailers or you’re simply watching the full movies from - let’s just say - an “alternative” source before you buy the physical product?

[Bayesian 1,363]

31 minutes ago, rough cut said:

@Bayesian Is this a review of the 4K trailers or you’re simply watching the full movies from - let’s just say - an “alternative” source before you buy the physical product?

I'm not sure I fully get your question. These movies I watched in full in theaters and then once more on DVD or bluray. Except for True Lies, which I watched twice in my life, the last time on DVD like 15 years ago or something.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

We got a PS5 earlier this year, so I've given in to the 4K madness. It's quite nice, but I think a lot of regular Blu-rays still look pretty good. That said, I've only watched a few 4K discs in full so far. But Jurassic Park and Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone both looked pretty sweet.

 

We also watched a few movies on Disney+ that were labeled as having a 4K version, but I don't think there's a way to verify what resolution you're actually watching at any given moment on Disney+, so I always find that a little iffy.

 

 

[rough cut 1,714]

3 hours ago, Bayesian said:

I'm not sure I fully get your question. These movies I watched in full in theaters and then once more on DVD or bluray. Except for True Lies, which I watched twice in my life, the last time on DVD like 15 years ago or something.

Reading your post, I first got the impression you were giving your thoughts on the new 4K transfers. Reading your post a little more carefully I see that isn’t the case.

[Jay 37,369]

On 13/11/2023 at 2:53 PM, Jay said:

I'd like to go see that!

 

AAAAAAAAAAND I forgot all about this and can't go tonight

 

Anybody from here going/went?

[Tallguy 3,398]

I work evenings. Why the hell is this on a Wednesday?

[Brando 1,864]

Super excited!! I’ve wanted to watch this for so long and this is the perfect first viewing. 10 minutes to go if it’s on time, 40ish minutes if they show trailers before.

[Jay 37,369]

Jealous!

[HunterTech 994]

The hour is too late for my (and more importantly my mother's) comfort, so I wouldn't be able to go. A great shame, since they're showing it in the premium auditorium at my local theater, which has quickly become a favorite screen of mine (having seen RotJ, Spider-Verse, and now Godzilla Minus One on it this year).

[Brando 1,864]

It was awesome!! I found out I can hold my bladder for almost 3 hours….Super cool effects, now I really want to watch the behind the scenes stuff cause I’ve heard that’s very fascinating. Plus, I got a free poster from it too!

 

[Jay 37,369]

Oh yeah, the making of doc is fantastic!

[Brando 1,864]

17 hours ago, Jay said:

Oh yeah, the making of doc is fantastic!

Is that making of doc on YT or is it a bonus feature on the disc? I looked on YT and could only find short ones, I assume the actual one is at least an hour or so.

[1977 1,743]

Under Pressure is the title of the doc and it's fantastic.

[Brando 1,864]

9 minutes ago, JTWfan77 said:

Under Pressure is the title of the doc and it's fantastic.

I assumed that was the one, but only found 1 video with that title and it was a part 1 clocking in at 9 minutes, so I figured the whole thing might not be on YT

[1977 1,743]

The doc is an hour long. I have it on my Abyss laserdisc sets (PAL and NTSC) as well as DVD.

[Tallguy 3,398]

The best part is all the interviews with Mastrantonio.

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,079]

TownerFan?

[Jay 37,369]

Yea I remember it was called "Under Pressure: Making The Abyss" and was over an hour.  I first saw it as a vhs rip of a laserdisc a friend sent me!  It was on the DVD too AFAIR

[Tallguy 3,398]

1 hour ago, Jay said:

Yea I remember it was called "Under Pressure: Making The Abyss" and was over an hour.  I first saw it as a vhs rip of a laserdisc a friend sent me!  It was on the DVD too AFAIR

 

I remember when this came out on DVD with all the features of the laser disc. It was one of the fist double discers. And people COMPLAINED that it was THIRTY DOLLARS. I said "You know I paid over a HUNDRED for the laser disc, right?" (I don't remember how much over. I just know it was insane. And clearly, so was I.)

 

3 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

TownerFan?

 

You might be misunderstanding me. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is no where to be found in that documentary. Her experience with the film was awful. (So was everyone's but I suppose it's how you look at it.)

[1977 1,743]

6 hours ago, Tallguy said:

 

I remember when this came out on DVD with all the features of the laser disc. It was one of the fist double discers. And people COMPLAINED that it was THIRTY DOLLARS. I said "You know I paid over a HUNDRED for the laser disc, right?" (I don't remember how much over. I just know it was insane. And clearly, so was I.)

 

Those were the days. I miss them. Back then it was such a niche thing to have one's favourite films on an obscure disc format called LaserDisc. Letterbox and Dolby Surround were king. Special features were awesome. TVs were bulky and back-breakingly heavy. Dave's Video had those fantastic studio days. The world was a simpler place. Happy times.

[Corellian2019 386]

On 07/12/2023 at 3:52 PM, Brando said:

I assumed that was the one, but only found 1 video with that title and it was a part 1 clocking in at 9 minutes, so I figured the whole thing might not be on YT

 

Here, with Spanish subtitles:

 

 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,537]

On 08/12/2023 at 12:28 AM, Tallguy said:

You might be misunderstanding me. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is no where to be found in that documentary. Her experience with the film was awful. (So was everyone's but I suppose it's how you look at it.)

 

Life's abyss, and then you dive.

[Alan 689]

I've got a bad feeling about this...

 

Just watching some of the newly updated master of Aliens on Apple TV. Terrible. Everything is now unnaturally smooth while also being uncannily sharp. Basically, it looks like AI images. Cameron is using Park Road Post for these remasters, Peter Jackson's post facility that created the ghoulish looking "Get Back" series. It's a shame if The Abyss ends up looking similar given that there isn't an existing Blu-ray to fall back on but I'll definitely be sticking with my existing disc for Aliens!

[Naïve Old Fart 9,537]

Thanks for the tip, @Alan.

[Jay 37,369]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Alan 689]

Actual screenshot from the newly AI remastered scene when we first see the Queen 😉

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

First reviews of the digital 4K are up.

 

Quote

The result is remarkable clarity and detail, but it is a bit jarring. Applied to Titanic, this unique remastering process feels completely appropriate. Applied to Aliens, which has always been a film with a grittier look, it takes more getting used to. The film looks almost modern now as opposed to vintage late 80s, which appears to be Cameron’s intent. On the other hand, I’ve just spent the entire morning going back and forth between the Alien Anthology Blu-ray and the new 4K Digital presentation on Vudu, Apple TV, and Movies Anywhere, and I definitely prefer the 4K (with a caveat that the forthcoming physical UHD should release improve upon it). There’s no doubt that this is James Cameron’s Aliens looking better than you’ve ever seen it before. There’s still light photochemical grain visible. There is plenty of fine image detail visible (though it’s a little less nuanced looking than the fine detail on Titanic). The color palette is vibrant, with the cool blue-gray tones it’s always had, and it’s close enough to the Blu-ray palette that you wouldn’t notice a difference unless you compared the images side-by-side. Blacks are incredibly deep, highlights are genuinely bold. This 4K image certainly isn’t perfect—it often looks a little… processed is the best word I can come up with. But the more I look at it, the more I like it, and I suspect that most fans will feel the same. But I also suspect that some viewers will really dislike it, because it’s definitely different, and I certainly appreciate that perspective too.

 

[Tallguy 3,398]

I think this weekend I'm going to finally hook up my Blu Ray player and my 4K to the same TV and try some A/B tests to find out if I can actually tell the difference.

 

We watched the Anthology disc of Alien a month or two ago and it was gorgeous.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

To be honest, I felt the Blu-ray remaster of Aliens already "updated" the look too much. It looks more like a late '00's/early '10's movie. The DVD looks much more like a movie that's actually from 1986.

[Manakin Skywalker 4,897]

This has been a major concern of mine for the last few years: AI upscaled film scans.

 

There is absolutely NO reason for AI to be used in the process of scanning and remastering a film, unless it's been horribly damaged or degraded. The old process for remastering (sans DNR) is pretty much perfect as is, you cannot get better results than that without corrupting the image, making it look fake and waxy. AI (and traditional DNR by extent) should only be used in the most extreme of circumstances, if even that.

[Brando 1,864]

https://thedigitalbits.com/item/abyss-2023-digital-uhd

[A24 4,338]

6 hours ago, Mr. Breathmask said:

To be honest, I felt the Blu-ray remaster of Aliens already "updated" the look too much. It looks more like a late '00's/early '10's movie. The DVD looks much more like a movie that's actually from 1986.

 

????

 

Not my experience at all. Aliens looks very much of its time, film stock-wise, photography-wise and production design-wise. That was actually a major problem for me the last time watched it, which was a day after I watched the superior looking Alien on Blu-ray.

[GerateWohl 4,370]

22 minutes ago, A24 said:

 

????

 

Not my experience at all. Aliens looks very much of its time, film stock-wise, photography-wise and production design-wise. That was actually a major problem for me the last time watched it, which was a day after I watched the superior looking Alien on Blu-ray.

One more reason why I prefer the theatrical cut of Aliens. The colony scenes at the beginning always gave me a cheap 80s sci-fi TV show feeling. The theatrical cut works better for me look-wise.

[A24 4,338]

 

 

Ah, for some reason I always watched the longer version. I haven't seen the TC since ... I don't even remember.

[Tallguy 3,398]

Quote

In addition to the 145-minute Theatrical Version, Cameron completed a 171-minute Special Edition in 1993 that is a significantly better experience. Whereas the Theatrical Version grinds to a bewildering and unearned conclusion, the Special Edition’s restored scenes add depth to the characters’ backstories and a much needed measure of tension in the form of newscasts that reinforce the superpower political drama unfolding on the surface. All of that leads to a longer and much more satisfying ending, which now has both a point and a moral. That isn’t quite enough to make The Abyss a truly great film, but it definitely gives the ride some badly needed payoff. And the ride itself makes the film worth viewing all on its own.

 

I know people who have this opinion. I disagree.

 

"grinds to a bewildering and unearned conclusion" - I somehow feel that this means the viewer wasn't paying attention. The very first scene of the movie establishes "magic underwater things" and this is reinforced throughout the film. "Who thinks this was a Russian water tentacle?"

 

"a much needed measure of tension in the form of newscasts that reinforce the superpower political drama unfolding on the surface." - "We're in the middle of some Cuban missile crisis!" (paraphrase) The last act of the film revolves around struggling for control of a nuke.

 

"much more satisfying ending, which now has both a point and a moral." - Ugh. It's SO heavy handed. One of the lauded news clips even has some schmoe quoting Sting like it's a profound point. "Even the Russians love their kids, right?" Even at the tippy top of the cold war we knew that nuclear war would be bad. Seriously, James, we did. In the original cut Lindsey's line "This thing is World War III in a can!" has a much more profound and chilling effect. And is it really that believable that some high level oil worker is going to smirk at a naval officer and gleefully declare "Looks like you boys are out of a job!" (An unknown advanced intelligence just threatened the coastline of... THE WORLD. Is that really going to calm the militaries of the world DOWN?)

 

"the Special Edition’s restored scenes add depth to the characters’ backstories" - This. The only reason I ever revisit the extended cut is that there are moments with Bud and the crew sprinkled throughout that make the movie measurably better.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

5 hours ago, GerateWohl said:

One more reason why I prefer the theatrical cut of Aliens. The colony scenes at the beginning always gave me a cheap 80s sci-fi TV show feeling. The theatrical cut works better for me look-wise.

 

Mostly agree. I also hate the colony scenes. Adds nothing to the film, undercuts the dramatic tension and surprise, and brings the momentum to a halt.

 

But I do like the other stuff in the Special Edition very much, which is why I made my own fan edit of the SE which simply excises the Hadley's Hope sequence. First and last time I've ever made my own fan edit (mostly because I utterly lack the skills to do much more than delete a scene).

 

25 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

 

I know people who have this opinion. I disagree.

 

"grinds to a bewildering and unearned conclusion" - I somehow feel that this means the viewer wasn't paying attention. The very first scene of the movie establishes "magic underwater things" and this is reinforced throughout the film. "Who thinks this was a Russian water tentacle?"

 

"a much needed measure of tension in the form of newscasts that reinforce the superpower political drama unfolding on the surface." - "We're in the middle of some Cuban missile crisis!" (paraphrase) The last act of the film revolves around struggling for control of a nuke.

 

"much more satisfying ending, which now has both a point and a moral." - Ugh. It's SO heavy handed. One of the lauded news clips even has some schmoe quoting Sting like it's a profound point. "Even the Russians love their kids, right?" Even at the tippy top of the cold war we knew that nuclear war would be bad. Seriously, James, we did. In the original cut Lindsey's line "This thing is World War III in a can!" has a much more profound and chilling effect. And is it really that believable that some high level oil worker is going to smirk at a naval officer and gleefully declare "Looks like you boys are out of a job!" (An unknown advanced intelligence just threatened the coastline of... THE WORLD. Is that really going to calm the militaries of the world DOWN?)

 

"the Special Edition’s restored scenes add depth to the characters’ backstories" - This. The only reason I ever revisit the extended cut is that there are moments with Bud and the crew sprinkled throughout that make the movie measurably better.

 

100%. You're the only person I've come across who feels the exact same way about the Abyss SE as I do. Love the additional depth and backstory to the characters, but hate the extended ending with the cold war stuff. It's heavy-handed and  just changes the tone from a beautiful, personal conclusion to something that looks like a bad Roland Emmerich disaster flick. The hints we got of a conflict above the surface were way more effective.

 

So yeah, I guess I prefer both the Aliens & Abyss SE in general, but they both have major sequences that prevent them from being my go-to version.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I concur with others regarding 'fake' A.I. upscales of movies, at least in its current form.

 

My first experience with an attempted improvement of a film was Shawshank Redemption, a grainy, noisy and essentially not very good looking film. My brother bought two DVD versions, and while the one I've got is the original, he got another 'special edition' where they'd tried de-graining it and it just looked really soft and severely lacking in detail. I've no doubt some tech company somewhere nowadays can magically remove all the grain and make this film look like it was shot yesterday but... a certain Ian Malcolm quote comes up here.

 

I've also got a DVD of a 90s UK TV special about paranormal happenings in a family home (Ghostwatch for those who know it) and there's a lot of very subtle visual effects work which I firmly believe should be seen in the intended SD resolution. The moment you start fiddling with the image you're meddling with the creators' intended effect, and particularly on a BBC budget there may be things that don't work once upscaled to HD.

[GerateWohl 4,370]

8 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Mostly agree. I also hate the colony scenes. Adds nothing to the film, undercuts the dramatic tension and surprise, and brings the momentum to a halt.

 

But I do like the other stuff in the Special Edition very much, which is why I made my own fan edit of the SE which simply excises the Hadley's Hope sequence. First and last time I've ever made my own fan edit (mostly because I utterly lack the skills to do much more than delete a scene).

When I saw it, I thought, Cameron included the colony scene only to show a facehugger on face scene. So, to show to people, who haven't seen the original, what these creatures do. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,537]

4 hours ago, Tallguy said:

 

I know people who have this opinion. I disagree.

 

"grinds to a bewildering and unearned conclusion" - I somehow feel that this means the viewer wasn't paying attention. The very first scene of the movie establishes "magic underwater things" and this is reinforced throughout the film. "Who thinks this was a Russian water tentacle?"

 

"a much needed measure of tension in the form of newscasts that reinforce the superpower political drama unfolding on the surface." - "We're in the middle of some Cuban missile crisis!" (paraphrase) The last act of the film revolves around struggling for control of a nuke.

 

"much more satisfying ending, which now has both a point and a moral." - Ugh. It's SO heavy handed. One of the lauded news clips even has some schmoe quoting Sting like it's a profound point. "Even the Russians love their kids, right?" Even at the tippy top of the cold war we knew that nuclear war would be bad. Seriously, James, we did. In the original cut Lindsey's line "This thing is World War III in a can!" has a much more profound and chilling effect. And is it really that believable that some high level oil worker is going to smirk at a naval officer and gleefully declare "Looks like you boys are out of a job!" (An unknown advanced intelligence just threatened the coastline of... THE WORLD. Is that really going to calm the militaries of the world DOWN?)

 

"the Special Edition’s restored scenes add depth to the characters’ backstories" - This. The only reason I ever revisit the extended cut is that there are moments with Bud and the crew sprinkled throughout that make the movie measurably better.

 

@Tallguy, you act like everything's a conspiracy 

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Richard Penna said:

I concur with others regarding 'fake' A.I. upscales of movies, at least in its current form.

 

My first experience with an attempted improvement of a film was Shawshank Redemption, a grainy, noisy and essentially not very good looking film. My brother bought two DVD versions, and while the one I've got is the original, he got another 'special edition' where they'd tried de-graining it and it just looked really soft and severely lacking in detail. I've no doubt some tech company somewhere nowadays can magically remove all the grain and make this film look like it was shot yesterday but...

 

a certain Ian Malcolm quote comes up here.

"That is one big pile of shit"? 

 

 

 

 

Seriously, guys, maybe DVD is the most authentic way to watch older films. No de-graining, no DNR, and definitely no teal!

[Richard Penna 3,694]

19 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

"That is one big pile of shit"? 

 

Wrong one. Our video restorers were so preoccopied with whether they could, they didn't think about whether they should.

 

Although I admit your one is the more classic one.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

18 hours ago, A24 said:

 

????

 

Not my experience at all. Aliens looks very much of its time, film stock-wise, photography-wise and production design-wise. That was actually a major problem for me the last time watched it, which was a day after I watched the superior looking Alien on Blu-ray.

 

Uhm...

 

 

That's the Blu-ray on the left and the old DVD transfer on the right. The Blu-ray seems to have this blue/green/teal wash over it that I can't say I like. Doesn't feel like an '80's movie to me at all. The image on the right does.