'Superman: The Movie' 4K UHD Blu-ray... it's official.

The television cut on that Blu-ray is an interesting curiosity. As a lifetime fan of the movie, more footage of Christopher Reeve's Superman is always welcome. It's not the first cut I would show new viewers, but hardcore fans should make it a priority.

 

Yeah, I agree that it's worth a look for fans, but I can't imagine I'd want to watch it "for pleasure". It's simply not a good version of the film - I'd honestly prefer to see the added scenes separately in a collection of deleted scenes...

 

Fans of the films often want more. I see nothing wrong with having an alternative version included or released separately. There are lots of fans of the version because it was broadcast to millions. I certainly consider it an official release and not some kind of fan edit.

What is "good" is relative to the viewer.

Though I in no way am saying that the original theatrical should be replaced. Now Superman II, that is another story.

 

What is your preferred version, theatrical or Director’s Cut? If you could only take one version to a desert island that has on outlet in the sand to plug in your television and Blu-ray player, which would it be?

 

If we're talking about Superman: The Movie, then it's undoubtedly, unreservedly, unquestionably the original theatrical cut... the only one I watch, the only one that matters (IMHO). Here's hoping the upcoming 4K remaster is the definitive version...

If we're talking about Superman II, again it's the original theatrical cut... but with the caveat of dearly wishing Donner had finished that film back in the day himself.

Lester's theatrical cut of II is arguably still the superior version over Donner's incomplete and at-times-shoddy 'version'... just trim out some of the more overt campy humor to tonally tighten things up a little; remove the rather cheesy special effect of Superman being physically depowered and just replace it with the relevant Donner footage; and add the scene at the end with Lex and the three villains being arrested and led away by the Arctic Patrol... if Warner Bros' MPI mastering division did all that and gave II a brand new 4K transfer (from the original camera negatives) and remastering on Blu-ray, it'd be the definitive version by far, no question.

If we're talking about the other two sequels... what other two sequels...?

 

Theatrical is best for 1...but if its a deserted island I want the longest version possible. I would need longer scenes of Ms. Teschmaker.

 

You're sick.....sick!.........as she would say.

 

For Superman: The Movie? I really have no strong opinion on whether the theatrical or director's cut is better. I've grown used to watching the director's cut over the past few years, but I occasionally pull out the theatrical cut as well.

 

There was an interview with Michael Thau during the making of the Extended version that went into the history of the mixes. Each of the three main mixes were done at a single mixing board one right after the other in separate sessions. Most of the effort went into the 70mm mix apparently and no one was happy with the flat sounding Dolby stereo which is what led Thau and Donner to make the new beefed up 5.1 track for the SE theatrical reissue. Nothing is mentioned of the split stereo mix other than it was a test and never used.
The mono mix has never been issued to my knowledge unless there was an early Beta/CED/VHS that had it. I've only seen it on 16mm and one 35mm print that turned up on ebay. Many films seemed to have custom monos made right into the 80's-particularly Lucasfilm releases which have distinct differences such as Empire Strikes Back and Raiders.


Personally I think the original film is best in its theatrical cut. The SE pads it too much and the only really good addition I think is the gauntlet of weapons Supes goes through to get to Luthor. However impressive it may be though it hinders the pacing and is really unnecessary.

As for II, it's the Donner cut all the way despite the horrendous cheap outdated CG, the not so good 5.1 remix, the lack of several big action sequences and the removal of perhaps the film's best remembered line : "Would you care to step outside?"
Why you ask?
Tone. Pure and simple. Seeing the Donner version despite being a rough edit more akin to a fan re-edited imagining was like finally seeing the bits of the film I always liked without all the silly stuff I hated. I think if you re-instated the "step outside" line, the town attack, and reverted to the theatrical effects and soundmix wherever possible that the Donner cut would be much better than it is.
That said the theatrical II release came out in the Megasound process which was supposed to be about large bass enhancement in 70mm. The current 5.1 mix seems far better in dynamics but some diehard fans say there are some errors that aren't in the 2.0 mix. The Donner version has the added bonus of finally hearing Gene Hackman's voice instead of the horribly noticeable impersonator in the theatrical release version.

It's funny that SII has mostly good material, SIII has maybe 20-30 minutes, and SIV has even less. That said I'd take IV over III any day because at least in IV everyone was trying. And this comes from a big Robert Vaughn fan and a great admirer of the good bits in the film such as the Smallville sequence and the junk yard battle which is still one of the best moments in any comic book film.

The original proved that Supes could work onscreen perfectly even in an era which seemed to have moved past him. Why WB cannot do the same and seems hell bent on restructuring the character is beyond me.

 

I thought for sure that there was a mono DVD or Laserdisc released at some point. I know the foreign languages are in mono, but still it baffles me that I cannot find the example.

 

Agreed. Theatrical cut is the definitive version. Both the 2001 cut and the TV version are just bonuses for me.

 

The most noticeable voice/audio change I noticed between the Lester and Donner version was of the General who has his stripes ripped off by Zod in the town they destroy ............... I don't know why they carry out such changes?

 

I'm ordering Superman:TM just for technical reasons, I'm very very curious to see how this soft and hazy looking picture looks on HDR 4K. The only movies from the same period I have on UHD BD are Close Encounters Of The Third Kind and Halloween and both of them look great to me despite being very grainy. For me grain on those movies it's not an artifact (even 'though it really is, just as tape hiss on "old" analog recordings), it has become part of the movie.
Both CEOT3K and Halloween (up to a point) went for a natural looking picture while Superman did not. I don't only see the sharpness and detail of the picture afected, colors look a bit pastel-like in my opinion and I'm curious to see how 10 bit HDR renders that or if 8 bit HD Blu ray is enough both detail and color wise. Anyway, it wouldn't be a fair comparison, the still to be released UHD BD and the BD as they used different sources and the one using the OCN will win.

 

If the technicians use original notes and don't put their spin on the so called correct way to see things. I care about accuracy, not playing up to trendy things like the teal revolution.

Regardless, Warner Bros. transfers have been overall pretty good and other than 2001 this one is really really high my all time favorite list. Very much looking forward to it!

 

I have no doubt the UHD will look superb.

 

I've seen CE3K in theaters at least 5 or 6 times, and it was never, ever as grainy as it was on 4K HDR. That is an awful, awfully grainy transfer. Bad decisions were made. Color was great.

 

Everyone knows how much you dislike film grain and how you like to reduce it every chance you get for mastering decisions....however

this one goes a step more because on the Star Wars thread you mentioned your dislike for Grover Crisp from Sony Pictures choosing to keep the work with a look and criticized him for not "de-graining".

While you have also stated that if it ain't from negative it is "BS" (a point that I have never ever agreed with), then why are you using your memory of a printed image? Are we talking about a digital projection from the 4K restoration or an analog print?

Weren't you saying that the theater experience is always that much removed from the negative since film prints are less detailed since quality is all often all over the place? Didn't you say IP's are not good enough for 4K?

I know you have stated that you like to take half the grain out of an image (and I have seen a lot of abominations on blurays that look like complete and utter waxy messes) and even have gone further and stated that you manage some things shot to shot to control the grain structure (which I cannot say enough how much that one peeves me off). Knowing that CEOTTK is a scan from negative wouldn't it make absolute sense that it is going to have more grain than what you saw in the theaters?

While there have been mixed reviews on bluray that came with the 4K, the 4K version have been getting great reviews from websites that I trust. Grain is part of film detail because that is the nature of its physical properties that human resolve with their eye frame to frame. Grain reduction is artificial and destroys the accuracy that is present when the silver halide particles emulsions take place when adhering to the film stock. I deplore the tactics and the criticism for companies like Sony and Warner Brothers that often do a great job at getting it right.

I hope Superman retains its grain structure because it is essential to the details of the film experience. That includes the artistic decision in the Zoptic shots that I think worked really well for giving us a surreal kind of look throughout the film. Man I love this film!!!

 

The recent Dark Knight trilogy 4K UHD releases were all sourced from IP's, at Chris Nolan's specific instructions... and they looked great, it has to be said.

 

What’s with the regular aggression towards Vidiot?

It’s not necessary but seems to be a habitual posting style.

The guy brings a lot to the forum, is an expert in his field. It would be unfortunate if members like him decided to stop sharing here. Certainly we’ve seen other professionals depart the forum for similar.

 

Never seen Vidiot post that he "hates grain". His point is it has to be managed for digital presentation. He also said that grain in multiple sources in a film like Superman needs to be matched.

I love grain. However, we're talking about really old films in various states of repair that were made in an era of optical projection that are now being presented to us by a completely different technology. Erasing the "film" from film is a terrible, but expertly translating that film to the digital era making it look both original and new takes a lot of work by skilled people. The purist hands off everything approach simply isn't practical.

Watch the early-80s animated feature "Land Before Time" streaming now on Netflix and tell me how much you love a hands off transfer. It's a disaster.

dan c

 

Aggression because I state what he has actually said?

If he departs the forum because some truth is spoken I feel sorry for the individual.

I don't see stars because of title.

I speak the truth and did not disrespect him one bit. PERIOD

If you don't believe what I wrote go and read it yourself. If I quote here it will be deleted.

P.S. For those concerned he has me on ignore anyway.

Where is this quote you speak of? I think the word I used was dislike.

 

Aggression because... only you know, I guess.

If you really believe that, not worth tanking the thread, happy hunting!

Can't imagine why but if so, strange to be going after him post after post, thread after thread.

Vidiot's one of the good ones, who you've clearly misread.

------

Back to Superman - I'll take any good approach to this movie, this was my "Star Wars" as a kid. I haven't made the move to 4K TV yet though, and if the HD disc is not derived from the new mastering I guess I'll need to wait and see.

Still got to pickup the TV version first.

 

Dude people "go after" in all kinds of ways, but I never went after him. I am asking about contradictions in information. BACK TO TOPIC

I don't want to see the movie "degrained" because of public/expert opinion.

While some people will applaud efforts I hope Superman has none of that.

 

Lamentably, it looks like the 1080p Blu-ray disc on the upcoming new set is just the 2011 remaster; which was a (then) brand new HD transfer, sourced from a 2K scan of a first-generation IP... it looks really, really good (aside from the usual teal in the final color grading and an unfortunate albeit near-imperceptible little glitch in one scene), but it's really a shame that the new UHD release doesn't have an accompanying disc with a brand new transfer sourced from the recent 4K remastering, if they went to the trouble to scan the whole film at 4K resolution from the original camera negatives and remaster it for HDR, why not go the whole hog and include that new hi-res transfer on the companion Blu-ray disc... The Matrix, among other Warner Bros releases, have taken that approach, so why not such a prestigious and popular catalog title as Superman: The Movie, alas...???

If it's the case that the upcoming new release has just slapped the 2011 remaster on the accompanying disc, guess I'll just stick with the latter then... damn ...

 

"Grain management" is all I ever see Vidiot mentioning, which makes sense.

The audio equivalent would be a vintage song compiled from various edits, but some sections have a huge amount of tape hiss and others don't. It doesn't happen, but old movies with heavy special FX burdens?

No way the "original artistic intent" for Superman: The Movie included wildly different grain patterns from scene to scene, due to the optical special FX.

Grain management does not equal zero grain.