2001 coming back in 70mm, unrestored

Can we get some synergy with our 2001: A Space Odyssey UnRestored, please!

70MM sounds just about right...

 

Lumière 2018 : Douglas Trumbull célèbre Stanley Kubrick et annonce la révolution du cinéma

Some pretty interesting comments from Douglas Trumbull. Article is in French - translated to English, the key section is as follows (not my own translation, but quoted from a Usenet post):

 

The last paragrah is key.

It is a shame that people talk crap on each other instead of discussing what we all love and that includes him and his comment on Nolan.

Trumbull has a preference and he has been pushing for astronomical frame rate standard and curved screens and has been awarded by the SMPTE in kind (among his OBVIOUS other landmark works).

The push for digital only is clear and a big part of that is firmly grounded in economics paired with distribution control that takes power away from consumers.

Nolan has had nothing but good things to say about Kubrick. And has done everything he can to preserve his vision which includes helping to fund and supervise the 2001 restoration digital and analog. I think that deserves being applauded.

Yet Trumbull has done introductions to previous 70 mm presentations and obviously has his eye on the fact that as he says he wasn't asked to participate in the restoration.

As a man that has generated far less in the director's chair box office wise while creating so much..do I think he may be a tad bit bitter?...hmmm

You also got to look at the fact that he is still nursing wounds because of Kubrick getting the Special Effects awards credit (and Kubrick fighting with him about it in phone calls)....etc.

Yet he should know like so many others what Nolan goes through while being ignored by the Academy for outstanding work.

For all the reasons he states that 4K is better this is why many of us actually enjoy it.

The shudder and the gate weave give an experience much like the rumblings of a turn table or the hiss of a tape machine.

What this gifted artist misses (and I say this with deep respect before someone falsely claims that I am disregarding his viewpoint down to the world awarded scientists or that somehow I don't know math because of an simple decimal error) is that the human brain uses this information to better discern the analog image. If it isn't there it will focus on other aspects because as Tarantino says about film....no one is ever truly fooled into actually believing they are in the exact physical circumstace they are seeing recreated.

There has been studies on reference points and how "noise" gives a perception of position. This is key to understanding why people like me prefer an analog presentation even if I know that the experience is fleeting compared to a practical sense of what we get at consumer level.

All I gotta say is this. If I was in a room with Trumbull I would be saying the same things that I have said here about the chemical properties and he would no doubt agree. It is a trade off and he can have his choice without calling me names for it. Though again I would call out some of those remarks about the better colors or brightness etc... I would say really? So an approximation of what was filmed can prove the experience more then the film print we enjoyed? Isn't there a limit to what was actually developed at the time and the goal of some here for the "whiter whites" are ctually re-writing history because the film print that was approved by him with its limitations is the save state? You are "all digital" now but does that statement really make sense when we are talking about practical applications in real world scenarios where analog very much still gives superior results like Peter Jackson "bigatures" or say practical effects like Greg Nicotero's work etc...?

In the end, it is hard to say what even Kubrick would really express because there are arguments for both sides. I know Kubrick disliked the weave and actually criticized Kodak for not having sprocket holes aligned properly, but then we also have a man that was overdeveloping standards and insisting on using candles and crazy filters all at the same time.

I say both film and digital can exist and instead of proclaiming right or wrong why not just say that as humans we can have our preference?

Who knows I might just perhaps disagree with Kubrick himself if he bought into this new digital group think. Though again if he did I still respect his opinion. There is no real "wrong".

P.S. small note...when Trumbull says "no grain" as a reason why 4K 2001 is better I tune out.

 

Interesting interview. Trumbull still banging the drum for high frame rate despite the complete lack of enthusiasm for those films released in this format.

I do agree with him that the average cinema going experience needs to be improved if people are to be enticed back.

 

Someone has seen the new UHD blu-ray.
Take it for what is.

Hi all, I received my 4K copy of 2001 in Australia today. As with all Village Roadshow 4K releases, it will be the same as the U.S. disc.

I know you guys would be keen for initial impressions, but I'll preface it by saying I am no 2001expert and it's been many years since I've watched the original Blu-ray release, and not on the Sony VPL-VW885 project I now own - so bear with me. Please note that this projector isn't Dolby Vision compatible so I can't comment on this (although does have HDR-10).

First up, this is a pretty magnificent release. It truly is like having your own 70mm print. It's overwhelming. It's very sharp and detailed, with lots of grain and only very subtle hints at the usual Warner Bros grain filtering.

Those that were concerned this would be a teal re-grade can relax. The whites are as blinding and pure as they should be. Colours are very nicely saturated throughout. Wait till You get to the Star Gate sequence. The HDR is very subtle, somewhat like Goodfellas, but WCG really shines.

Overall, I found the restoration to be first class, it's rock solid with no telecine wobble to be seen. It's also very clean, and there's no major film artefacts (although if you do examine very closely on a 130" screen, you can see some smallish black dots occasionally.)

The 4K disc includes two DTS HD MA 5.1 tracks, one labelled restored and one 'original sound mix'.

Warner have even gone the extra mile and included a lovely HAL inspired main menu, which looks nothing like their bog standard menu system.

I haven't checked out the Blu-ray discs as I really just wanted to give you an initial heads-up.

If anyone has any questions I'm happy to help out and can possibly provide some pictures if that assists. If you want me to check out any specific scenes, please provide time codeS as I said I'm not an expert on the film.

 

Why is it always the "not-an-expert" people who get things first?

 

Found a screenshot.


And remember, it's just a screenshot. I have no idea how it was taken.

 

Best model ever made is Captain Cardboard's One-Man Space Pod. Google it.

 

Old blu-ray


New 4K UHD

 

If there is something you don't understand about what I said, can you be more specific? Quoting something out of context and dismissing my entire next paragraph is pretty deceptive in my book.

I am thoroughly convinced that screen shots are useless much like the one I gave on the Valley Girl page. If that pink color is indicating of the how this 4K looks, I am not going to be happy. Thankfully images online are merely a guide especially if one doesn't give a note of where they got it.

 

It looks pretty damn white to me. The pink/red seems to be coming from the corridor lights

 

Relax, it is just my observation.

The top shot was the orangy look of the space suit, the reddish hue of the lights are apparent in how the suit has turned to the all out red color. It clearly looks more defined, but that red corrider has me spooked. It isn't on the original, and it sure isn't on other versions I have seen, including the 70 mm print. Perhaps I am wrong, but again just my first observation.

As for the white, I am not referring to that, but I do know many shots that Kubrick had were the bluish shade NOT the red look you see in the background of the 4K.



I am saying this right now. If the 4K looks like that, they screwed it up big time! The original bluray wasn't perfect, but I never heard any serious problems with the color at all.

 

I think the youtube trailer was the ignition for concerns about the colors etc. Here are some comparriosons between the trailer and the new 4K blu-ray. These are not my pics and I don't know how true they are but hopefully it's pretty close to reality.

Trailer first, 4K blu-ray second

 

From posts over at blu-ray.com, please ignore the YouTube trailer as any sort of reference point

Haha - what normally happens...

Me;
I'm waiting
I'm waiting
No delivery
No delivery for days

Others:
Mine just arrived!!! - I don't have time to watch it though until next week though

This happens with everything. Films, games and music. Sods law

 

Definitely, but that's how/where the craziness started... I found it amusing though. People like to spin everything and fear the worse.

 

Makes me glad I scored an Oppo 203 this year, for sure.

By the time 2001 rolls around, maybe I'll have a proper 4K set to view it on

 

BTW, those "before" pictures above...is that the "orange-and-teal" color-timing effect we're lookin' at here? Because that almost resembles that, to my eyes...

 

Seen this twice already at the tiff lightbox, they have been screening 2001 in 70mm every christmas for a decade now.

 

Correct as usual, King Friday.

 

Most editions of 2001 that I've seen have looked somewhat...fluorescent in their overall color timing. I always presumed that was intentional, but it's the look I recall from the NBC screening of the film I saw in the mid-'70s, from the Laserdisc, the 70mm viewing at the Northpoint in the late '90s, and the Academy screening with Tom Hanks and Buzz Aldrin in Beverly Hills in 2008. The Blu-ray seemed a bit warmer.

Of course, that's all going by memory.

 

The new 4K blu ray is correct because that storage room was always a bright white -- a stunningly clean white.

I think I liked the look of a DVD better than a Blu Ray at some point. i know I didn't like the latest blu ray.

 

The old bluray got high marks by virtually all major reviewers.

This 4K BD is looking pretty bad.

I am looking at capsaholic what the hell is going on with this pink color!!

2001: A Space Odyssey • UK Ultra HD Blu-ray vs. US Blu-ray

 

I've only read positive remarks from those who have actually seen it. Including that scene