30th Anniversary of BACK TO THE FUTURE

There may be only one transfer, but having seen the HDTV source, I can say it's not the same master as was used for the Blu-ray.

I'm only borrowing the terminology from the reviewers at Blu-ray.com, when they describe the picture quality of new releases.
If you look closely at the screencaps, you can see evidence of grain reduction and sharpening of edges.

I'm not the only person who has expressed criticism of these Blu-rays and other catalog titles by Universal.
I know it might sound like nit-picking, but I think we need to push for the studios to do a better job, so we get a better product.

 

Did anyone spot the long shots of Eric Stoltz that were kept in the film?

I've been told the shot of Marty diving into the DeLorean is one of them, as is the show of Marty punching Biff in the face in the 1955 Lou's Cafe. In the former, Marty clearly looks taller, and his hair looks different.

 

Could those be just stunt doubles?

 

The new book on BTTF, "We Don't Need Roads," has a list of shots that most likely had Stoltz in them. Quite a few of the reverse shots had Stoltz just out of frame, so you might see an actor talking to "Marty" but it was all material shot in November-December. After the new year, Fox was brought in, starting with the first night at the Twin Pines Mall (Puente Hills Mall in City of Industry, CA). The book makes it clear that Stoltz was kind of an a-hole, forcing everybody to address him only as "Marty," being a little combative, eating all meals in his dressing room, etc. Fox was exactly the opposite: down to earth, funny, ate with the crew, very funny and approachable. Very interesting story.

The editor and director insist that Stoltz is not in even 1 second of finished footage, but there are those with the cast and crew who disagree.

 

You judging a 50Hz transfer or a 60Hz transfer? I've only seen the 60Hz Region 1 Blu-ray for America. Again, your monitor may be lying to you. What are you watching the material on?

 

Cool, did not know about this book I will have to get it!

 

Someone in the wild took the image essence from a DCP and downsampled it to 1080i at a Blu-ray bitrate. There were moments where the commercial Blu-ray appeared to be missing details that were still visible in the DCP extraction at 1080i. Obviously, not a true apples to apples comparison, but this implies (but does not prove) that Universal felt the need to do some processing (what kind is unknown) for the consumer product.

 

The HDTV version looks better to me. The Bluray is so sharp and clear, it doesn't look natural anymore. You can see how the faces are covered in make up. Kills the illusion for me.

 

Yeah its a DCP, basically a raw digital master. Apart from that I don't know much about it, but you can find out more here: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleic...p?disc1=874&disc2=4005&hd_multiID=958#auswahl

 

You dont realise HOW MUCH I love it bud!!!

I got part 1 (1985) on VHS recorded off ANALOG CABLE on 4.1.87 (Off HBO) and it is NO APRIL FOOLS JOKE,it is pure analogue beauty.... ITS ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL!! (Seeing it in its original format) -- Now I Wanna get part 2 and maybe 3 also recorded off analog cable!! (All 3 on thier official VHS tapes (and BETA tapes) have been "DIGITALLY RECORDED" and I think its sickening -- NOTHING PURE ABOUT THAT CRAP!!)

I love this movie!!!!!

 

I deal with DCPs all the time. So you're judging a cinema master intended for projection at 14fL in P3 color space, only you're checking it on a consumer monitor in Rec709 color space, and the monitor isn't calibrated? Interesting.

 

I must admit that's over my head, and I'm not sure why my monitor is relevant to the discussion. Did you look at the screenshot comparisons in the link I posted?

 

Fascinating story. I'm halfway through and learned about 99 things I didn't know about the Back to the Future trilogy. Bob Gale has some amazing stories to tell, but interestingly, it looks like Michael J. Fox had very little to say. Lea Thompson and Christopher Lloyd more than pick up the slack, as does Tom Wilson (Biff). Former Universal chief Sid Sheinberg also has quite a bit to say, including refuting quite a few longstanding legends.

 

There's a new set coming on October 21, 2015 to celebrate Marty's arrival in the "future" as they envisioned it back in the 80s.


Includes:

- Back to the Future, Back to the Future Part II, Back to the Future Part III
- Back to the Future: The Complete Animated Series DVD
- Bonus Disc with More than 2 Hours of Content
- Digital HD with UltraViolet (Blu-ray Exclusive)
- Back to the Future: A Visual History 64-Page Book
- Light-Up “Flux Capacitor” Packaging
http://www.comingsoon.net/dvd/trailers/462455-back-to-the-future-30th-anniversary-trilogy

 

I'm waiting for the 35th anniversary Blu-Ray release with another 2 bonus discs.

 

I had a look at them. The degrained versions look much better.

 

No, no! You mustn't wait! You MUST buy them on October 21, 2015. That way you will always be able to say that you bought the trilogy on the exact day that Marty arrived from 1985. That can never happen again as Marty didn't travel any further into the future than October 21, 2015. So, you absolutely, positively must buy the set on October 21, 2105. This is REALLY important!

 

Respectfully disagree, but I know it is subjective. I love film grain and always prefer a more natural presentation.

 

I know that you do, but what is natural about seeing recording artifacts (grain)? Natural is what you see with your eyes when you look at the world around you. You don't see grain in the person standing next to you. However, I get that that is your preference.

 

Of course that doesn't mean there isn't "grain" in the person standing next to you. Our eyes are just not terribly resolving. ("Solidity" is an illusion--at least in the space normal to us--born of each atom's electron shells...and the attendant electrostatic fields. But perhaps I have said too much.)

 

Indeed you have, but kudos for scientific pedantry!

 

Hmm. You'll have to explain to me why ad hominem was a rational response to my post.

 

Huh? It certainly wasn't so intended. It was a playful jibe (note the smiley) while acknowledging the scientific rigor you brought to the proceedings.

 

Interesting about Blu-ray reissue in October. Probably look into picking up the Set one day.

 

The problem is always making the grain level consistent. Grain increases and decreases depending on exposure level, developing, and the type of film stock. If the amount of grain goes up by ten times on a visual effect, it's not right. If the grain completely disappears on some shots and then is visible on others, that's inconsistent. There's a lot of ways to solve this problem, but grain management is more complicated and involved than you might think. Merely taking 100% of the grain out all the time -- which some directors absolutely prefer -- is rarely the best answer.