Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by primejive, Jul 25, 2017.
And Dennis Rodman!
Even the MIB's had him sussed out.
And the rest of the universe can be very grateful for that fact. Somewhere I can see the great intelligence who seeded life on Earth and throughout the galaxies, shaking their heads saying, "well that one was a dud."
So the sound was a new remix.......but still mono?
I just caught it in the theatre and it sounded mono.
The dialogue/sound seemed fine in there........except the first scene of ships entering the mountain.It wasn't so much a loud rumble as a very LOUD rattle.
The speakers at the front were rattling in their cabinets [not the theatres fault as I've watched many loud films and rock concerts there without similar rattling].
The theatre was surprisingly 75% full........about 150 folks..........but there were only 2 showings over 2 days.
Blade Runner next week as a prelude to the forthcoming sequel.
I hope it's the original theatrical version with the voice over.
The version of Blade Runner showing theatrically in advance of the sequel is the Final Cut.
Blade Runner: The Final Cut (2017)
5.1 surround, at least in my room. Dynamic range, like everything else, is a judgement call and a matter of opinion.
I take it that the grain was not exacerbated by sharpening or other misapplied digital processing? It looked like "natural" grain? As I said upthread, my biggest problem with the re-release I saw in the theater was very harsh, sharpened grain. It's nothing that has ever bothered me on laserdisc, DVD or Blu-ray.
It didn't look sharpened to me. Two issues could be: 1) the 4K preserved the sharpness of the grain better than ever before; and 2) the HDR may have brightened the grain to an extent we've never seen.
Personally, I hate the look of the new bluray and regret buying it. I dislike it so much its heading to eBay as soon as possible. Its just too dark and contrasty. Ill stick with the old bluay.
I keep reading this on other forums. Fortunately I got the UHD BD version, I hope that the UHD BD with its higher resolution and HDR is more forgiving than the plain-HD BD.
Grain is not something that bothers me, if a movie release preserves its grain, that means no DNR or has it well managed like Vidiot has explained several on this forum, I like grain as that mean picture as a whole should look very film like. Two grainy releases that I like a lot come to mind, one is Aliens on BD and the other is Léon The Professional. One thing I HATE even more than DNR is fake digitally generated grain like the one used on the 2004/2009 reboot of Battlestar Galactica, I love the series but I hate how it looks. Anyway, I don't know how it would have looked without the fake grain as it was shot with early HD cameras. Maybe if it wasn't for the fake grain it would look very dated by today's standards.
Man, I remember how famous (in a bad way) Aliens on laserdisc was for its grain, back in the day.
But we are on the HD/UHD era and most people, including me, want to see everything that's on 35 mm reels for a movie. If a given movie is grainy, and Aliens being shot on early Super35 is very grainy, we want to see up to the slight detail, grain included. Aliens on BD is sourced from a 4K scan, I think the restoring job they did to it is outstanding, it's still very grainy but also has a very detailed picture. What I don't like and want are releases with tons of DNR aplied that leaves picture with no detail and waxy looking faces, some of the Star Trek movies come to mind.
Jim Cameron is not a fan of grain at all and he demanded all the grain be removed during the HD and 4K restorations of his older films in the last 10 years.
But the BD of Aliens, which I think was shot on Super35 is grainy, it does have grain, it seems to be, using your own vocabulary, managed, but grain is there. Sure the original film has more grain but Aliens on BD doesn't look super clean or with "waxy" faces. Do you have any idea what they did to Aliens to restore it and if it was done by a James Cameron team? I like how the BD looks.
I know all that work was done by Lowry Digital, but how the balance of "no grain" vs. "some grain" vs. "excessive grain" is a very subjective call. But all of it was approved by Mr. Cameron.
Thanks for your reply Vidiot. I think Aliens on BD looks pretty well, I didn't expect it to look so good, what I expected was a degrained to death release,very clean of grain but absolutely lacking in detail, or the opposite, the film restored and color corrected but with ALL its grain intact. I think they got the right balance between grain management and yet a very detailed picture. I like it.
The little secret of the Lowry Process (which one an Oscar) was that they basically used heavy degraining to remove all the grain before mastering, then at the very end they'd take a minute-long grain sample -- based on the same grain in the film -- and apply it to the whole movie. That way, you saw the actual grain from the film, but it was absolutely constant throughout every frame. They also had precise control over how the grain affected highlights, mids, and blacks, so it was pretty exacting. I think the results on the Bond films were spectacularly good, and also with the Star Wars films.
I saw Aliens at the cinema when I was 12, at this age I don't recall anything about grain. In addition to that Spanish cinemas of the time were not the most reliable source of how good or bad a movie looks.
How do you like the Aliens BD? Does it look digital and tweaked to you? It's obvious some tampering has been done with picture but it looks great, at least for me.
I wouldn't mind if Fox took this 4K restoration, did an HDR pass and put it out on UHD BD, like Warner Bros. did with Blade Runner and Universal with E.T.
Back to topic, I saw the UHD BD of Close Encounters Of The Third Kind. I've seen this plenty of times, the last time I must be on my 20's and I always thought it was slow and boring movie. Now being 43 I saw a very different movie, the pace doesn't seem to slow to me now and in general Ienjoyed themovie quite a lot. I didn't think 4K and even less HDR was going to improve the movie much, but I was wrong. Grain is perfectly rendered, on BD very grainy movies causes compression artifacts as grain is random in nature and one of the strategies used by picture data compressions is redundancy, on BD sometimes is like if mosquito noise is added on top of film grain (this also happens on the BD of Léon The Professional), on UHD is just beautiful and very detailed picture with its grain. Regarding HDR, the lights of UFOs make good use of it, and the final scene with the mother ship UFO and all its lights is a HDR fest, I absolutely love how those final scenes look. I saw the Director's Cut by the way.
It looks fine by me. A 4K HDR pass would take a lot more work.
A lot more work that would give 20th Century Fox a lot more money to win, don't you think? Alien and Aliens are two of those films that people rebuy everytime there's a new format or a new remastering.
Is the "Collector's Edition" the best version of the film? As opposed to the "Theatrical Version" and the "Special Edition?"
Obviously that's going to depend on what 'best' means to you. Most complete? Most enjoyable overall? Do you want to see the inside of the spaceship? etc.
I've tried watching the various version to answer this myself. However, as much as I enjoy the film, I can't watch it three times in short order. Good movie, but it's years between viewings. I forget what the previous viewing contained.
'Aliens" was grainy when first released. I saw the film It comes down to the film that was used. It had advantages but grain wasn't one of them.
I think that "CE3K" remains a classic but the original theatrical cut is the one.
In my humble opinion... hell yeah; it's tighter (even though it's a few minutes longer), more concise, trims away the scenes that just slow things down unnecessarily (like the power plant scene early in the film).... and best of all, removes the scene inside of the mothership that Spielberg never liked nor wanted but was forced by the studio to shoot in order to get funding for the 1980 Special Edition.
Spielberg was never happy with the original 1977 theatrical cut as it was a very rushed affair to make a set-in-stone release date, and he never felt he nailed it in the way he would have liked had he been given more time. I recently saw the theatrical version again on Netflix... and Spielberg was absolutely right in his assessment of it.
The 1997 'Collector's Edition' is the real director's cut - much like Blade Runner: The Final Cut - and is the definitive version for me...
This good review also answers the technical questions about the 2017 release: 4k (3840 x 2160 resolution which is 4x HD), HDR, WCG, using H.265 (HEVC) compression
Close Encounters of the Third Kind Ultra HD Blu-ray Review
Current reference spec for UHD is ITU-R BT2100
I'd been hoping for more outtakes of Melinda Dillon in cutoffs but that's just me.
Separate names with a comma.