|
CPL593H posted:It was me. But I don't have an all regions player. Such is life. I believe UHD discs are region free.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I believe UHD discs are region free. I keep forgetting I can play those. I still want to get a region free blu-ray player because there's a whole bunch I want to get that are region 2 only. And also you can get the complete Space Ghost: Coast to Coast on DVD from Australia for some reason. CPL593H fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jun 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:Attack of the Clones and ROTS always looked like deep fried dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
Yep. Though, honestly I wouldn't be surprised if neural networks would smooth over those fidelity issues in the next few years to make them look passable in 4K. The AI enhancement field is pretty nuts these days. They'll still look like poo poo. Just quasi-4K poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
honestly the way to handle the prequels is the same thing they did to Toy Story: re-render and recomposite all of the CGI, keeping original assets wherever they can but redoing anything that looks jank in high-res, to meet modern standards. the live-action elements will look okay if they're just upscaled from original res to 4K, but the CGI is inevitably going to look like absolute poo poo, and assuming Lucasfilm/ILM still have all the original assets on servers somewhere it'd be a relatively easy workaround.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:04
|
|
|
WeedlordGoku69 posted:honestly the way to handle the prequels is the same thing they did to Toy Story: re-render and recomposite all of the CGI, keeping original assets wherever they can but redoing anything that looks jank in high-res, to meet modern standards. Yeah but... why bother
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Agreed, but only if they can do it with the original assets. I loathe the re-done effects for Star Trek: TOS and it would feel like a similar situation, even if it was presented as a side-by-side alternate option. If they redid the effects from scratch I'd be forced to have solidarity with Star Wars fans and that cannot happen. e: Though on second thought, the set extension in the Trek remastered episodes are neat, as are a few of the shots where they actually try to retain the design language of the 60s. But those aren't worth watching some rushed and lovely CGI that feels out of a different era and disrespects the work of the original effects team. So I guess as long as they remain irreverent toward the originals and try to maintain a feel of authenticity it could turn out okay. Plus, yeah. Why bother?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:11
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:Yeah but... why bother feedmyleg posted:Plus, yeah. Why bother? enough people like the prequels that they pretty consistently print money on home media, and given that their biggest flaw by a wide margin is how lovely they look, a lot of people would probably actually be on board for an unfucked version. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
One problem that comes up is that a lot of films and TV shows were completely designed around how they're going to be presented. This is why the wires in The Wizard of Oz weren't a big deal because the process of printing dye-transfer Technicolor prints diffuses the image in such a way that they're basically invisible. However, later prints created using finer-grained stocks and other quirks of post-dye-transfer printing bring out a lot of details nobody ever saw. When Warner Bros. did the latest 4K restoration, they scanned the original 3-strip B&W camera negatives (plus the fine-grains of the sepia portions since the negs don't exist anymore) in 8K resolution. They used some minor processing and even some touching up to get it closer to what you'd see in a 1939 print, but with modern technology. They didn't go overboard by fixing anything else, just stuff like wires. There's a lot of invisible fixes in tons of films, too. Sync is fine-tuned digitally, even if original prints are off by a frame or two. Splices were usually visible on silent films, but they're often painted out. Or stuff like Ben-Hur always being 2.75:1 on home video, even though the majority of theaters in 1959-1960 were screening prints cropped to 2.20:1 or 2.50:1. I think I read somewhere that only half a dozen theaters were actually able to show the full width.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:36
|
|
|
Egbert just reminded me I don't see cigarette burns in film anymore and I'm kind of sad about that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:45
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Egbert just reminded me I don't see cigarette burns in film anymore and I'm kind of sad about that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
caligulamprey posted:I miss the awkward shots-that-are-a-beat-too-long to accommodate the reel change so much. On that note, did you know that opening logos of films are mainly there to serve as a final check for screen alignment? Especially during the switch to widescreen (1953-1954), the logo would on screen long enough for curtains to open and also so that the projectionist knew the image was properly centered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
WeedlordGoku69 posted:enough people like the prequels that they pretty consistently print money on home media, and given that their biggest flaw by a wide margin is how lovely they look, a lot of people would probably actually be on board for an unfucked version. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 03:01
|
|
|
caligulamprey posted:I miss the awkward shots-that-are-a-beat-too-long to accommodate the reel change so much. Don’t forget the awkward sound cut.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
Anyone know if Laurence and Dr. Strangelove 4k are going to get standalone releases? Don't really want to invest in the upcoming box set for 2 films.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 05:06
|
|
|
Feel like they’d be foolish not to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 05:38
|
|
|
ChazTurbo posted:Anyone know if Laurence and Dr. Strangelove 4k are going to get standalone releases? Don't really want to invest in the upcoming box set for 2 films. Probably, but the box is cheap enough. Lawrence of Arabia is one of my all-time favorites and I had no trouble putting down $65 back in 2012 for the big gift set, so $105 and change for that plus five other movies (including two more of my all-times Dr. Strangelove and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) is a hell of a deal. Especially since Sony is pretty much holding nothing back. LoA is allegedly split across two BD-100s, so it's going to probably be the definitive UHD demo disc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 05:58
|
|
|
Revenge of the Sith is by far the best looking uhd of the first six movies, and I thought it looked terrific in general. I thought it was as impressive as I thought The Phantom Menace looked terrible (and boy does it, seemed like vaseline was smeared on the camera at points). I recently watched the uhd box set of all nine films so they are pretty fresh in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 07:32
|
|
|
WeedlordGoku69 posted:honestly the way to handle the prequels is the same thing they did to Toy Story: re-render and recomposite all of the CGI, keeping original assets wherever they can but redoing anything that looks jank in high-res, to meet modern standards. Are you quite sure about that? The Toy Story UHD looks like it was just upscaled to 4K.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 08:16
|
|
|
Steen71 posted:Are you quite sure about that? The Toy Story UHD looks like it was just upscaled to 4K. i think they did it for the blu-ray, not the UHD, and uprezzed everything from ~480p ish to 1080p.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 08:54
|
|
|
mem posted:Revenge of the Sith is by far the best looking uhd of the first six movies, and I thought it looked terrific in general. I thought it was as impressive as I thought The Phantom Menace looked terrible (and boy does it, seemed like vaseline was smeared on the camera at points). Do you mean the disc itself? Because ROTS is probably the most aggressively ugly movie I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 09:22
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:Do you mean the disc itself? Because ROTS is probably the most aggressively ugly movie I've ever seen. Never watched a single Marvel movie?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:Do you mean the disc itself? Because ROTS is probably the most aggressively ugly movie I've ever seen. I might be misremembering but RotS was the one shot on digital HD, wasn't it? Whereas TPM was shot on 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 10:34
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:I might be misremembering but RotS was the one shot on digital HD, wasn't it? Whereas TPM was shot on 35mm. Yes. TPM, aside from a few shots, was shot on 35mm anamorphic. I think the issue as to why it doesn't look that great is because the film scans are probably old and captured with film scanners that couldn't capture as much information and detail than film scanners today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 10:39
|
|
|
mem posted:I recently watched the uhd box set of all nine films so they are pretty fresh in my mind. Why would you do this to yourself?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Why would you do this to yourself? Not empty-quoting. It’s a question that demands answers. The only positive memories I have of the prequels are who I saw it with. Ep 1: my older brothers. Ep 2: my now late BFF. Ep 3: my dad. That last one was insane because I had not watched like... any movies with my dad solo. Let alone Star Wars!
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 13:51
|
|
|
The recent Star Wars UHDs appear to be mostly unremarkable. Nothing that special but also not particularly bad. I bought Empire Strikes Back(it's by far my favorite of the series) just as a test to see if I wanted to buy the others and nah, it was fine but not enough of an upgrade to justify buying the rest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 14:11
|
|
|
I just want to know how Disney came to the decision that the original Star Wars’ cover art should be dominated by magenta. That’s not a color I associate with that movie’s palette. I feel Iike I’ve complained about this in this thread before. Edit: And I have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 14:53
|
|
|
Finally gunna make my way through the HG Lewis box set. I can't get over how good these remasters look.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Why would you do this to yourself? Lol, I hadn't seen them in quite some time. The prequels I hadn't seen since the theatre, the originals probably from before that, and I hadn't seen episode 9 yet. Empire looked the worst of the original trilogy. The new ones all looked superb. And yeah I can get someone not liking the look of RotS but it's transfer to uhd was excellent. I guess I hadn't seen the originals since Lucas shitted em up, some of that was jarring. And The Phantom Menace is easily the worst uhd I've seen (and I have T2). I guess I've just been bored during quarintine, I also watched the Fast and Furious box set recently. I hadn't seen any of those prior.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
The problem with Phantom that there's literally only two shots in the entire film that are actual camera negative - the rest are film-outs because they all had CGI, which was probably done at around 1K resolution. For the 3-D conversion, they used noise reduction to smooth it out. Like wise, all the 1997 shots from the OT are 1K film-outs. If only someone went back to the original film elements and improved the effects compositing and rendering...
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:The problem with Phantom that there's literally only two shots in the entire film that are actual camera negative - the rest are film-outs because they all had CGI, which was probably done at around 1K resolution. For the 3-D conversion, they used noise reduction to smooth it out. I don't understand why it hasn't happened, it's not like that wouldn't be a major money printer for Disney.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 00:01
|
|
|
mem posted:Empire looked the worst of the original trilogy. The new ones all looked superb. And yeah I can get someone not liking the look of RotS but it's transfer to uhd was excellent. I don't get this. At least the Empire UHD provides much better detail than the old BD (though the new colour scheme is... questionable). RotS looks the same, apart from the HDR, because there's no more resolution in the original footage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 07:51
|
|
|
You might be right, it's been a couple weekends since I watched the original trilogy, maybe I was just more disappointed since I like Empire more. It just had some really uneven DNR, but there was some of that going on in RotJ and aNH as well for sure. All three of these are in the same ballpark at least. Edit:. I've never watched the blurays for comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 09:54
|
|
|
Grabbed four of the five IMPRINT releases today, will plug away at them over the weekend. Watched the first thirty minutes of The Duellists and it looks great, but it seems like Waterloo and I Married a Monster from Outer Space are very barebones. Sorry, Wrong Number and The Duellists have heaps of commentaries and extras though. Didn't grab The War of the Worlds because it was out of stock everywhere, and I think I'm gonna splurge on the Criterion edition for the extras.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 11:33
|
|
|
I treated myself to some boxsets on sale A 20 movie Clint Eastwood collection  A 7 movie Stanley Kubrick collection  A 5 movie Coen Bros collection  All of these boxsets have slightly different contents in other regions, weirdly. Also, Ice Age 4-film and Nightmare on Elm Street 7-film boxsets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
I’ve got the Nightmare on Elm Street Blu-ray set. It’s pretty good. Also, Jaws 4K arrives today. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
Got 4K parasite UHD that I’m hoping to show my gal tonight. Also, I saw The Fast and The Furious movies for the first time a couple years ago. Great popcorn stuff. 8 was kinda boring but I enjoyed everything up through 7. It’s insane how they transform by Fast Five.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 18:50
|
|
|
Every Fast and Furious movie has something to offer, though I still think 4's the lowpoint and Tokyo Drift is deeply underrated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
Overall as a movie Fast & Furious(the 4th movie) isn't as good as the others but it actually is a pretty crucial piece of the overall story, if you're into following all that stuff. It's where Dom and Brian reunite after Letty's supposed death, which obviously is relevant in every movie going forward after that, and it also is Brian's final cutting the cord moment with the FBI. Starting with Fast Five he's a fugitive just like every other member of the crew.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 20:10
|
|