UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Frenzy -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[lark144]

This afternoon I took a look at "The Man Who Knew Too Much" Blu-ray and noticed right away the menu appeared to be same as the 11-12-12 Blu-ray. I didn't check the copyright but thought as you have on the matter. I hate it when the studios do this type of crap.

That's unfortunate. I replaced my Blu-Ray player about six months ago, and was investigating bumping up to UHD, but the smallest screen I could find was way too big for my living room, which is very narrow, with a fireplace in the middle, and rococo molding and a mantle that sticks out. I'd love to see these new masters, especially ROPE, but that's life, I guess.

Oh, Robert, thanks for looking into this for those of who don't have the capacity for UHD.

 

[Lord Dalek]

With the sole exception of Psycho, every Hitchcock Blu-ray has been the same exact disc as the Masterpiece Collection.

 

[haineshisway]

That is so annoying about the Blu-rays, I'm sorry. A major faux pas in my opinion.

 

[Mark-P]

I think RAH has made the point that the extra expense of re-authoring Blu-rays is not considered worthwhile as the 4K discs can be played back on 2K equipment, all you need is a fairly inexpensive 4K Blu-ray player.

P.S. I also am slightly amused that some of the most ardent “Physical media or nothing!” folks refuse to partake of 4K disc players.

 

[lark144]

I think RAH has made the point that the extra expense of re-authoring Blu-rays is not considered worthwhile as the 4K discs can be played back on 2K equipment, all you need is a fairly inexpensive 4K Blu-ray player.

P.S. I also am slightly amused that some of the most ardent “Physical media or nothing!” folks refuse to partake of 4K disc players.

I spoke to a number of tech people here in NYC who advised me against getting a 4K player, unless I was going to get a UHD television. And I don't have the space for one. That's my view and there are companies that do include a Blu from a new master with the 4K, which I often buy. The others I'll live without.

 

[titch]

That is so annoying about the Blu-rays, I'm sorry. A major faux pas in my opinion.

I thought you were going to bite the bullet and go 4K this year? Quite a number of classic movies coming out on the format. Europe has a good number too.

 

[Robin9]

I spoke to a number of tech people here in NYC who advised me against getting a 4K player, unless I was going to get a UHD television. And I don't have the space for one. That's my view and there are companies that do include a Blu from a new master with the 4K, which I often buy. The others I'll live without.

I think you were given bad advice. As already mentioned, a 4K Blu-ray player can work with non-4K televisions or projectors. The one good reason for not buying a 4k player is if you are convinced that no 4K disc of a movie you like will ever be a worthwhile upgrade from the Blu-ray disc. Vertigo, Marnie and The Trouble With Harry are very substantial upgrades.

 

[Robert Harris]

I think you were given bad advice. As already mentioned, a 4K Blu-ray player can work with a non-4K televisions or projectors. The one good reason for not buying a 4k player is if you are convinced that no 4K disc of a movie you like will ever be a worthwhile upgrade from the Blu-ray disc. Vertigo, Marnie and The Trouble With Harry are very substantial upgrades.

Every title in the latest set is a substantial upgrade.

 

[Rick Thompson]

P.S. I also am slightly amused that some of the most ardent “Physical media or nothing!” folks refuse to partake of 4K disc players.

I am one of those. The reason is that I simply can't see much of a difference between blu and 4K, certainly not like the differece between DVD and blu. My next screen will probably be 4K (because it will be the only thing out there) but I don't feel any urge to spend the money now for the very small difference I see. You folks who see a big difference, go for it. But I don't.

 

[Bartman]

I spoke to a number of tech people here in NYC who advised me against getting a 4K player, unless I was going to get a UHD television. And I don't have the space for one. That's my view and there are companies that do include a Blu from a new master with the 4K, which I often buy. The others I'll live without.

While I agree that early 4K player adopters were plagued with disc problems & the HDR debacle, my major problem is my eyesight is not good enough to justify a 4K player, despite being tested by an opthalmologist two years ago. I also have space problems & fear of another (VHS/laserdisc/DVD/Blu-ray) buying spree.
That said, I do enjoy streaming 4K when the upgrade from Blu-ray is significant & that's what I'll do for Frenzy!

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

Another alternative is the included digital copy. iTunes streams the new transfer of "The Man Who Knew Too Much" in HD, for instance.

 

[JoshZ]

I think RAH has made the point that the extra expense of re-authoring Blu-rays is not considered worthwhile as the 4K discs can be played back on 2K equipment, all you need is a fairly inexpensive 4K Blu-ray player.

While 4K discs can be played on a 1080p HDTV, the downconversion from HDR to SDR is extremely complicated and almost all players do a crap job with it.

 

[David_B_K]

I am one of those. The reason is that I simply can't see much of a difference between blu and 4K, certainly not like the differece between DVD and blu. My next screen will probably be 4K (because it will be the only thing out there) but I don't feel any urge to spend the money now for the very small difference I see. You folks who see a big difference, go for it. But I don't.

As am I. I have glaucoma in one eye and my wife is legally blind in one eye due to macular degeneration. I would probably notice the difference with my good eye if I had a 4K system, but I don't think it would be life-changing. I doubt my wife would notice a difference at all. When my Sharp Aquos 1080P TV dies, I will certainly be getting a 4K set and player, but Blu-ray quality is good enough for me. Besides, RAH says some of the 4K releases of older catalog titles don't have 4K worth of resolution in them. As Bartman says, I don't relish re-purchasing my library in 4K as I near retirement.

 

[jayembee]

There's nothing wrong with deciding that what you currently have is "good enough".

 

[Josh Steinberg]

If you one day decide to go the 4K route, it’s almost better not to think of it as “upgrading to 4K” but simply getting the latest update of a title you like. I’m in the middle of a 4K system upgrade right now and it’s not because I was chomping at the bit to go 4K, it was because my HD stuff is reaching end of life and malfunctioning, and 4K is just what’s available now. I have no intention of repurchasing my entire library; I’ll get new versions of old titles in instances where I felt the older versions I owned had room for improvement and where the 4K versions are recognized to be improvements.

 

[mackjay]

in the minority, I've always liked FRENZY, with the exception of a gruesome murder scene early on that I find unnecessary and disturbing. THE FAMILY PLOT is downright awful, imho. To me it plays like a TV movie of the week

 

[James Luckard]

I am one of those. The reason is that I simply can't see much of a difference between blu and 4K, certainly not like the differece between DVD and blu. My next screen will probably be 4K (because it will be the only thing out there) but I don't feel any urge to spend the money now for the very small difference I see. You folks who see a big difference, go for it. But I don't.

I was late to the game with 4K, but I'll say one thing:

There's a HUGE difference in quality between generic 4K televisions and high-end 4K televisions.

If you do ever switch to 4K, and if you can afford it, I highly recommend buying a high-end 4K TV, even if you have to get a MUCH smaller one.

I bought a cheap regular 4K TV that was about 65" for about $700 and hated the image so much I returned it. Many cheap 4K TVS have motion smoothing built in that can't be turned off. Most people use their TVs to watch sports and play video games.

I talked to multiple friends who work in feature film post-production and asked what TV I should buy if I want to use my TV only as a monitor to watch movies, and if I want them to look like they do in a theater.

They all recommended an LG OLED.

I bought one, a 55" TV for $1300, and it's the best investment I ever made.

The image is STAGGERING.

The leap from BD to UHD, with a good player (I have a Panasonic 820) and a good TV, is as huge as the leap from VHS to DVD was. I'm not kidding.

UHD is the first home video format that can properly reproduce film grain, in my opinion.

I urge anyone who has dismissed 4K, as I did for a couple of years, to reconsider, because I'm a total convert now.

 

[James Luckard]

And I should've known that, as I have a copy of that disc. Bought it, but hadn't gotten around to watching it.

So, with the replies to my comment, it appears that all of Hitch's films are accounted for. Which only leaves some of his short films unreleased. And maybe two of the TV episodes -- one from Suspense (1957) and one from Startime (1960) -- that he directed.

There's a French DVD set from Universal that includes every single episode of TV he ever directed. I have no idea why they never released such a set in the US.

It has all 17 of the Hitchcock-directed "Presents" episodes, his one episode of "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour," and his "Suspense" and "Startime" episodes.

Unfortunately, it's PAL, so they're sped up by 4%. Also, many of the "Presents" episodes have alternate French title cards. I only bought it for the "AH Hour," "Suspense" and "Startime" episodes. I've kept the 4 "Presents" DVDs from 20 years ago for those episodes.

The "Startime" episode was also included on the overseas DVD sets of "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour."

His episode of "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour" is also included as an extra on the 2017 Universal Blu-Ray set "Alfred Hitchcock: The Ultimate Collection," a repackaging of the 2012 "Alfred Hitchcock: The Masterpiece Collection" BD set which added two bonus DVDs of TV shows, but I wasn't going to spend all that money to rebuy 14 films I already had, just to get that episode in NTSC at its normal speed.

Also, his short films Bon Voyage and Aventure Malgache are restored and are extras on the Eureka BD of Lifeboat.

 

[James Luckard]

Topaz probably would be improved by putting the shorter theatrical version on disc rather than the extended pre-release version that they’ve been putting out for years.

Only the UK and US get the longer version of Topaz on home video.

The rest of the world has always had the theatrical cut on every home video format, as far as I know, because Universal lacks foreign language dubs for the 20 mins of added scenes.

I bought the German BD of Topaz to get the theatrical cut, and I plan to buy one of the foreign UHDs too.

At the moment, there are three options of foreign UHDs of Topaz:

France
Scandinavia (one disc for all countries)
Spain

 

[James Luckard]

If you one day decide to go the 4K route, it’s almost better not to think of it as “upgrading to 4K” but simply getting the latest update of a title you like. I’m in the middle of a 4K system upgrade right now and it’s not because I was chomping at the bit to go 4K, it was because my HD stuff is reaching end of life and malfunctioning, and 4K is just what’s available now. I have no intention of repurchasing my entire library; I’ll get new versions of old titles in instances where I felt the older versions I owned had room for improvement and where the 4K versions are recognized to be improvements.

I felt the same... at first...

If you get a good 4K TV and a good 4K UHD Blu-Ray player, you'll soon find that about 90% of UHDs are noticeable upgrades over BDs, even if they come from the same video master. It's dangerously addictive.