UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Stalag 17 -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

It's nice to see Kino releasing more black & white classics in 4k UHD, but sometimes I wonder if it's worth the trouble and expense.

Billy Wilder's Stalag 17 is a perfect example.

Don't get me know. There is absolutely nothing wrong with releasing 70 year-old black & white productions in 4k. They can look great, and this one does also.

One of my pet peeves in packaging is that I prefer to find the more highly resolved disc mounted to the right of a case, when in combination with another. It seems that probably 90% of the time, the higher resolution disc is on the right, but on occasion...

Such was the case, with Stalag. I played the Blu-ray, being uprezzed to 4k in projection, and thought it looked terrific, especially as I'd hear aeons ago, that the OCN was AWOL. This is unconfirmed.

As I removed the disc from the player, I happened to check, and found that I'd been viewing the Blu-ray. So I popped the 4k into the player.

What I found was similar to so many other instances in earlier productions, where the OCN probably tapped out at 2k or less, so where is there to go, beyond adding a layer of Dolby Vision, which my projector cannot decode and projects as HDR.

The difference between the two at the screen, was minimal. The 2k had a tiny bit of softness around the grain structure, but from a nominal seating disturbance, there really is no difference.

So the question is asked once again. What is the purpose of releasing a 2k project in 4k?

It eeks out every last bit of detail that "might" be on the element, and that's fine. Especially for a film the quality of Stalag 17, which beautifully stands the test of time.


Image – 5 (Dolby Vision)

Audio – 5 (DTS-HD MA 2.0)

Pass / Fail – Pass

Plays nicely with projectors - Yes

Makes use of and works well in 4k - 3.5

Upgrade from old Blu-ray - Yes

Worth your attention - 10

Slipcover rating - 2

Highly Recommended

RAH


Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

See on Amazon

 

[Malcolm R]

So the question is asked once again. What is the purpose of releasing a 2k project in 4k?

To suck the dollars out of the pockets of collectors and completists.

 

[PatrickDA]

I've never owned it in any form, so I'll be more than happy to buy this version.

 

[Edwin-S]

The publisher can charge more because consumers think they are getting better quality with 4K on the box, even if they are not?

It is exactly like hard covers versus soft covers. The story between the covers is exactly the same, but the hard cover is more expensive because........hard cover.

 

[Robert Harris]

The publisher can charge more because consumers think they are getting better quality with 4K on the box, even if they are not?

It is exactly like hard covers versus soft covers. The story between the covers is exactly the same, but the hard cover is more expensive because........hard cover.

Much higher quality paper, larger format, archival binding. Soft cover = disposable.

4k vs 2k, there is a quality difference. It just can’t be discerned from a distance.

 

[jayembee]

It is exactly like hard covers versus soft covers. The story between the covers is exactly the same, but the hard cover is more expensive because........hard cover.

I prefer hardcovers because I like the heft.

 

[David_B_K]

The publisher can charge more because consumers think they are getting better quality with 4K on the box, even if they are not?

It is exactly like hard covers versus soft covers. The story between the covers is exactly the same, but the hard cover is more expensive because........hard cover.

If you are a collector, hardcovers are the way to go. The pages are usually sewn in for hardcovers; for paperbacks they are glued in. Over time the glue will harden and start cracking and the pages will start coming out as the book falls apart. If all you want is a read with no collecting in mind, certainly a paperback or Kindle version will do.

 

[mackjay]

I totally get what you say, and I'm happy to see an authoritative person say it. I own only 8 4K discs, and I favor older films, where I think the higher resolution can make a big difference. But aside from the oldest films I have in 4K (Universal horrors, like Dracula, The Invisible Man...which look incredible good to my eyes.) I don't see any really discernible improvement over standard Blu-ray, which I consider the ultimate presentation just about any film on home video. I am far from an expert about this, but, with few exceptions, I don't see a need for 4K in my collection. The 4K titles I bought were ones I only owned as DVDs, to there is of course a vast improvement. / I smiled at your story about playing the wrong disc. Recently did that too, but the wrong one was a DVD and wow was I disappointed until I saw my mistake

 

[SimonTC]

beyond adding a layer of Dolby Vision, which my projector cannot decode and projects as HDR

Just a nitpick here - Dolby Vision is a HDR format. Undecoded DV falls back to the HDR10 layer.

 

[DanH1972]

When using 4k media there are also the benefits of a greater pixel bit depth, wider gamut, and dynamic range to eek out small gains in the source for older movies compared to the more limited 8 bit, Rec 709 Blu-ray format.

If anything, you are less likely to get visible banding with 4k, which is the bane of my existence, especially when using a front projection system.

 

[Dr. Lejos]

For me, the rerelease of classic titles in 4K is always welcome when a discernible difference can be seen, which happily Mr. Harris lets us know with his choice “few words”.

Older titles seem to benefit most from the upgrade when the earlier blu-ray was published quite a few years ago, so that beyond the higher resolution, we are gaining via other restorative advances as well.

Tho I guess it goes without saying that the extent these improvements can also depend a great deal on the equipment used for your own viewing experience.

As Mr. Harris indicates, visually with STALAG 17, there doesn’t appear to be a significant improvement. But since my blu-ray is an old one (2013 published by Warner), I’d hope some upgrade with the new scan would be inevitable.

Actually, a primary selling point for me is the new commentary by Joseph McBride, who like Bogdanovich (sadly no longer with us) was able to meet and reminisce with directors like Wilder, Welles, Hawks and Ford, and has been researching, writing, commenting and in McBride’s case, teaching on the background, appreciation and style of these master directors for many years. His commentaries are always especially informative and engaging. He’s done several for Kino including SOME LIKE IT HOT, THE APARTMENT (one of my favorite 4Ks), THE FORTUNE COOKIE (blu), THE LOST WEEKEND … even EMPEROR WALTZ and FIVE GRAVES TO CAIRO … so I guess if you want the equivalent of taking one of Mr. McBride’s college courses, pick up a batch of these discs, along with his Wilder book, and you can lay claim to deserving a college credit without actually getting one.

 

[James Luckard]

As Mr. Harris indicates, visually with STALAG 17, there doesn’t appear to be a significant improvement. But since my blu-ray is an old one (2013 published by Warner), I’d hope some upgrade with the new scan would be inevitable.

The difference between the BD included in the UHD set and the UHD itself may look negligible to some people. That's fair. I noticed the difference immediately when I tried the BD just now, after watching the UHD last night. But if others find the difference subtle to the point of being meaningless, I won't argue.

The bigger issue is that the BD included in the UHD set is sourced from the same new 4K scan of the OCN used for the UHD. That's why they look so similar.

The KL BD is not the original BD, which was an identical disc issued three times, with slightly different packaging, by Warners in 2013, Paramount in 2017 and Paramount again in 2022. That disc used an ancient HD transfer that looks almost like a DVD against the new transfer.

I just want to be sure people are aware that the BD issued this year by Kino Lorber, as both a standalone and with the UHD, is not the same old master that many people already have.

 

[PMF]

I simply like the fact that KL is cranking out the Billy Wilder titles on 4K/UHD at a good steady pace. Even a little improvement via 4K is a very good thing in my book, and without hesitation a purchase of Stalag 17 is money of mine well spent. Sold.

Could Irma La Douce, Sunset Blvd, The Lost Weekend or Sabrina be far behind on the 4K/UHD landscape? Fingers crossed; and my thanks to Kino Lorber for all of their efforts.

 

[Robert Harris]

The difference between the BD included in the UHD set and the UHD itself may look negligible to some people. That's fair. I noticed the difference immediately when I tried the BD just now, after watching the UHD last night. But if others find the difference subtle to the point of being meaningless, I won't argue.

The bigger issue is that the BD included in the UHD set is sourced from the same new 4K scan of the OCN used for the UHD. That's why they look so similar.

The KL BD is not the original BD, which was an identical disc issued three times, with slightly different packaging, by Warners in 2013, Paramount in 2017 and Paramount again in 2022. That disc used an ancient HD transfer that looks almost like a DVD against the new transfer.

I just want to be sure people are aware that the BD issued this year by Kino Lorber, as both a standalone and with the UHD, is not the same old master that many people already have.

Possibly I should make the point more often when comparing a new 4k UHD release to a BD, that the reference goes to the necessity of 4k over BD OF THE SAME MASTER.

Comparing a new 4k to a ten to fifteen year-old Blu derived from an old master is never a wash.

 

[Gerani53]

While the presumption is that the 4K cannot help but be better than a BD, it should also be noted that the increased resolution often brings with it excessive grain and other screen confetti. Some shots are actually unwatchable in 4K; these same shots may be problematic on the Blu-ray, but they are nowhere near as bad. Check out the establishing shot of the aquarium in CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. We're within the watery display, and we can see Julie Adams watching the fish swim about on the other side of the glass. Or rather, we can barely see her. In 4K, this is a video disaster; but the Blu-ray handles this problematic shot far more gracefully, so much so that I have to debate which version of the film to run for viewers. So, yes, when everything is working as it should, 4K can indeed be wonderful. The recent IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE 4K was perfect to my eyes, as was THE TRAIN. But I've found that, X amount of the time, you have to pay for the privilege of better-looking material with frustrating anomalies out of left field, like the one I've just described. My two cents.