A Few Words About A few words about...™ Spartacus -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[FoxyMulder]

Just wondering why it was possible for Criterion to release this brand new deluxe MAD MAD WORLD not long after a pretty decent looking BD hit the market just about a year go? How was it possible for Fox to fix and rerelease a brand new replacement for their substandard release of PATTON? I mean, how is it so "impossible" that we can even hope for a new SPARTACUS when a perfectly beautiful restoration already exists. Aren't they are doing a large format 4K scan for the upcoming 3,000 unit only TT release of KHARTOUM? Besides, anyone who bought the Universal BD abortion would toss it in the trash in a second if a decent BD were made available. This negative reasoning just makes no sense to me at all. I'm just angry because I was actually expecting that we would see it in the next few months.

I also do not understand why Universal would not pay the money for a new transfer of Spartacus, are they so short sighted about their film history, i cannot understand why a studio cannot do deals with international distributors and licence the title out for three years, for example get Arrow in the UK onboard, get Criterion in the USA, get some other distributors in France and Australia, all of them footing the bill along with Universal, let each release in their various territories in a limited 3000 copies type of deal.

Alternatively just pay for the new transfer themselves and re-release and get all the acclaim and goodwill that will come from doing this. The current version is an abomination, i have been waiting years to buy this on blu ray, the wait continues.

 

[Kevin EK]

I would frankly love to see Universal pay to do a proper 4K transfer of Spartacus, and for them to work with Criterion to have a really nice Blu-ray special edition come out. But I don't know who at Universal would approve the funds to do this new transfer. They could have done that in the first place, and went the other way. But they own the movie. It's their call whether they want to do what we would prefer that they do.

My frustration with what happened with Spartacus is both that the transfer wasn't well done and that the plentiful extras from the Criterion laserdisc/DVD edition weren't ported over. Both ideas could have been accomplished, particularly if they had just done the transfer right and licensed the title to Criterion. But it's clear that for the 50th Anniversary they wanted to release it themselves. Hence, we get a Blu-ray with the minimal extra content that Universal themselves controlled. None of the other materials from the Criterion edition came over - not the commentary, not the other interviews, none of that.

Given where we are now, I continue to wish that Universal would revisit this title, but I honestly can't imagine it. Dedicated Kubrick fans and fans of the movie would certainly buy it, but it wouldn't likely get a mass reception. We'd all buy it, but that's not a number that would justify the cost, sadly.

 

[Ed Lachmann]

Okay, but I still can't imagine them not doing it since the cost of putting even a large format film up on a telecine and running off a 4K master in one afternoon simply can't cost more than the potential international sales of a bonafide classic. As you noted, this is a landmark Kubrick film and a true classic beloved around the world. And, when you read the Amazon reviews from other countries, it's clear that everyone is pissed off about this travesty. Plus, I still wonder how Fox could possibly afford to do the same damn thing with PATTON? It didn't bankrupt them, after all.

 

[Kevin EK]

I really can't answer why Fox was willing to spend the money to redo Patton but Universal has not wished to expend the funds for Spartacus. My instincts say that it may be as simple as that statement. It may be that Spartacus would be a bigger job, for reasons I would not know.

But the thing is, that the number of people we're talking about who are concerned about the transfer on Spartacus is quite small as far as Universal is looking. Yes, it's a landmark Kubrick film, and a classic. But it's not going to move the number of units that a Jaws would sell. And the big moment for its sales was the 2010 edition for the 50th Anniversary. Since Universal already took the steps that it did, and since those editions were already bought, both on their own and in the Kubrick box set, and some were even bought again last year, I just don't see them spending more money to issue the title again. I wish they would. But it just isn't likely.

 

[Robert Harris]

Okay, but I still can't imagine them not doing it since the cost of putting even a large format film up on a telecine and running off a 4K master in one afternoon simply can't cost more than the potential international sales of a bonafide classic. As you noted, this is a landmark Kubrick film and a true classic beloved around the world. And, when you read the Amazon reviews from other countries, it's clear that everyone is pissed off about this travesty. Plus, I still wonder how Fox could possibly afford to do the same damn thing with PATTON? It didn't bankrupt them, after all.

Why a 4k master? And if a 4k master, image harvest time would be a tad longer than an afternoon.RAH

 

[FoxyMulder]

Why a 4k master? And if a 4k master, image harvest time would be a tad longer than an afternoon.RAH

Because 4K blu ray is on the horizon so why not prepare for it and if 4K is good enough for Lawrence then why not for Spartacus.

 

[Paul Rossen]

Because 4K blu ray is on the horizon so why not prepare for it and if 4K is good enough for Lawrence then why not for Spartacus.

Why not go for 6k or higher?

 

[FoxyMulder]

Why not go for 6k or higher?

An 8K scan and a 4K master is good enough for now.

 

[Robert Harris]

An 8K scan and a 4K master is good enough for now.

Of what elements?

 

[FoxyMulder]

Of what elements?

I believe when you did your restoration back in the nineties that a 65mm preservation internegative was made, is there any reason they cannot use that, if not that then what is the best possible source for a modern day new scan regardless of the cost.

 

[Douglas R]

In the UK alone, in the past two years, the Blu-ray of SPARTACUS has been repackaged at least 5 times - 50th Anniversary Edition, Limited Edition Digibook, Original Poster Series, Three Disc Set with "Robin Hood" and "Gladiator" and Universal 100th Anniversary Edition (I may even have missed one or two!).

So many reissues indicates that it must have sold extremely well. It's also one of the few titles from that era which I regularly see on sale in retail outlets. From Universal's point of view, I imagine they must think, what would be the point in spending a large amount of money for a new restoration which would sell relatively few extra copies to a limited number of enthusiasts?

 

[OliverK]

In the UK alone, in the past two years, the Blu-ray of SPARTACUS has been repackaged at least 5 times - 50th Anniversary Edition, Limited Edition Digibook, Original Poster Series, Three Disc Set with "Robin Hood" and "Gladiator" and Universal 100th Anniversary Edition (I may even have missed one or two!). So many reissues indicates that it must have sold extremely well. It's also one of the few titles from that era which I regularly see on sale in retail outlets. From Universal's point of view, I imagine they must think, what would be the point in spending a large amount of money for a new restoration which would sell relatively few extra copies to a limited number of enthusiasts?

I hate it when people buy this stuff - Universal must feel very smart to sell this substandard product that they spent almost nothing on. Oh well, I make it a point to spend next to nothing on Blu-rays from Universal in return and I also let them know why: Lots of substandard catalog releases like Spartacus.

 

[Ed Lachmann]

So many reissues indicates that it must have sold extremely well. It's also one of the few titles from that era which I regularly see on sale in retail outlets. From Universal's point of view, I imagine they must think, what would be the point in spending a large amount of money for a new restoration which would sell relatively few extra copies to a limited number of enthusiasts?

But, if that same old piece o'crap BD still sells well and the vast majority of fans who own it are really dissatisfied with that lousy sub-standard product, wouldn't it make sense that ALL of these folks would pony up for a newly transferred BD? Seems that every Criterion title boasts a "new 4K or 2K transfer" and often for some pretty obscure titles. I'm not the equivalent of a thoracic surgeon who specializes in restoration and/or film transfers, either. I'm just the unwashed jamoke who buys them. I did work at a studio that had a Rank transfer unit (the Rolls Royce of its day) back in the 80's, however. I sometimes was called upon to thread up the 35mm prints and start up the machine. The machine did its frame by frame scan, chugging along happily. Then I removed the print and put up the next reel. Whole thing took a couple hours at most. So do a 2K scan or a 1080 scan or whatever you please and, by all means, save some money. And have patience with us morons who can't understand why this process would break the World Bank. I saw the restored SPARTACUS in theater not many years ago and that "restoration" looked fine to me. I guess the REAL question is how do the limited number of PATTON enthusiasts compare to the limited number of SPARTACUS enthusiasts?

 

[moovtune]

In the UK alone, in the past two years, the Blu-ray of SPARTACUS has been repackaged at least 5 times - 50th Anniversary Edition, Limited Edition Digibook, Original Poster Series, Three Disc Set with "Robin Hood" and "Gladiator" and Universal 100th Anniversary Edition (I may even have missed one or two!).

So many reissues indicates that it must have sold extremely well. It's also one of the few titles from that era which I regularly see on sale in retail outlets. From Universal's point of view, I imagine they must think, what would be the point in spending a large amount of money for a new restoration which would sell relatively few extra copies to a limited number of enthusiasts?

Then again, perhaps it didn't sell well and all the repackaging was an attempt to sell more copies and unload the warehouse of all the pressings originally made. In any case, I agree it desperately needs to be redone.

 

[Persianimmortal]

I admit that I have absolutely no idea how many copies of the existing transfer of Spartacus have been sold, nor what proportion of those are people who have complained about the transfer. But I think in all likelihood, the people who are dissatisfied with the transfer likely form an educated and vocal minority - of both the marketplace as a whole, and Spartacus buyers in particular. Sadly, I suspect that Universal is right in their strategy, purely from a business perspective, of pumping out half-ass transfers on Blu-ray, often using DVD-era masters pumped up with obvious digital manipulation. They make easy money doing this, for very little investment, in what is likely a very small market anyway (classic movies on Blu).

I for one haven't given Universal any money for the Spartacus BD, and will continue to make do with the DVD version, because I don't see a new release on the immediate horizon.

Having said that, there is strong possibility that in coming years, as 4K UHD TVs become mainstream (say anywhere from 5 to 10 years from now), Universal and other studios will create proper 4K transfers for digital download/streaming. Their existing masters would look too terrible on large 4K screens, no matter how much they fudge it. For now, I can't see them spending money to do it just for Blu-ray on existing 1080p sets.

 

[Douglas R]

I for one haven't given Universal any money for the Spartacus BD, and will continue to make do with the DVD version Having said that, there is strong possibility that in coming years, as 4K UHD TVs become mainstream (say anywhere from 5 to 10 years from now), Universal and other studios will create proper 4K transfers for digital download/streaming. .

In 10 years time I'm not sure if my then aged eyes will see the difference between DVD and BD, let alone UHD, so I'll take what's available now rather than wait for something which may never happen and at least the existing BD of SPARTACUS looks better than the DVD.

 

[Reed Grele]

To paraphrase Gracchus: I'll take some image corruption along with some blu-ray resolution... but I won't take... the dvd of Universal and no blu-ray at all!

 

[Yorkshire]

I'm with Doug on this one.

I hope Spartacus is restored to its full glory.

But it may never be, or at least not for a long time.

The question is (actually 'was', for me when I bought the disc) whether the less-than-stellar upgrade over the DVD was worth the £6 or so it cost me. The answer was yes.

But it's certainly a 'yes' which hopes for more to come. Much more.

Steve W

 

[Kevin EK]

Just to chime back in for a second.

I wouldn't say that Universal spent "almost nothing" on Spartacus. It's just that they didn't take the steps that could have prepared it for Blu-ray properly. I don't know how many units they moved of it, but my instincts say that all the repackagings are what James thinks: multiple attempts to get unsold product out the door. I think the biggest sales they got out of it were when it initially appeared on Blu, and uninformed collectors picked up the discs right away, and when it was sold in the Stanley Kubrick box that WB put together.

An ideal situation to me, as I said, would be to have them revisit the title and do the transfer properly, and maybe even release it in conjunction with Criterion so that viewers could enjoy all the extra features as well. Or they could remaster it, do it properly, and offer exchanges for people that bought the 2010 release, as they did with Out of Africa. But I just don't see them going back and pouring the necessary funds into the project.

I also wouldn't say that Universal has LOTS of substandard releases on Blu. I'd say they've had a few, and we've covered them here fairly carefully. But I wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There were some really nice catalogue releases over the past couple of years, and we shouldn't discount those. The notion that Universal is just using the old masters was something I had thought until last year, when we were able to confirm that actually new masters were being done. The point that they've gone cheaper on several titles is still accurate, but it's not accurate to use that to describe their entire model. Otherwise, how do we explain the work done on the Monster movies last year, or the work done on High Plains Drifter this year?

I'm also not sold on the whole 4K TV idea at this point. I don't see how you would see much difference in PQ in any size TV we would normally encounter here. I think you'll see a difference in a much, much larger projection screen, and you'll absolutely see it in a regular movie theater. But on a 65" HDTV as I have? All I can see a 4K TV doing is making the color a little deeper. Now, if we're talking about glasses-free 3D, then you've got a different story. Whenever they finally get the kinks worked out of that idea, you could see 4K TVs making 3D a very popular experience in the home. But we're years out from that.

 

[JoHud]

Fail.RAH

Pretty much sums up this blu-ray, even moreso at this stage in the blu-ray's lifespan.

I'm usually someone who can compromise with a sub-par blu-ray, but this was just bad. I got rid of it second hand the first chance I got. This is one of the few where I'm sticking to the standard DVD until it's done right.

Definitely deserves a remastering and considering how much of a tentpole classic this is (along with being a Kubrick film). I'm sure a new transfer will get funded at some point. It's not a question of "if" but "when".