I was over at the Roger Deakins forum, as you already know, he is a top cinematographer, there seems a consensus that 2K scans can not really do justice to film grain and you need 4K scans to capture everything with accuracy, so while this is probably a good looking disc i believe it could be better, Time Bandits had a 2K film scan.
Post and link below.
"Scanning resolution etc. is very important and not every system will get the best from a negative. The strange thing is that grain will appear less on a 2K scan than on a 4K scan. The fact is film grain is finer than a 2K pixel and that is why I insist on 4K scans, as I like any grain that there is to be sharp and the image also. Some would say that you need a 6K scan to see the full detail/fine grain in a 35mm or anamorphic negative and I believe they would be right."
Foxy, I don't disagree with the point, it's more a matter of degree.
I've followed RD's comments on this, and he's never said that a 2k scan isn't good, more that you need a 4k scan to squeeze every last drop of information out of the source.
I'd always desire the best you can get, but I'll happily settle for 85% of the maximum, particularly on a low budget '80s British film which, let's face it, is never going to get the attention/time/money lavished on it that you'll get for bigger titles.
This is a rare Blu-ray double dip for me, so I'll have a look and compare the two But I think it's fantastic that we've got a quite serviceable Blu-ray Disc release being replaced by something (apparently) better.
Foxy, my movie-going/learning experience was a mixture of third-rate & ancient rep prints, VHS, and P&S broadcasts. Occasionally I got a good 35mm print at the NFT, or similar. In most cases a 2k scan will take me to at least that.