2001: A Space Odyssey (4k UHD) Available for Preorder

3 Stars

FB_IMG_1519785963288.jpg

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

Published by

Kevin Collins

administrator

83 Comments

  1. Jeff F.

    $41.99? I love this film, but that's way too pricey. Prices need to come down on 4K titles in order to entice more to join the format.

    This is MSRP. The street price will be between $20 and $30 by release day.

  2. Sam Posten

    Pre-ordered but this is TERRIBLE artwork compared to the iconic HAL one that it seems the UK is getting =/

    Funny as I feel the total opposite. However, so long as we get top notch PQ quality I am fine with any cover.

  3. dpippel

    This is MSRP. The street price will be between $20 and $30 by release day.

    Since it's Warner Brothers, it will probably be a little over $30 and will stay around that price for quite awhile. That was their pattern with Blade Runner and Unforgiven in UHD.

  4. Jeff F.

    $41.99? I love this film, but that's way too pricey. Prices need to come down on 4K titles in order to entice more to join the format.

    I agree; but, with no information from my end; this price could also be an indicator of a rolled out red carpet on both the transfer and much, much more. So, let's wait and see, as I'm thinking that something great just might be ahead.

  5. Just got an email from Amazon with a release date:

    We now have delivery date(s) for the order you placed on February 27, 2018 (Order# 114-3650159-3414669):

    "2001: A Space Odyssey (UHD/BD) (4K Ultra HD) [Blu-ray]"
    Estimated arrival date: May 08, 2018

  6. Unfortunately I got a notice today from Amazon where they said there was no set release date. Only a few weeks ago I got a notice indicating that I would have the disc by mid May. Wonder if there is going to be a delay?

  7. Jim*Tod

    Unfortunately I got a notice today from Amazon where they said there was no set release date. Only a few weeks ago I got a notice indicating that I would have the disc by mid May. Wonder if there is going to be a delay?

    I had the same thing happen to me.

  8. TravisR

    A movie prop replica company called Master Replicas is doing HAL too.

    Yeah, mine's from the same guy. The one I have is what he was making five years ago and the new one is what he is doing now. I'm very curious as to the price.

    —————

  9. I have seen on Film Tech that the 70mm print of Ready Player One has a trailer of 2001 attached.
    No 70mm prints in the UK.:angry:

    So if this is getting a new 70mm release and this is from the 65mm neg and the 4KUHD is from that as well
    we will all be very happy.:)

  10. From that article:

    "According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation."

    I'm pretty sure the 70mm print (prints?) that were struck in 2001 were new prints. Perhaps they came from vintage IPs, but the print wasn't faded and was in great condition. I saw it projected at the Loews Astor Plaza in NYC and it looked gorgeous on their huge screen, even though the theater stupidly removed the intermission.

    Vincent

  11. "Nolan said, “One of my earliest memories of cinema is seeing Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, in 70mm, at the Leicester Square Theatre in London with my father. The opportunity to be involved in recreating that experience for a new generation, and of introducing our new unrestored 70mm print of Kubrick’s masterpiece in all its analogue glory at the Festival de Cannes is an honour and a privilege.

    What a bizarre statement (the unrestored comment). I wonder if this is a sloppy translation of a French-language press release? I imagine what Nolan is actually referring to is the lack of "updated" special effects, and he isn't actually touting a complete lack of restoration as being a good thing?

    Vincent

  12. Yeah, I'm sure there's a mistake or two there. I understand that the originals are not in a great state. If there's an interpos/interneg floating around, they must be a few years old. I'd think it's more likely that a print has been made from the new scan & restoration made by Warner. Whatever, I won't be going to Cannes to see it, but I'm very much looking forward to reading some reviews of the new Blu-ray

  13. Vincent_P

    I'm pretty sure the 70mm print (prints?) that were struck in 2001 were new prints. Perhaps they came from vintage IPs, but the print wasn't faded and was in great condition. I saw it projected at the Loews Astor Plaza in NYC and it looked gorgeous on their huge screen, even though the theater stupidly removed the intermission.

    Likewise, that was a great presentation.

    I think Warner made two prints back for the 2001-2002 domestic re-release. Because many of the venues it played at no longer had 70mm capability, Warner supplied not only the film print but also the 70mm projector to theaters that needed it. If memory serves, there were two new prints struck for that run, and they'd leapfrog from city to city during the revival. (It was scheduled more like a band going on tour, rather than a standard movie release, in that it didn't play simultaneously across the country.) I remember seeing the NYC showing, and then seeing it again in Boston about a month later. The prints looked slightly different, so I presume I saw both of the new prints.

    The Museum Of The Moving Image in Astoria shows 2001 every summer in 70mm — I think they're showing one of the two prints from the 2001-2002 reissue. It's generally in good shape, but has picked up some scratches along the way. They have been showing the same print from year to year, because I recognize the scratching happening in the exact same place. (If you happen to see that print, look out for the green lines appearing during the scene where Bowman is in the pod, arguing with HAL about opening the doors.)

    It would be great if the Nolan presentation was filmed for inclusion in an upcoming disc-based re-release. I am sincerely hoping that the new remaster is presented on regular Blu-ray in addition to UHD. While I will undoubtedly buy it in UHD one day, right now I am still just in HD, and have no plans to upgrade in the foreseeable future – but I'd love to retire the current (underwhelming) Blu-ray.

  14. From Deadline.

    According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation. There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. Nolan worked closely with Warner Bros. throughout the mastering process. The film will also return to U.S. theaters in 70mm beginning May 18, 2018.

  15. Tino

    From Deadline.

    According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation. There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. Nolan worked closely with Warner Bros. throughout the mastering process. The film will also return to U.S. theaters in 70mm beginning May 18, 2018.

    What is a "new printing element"? Thank you.

  16. And there was an interesting feature in the Hollywood issue of Vanity Fair, which I just read.

    I wasn't aware of the extremely complex nature of filming the special effects, to avoid composite shots:

    "One overriding difficulty was that Kubrick insisted there be no second- or third-generation degradation of the film image when shots were composited; thus every element of a given scene—a spaceship, say, plus a star field, and maybe a planet or actor or both—had to be shot on the same film negative, with separate passes through the camera sometimes coming more than a year apart. More complex shots might have 7, 8, even 10 elements. If a new pass was wonky—if stars showed through the edge of a spaceship—the negative would be scrapped and the entire sequence begun over. As Kubrick wrote Clarke, “We are getting magnificent shots, but everything is like a 106-move chess game with two adjournments.”

    https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo…scenes-of-2001-a-space-odyssey-50-years-later

  17. Robert Harris

    Unfortunately, some of that footage no longer survives, and is represented by dupes from b/w masters.

    So these parts of the original negative were worn out so much they were cut and dupes put into the negative? And then the cut pieces were not archived but thrown into the garbage? And this kind of thing was done without aksing or informing Kubrick, behind his back?

  18. Michel_Hafner

    So these parts of the original negative were worn out so much they were cut and dupes put into the negative? And then the cut pieces were not archived but thrown into the garbage? And this kind of thing was done without aksing or informing Kubrick, behind his back?

    I'd think decisions like this would have been made at a really low level. A shot is too damaged to go through a printing machine, so the film lab get in touch with MGM who organize a dupe (or maybe all that's done & decided at the lab), & who wants the damaged shot that's been cut out? No one. And it doesn't help that nearly all the film labs have been closed down now, along with all the vast film vaults. And who wants to get Kubrick involved? I wouldn't. He's moved on, now making films exclusively for Warner.

  19. Billy Batson

    I'd think decisions like this would have been made at a really low level. A shot is too damaged to go through a printing machine, so the film lab get in touch with MGM who organize a dupe (or maybe all that's done & decided at the lab), & who wants the damaged shot that's been cut out? No one. And it doesn't help that nearly all the film labs have been closed down now, along with all the vast film vaults. And who wants to get Kubrick involved? I wouldn't. He's moved on, now making films exclusively for Warner.

    I understand the rationale but in hindsight it's stupid like many other things that were done back then, like tossing all nitrates after copying to "safety". Lack of imagination about what use/worth films could have some decades from then and how technology could progress and make the unthinkable doable.

  20. Yup, & we don't learn. I'm sure it's still happening today with lots of things. The long view is a long ways off, & there's budgets & short term considerations. In fifty years time people will be outraged at what we threw away & pulled down (& then there's the rainforest).

  21. Please keep something in mind when it came to inserting dupes.

    If a lab had an order for 20 70mm prints, they would be struck on optical printers. Probably 2-3 prints per week.

    If there was a tear — I generally received a call from the lab at around 7AM, informing me as to what shots in Lawrence had torn the night before — one had to immediately go to the masters, or shut down printing.

    This was standard lab procedure.

    When a large order was being produced, generally the masters stood by somewhere accessible.

  22. I really wasn't that bothered about this release, I saw it three or four times on the big screen at the Casino Cinerama, London back in 1968, but thought I might find it a bit slow now. Now reading all this stuff online has enthused me, I can't wait to read the reports/reviews on the Blu-ray (especially from Mr Harris). I bought the Taschen book about the making of the film a couple of months ago, only £12 on Amazon UK, it's over £36 now (Amazon must have been clearing out their warehouse).

  23. If the colors in the trailer are indicative of what's in the Bluray (or UHD if you will), I think I'll stick to my current Bluray.
    I already have enough teal and yellow blurays in my collection.

    (reference comparison from bluray.com)
    top: old bluray
    bottom: new trailer of restored film

    [​IMG]

  24. Konstantinos

    If the colors in the trailer are indicative of what's in the Bluray (or UHD if you will), I think I'll stick to my current Bluray.
    I already have enough teal and yellow blurays in my collection.

    Ha, exactly my thoughts on seeing the trailer, & those caps are very damming.

  25. Yet more wreckstoration. Yuk. Every other new release of a vintage film is coming out like this now. I hope this, along with music's loudness wars, is just an extended fad. Perhaps one day this period of madness will be looked back on as a pointless marketing craze, like 1980s-style colorization or "Electronically Reprocessed Stereo" and "Duophonic" recordings of the 1960s and 1970s.

    Regardless, cue the usual confirmation bias-ridden posters who will swear blind 2001 was aways meant to be thoroughly tealed and you can't judge its original colour palette based on years of mistimed home video video releases, blah, blah, blah…

  26. I don't think a quick scan of a newly made trailer released to YouTube should be taken as representative of either the new 70mm prints (created in the analogue realm) or the upcoming UHD release (for which the transfer source hasn't been announced, and may not even have been done yet).

    Also, for what it's worth, the current Blu-ray should not be used as the absolute final word on what the film is supposed to look like. Some of us, myself included, dislike the Blu-ray because it's not at all representative of the 70mm prints.

  27. Since they closed the Ziegfeld several years ago I can't think of a decent sized theater in NYC that could take advange of a 70MM print . Ah for the days before the Rivoli theater was first twined and then torn down.

  28. Josh Steinberg

    I don't think a quick scan of a newly made trailer released to YouTube should be taken as representative of either the new 70mm prints (created in the analogue realm) or the upcoming UHD release (for which the transfer source hasn't been announced, and may not even have been done yet).

    I agree, it's just a trailer, but if the new Blu-ray does look like that flat greeny mess, then there's going to be online fireworks, & I'll save myself a few bob by not buying it.

    …& thinking about it, it is only a trailer, but why not get the colour right for it?

  29. Garysb

    Since they closed the Ziegfeld several years ago I can't think of a decent sized theater in NYC that could take advange of a 70MM print . Ah for the days before the Rivoli theater was first twined and then torn down.

    They could book it into the IMAX screen at Loew's (now AMC) Lincoln Square.

  30. Brent Reid

    Yet more wreckstoration. Yuk. Every other new release of a vintage film is coming out like this now. I hope this, along with music's loudness wars, is just an extended fad. Perhaps one day this period of madness will be looked back on as a pointless marketing craze, like 1980s-style colorization or "Electronically Reprocessed Stereo" and "Duophonic" recordings of the 1960s and 1970s.

    Regardless, cue the usual confirmation bias-ridden posters who will swear blind 2001 was aways meant to be thoroughly tealed and you can't judge its original colour palette based on years of mistimed home video video releases, blah, blah, blah…

    The problem is, Hollywood's adoration of teal and orange has been going on for over a decade, and shows no signs of abating. What an annoyance. The fear is that this is what we'll be stuck with, since it seems unlikely that there will be a subsequent corrected version. This was the title that had me finally seriously considering getting a UHD player, and these screenshots have thrown cold water on it.

  31. Patrick McCart

    I don't get why anyone is getting worked up about the UHD since it's really obvious the trailer uses footage from the existing HD master with color tweaking added.

    It's legitimate to be worried, because it seems there's a real possibility that the colors will be mucked with for the UHD release.

  32. Probably right. I cannot imagine the Kubrick estate, which has been very exacting in the past, would allow anything less than a perfect presentation of the film. Still waiting to see just what venues are going to show this.

  33. Edwin-S

    First. It is a trailer. Second. It is on YouTube. Hardly, the medium for accurate film representation. Thirdly. The trailer is being seen on mostly uncalibrated computer monitors.

    Big differences can be seen in post #54 on "uncalibrated computer monitors".

  34. Edwin-S

    First. It is a trailer. Second. It is on YouTube. Hardly, the medium for accurate film representation. Thirdly. The trailer is being seen on mostly uncalibrated computer monitors.

    Can you give me an example of a trailer of a restored film where the subsequent Bluray had significantly altered colors?
    I can't think of any right now.
    What I see in these trailers I see in the blurays themselves.

    Anyway, we'll be here (hopefully) in a few months where the blurays will be released and we'll see if it was representative or not.

  35. Konstantinos

    Can you give me an example of a trailer of a restored film where the subsequent Bluray had significantly altered colors?
    I can't think of any right now.
    What I see in these trailers I see in the blurays themselves.

    Anyway, we'll be here (hopefully) in a few months where the blurays will be released and we'll see if it was representative or not.

    Videa's first trailer for TLE's 4K restoration of SUSPIRIA used an earlier HD video master.

    Vincent

  36. WHITE TERROR – meaning the fear of a white balance. For anyone who doesn't know, and respecting the level of technical knowledge on this forum, a white balance is when a cameraman presses the white balance button on the camera whilst it's looking at a white card. Any colour cast anomalies created by the location and lighting are cancelled out and white is seen as pure white.

    Colour manipulation is easily achieved by using a warmer or colder card so that the camera compensates.

    My impression is that the development over the last quite a few years of highly colourful but highly manipulated, non-realistic colour in television was caused by creating the new post of POST PRODUCTION COLOUR GRADER/CONTROLLER. The objective became not realism but artistic colour changes.

    That in itself merely copies what has always happened in film and tv – highly detailed colour grading in order to match shots and create a perticular look.

    But readers of this forum know that it frequently goes much too far and results in people asking why a production now has a green, yellow, blue or golden cast.

    Is it a case of misuse of facilities? This will remain controversial but looking at comparisons a few posts further back I'll add my opinion that the current look of 2001, judging from the trailer, exhibits profound WHITE TERROR. A particular cast is administered rather than have any pure white in the picture.

    A most honourable recent exception is MY FAIR LADY. The Ascot scenes are as gloriously white as intended.

    I've seen 2001 many times and always in 70mm and can endorse that its white balance was perfect. I believe that we're constantly seeing the products of immature people who can't resist fiddling to prove how clever they are at playing with the colour temperature.

  37. Malcolm Bmoor

    A most honourable recent exception is MY FAIR LADY. The Ascot scenes are as gloriously white as intended.

    And Spartacus too. Pure blues, pure whites.
    No teals, no yellows!
    Well, this is the outcome of competent and humble (respecting the original films) people.

    Another recent example of color manipulation in the usual color palette (teal) (although not radical – and not in all scenes as it seems – like the Eclair/Ritrovata companies) is found in the recent Criterion of Midnight Cowboy which comes from a new 4K scan.
    Without even comparing with the old release, when i saw that shirt in the Criterion release, it immediately looked unnatural and aligned with the current trends.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

  38. Well I was a colour grader/timer in a film lab for 20 years, only 16mm, industrial & TV, & there was only so much I could do. I only had red green & blue (yellow, magenta & cyan at Techicolor, but the same thing really) & I could make it lighter or darker. And then on to telecine, wow, much more, change the contrast, turn the colour down, change the hue on any individual colour, & SO much more, which is why you now get some weird & wonderful looks on some films & TV programs, & when done well & tastefully it really works a treat. When it comes to older films I have this old fashion view that I want greys to look grey (neutral) & not blue or green, & whites (a lot of the time) should look white, & colours not mucked about with.

  39. Konstantinos

    And Spartacus too. Pure blues, pure whites.
    No teals, no yellows!
    Well, this is the outcome of competent and humble (respecting the original films) people.

    Another recent example of color manipulation in the usual color palette (teal) (although not radical – and not in all scenes as it seems – like the Eclair/Ritrovata companies) is found in the recent Criterion of Midnight Cowboy which comes from a new 4K scan.
    Without even comparing with the old release, when i saw that shirt in the Criterion release, it immediately looked unnatural and aligned with the current trends.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    This is why some of us are so worried about 2001. We know that there is a very heavy predisposition in Hollywood to make these kind of color changes to older films, and we SEE the changes in the trailer. The only basis given so far for saying there's no reason to worry is an assumption that "they wouldn't dare" do it to the film itself.

Leave a Reply