Pre-Order 2001: A Space Odyssey (4k UHD) Available for Preorder (2 Viewers)

[CarlosMeat]

Nobody but Ridley Scott is to blame for this. Just have a look at what he did to Gladiator - luckily I do not like that one very much but I am a big fan of Blade Runner and I liked that it was one of the few Science Fiction movies that seemed to have a warmer color timing and I want that one back, not the teal/greenified version.

If you look at yellow lights and objects, red lipstick, blue lights ,red lights subtle colors on clothing they are simply gone. I will say that as you sit there you habituate to it and the effect of the teal curse seems to become less of a deal over time but if you switch back and forth you just want to say why, why is the teal application in any way considered superior by anyone when so much richness of color was lost by doing it ?

 

[RobertR]

If you look at yellow lights and objects, red lipstick, blue lights ,red lights subtle colors on clothing they are simply gone. I will say that as you sit there you habituate to it and the effect of the teal curse seems to become less of a deal over time but if you switch back and forth you just want to say why, why is the teal application in any way considered superior by anyone when so much richness of color was lost by doing it ?

It's a collective mindset of modern Hollywood that's truly ridiculous and disgusting. There seems to be no way of getting rid of it, unfortunately.

 

[Wayne_j]

I'm not going to blame Warner Brothers for what Ridley Scott did to his own film. Warners at least provided every previous version of the same movie.

 

[RobertR]

I'm not going to blame Warner Brothers for what Ridley Scott did to his own film. Warners at least provided every previous version of the same movie.

"It's his own film" doesn't apply to Nolan and 2001. For Nolan to make that change to a film he had no part in making would be inexcusable.

 

[Wayne_j]

We won't know if Nolan messed significantly with this release until Thursday night.

 

[RobertR]

We won't know if Nolan messed significantly with this release until Thursday night.

If he did, I predict some people will say "ehhh, it doesn't look that bad, what are some people so worked up about?"

 

[dpippel]

I think it's been stated here before that the only involvement Nolan has had with 2001 was with the unrestored 70mm print. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read he had nothing to do with the 4K DI used for the 4K UHD release.

 

[CarlosMeat]

I'm not going to blame Warner Brothers for what Ridley Scott did to his own film. Warners at least provided every previous version of the same movie.

Not in UHD unfortunately.

 

[RobertR]

I think it's been stated here before that the only involvement Nolan has had with 2001 was with the unrestored 70mm print. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read he had nothing to do with the 4K DI used for the 4K UHD release.

Continuing the celebration of the 50th anniversary of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, Warner Bros. Home Entertainment announced today that the renowned director’s groundbreaking science fiction epic will be released on 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) Blu-ray™ in premium collectible packaging and 4K UHD Digital on October 30. Widely considered among the greatest films of the 20th century, 2001: A Space Odyssey returned to U.S. theatres in May following the debut of an “unrestored” 70mm print at the 71st annual Cannes Film Festival. The film is playing throughout the summer at select theatres.

For the first time since the original release, new 70mm prints were struck from pristine printing elements made from the original camera negative. A longtime admirer of the late American auteur, Christopher Nolan worked closely with the team at Warner Bros. Pictures throughout the mastering process.

Building on the work done for the new 70mm prints, the 4K UHD with HDR presentation was mastered from the 65mm original camera negative.

That's directly from the press release. Sounds to me like Nolan was heavily involved. If it does turn out to be tealified, it would not wash to say that Nolan bears no responsibility.

 

[dpippel]

Well then, I (and a few others) must have missed that bit in the release. That's the first time I've seen it. However, the wording is a bit ambiguous on his involvement with the 4K UHD production. He's only mentioned by name in the paragraph referencing the unrestored 70mm print, so maybe there's a bit of hope. If Nolan truly did have a hand in producing the source for the 4K UHD though, then we're probably screwed. I'll choose to remain cautiously optimistic until I actually see the presentation on the disc.

 

[Robert Harris]

I think it's been stated here before that the only involvement Nolan has had with 2001 was with the unrestored 70mm print. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read he had nothing to do with the 4K DI used for the 4K UHD release.

I’d not be too certain about that.

 

[RobertR]

However, the wording is a bit ambiguous on his involvement with the 4K UHD production. He's only mentioned by name in the paragraph referencing the unrestored 70mm print, so maybe there's a bit of hope. If Nolan truly did have a hand in producing the source for the 4K UHD though, then we're probably screwed. I'll choose to remain cautiously optimistic until I actually see the presentation on the disc.

The release says Nolan worked closely on the mastering of new 70mm prints, which are clearly not the same as the unrestored print (you don't need to restore a brand new print). It also states that the 4K HDR master was based on the work done for the new 70 mm prints. That makes it rather obvious that Nolan WAS involved with the mastering of the 4K release.

 

[dpippel]

I was under the impression that the only 70mm prints that were struck were the "unrestored" version. The 4K DI is NOT the same beast and is for the upcoming IMAX release and the UHD release, and that they were completely separate things from the 70mm film work. Guess I haven't been paying close enough attention.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The logic of what you said is that the new 4K release will be tealified "to appeal to a modern audience that knows nothing about it at all", and that prospect is horrifying. If that does turn out to be the case, it will be inexcusable. Nolan being connected to such an alteration would be unforgiveable.

I don't think that's true at all. I don't think the subcontracting of a trailer to a post-production facility with the mandate to make it a modern trailer that wouldn't be out of place screening at a regular multiplex with contemporary releases has any relation to how the actual restoration looks. They're two entirely separate projects.

I don't love the new poster for the movie either, but I recognize that it's merely a promotional object that has no relation to the actual film content presentation.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I was under the impression that the only 70mm prints that were struck were the "unrestored" version. The 4K DI is NOT the same beast and is for the upcoming IMAX release and the UHD release, and that they were completely separate things from the 70mm film work. Guess I haven't been paying close enough attention.

I believe you're correct.

The story, as originally reported, put the event chronology like this:

1) Warner was mastering "2001" from the original negative for 4K restoration with an eye towards UHD release and a new DCP, working closely with Leon Vitali
2) Simultaneously, Christopher Nolan was at Warner mastering his back catalogue for UHD release
3) The team mastering "2001" pulled a previously unused interpositive made in 1999 from the original camera negative, under Kubrick's direction, and looked at that IP as one reference as part of their work in creating the new 4K restoration
4) Knowing that Nolan was such a big "2001" fan and already working in the same facility, the "2001" team headed by Ned Price reached out to Nolan and offered him the chance to look at the 1999 IP
5) Nolan viewed the 1999 IP and was impressed by the quality of it, and felt that audiences should have a chance to see something sourced from that IP in a fully photochemical fashion
6) Inspired by Nolan's idea, Warner decided to invite him to oversee having new prints created from that IP, using the same lab that worked on prints for Nolan's Dunkirk, to be shown on 70mm equipment that was in place because of Dunkirk's release
7) While Nolan worked on 70mm prints for a spring release, Ned Price and the team mastering "2001" continued working on their 4K digital restoration, with an eye towards a fall release

I've read just about every primary source article and interview that's been released this year regarding "2001" and although there's been a fair bit of marketing that's creeped into the descriptions of what's going on, I believe my above summary to be an accurate distillation of what's actually been going on behind the scenes. I fully expect the new 4K restoration to be a quality effort that preserves the intent of Kubrick.

Incidentally, the 4K restoration has already played in some European venues and the little bit of writing I have seen about has all been positive.

 

[CarlosMeat]

Incidentally, the 4K restoration has already played in some European venues and the little bit of writing I have seen about has all been positive.

True and the reason I have some optimism.

 

[RobertR]

6) Inspired by Nolan's idea, Warner decided to invite him to oversee having new prints created from that IP, using the same lab that worked on prints for Nolan's Dunkirk, to be shown on 70mm equipment that was in place because of Dunkirk's release

So Nolan did oversee the creation of the new prints. The press release states "Building on the work done for the new 70mm prints, the 4K UHD with HDR presentation was mastered". "Building on" sounds a LOT like "based on" which Nolan clearly oversaw.

Incidentally, the 4K restoration has already played in some European venues and the little bit of writing I have seen about has all been positive.

Links please.

 

[RobertR]

I don't think that's true at all. I don't think the subcontracting of a trailer to a post-production facility with the mandate to make it a modern trailer that wouldn't be out of place screening at a regular multiplex with contemporary releases has any relation to how the actual restoration looks. They're two entirely separate projects.

If Warner allowed the tealification of the trailer to appeal to "modern audiences", it's nothing more than an assumption that they wouldn't allow such tealification of the film for the same reason.

 

[dpippel]

So Nolan did oversee the creation of the new prints. The press release states "Building on the work done for the new 70mm prints, the 4K UHD with HDR presentation was mastered". "Building on" sounds a LOT like "based on" which Nolan clearly oversaw.

It's from a press release. It's quite possible this is nothing more than marketing speak that has no accurate bearing on the digital work, which Nolan reportedly abhors dealing with anyway. He was adamant on doing this by photochemical means ONLY, and by all reports the unrestored 70mm presentations had no tealification, since none of the work on the prints was done digitally.

 

[Robert Harris]

The words now published by the studio, make note of the fact that the 65/15 printing neg, is also from the old IP.

Keep your eyes on the shells, and find the pea...