A Few Words About A few words about...™ 2001: a space odyssey -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

There are some red fringes here and there but they were also there in the 70mm prints so we cannot hold that against the UHD release.

AFAIK the UHD release and the 70mm prints, if you're talking about the "Nolan" prints that were shown this year, have nothing to do with each other. The 4K disc originated from a different source.

 

[John Gilmore]

The Castro Theater in San Francisco will be doing a 70mm/4k 2001 "shootout" 12/28-1/1
http://www.castrotheatre.com/p-list.html#dec28

 

[OliverK]

AFAIK the UHD release and the 70mm prints, if you're talking about the "Nolan" prints that were shown this year, have nothing to do with each other. The 4K disc originated from a different source.

I meant the original 70mm prints, but obviously it would also apply to the Nolan prints as they both show what is on the negative or in this case possibly duplicate negative or IP.
Here is a very good picture of the effect taken off a (very big) screen:
http://dci-forum.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1710.0;attach=4339;image

 

[OliverK]

Great post and so true. This the reason why I got out of the PQ thread on another forum . No one took into account things like soft focus techniques true natural grain etc it was obvious when the top tier was only CGI animated titles.

The problem arises when it becomes difficult to distinguish which is the issue, the transfer or the appearance or quality of the original elements.

Agreed on tier threads, in my opinion they should not even include animated movies, but obviously these days it is a very slippery slope between CGI and real world photography for a lot of movies. I also do not find it much of an accomplishment if for example Ben-Hur looks and sounds better than Citizen Kane - it should be that way obviously with 6 track magnetic sound and 65mm color photography
But does it live up to its potential on Blu-ray better than Citizen Kane? That one is harder to answer but this is what should interest us more, to make each movie as good as it can given constraints in available elements, time and budget.

I think that 2001 mostly achieved that when it comes to textures and detail, the 8k scan cannot help the original elements not carrying more information and trick technology was still in its infancy back then and considering that the effects they achieved were stunning, no complaints from me.

 

[Bill McCamy]

The Castro Theater in San Francisco will be doing a 70mm/4k 2001 "shootout" 12/28-1/1
http://www.castrotheatre.com/p-list.html#dec28

Thanks, I think, for that post. I attended a Nolan screening in May at the Castro. My local theater had an awful out-of-focus presentation of the 4K DCP in August. Now, do I want to take BART into the City New Year's weekend and spend seven to eight hours devoted to this movie? Of course I do. There's a great pizza joint directly across the street. Perfect place for a break between the two showings.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I had fun doing basically the same thing in NYC, seeing the unrestored 70mm IMAX version and then hopping across town for the restored IMAX digital version. I’d seen the movie countless times before then, but that wound up being a special night. That restored showing just brought a huge smile to my face after seeing the less than perfect version immediately beforehand.

 

[Robert Harris]

I meant the original 70mm prints, but obviously it would also apply to the Nolan prints as they both show what is on the negative or in this case possibly duplicate negative or IP.
Here is a very good picture of the effect taken off a (very big) screen:
http://dci-forum.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1710.0;attach=4339;image

Appears to be improper alignment of masters.

 

[Bill McCamy]

I had fun doing basically the same thing in NYC, seeing the unrestored 70mm IMAX version and then hopping across town for the restored IMAX digital version. I’d seen the movie countless times before then, but that wound up being a special night. That restored showing just brought a huge smile to my face after seeing the less than perfect version immediately beforehand.

I mischaracterized this year's viewing experiences. The botched local theater presentation was in October or early November as part of the syndicated "Flashback Tuesday" series. I spoke later to the theater manager about the focus problems, but she had no idea it had happened or why. It was like watching my laser disc on my OLED. However, I did see the restored digital version in true IMAX in late August . Despite being a 2K projection, it was breathtaking. The size of the projected image and its clarity were spectacular. It may have been better than the Cinerama presentation I saw in '68.

While the Castro is smaller than IMAX, it is a large screen in a beautiful art-deco environment. I am looking forward to a bit of "Space Odyssey Overload."

I've unsuccessfully searched the web to see if the Castro is unique in presenting this "70mm/4K DCP Challenge." Are other theaters also showing both versions back-to-back?

 

[PMF]

[...]There's a great pizza joint directly across the street.
Perfect place for a break between the two showings.

Two Shows = Double orders of cheese and tomato.

 

[Wayne_j]

I just got notification that my copy of 2001 should arrive from Amazon on December 18.

 

[bujaki]

My copy from BB shipped today.

 

[Britton]

Amazon has their listing straightened out now. It's very clear now that the 4K UHD is $24.99.

https://www.amazon.com/2001-SPACE-O.../ref=tmm_frk_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

 

[RetroGuy]

I just received my Blu-ray copy from Best Buy and the fade is there at the end of the scene with the Russians. (I bought the 4K steelbook, but don't have a 4K system yet, so was only able to check the Blu-ray.)

 

[Wayne_j]

I got mine from Amazon today, I haven't checked it yet.

 

[PMF]

I got mine from Amazon today, I haven't checked it yet.

That's a post?
C'mon, man, the least you could do is sample it.

 

[Wayne_j]

I will post more after I at least see the scene with the Russians on the 4k. So it looks like there actually was a recall for this title as they used the production delay to correct the fade and didn't want stock previously shipped to stores to be sold when the disc was actually released.

 

[Wayne_j]

I checked the scene in question and there is a fade to black on the UHD Blu-ray but a cut on the iTunes version (which finally changed to UHD overnight).

 

[Reed Grele]

I've owned just about every home video release of 2001. The latest 4k UHD/BD 1080p release tops them all!

BTW, I'm not able to view the 4K as yet, as I haven't upgraded to a 4K projector or monitor, but fwiw, the MGM logo on the 1080P Blu-ray appears dark blue (not purple) on my system.

 

[Britton]

So it looks like the "remixed and restored" audio track (which is the default option on the discs and the only option on Vudu) is a bit out of sync during the opening credits. The visuals are about half a second ahead of the music. It Is especially noticeable when the 3 credits appear. The rest of the movie is fine. This is the case for all versions of this release (cut and fade).

Fortunately the "Original 1968" audio does not have this issue!

Oh well. I think we'll just have to live with this one and hope they get it right when the 60th Anniversary rolls around if the remix is going to be the default audio from now on.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The remix has been the default track since about 1999 or 2000 (at least as far as the studio is concerned). I've never been a huge fan; it's hard for me to put into words my exact objection to it, but it just sounds small to me, for lack of a better word. The original 1968 audio sounds tremendous by comparison, a rich and full track with some directional dialogue and wide dynamics. After listening to the remix for years on the earlier DVD and BD versions, I'm so glad to have the original audio to listen to at home at last.