A Few Words About A few words about...™ Star Wars: The Last Jedi -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[TJPC]

I have no desire to side track this discussion, so I will say my piece and shut up! Almost every 3D film is post converted now, this is the way 3D movies are done.

They are filmed with that in mind however, with the directors input. Scenes are set up to look good when converted to 3D. This is the last step in a planned design.

It is not as if the director filmed a flat film and then it was stolen from him or her and forced to be converted to 3D by uncaring technicians who’s only goal is to rook the public!

 

[Carlo_M]

Rian Johnson's thoughts on 3D from his personal blog directly contradict what you wrote: http://rcjohnso.tumblr.com/post/24693276556/some-thoughts-on-3d

 

[Carlo_M]

Also the rise of 3D conversion was primarily to bring people back into the theaters, but it has plateau'd in the US (but not in China):
https://qz.com/1039936/imax-says-no-too-the-reign-of-3d-movies-is-over-in-us-cinemas/
https://www.thewrap.com/3d-movie-market-why-its-no-longer-hollywood-studios-savior/
https://www.techradar.com/news/even-imax-is-turning-its-back-on-3d-films

There is very little evidence that all, or even the majority, of films are filmed "with 3D in mind". There are some staunch advocates (James Cameron comes to mind), but I find very little evidence to support your point about all (or most) films being filmed with 3D in mind.

And to equate 3D conversion to the Original Aspect Ratio vs. Pan-and-scan argument is quite frankly nonsensical. It's like when a 1.85 film was shot "open matte" so that the director could "keep TV 4:3 aspect ratio in mind", we still supported the original aspect ratio of 1.85, 1.77 or 1.66:1. By your logic, we should have been watching the 4:3 since the director kept that in mind.

Whether Rian Johnson, or anyone else, had "3D in mind" (again an assertion I see very little evidence of), the director still shot natively flat, and thus the version of record is what's come from the camera negative (or native digital files, in the case that film is no longer used). A conversion is just that: a conversion.

You may prefer the 3D version, and that's your right. But don't presume to equate a 3D conversion to the "original aspect ratio" vs. pan-n-scan argument, as the latter is a compromise of the artist's vision and the former is a value-add process designed to lure moviegoers to the theater.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Finished watching the 4k (downconverted to 1080p) release in Atmos moments ago. Bought the BestBuy steelbook.

Found myself skimming through some of it as I really had difficulty watching this a second time.

I put together a simple collage of photos that explains everything that I feel is wrong with this film. See below.

However, on technical merits, it sounded fantastic on my theater system. Atmos was evident in a few areas, but not as widespread as I had hoped. I like the way they put resistance ship chatter communication into the high channels. That was kind of neat.

I feel the need to reiterate --- I am getting more satisfaction from the butt kickers I put in my recliner chairs than Dobly Atmos. Those deep thuds I feel in my chair during gunfire and explosions really accent the screen action to the point that it immerses me more into the film. This was a perfect film to demo butt kicker capability.

 

[Lord Dalek]

As I have said multiple times on this forum, the success of theatrical 3D in North America has had absolutely no corolation whatsoever to the "potential" success (which is of course now complete failure) of the home consumer 3D format.

As I have also said in the past, this forum also does not represent the views of the general public, and frequently exhibits the exact opposite.

 

[Worth]

A frisbee is a frisbee even in a tin box! I am waiting for my Amazon.uk 3D version. I will never buy a flat version of a 3D film. In the past I also would not buy pan and scan.

Just curious - what about the other way around? Are you okay with watching something like The Wizard of Oz in 3D? That was clearly never intended to be seen in that format, and anyone responsible for creative decision making for that film is long gone.

 

[TJPC]

I am OK with things like the 3D “Wizard of Oz” (which is just about the best conversion I have ever seen), and Titanic. (How many films of the 1930s have been converted?) I would not be OK with it being the only one available.

I am ok with anyone else watching a flat version of a movie intended for 3D, I just can’t understand why anyone would want to. The same holds true for things like the black and white “Logan”. It is your TV and your choice. Mount your flat screen upside down and stand on your head if you want to.

I do not like having my preference, which is to see movies intended for 3D at home, taken away.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I am OK with things like the 3D “Wizard of Oz” (which is just about the best conversion I have ever seen), and Titanic. (How many films of the 1930s have been converted?) I would not be OK with it being the only one available.

I am ok with anyone else watching a flat version of a movie intended for 3D, I just can’t understand why anyone would want to. The same holds true for things like the black and white “Logan”. It is your TV and your choice. Mount your flat screen upside down and stand on your head if you want to.

I do not like having my preference, which is to see movies intended for 3D at home, taken away.

And that's an argument for another thread.

I'll be revisiting this film today as I sit down and watch this 4K/UHD disc.

 

[TJPC]

I realize this argument goes round and round and gets tiresome. I would not have broken my promise to shut up, but I was asked a question. I will return to my previous state now.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I realize this argument goes round and round and gets tiresome. I would not have broken my promise to shut up, but I was asked a question. I will return to my previous state now.

No problem!

 

[Steve Armbrust]

Good film and happy with the new series so far with Disney. I did read somewhere about Mark Hamill not being happy about the script and the way his character was handled in the movie.

The first extra in the package, a piece about directing the movie, addresses Hamill's discomfort about his character. He said he was adamantly opposed to the direction that Luke was taking, but that after saying so to the director, he bought into the character and the film totally. Rian Johnson said he admired Hamill for disagreeing and then buying in, saying something like, "Mark thought he would be playing Luke Skywalker, when he was actually playing Obi Wan Kenobi."

 

[dobyblue]

I don't know what Disney is doing with their Atmos encodings, the levels are absurdly low. I have some audiophile SHM-SACDs from Universal Japan and Hoffman-mastered SACDs from Audio Fidelity that appear to have less headroom than Disney are putting on their UHD Atmos tracks.

The dts-ma track on the Blu-ray is at a much more normal level than the UHD disc.

For me this is in the bottom three movies to date, can't decide which order they're in but it's I, II and VIII in the bottom three for sure. Worth owning still, but I can only dream of what this could have been with Abrams helming the entire trilogy arc.

Fantastic picture on this UHD but very underwhelming volume level. WHen I'm cranking a Blu-ray it's usually at -12dB on my AVR, and that's with no-one else home. With my youngest already in bed trying to sleep I had this one up at -8dB and still wasn't worried the wife was about to come in and say "sleeping!!!!"

 

[Steve Armbrust]

I don't know what Disney is doing with their Atmos encodings, the levels are absurdly low. I have some audiophile SHM-SACDs from Universal Japan and Hoffman-mastered SACDs from Audio Fidelity that appear to have less headroom than Disney are putting on their UHD Atmos tracks.

The dts-ma track on the Blu-ray is at a much more normal level than the UHD disc.

For me this is in the bottom three movies to date, can't decide which order they're in but it's I, II and VIII in the bottom three for sure. Worth owning still, but I can only dream of what this could have been with Abrams helming the entire trilogy arc.

Fantastic picture on this UHD but very underwhelming volume level. WHen I'm cranking a Blu-ray it's usually at -12dB on my AVR, and that's with no-one else home. With my youngest already in bed trying to sleep I had this one up at -8dB and still wasn't worried the wife was about to come in and say "sleeping!!!!"

Did you try the 7.1 English track on the UHD? I thought the audio on the Atmos track was underwhelming, but I don't have the latest audio gear, so it might just have defaulted to something less on my system.

 

[Gary Seven]

It is not as if the director filmed a flat film

That is exactly what is done. Based on my observations, most if not all post converted have very little, if any, 3D in mind. Compare it to the 3D movies from the 50s and you see an immediate difference in the way depth of field is adjusted for 3D. Modern post converted use standard flat film depth of field which is detrimental to the 3D effect.

 

[Sam Posten]

I don't know what Disney is doing with their Atmos encodings, the levels are absurdly low.

WHEW. I'm glad it's not just me. The Atmos track seemed super low to me even AFTER I put it a full 3DB up from where I usually listen (72.5 for the record is my standard on a Denon 6300. I have no idea what reference is on this one, I should probably research that as I'm about to be an HTF media reviewer again) =)

Can you comment on these levels please @Robert Harris ?

 

[Wayne_j]

I don't know what Disney is doing with their Atmos encodings, the levels are absurdly low. I have some audiophile SHM-SACDs from Universal Japan and Hoffman-mastered SACDs from Audio Fidelity that appear to have less headroom than Disney are putting on their UHD Atmos tracks."

Disney has been putting theatrical mixes on their discs. These are meant to be played at reference at which point you get the same experience you would get at a theater. Other studios mix for discs with a lot less headroom that are meant to be played as much as 10dB lower to achieve the same experience. I would rather studios used the theatrical mix since you would at least know what volume you should be listening to the movie at.

 

[Bryan^H]

Looks like I'm getting soaked for $70, buying it twice UHD, and 3D.

Honestly, I wish one of these formats would just go away so I wouldn't have to keep doing this(I just love both so much).

I wonder which format will go first

 

[Carlo_M]

I just made it through The Director and The Jedi special feature. I am in agreement with the HTF review which states that this is how extras should be done (and used to be done). The Criterion model of substantive extras, which peaked during DVD and early BD days, was soon replaced with lazy EPK style promo extras...not the case with TD&TJ. I can't wait until I get home from work tonight to watch the other extras!

I love how they didn't even dance around sensitive subjects, they tackled them head-on (like Hamill's dislike of how Luke was written into the story). They could have shied away from it but they didn't, getting Hamill to fully address it in the feature.

 

[zoetmb]

Saw this in the theater. The visuals were unbelievably good but some of the film felt a bit rushed. I still think the del Toro character was unnecessary as well as the whole venture to the casino resort. I also wasn't too keen on Skywalker's portrayal. It seemed to stray too far from his character development in the original films. I'm passing on picking up anymore Star Wars films. I'll see them in the theater but that's about it.

I loved Luke’s portrayal. Fans wanted him swashbuckling around like he was still 25.

SPOILERS AHEAD:

Spoiler

Instead, we got someone who realized that turning Vader away from the dark side didn’t accomplish much, that the Jedi made many mistakes, that he himself failed at training new Jedi and that here we are 30 years later and his galaxy is still at war.

Compared to what the fans wanted, this was IMO, the far more interesting story. If we had gotten the Luke they wanted, then they would have complained like they did about TFA, that it paralleled the beats of the original films too closely.

And while the casino resort wasn’t absolutely necessary, it gave us some insight into how people lived other than rebels and stormtroopers. That diversion made the film seem more novel-like, which I liked.

I can’t say I would have had Luke toss as he did, but it certainly was a surprise. One change I would have made is that I would have killed Leia in this film and had Luke die in IX (but that’s meaningless because who am I?)

 

[Bryan^H]

One of the biggest complaints I have heard is that TLJ is that there are too many funny moments in it. I wonder if the fans complaining remember "A New Hope"? nearly every time Luke, Leia, and Han are around together there are many funny one liners/dialogue, and that isn't even including R2, and 3PO which are also very funny.