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

[trajan007]

Just finished watching the bluray.. Improved image clarity and improved sound. I just wish some of the star field images had deeper black levels. They appeared washed out at times. Maybe its better on the 4K disc.

 

[haineshisway]

Finished the first half up to intermission. Replacement dupes are VERY obvious, but it all looks pretty fine, but agree with Trajan about the black levels at times. The movie is as brilliant as ever.

 

[Robert Harris]

Finished the first half up to intermission. Replacement dupes are VERY obvious, but it all looks pretty fine, but agree with Trajan about the black levels at times. The movie is as brilliant as ever.

MAJOR difference in black levels between HD and 4k mit HDR. On 4k, it works.

 

[CarlosMeat]

Finished the first half up to intermission. Replacement dupes are VERY obvious

Would you be so kind as to tell me where they are located in the film ?

 

[CarlosMeat]

Would you be so kind as to tell me where they are located in the film ?

So I'm guessing the answer is you won't be.

 

[mcash007]

I ordered frm amazon on Nov 2nd, with a another movie. It said it wouldn't ship until late Nov or Early Dec (can't remember exactly) . But much to my surprise it showed up with the other movie two days later.

I finally watched it last night, and was blown away by how good it looks. This is really an example of what a classic film can look like in 4K with the right TLC

 

[Mike Frezon]

Would you be so kind as to tell me where they are located in the film ?

So I'm guessing the answer is you won't be.

Wasn't your question answered by RAH in posts #247 & 249 of this thread (last page)? Or are you asking something different?

 

[CarlosMeat]

Wasn't your question answered by RAH in posts #247 & 249 of this thread (last page)? Or are you asking something different?

No and since Bruce said that the dupes were obvious to him I asked him instead.

 

[usrunnr]

Doesn't anyone just watch movies any more

I get asked that every once in a while. I think that if I just watched a movie without a critical eye, I wouldn't ever need to be on HTF. That's why we are here -- to understand, to learn, and to experience every aspect of film that we can. Can anyone add to this?

 

[CarlosMeat]

I get asked that every once in a while. I think that if I just watched a movie without a critical eye, I wouldn't ever need to be on HTF. That's why we are here -- to understand, to learn, and to experience every aspect of film that we can. Can anyone add to this?

I agree and since it isn't like I've not seen 2001 50 times before ..the newness and fresh enjoyment comes from the difference the UHD presentation has compared to previous experiences for me.

 

[haineshisway]

So I'm guessing the answer is you won't be.

I don't respond because there is something about the tone of your posts to me that makes me not wish to respond.

However: I didn't write them down - there's one in the Dawn of Man sequence where for one shot the entire image goes quite fuzzy-looking compared to the shots before and after. That's one. I believe in either this or the really long thread that someone else has pointed out others. Or maybe that was another board.

 

[CarlosMeat]

I don't respond because there is something about the tone of your posts to me that makes me not wish to respond.

I see. Since they were obvious to you I had hoped you would just point them out for me so I could go back and see and to learn.

 

[JSLasher]

Just finished watching the bluray.. Improved image clarity and improved sound. I just wish some of the star field images had deeper black levels. They appeared washed out at times. Maybe its better on the 4K disc.

Don't have the equipment to play the 4K disc, but watched the blu-ray. I agree that the improved sound was quite impressive.

 

[Jean-Pierre Gutzeit]

I believe there is a color flaw in this movie. I don't understand the technical methods that are used, but I can describe what I think went wrong. Something has caused a certain shade and tone of blue, in usually thin lines, to get pumped up and create an almost cartoon boldness. This is easiest to see when the landing craft is heading toward the moonbase. At 36:50 look at the craters along the terminator of the moon (the separation point between the moon's day and night.) Many of them have a strong blue nail polish look along some of the "highest" walls of the craters. It's even worse in the next shot.

I noticed this in other scenes also.By coincidence TCM just showed the movie. In this HD only broadcast this blue flaw does not exist. I also checked my Blu-ray disc and again this flaw does not appear.

In addition, I recently saw the 70mm film projection at LA's great Cinerama Dome, 70mm film projection on the giant IMAX screen at Universal Citywalk, and a digital showing at a medium IMAX. I did not notice a problem (even though the Universal print was terrible) at any of these showings.

I have now shown this to five people and it's was very easy to see for all of them. If there is a way to get a screen grab please let me know. I love this movie, having seen it first eight times in Cinerama in 1968, and I'm very disappointed is this disc.

This is correct, I think. All these versions since about 1988 have only rarely similarities to the 70mm first run versions. (was there for the first time produced a 65mm Internegative of "2001"? The same in the same year for "Ben Hur"? Order by Ted Turner? The results: Very grainy and greenish 70mm prints occured)-

To the version from November 2018:
Beginning with 0,46:00 the composits saw each other. At 0.53:00 the scene is terrible duped with unsharpness in the middle of the picture and then better towards the sides. Looks "like 16mm".

Leon Vitali had criticized the 70mm attempts by Christopher Nolan, while Mr. Nolan is powerless against restrictions of a certain 35/65/70mm laboratory; I believe. Also, I will not get rid of the impression that one has cropped the image content in the new version: see at 2.17.08 (Enclosed a scene from the 70mm premiere version from 1968)

 

[haineshisway]

I see. Since they were obvious to you I had hoped you would just point them out for me so I could go back and see and to learn.

And this is why you'll get no further responses from me. Whether you mean it or not, there's an attitude in every one of your posts to me and it stems from some back-and-forth from months ago. Go watch the Dawn of Man sequence. If you can't see the shot I reference, then you do indeed need to learn because it's VERY obvious.

 

[Robert Crawford]

And this is why you'll get no further responses from me. Whether you mean it or not, there's an attitude in every one of your posts to me and it stems from some back-and-forth from months ago. Go watch the Dawn of Man sequence. If you can't see the shot I reference, then you do indeed need to learn because it's VERY obvious.

If his responses bothers you that much, it's probably best for all that you just place him on "Ignore" and move on from him.

 

[Robert Harris]

Sorry. I’m easily confused. What does “Mr. Nolan is powerless against restrictions of a certain 35/65/70mm laboratory” mean?

 

[haineshisway]

If his responses bothers you that much, it's probably best for all that you just place him on "Ignore" and move on from him.

His responses don't bother me at all, I just see them for what they are and have been since his first response to me months ago. I think you're right, however - ignore is the ticket. That was easy - first time I've ever done it.

 

[Tino]

Sorry. I’m easily confused

Understandable considering the source.

 

[bugsy-pal]

And this is why you'll get no further responses from me. Whether you mean it or not, there's an attitude in every one of your posts to me and it stems from some back-and-forth from months ago. Go watch the Dawn of Man sequence. If you can't see the shot I reference, then you do indeed need to learn because it's VERY obvious.

Interesting - when I saw the film earlier this month (I'm pretty sure it was the 4K), I noticed a scene in the Dawn of Man sequence that appeared very fuzzy, almost out-of-focus looking, particularly in the foreground. I was momentarily alarmed, but then as it progressed it seemed to be fine. I don''t have UHD playback capability, but I should check with the new bluray to see if that scene is similarly blurry

 

[Jim*Tod]

I just watched the blu ray and would agree with trajan007 that overall it looks and sounds great but that the star fields at times look too light. The color seems richer than I remember.... I remember it being more muted in the 70mm prints for the original release. I have a plasma tv and kept playing around with the black levels to see if I could the star fields darker but that tended to wreck details in the image. Usually on this set the blacks are pretty flawless using the recommended settings. It is definitely an improvement over the first blu ray, especially in the Dawn of Man sequence. I saw it in 2K IMAX back in August and this looks like that overall. My guess is that the transfer is more geared the UHD/4K and the other technology that brings into play. Once OLED screens get more affordable, I will upgrade. Still.... what an incredible movie, truly one of a kind.