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

[PMF]

How many here are rooting for Josh Steinberg to be surprised with getting his UHD copy, far earlier than expected?
The "2001" cosmos demands this for our summer guide, who navigated us through all of its varied theatrical venues in a most positive and informative light. For my money, Warner's should had gifted him with a copy; hands down, no delays.

Meanwhile, kudos to RAH's most thoughtful, diagnostic and comprehensive review.
Cheers to both.

 

[David Norman]

I have a question that someone maybe can answer or confirm -- one poster mentioned the cut scene showing the Russian Male Doctor reaching for his left breast pocket like someone reaching for a cigarette (not seen on the fade out). I then starting thinking -- would they allow Cigarettes on a Space Station and I couldn't remember any scene at all specifically on the station. Furthermore I couldn't think of a single cigarette/cigar/smoking scene at all in the movie. On the spacecraft or space station that might make a little sense, but not on the Moonbase Committee Scene either nor on the few scenes from Earth shown during the movie. How many mainstream movies in 1968-1969 would have been completely smokeless -- even childrens movie often had someone with a smoke whether father or grandfather or .......?

Was this done intentionally for some reason by Kubrick? Was it a thing he thought would be eliminated by 2001?
It was very soon after the Surgeon General's health reports and certainly well before it was widely accepted in Mainstream Beliefs. I'm relative sure Kubrick was a heavy chain smoker even while filming 2001

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think the answer could be both. Josh can maybe answer better, but by my memory from a couple weeks ago, it was a hard cut.
Even it not 100% correct, I'm going to chalk this one into the not significant. I actually like the hard cut better given the general topic of that scene

I think pretty easy to believe the 70mm had a different transition

Memory is a tricky thing, so everything I'm saying, I'm saying with the caveat that I could be wrong. I remember it as being a fade, and that's what it was on the previous disc editions, and in older prints that I've seen. I could be wrong, but I don't think I'm misremembering.

My guess would be that the fade was originally designed as a printer function rather than as an optical spliced into the negative. I would guess that when Warner went back to that negative and scanned it to create the new master, that someone inadvertently forgot to digitally recreate the fade transition, which resulted in it being left as a cut. (I've seen this happen on rare occasions with some other titles.)

I have a question that someone maybe can answer or confirm -- one poster mentioned the cut scene showing the Russian Male Doctor reaching for his left breast pocket like someone reaching for a cigarette (not seen on the fade out). I then starting thinking -- would they allow Cigarettes on a Space Station and I couldn't remember any there specifically. Furthermore I couldn't think of a single cigarette/cigar/smoking scene at all in the movie.

I do not believe there's any smoking shown in the film. At the time the movie was being made, Kubrick had "quit" smoking, which his wife Christiane soon realized actually meant "quit purchasing cigarettes for myself while bumming them from every smoker in sight". (She started buying replacement cartons for the crew.) So it's certainly possible that smoking isn't shown in deference to health concerns. It's also possible that smoking isn't shown because it wasn't product placed. The production got lots of free research, supplies and promotional consideration for every logo that appears in the film. When I was at the Kubrick Archives in London researching the film, there were numerous examples of Kubrick trying to get the best deals possible for this. I don't recall seeing anything from cigarette companies.

In a real world scenario, smoking in a space station wouldn't be the smartest thing one could do, so the lack of smoking may not be health related, and may just be a nod to the scientific safety.

It's a good question.

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

For what it’s worth, Gene Roddenberry mandated there would be no smoking in the 23rd century. So the crew in Star Trek went smokeless on-screen, yet remained a collective set of house chimneys off-screen. That started in 1964 (pilot episode).

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

On the new transfer, a fade has become a cut:

https://twitter.com/shittydeath/status/1057091381624274944

https://twitter.com/shittydeath/status/1057091574411264000

Which is correct?

It's supposed to fade out. Maybe that's why this has been delayed for many people.

 

[ArnoldLayne]

Mr Harris, perhaps you will fill out the survey card?

 

[dpippel]

It's supposed to fade out. Maybe that's why this has been delayed for many people.

And you know this... how?

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

And you know this... how?

How do I know it's supposed to fade out? Because I've seen 70mm prints many times here in LA. It shows regularly and I go about twice a year when it plays.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

The IMAX presentation this summer also had a hard cut, I presume this is how they want it.

 

[WillG]

It’s funny how you can see something a hundred times and still catch something new.

This may be the first time I was able to see the unplayed chess moves HAL described to Frank Poole. “I'm sorry, Frank, I think you missed it. Queen to Bishop 3, Bishop takes Queen, Knight takes Bishop. Mate.” I could totally see it.

Also, I noticed that with every major technological advancement seems to come an equivalent advancement in whipping up convenient lunches. By this reckoning, The Star Child ought to fix a wicked pepper steak.

Here’s one I just started wondering about. Why did Dave have to blow the pod door to get into the emergency airlock when he could have just regularly opened the pod door, held his breath for a few moments and pulled the airlock door close lever. It would have at least spared Kier Dullea from having to be dropped 20 or so feet to complete the effect in the finished film.

 

[Mark McSherry]

Hard cut or fade out? Could someone reference Criterion's laserdisc of 2001? Released in 1988 with "an exclusive new film-to-tape transfer made under the supervision of Stanley Kubrick."

 

[Jim*Tod]

Hopefully Mr. Harris will weigh in on the cut vs. fade issue. I remember it as a fade but I could be wrong.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

"It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error."

 

[Robert Harris]

Should not be different

Hopefully Mr. Harris will weigh in on the cut vs. fade issue. I remember it as a fade but I could be wrong.

In space there are no printer functions, only cuts.

Fades and dissolves (think WWS Prologue) are encoded as each 70mm print is produced. Instructions will be found on the lab cards, noting the number of frames in the fade or dissolve, and their start & end points.

Our working continuities triple check these functions, first making note of them on original prints, then working with timing cards and printing logs, followed by confirmed with etchings in the area outside the perfs on the negative.

An example:

Since The Godfather had been re-cut from single strand auto-select format to A&B rolls, the company/people who did the re-cut followed no instructions, and apparently checked nothing. Footage needed for long printer functions was excised, and eventually things went downhill from there, with a new dissolve, that had not been in the final film appearing on new prints as well as, as I recall, the DVD set.

I’ve not checked the printing logs, and may not have them for the reel in question, but if I’m correct, the shot in question should be around 30-40 minutes in. If I have reference on this, I’ll check.

Easy enough for someone at WB to check, beginning with an original 1968 dye transfer print.

If it’s an error, remake the offending shot, and re-cut the IMAX printing neg, along with all data files.

Follow that up with a running change in media, and a disc replacement program.

Easy, if not inexpensive,

One would presume that someone went through proper steps during the restoration process.

This procedure applies to all large format productions, as well as 35mm in a-s format.

One would hope that it’s correct, as it stands, but I’m unable to confirm at this time.

To be clear, there would be no printer functions in the original 8k scans.

 

[Britton]

This wouldn't be the first time 2001 had a home video mistake. I remember that the 1999 DVD missed the "Affirmative Dave" part of the line when he replied "Affirmative Dave, I read you."

I guess the big question is how we can get WB's attention on this. Seems like the studios used to find out about these slip ups somehow.

 

[ghostwind]

Seems as though there may be too many tech permutations & combinations.

A disc should just play back properly on any tuned system.

The problem is that 4K HDR/DV is going to look different to everyone, as consumer displays/projectors cannot be properly calibrated for it. The REC.2020 colorspace is one that no consumer display can fully display (some more than others), and same with nit/brightness levels. Add to that the fact that each display has to tone map differently too, etc., it's a crap shoot, which is unfortunate, but the reality. The only way to know what the intention was, is to see the 1080p Blu-ray, which was mastered in REC.709 at 100nits, a colorspace and brightness level all consumer displays CAN show and be properly calibrated for. I have the Blu-ray on order, so will take a look when it comes and post back. The only thing we can be sure of is that the 4K has more detail.

 

[Robert Harris]

This wouldn't be the first time 2001 had a home video mistake. I remember that the 1999 DVD missed the "Affirmative Dave" part of the line when he replied "Affirmative Dave, I read you."

I guess the big question is how we can get WB's attention on this. Seems like the studios used to find out about these slip ups somehow.

I’m certain they’re aware. Especially if it’s an error.

 

[Tino]

a real shame we cant get any new features ,Yes they seem to have gotten the movie right,but this special film is in need of a real
SE!!

This release has over SIX hours of special features. That’s not an SE?? True there aren’t any “new” features but still. That’s pretty good.

 

[Robert Harris]

The fade out, which should be 64 frames, is missing. At that length, one would see the glass touch the table, as it’s only a dozen or so frames into the fade.

The Fade in has been encoded, but may stay in black too long.

Also, and I’ll not make a big thing of it, but black levels in skies are raised a bit.

 

[CarlosMeat]

I think the answer could be both. Josh can maybe answer better, but by my memory from a couple weeks ago, it was a hard cut.
Even it not 100% correct, I'm going to chalk this one into the not significant. I actually like the hard cut better given the general topic of that scene

I think pretty easy to believe the 70mm had a different transition

Obviously he is reaching for a smoke. When I saw this I said to myself I didn't remember that so that explains that.