UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Oppenheimer -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Indy Guy]

I am watching Oppenheimer as I type. I am viewing it on my constant height scope screen for the first time with a constant 2.35 aspect ratio. A fellow  HTF member clued me into a single button on the Lumagen processor remote that locks a variable aspect ratio film to the 2.35 screen dimension.
Tonight's viewing has been more riveted on the story and not the distractions of the gyrating frame formats.
In my IMAX theater viewing the height extension on the massive screen did offer added immersion. At home the effect was diminished and became a distraction. In this override mode, the changing aspect ratios are undetectable and involvement with the content is not hampered by distracting black bars coming and going on the limited size of a home screen. Oppenheimer appears to have been shot with ample safe space in the IMAX frames for theatrical presentation in the scope format.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I watched the Blu-Ray with my screen masking set at the 70mm 2.20:1 ratio and did not notice anything cropped awkwardly, either.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Am I the only one who doesn't really notice the AR changes in Nolan films?

I mean, I see them obviously, but I don't NOTICE them, if that makes sense.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Am I the only one who doesn't really notice the AR changes in Nolan films?

I mean, I see them obviously, but I don't NOTICE them, if that makes sense.

The same here as I’m too much into the movie.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Theatrically, not so much on an IMAX screen. But at home, the transitions are slightly more bothersome for me as it's not like a few complete scenes (other than Trinity) are in IMAX. He has very brief IMAX inserts in so many other sequences that it looks awkward.

 

[Charles Smith]

The same here as I’m too much into the movie.

Same here.

I would think I would notice it, and I don't.

 

[mskaye]

Am I the only one who doesn't really notice the AR changes in Nolan films?

I mean, I see them obviously, but I don't NOTICE them, if that makes sense.

Wes Anderson does it. Tarantino does it. They're having fun with it. I think it's a bit different with Nolan but as others have said, it doesnt take me out of the movie. It's seamless. It has a purpose. It announces a chapter and mood change.

 

[dpippel]

I notice it, but for me it's far from distracting. In fact, it's just the opposite - I love it. While I can appreciate that some don't care for shifting ARs, in most cases I see it as a bonus as long as it's the filmmaker's intent, as is quite obviously the case with Oppenheimer. IMO this is probably the 4K disc of the year A/V-wise, and those extra pixels in the IMAX sequences are just mind-blowing on my 77" OLED.

 

[Malcolm R]

I also don't usually notice AR shifts on my projector screen which is static 1.85. For years, I wondered what people were talking about as I had watched a few of the discs where they claimed this happened. Finally, watching Captain Marvel 3D a few years back, I noticed a shift. I thought it was pretty cool. But for the most part I'm watching what's on the screen and not paying attention to how much of the screen is filled (or not).

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I usually notice (most of) the AR shifts, but am not usually distracted/bothered by them (at least not anymore than I gather the filmmakers intended).

Don't have this 4K disc yet (though I've seen Oppy in IMAX 15/70 3x w/ good-to-great seats), but I don't expect any different for me... though I do have a good size FP setup (like at least several others here).

_Man_

 

[Noel Aguirre]

Rather than the shifting aspect ratio percentages I’d like to know the percentage of scenes that lasted longer than 3 mins. I could have sworn this was a movie made by someone w ADD. However it was quite effective in making a long film appear shorter and gave it an edge of your seat pacing. However I think the comparison to Lean IMHO is way off as Lean’s scenes in his films tended to have many long takes and would linger like a fine wine. I remember in the theater thinking can’t anyone write a scene longer than 5 mins these days? I like it very much but personally found it slightly lacking. Its pacing reminded me of TV drama shows like Law and Order- one short scene after the other (not that there’s anything wrong with that). The acting in it though is sublime.
I’m looking forward to Cooper’s Maestro because his filmmaking of A Star Is Born had the classic Hollywood moviemaking length/ pacing.

 

[garyrc]

Decimal points remain in our rating vocabulary.

I was hoping that the new scoring would be 1-100. Hard to know if a 10 is a 10, or a 10 is just below an 11.,

Measurement folk (psychologists, psychometrists, etc.) often prefer two features:

• An odd number of choices in rating, starting at 1, so something that is seen as typical would get the number in the middle, e.g., 3 in a 5 point scale, or 5 in a 9 point scale.
• No greater than a 9 point scale.

Those of us who try to see only those films that are predicted to be good may be reluctant to use the lower ratings, since we are unlikely to see a real clunker. In my own ratings, I reserve a rating of 1 for Fire Maidens of Outer Space, which almost ruined Borodin's Polovetsian Dances for me forever.

 

[PMF]

Also, in regards to all films, it just comes down to a feeling. The best is when a film that one was once mixed about is seen years later, only to become absolutely loved; leaving one to wonder why we didn’t get it at the time.

Harold & Maude, for example, reached me decades later in that fashion; which, prior to that, in the late 1970’s, left me baffled.

Scores can change within our own life-lived perceptions, even though the film does not. And thats always a pretty cool thing.

 

[OliverK]

I am watching Oppenheimer as I type. I am viewing it on my constant height scope screen for the first time with a constant 2.35 aspect ratio. A fellow  HTF member clued me into a single button on the Lumagen processor remote that locks a variable aspect ratio film to the 2.35 screen dimension.
Tonight's viewing has been more riveted on the story and not the distractions of the gyrating frame formats.
In my IMAX theater viewing the height extension on the massive screen did offer added immersion. At home the effect was diminished and became a distraction. In this override mode, the changing aspect ratios are undetectable and involvement with the content is not hampered by distracting black bars coming and going on the limited size of a home screen. Oppenheimer appears to have been shot with ample safe space in the IMAX frames for theatrical presentation in the scope format.

Lumagen also has the option of setting a fixed aspect ratio of 2.20 and that would be the logical choice for Oppenheimer if you resent aspect ratio changes.

 

[Bartman]

I'd heard the streaming version did not have shifting AR so I purchased the regular Blu-ray. The movie is fabulous. Shifting AR is not a problem but the Blu-ray is not visually stunning. Contrast & definition is not reference standard. Was the Blu-ray mastering supervised by Nolan or the DP? If not, is Universal dumbing down lesser formats?
I'm viewing on an LG B8 in ISF Dark mode. Other movies, both Blu-ray & streaming look better. Anyone else notice this?
P.S. If you dislike loud soundtracks I found Oppenheimer fine with the NIGHT mode (reduces audio dynamic range) selected on my Sony AVR.

 

[mskaye]

I'd heard the streaming version did not have shifting AR so I purchased the regular Blu-ray. The movie is fabulous. Shifting AR is not a problem but the Blu-ray is not visually stunning. Contrast & definition is not reference standard. Was the Blu-ray mastering supervised by Nolan or the DP? If not, is Universal dumbing down lesser formats?
I'm viewing on an LG B8 in ISF Dark mode. Other movies, both Blu-ray & streaming look better. Anyone else notice this?
P.S. If you dislike loud soundtracks I found Oppenheimer fine with the NIGHT mode (reduces audio dynamic range) selected on my Sony AVR.

this is really great.