What's new

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

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
16,561
Real Name
Robert Harris
A long time ago, in and around Los Angeles, a newly branded filmmaker had the nerve to make a low-budget film with a terrific cast, that eventually got him a few more gigs behind the camera.

It was be very difficult for anyone to view this film and deny Mr. Tarantino aka Mr. Brown his gifts as a future filmmaker.

Lionsgate has released Reservoir Dogs on 4k, and with the exception of their extremely annoying pre-film logo, which is Way too loud for human consumption, this is a quality 4k release, with nary a problem in sight.

Those with an aversion to blood may wish to view something else.

Image - 5 (Dolby Vision)

Audio – 5 (Dolby TrueHD 5.1)

Pass / Fail – Pass

Plays nicely with projectors - Yes

Makes use of and works well in 4k - 4

Upgrade from Blu-ray - Yes

Highly Recommended

RAH


Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. As an Amazon Associate, HTF earns from qualifying purchases. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
62,115
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Expect some blowback! I thought it looked great on my OLED, but others have been critical because of color over-saturation and excessive DNR.
 

Jeffrey D

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
3,797
Real Name
Jeffrey D Hanawalt
Thanks for your review, Robert. Anxiously waiting for my copy to arrive.
 

Stephen_J_H

All Things Film Junkie
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
7,340
Location
North of the 49th
Real Name
Stephen J. Hill
There is no DNR. This was shot well lit on low speed stock. Grain is appropriate. Colors, same. It’s the BD that was undersaturated.
I suspect a lot of the claims also arise from the fallacy that Super 35 shot films are necessarily grainy because the 2.35:1 frame is extracted from a spherically shot negative. While this would have been the case with SuperScope, Techniscope and early Super 35 productions, film stock was greatly improved by 1991-92. I haven’t seen the disc yet, but screen caps seen on other sites (for what little value they have) show nothing untoward, and I suspect it looks even better in motion.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
16,561
Real Name
Robert Harris
I suspect a lot of the claims also arise from the fallacy that Super 35 shot films are necessarily grainy because the 2.35:1 frame is extracted from a spherically shot negative. While this would have been the case with SuperScope, Techniscope and early Super 35 productions, film stock was greatly improved by 1991-92. I haven’t seen the disc yet, but screen caps seen on other sites (for what little value they have) show nothing untoward, and I suspect it looks even better in motion.
I’m seeing no problems. Beyond the blasting Lionsgate logo.
 

Chewbabka

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
284
Real Name
Joe
I suspect a lot of the claims also arise from the fallacy that Super 35 shot films are necessarily grainy because the 2.35:1 frame is extracted from a spherically shot negative. While this would have been the case with SuperScope, Techniscope and early Super 35 productions, film stock was greatly improved by 1991-92. I haven’t seen the disc yet, but screen caps seen on other sites (for what little value they have) show nothing untoward, and I suspect it looks even better in motion.
It looks amazing. Very fine grain you often have to squint to see, though I recall a few sequences where it was a touch more apparent. It’s very natural and never looks processed. Facial detail is phenomenal.
 

Kyle_D

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Messages
662
Real Name
Kyle Dickinson
I suspect a lot of the claims also arise from the fallacy that Super 35 shot films are necessarily grainy because the 2.35:1 frame is extracted from a spherically shot negative. While this would have been the case with SuperScope, Techniscope and early Super 35 productions, film stock was greatly improved by 1991-92.
Doing some research today, I learned Tarantino wanted to shoot anamorphic, but he couldn’t afford it on the budget, so he and the DP tried to recreate the grain density of an anamorphic production in release prints by shooting Super 35 on 50 ASA stock. They knew the optical extraction and anamorphic conversion process would introduce additional grain in the anamorphic release prints. They hoped that by starting out at 50 ASA, the grain in release prints would look comparable to an anamorphic production.

The UHD looks like it is derived straight from a spherical source that never went through an optical conversion to anamorphic, explaining the lack of grain that would have been present in a release print.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
16,561
Real Name
Robert Harris
I suspect a lot of the claims also arise from the fallacy that Super 35 shot films are necessarily grainy because the 2.35:1 frame is extracted from a spherically shot negative. While this would have been the case with SuperScope, Techniscope and early Super 35 productions, film stock was greatly improved by 1991-92. I haven’t seen the disc yet, but screen caps seen on other sites (for what little value they have) show nothing untoward, and I suspect it looks even better in motion.
Keep in mind that SuperScope and T’Scope and S35 are different in that the former does not use the track area for image, while the others do.
 

bobclampett

Agent
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
36
Location
Canada
Real Name
Mike Banks
A long time ago, in and around Los Angeles, a newly branded filmmaker had the nerve to make a low-budget film with a terrific cast, that eventually got him a few more gigs behind the camera.

It was be very difficult for anyone to view this film and deny Mr. Tarantino aka Mr. Brown his gifts as a future filmmaker.

Lionsgate has released Reservoir Dogs on 4k, and with the exception of their extremely annoying pre-film logo, which is Way too loud for human consumption, this is a quality 4k release, with nary a problem in sight.

Those with an aversion to blood may wish to view something else.

Image - 5 (Dolby Vision)

Audio – 5 (Dolby TrueHD 5.1)

Pass / Fail – Pass

Plays nicely with projectors - Yes

Makes use of and works well in 4k - 4

Upgrade from Blu-ray - Yes

Highly Recommended

RAH
The big question is how can Lionsgate deliver a first class 4K UHD Blu Ray of this film, that sells for about $14 USD, while every other studio 4K release goes for about $30 USD. Imagine if every studio took Lionsgate’s lead. Time to build a new pressing plant.
 

Jeffrey D

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
3,797
Real Name
Jeffrey D Hanawalt
I loved how sharp everything looks, but I thought the flesh tones look a tad too pink.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
353,204
Messages
5,011,311
Members
143,423
Latest member
MarfunAMD
Recent bookmarks
0
Top