UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Sean Connery - 6-Film Collection -- in 4k UHD (4 Viewers)

[JoshZ]

If you wanna listen to it in Dolby Atmos, I hear that’s pretty good and it’s probably cleaned up

If you wanna listen to it as it was, I would imagine there’s a lot of crackles and Vinyl sounding pops.

The Atmos track on Dr. No is heavily noise-reduced and rolled-off. I don't care for it. The movie also has absolutely zero need to be in Atmos. I might understand the argument to expand the score to stereo, but anything beyond that is pointless.

The mono has some hiss (no crackles or pops), but is a lot livelier than the Atmos track.

 

[JoshZ]

"From Russia With Love" I had not seen in some years and I have to admit, the storyline is a bit too muddled because of the decision to introduce SPECTRE and have them playing the Russians and Brits off against each other. It literally takes an hour before the main plot finally kicks into high gear and even then there are still some muddled details up to the end. The introduction of SPECTRE in "Dr. No" is less obtrusive than it is here, frankly (though of course it established the gimmick of Blofeld and the white cat).

What's funny is that I'm in the process of re-reading the original From Russia with Love novel. I'm ten chapters in and Bond hasn't even been introduced yet! The entire first act of the book is about Red Grant and SMERSH.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

That's one of the great things about that book - it really gives the reader a detailed primer on the spy operations of the time. Especially useful for the modern reader.

 

[Jeff Fearnside]

The Atmos track on Dr. No is heavily noise-reduced and rolled-off. I don't care for it. The movie also has absolutely zero need to be in Atmos. I might understand the argument to expand the score to stereo, but anything beyond that is pointless.

The mono has some hiss (no crackles or pops), but is a lot livelier than the Atmos track.

I totally agree with this. I suspect that, sometimes, certain sound mixes are added just for the marketing factor ("It has Dolby Atmos! It will pour your cup of coffee for you in the morning!") rather than need. However, a restored original audio track done well will sound pretty good--really good, if you prefer a more natural sound. Too many "restorations" are noise-reduced to flatness, filtering off wanted high-end frequencies at the expenses of getting rid of a little hiss. If done really overzealously, it can sound muffled, flat, dead--these kind of mixes actually bother my ears. I can't listen to them for too long. I'll take a little hiss anytime in order to hear the full spectrum of sound.

 

[Jeff Fearnside]

I love how many of us jumped up to defend the man.
@Robert Harris


That’s respect.

I personally have learned a TON about the technical aspects of film, film history, and film preservation from reading Mr. Harris' reviews and comments on these threads. I bet many others can say the same.

 

[Lord Dalek]

The Atmos track on Dr. No is heavily noise-reduced and rolled-off. I don't care for it. The movie also has absolutely zero need to be in Atmos. I might understand the argument to expand the score to stereo, but anything beyond that is pointless.

The mono has some hiss (no crackles or pops), but is a lot livelier than the Atmos track.

No multitrack music recordings exist for the film at all (the soundtrack album was never issued in true stereo and the session tapes are LONG gone), so it was always going to be fake.

 

[Lord Dalek]

As these were shot Hard Matte, correct?

Indeed.

 

[JoshZ]

No multitrack music recordings exist for the film at all (the soundtrack album was never issued in true stereo and the session tapes are LONG gone), so it was always going to be fake.

Agreed, and personally, I'd rather just have the mono. However, I can at least understand why some people might want to hear the score in stereo, even if fake stereo.

What makes no sense is why anyone thought Dr. No needed to be remixed all the way into Atmos, beyond adding a marketing bullet point to the package. The movie has, what, one wide shot of a Pan Am jet landing in the distance. That's about the limit of opportunities available for overhead effects. And when I checked it, I don't think I even heard any sounds coming from my height speakers in that scene.

From Russia with Love at least has the scene with the helicopter repeatedly trying to strafe Bond from above, which a mixer could do something really gimmicky with. The first movie, however, has nothing.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Agreed, and personally, I'd rather just have the mono. However, I can at least understand why some people might want to hear the score in stereo, even if fake stereo.

What makes no sense is why anyone thought Dr. No needed to be remixed all the way into Atmos, beyond adding a marketing bullet point to the package. The movie has, what, one wide shot of a Pan Am jet landing in the distance. That's about the limit of opportunities available for overhead effects. And when I checked it, I don't think I even heard any sounds coming from my height speakers in that scene.

From Russia with Love at least has the scene with the helicopter repeatedly trying to strafe Bond from above, which a mixer could do something really gimmicky with. The first movie, however, has nothing.

The old blu-ray had a decent LFE boom when the mine exploded at least. But it was a pretty "dragged" sounding remix even then.

 

[Malcolm R]

What makes no sense is why anyone thought Dr. No needed to be remixed all the way into Atmos, beyond adding a marketing bullet point to the package.

I think that's what it takes in the current retail market to get people excited enough to upgrade. It is mostly about marketing. Lots of HT customers, especially younger ones, want 4K even if it's not really relevant. They want HDR and Dolby Vision options. They want Dolby Atmos instead of mono or stereo. Even if these films were never made with these options in mind, and it's mostly achieved through artificial processing, many home viewers want them if they're buying discs.

 

[Robert Harris]

View attachment 254234

Indeed.

Perfect. Thank you. No need for me to search.

 

[JoshZ]

The old blu-ray had a decent LFE boom when the mine exploded at least. But it was a pretty "dragged" sounding remix even then.

I remember also disliking the 5.1 on the Blu-ray, but I didn't compare that aspect when I watched last night. In addition to its other problems, the Atmos track has bloated and muddy bass that sounds artificially boosted. Whether that's actually gotten worse since the Blu-ray 5.1, or is about the same, I can't say at the moment.

 

[Into The Archives]

Perfect. Thank you. No need for me to search.

Even more....from the AFA print

Goldfinger (1964) | Timeline of Historical Colors in Photography and Film

is a comprehensive resource for the investigation of film color technology and aesthetics, analysis and restoration, developed and curated by Barbara Flueckiger since 2012. In 2024 Sylvie Pénichon joined the Timeline as a co-curator for still photography.

filmcolors.org

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I've handled IB Tech prints of Dr. No, From Russia with Love, and Goldfinger and they are all soft-matted. Some shots have the matte, some don't - as evidenced in those Goldfinger frames in the link.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That matches my experience of having seen some incorrectly projected as 1.37, where some shots were hard matted and some were not. These clearly are not meant to be shown Academy ratio.

 

[Lord Dalek]

It looks like the bulk of Goldfinger was hard matted at 1.66. The only shots in those samples that weren't were inserts and 2nd unit shots.

Anyway here's from From Russia With Love scanned from an 80s IB Tech reissue print.

 

[Dave H]

The Atmos track on Dr. No is heavily noise-reduced and rolled-off. I don't care for it. The movie also has absolutely zero need to be in Atmos. I might understand the argument to expand the score to stereo, but anything beyond that is pointless.

The mono has some hiss (no crackles or pops), but is a lot livelier than the Atmos track.

I compared both tracks and that was my experience as well. Mono easy choice.

 

[SwatDB]

I compared both tracks and that was my experience as well. Mono easy choice.

Does it beat the 1992 MGM/UA "Connery Collection Vol. 1" LD's mono mix out of the water?

Easter Egg: If you switch to Analog Right it will take you to Music & Effects Track (even though it is not mentioned in the cover), Just in case for either if you did or did not know this

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

Does it beat the 1992 MGM/UA "Connery Collection Vol. 1" LD's mono mix out of the water?

Easter Egg: If you switch to Analog Right it will take you to Music & Effects Track (even though it is not mentioned in the cover), Just in case for either if you did or did not know this

At this point I think you're going to have to buy the new 4Ks and do the comparison yourself.

 

[SwatDB]

At this point I think you're going to have to buy the new 4Ks and do the comparison yourself.

Wish me luck