UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - Sean Connery - 6-Film Collection -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Worth]

On second glance, I’m not quite as impressed with these. I still feel like they’ve been messed with in ways that I can’t quite put my finger on, though far less than their Lowry equivalents. They don’t look quite as natural as the newer scans for The Man with the Golden Gun or The Spy Who Loved Me on digital, but they are still much better than anything else we’ve had so far.

 

[JPCinema]

I bought the lower priced set with the horrible artwork. I carefully opened it up and all the discs were loose and fell out. I put them on the spindles and they will not stay. What a disaster of packaging. I’m concerned about many scratches on these 4K discs.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

I bought the lower priced set with the horrible artwork. I carefully opened it up and all the discs were loose and fell out. I put them on the spindles and they will not stay. What a disaster of packaging. I’m concerned about many scratches on these 4K discs.

I put the new discs in the old Blu-ray case.

 

[JPCinema]

I put the new discs in the old Blu-ray case.

I will do the same

 

[Jeff Fearnside]

I bought the lower priced set with the horrible artwork. I carefully opened it up and all the discs were loose and fell out. I put them on the spindles and they will not stay. What a disaster of packaging. I’m concerned about many scratches on these 4K discs.

Why, oh, why do home video companies keep putting out premium product in the most ridiculous, space-hogging, flimsy packages that don't do the single most important thing a disc package is supposed to do: hold the discs and protect them?

 

[Sultanofcinema]

More Diamonds Behind the scenes .....View attachment 254413View attachment 254414View attachment 254415

If you look at the first shot of Jill on Connery's back, you can see why the woman with glasses is repairing his shirt.

 

[SwatDB]

I should go back and sample the original audio mixes for both films….

I did that last night.

Unless you and others are interested, I will have no choice but to keep my preliminary findings to myself, in case the person misunderstand my posts as usual, unless I receive some advice on "how not to let readers misunderstand a post from a user"

Thank you.

 

[brioni]

B) The UHD's Mono mixes that I've checked so far, hasn't demonstrated to my ears' satisfaction in beating the selected VHS/LD/DVD mixes (waiting to hear a word if the Remastered Mono [Mix B] is a downmix of the Remastered Dolby Atmos [Mix B])

Oh lord. I would seriously hope they aren't a downmix. That would be on a level with Warner's Rocky set mishap. Seem's that most on here have acknologed they are different enough in there own right not to be but I think the gold standard to compare against are the LD's. Everything since and inexplicably, even the blu-rays have been rock bottom bitrates.

In the previous thread I remember some people saying that it looks like the frames were damaged on the LD version because they danced around a bit, which you can see very clearly if you do a frame-advance. Someone actually posted a jpeg showing the entire strip of the LD frames that were missing from the blu-ray. But that doesn't really explain why they were missing from the OCN that Lowry supposedly used.

Yh, I guess no one was going to lose sleep over it and worry about finding another source. We must be talking about no more than 3 frames, maybe even 1. Hard to tell if there is a jump in the music track due to SFX. It's not obvious unlike Bond's fight with the chauffeur in Dr No.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

Oh lord. I would seriously hope they aren't a downmix.

They are not downmixes.

 

[SwatDB]

They are not downmixes.

If MGM is right about this, then what's different between the 2025 UHD Remastered Mono and 2008/2012 BD Mono?

Did you hear word from MGM using actual Mono elements for the US/International Mix? (introduced for Home Video since the 1996 LD [IIRC])

Out of curiosity since I have read that the previous 2008/2012 BD Mono was a downmix of the 5.1 mix (not to be confused with the 2006 UE DVD)

The 5.1 is very much like the 1996/1998 LaserDiscs but spread across more channels (and with a discrete albeit rarely active LFE). Of the Connery remixes I've heard, this is the only one with solid fidelity, aside from the hiss reduction veiling most quiet (dialogue-centric) scenes. The US blu-ray's mono track is a downmix of the 5.1

Source: blah-ray.blogspot.com

Feel free to let me know what you think of "Moshrom"'s words/findings
Thank you

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

If MGM is right about this, then what's different between the 2025 UHD Remastered Mono and 2008/2012 BD Mono?

You're asking about two different things. I said they "are not downmixes" and they're not. This is obvious because the music error in Dr. No on the "remastered" Atmos track is not on the mono. And the end of Thunderball on both mono mixes has the sound of the wire snapping against the windshield which is missing from both Atmos tracks. If the mono tracks were downmixes these issues would be carried over.

If you had the discs, and I know you don't, you'd see that the menu calls the Atmos tracks "remastered" while it doesn't use that term on the mono mixes.

 

[SwatDB]

You're asking about two different things. I said they "are not downmixes" and they're not.

You must excuse me, if you thought I have said they were downmixes thank you for confirming it (hats off)

This is obvious because the music error in Dr. No on the "remastered" Atmos track is not on the mono. And the end of Thunderball on both mono mixes has the sound of the wire snapping against the windshield which is missing from both Atmos tracks. If the mono tracks were downmixes these issues would be carried over.

First thing I noticed while was watching the film (as a teenager) on Bond 50 BD back in 2013 [IIRC] it played out the Dr. No theme.

If you had the discs, and I know you don't, you'd see that the menu calls the Atmos tracks "remastered" while it doesn't use that term on the mono mixes.

From what I saw (just to recap):

If it's Alternate Mix it is the intended end titles?
If it's Remastered Mix it is identical to the 2008/2012 BDs?

For example:

Remastered [Atmos] [Bond theme "Dr. No" variant] (US/International Mix) [Mastered i.e. Mix B]
Remastered (Alt) [Intended End Titles theme [UK Mix] [Alternate i.e. Mix A]
OG Mono [Bond theme "Dr. No" variant] (US/International Mix) [Mastered i.e. Mix B]
OG Mono (Alt) (Intended End Titles theme) [UK Mix] [Alternate i.e. Mix A]

Or is it the opposite?

* Nice to see the Mink Glove Scene [on the UK mix] (which the BBFC cut to achieve an A-rating) retained [since 1987, onwards]

What other mix names would you give over "Remastered" and "Original"=

Intended End Titles theme can be found on 2003 Capitol/MGM CD, correct?

I'll be looking forward to watch the Connery Bonds primarily for the authentic 1.75:1 framing, PQ and their new Master. Can't wait to check it (so long as I have the sufficient dough with me.)

I won't forget it.
Thank you

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

The Atmos and mono tracks on Thunderball labelled "[Alt]" match the pre-1995 video releases (photos here). This has the "Now you can tell about the one that got away" line as Bond escapes the shark pool. It has the inexplicable Pinder line about manta rays. It doesn't have the tracked music during the underwater fight when Bond is discovered unloading the bombs. It does have the cue Barry composed for the end titles and not the 1962 James Bond theme.

I have never seen a 35mm print (and I've seen a lot) of Thunderball that has the Barry cue for the end titles, but it is the version I grew up with on video and what I prefer. That this release offers both mixes for the first time makes this set an easy recommendation.

 

[SwatDB]

The Atmos and mono tracks on Thunderball labelled "[Alt]" match the pre-1995 video releases:

- This has the "Now you can tell about the one that got away" line as Bond escapes the shark pool.
- It has the inexplicable Pinder line about manta rays.
- It doesn't have the tracked music during the underwater fight when Bond is discovered unloading the bombs.
- It does have the cue Barry composed for the end titles and not the 1962 James Bond theme.

"Alternate" confirmed as "Mix A" check. [have checked any errors at the Dom Pérignon section (both Atmos/Mono), like the 1989 MGM/UA LD does?]

I have never seen a 35mm print (and I've seen a lot) of Thunderball that has the Barry cue for the end titles, but it is the version I grew up with on video and what I prefer. That this release offers both mixes for the first time makes this set an easy recommendation.

Phase One successful, camping dough, before carving a path straight to Phase Two (AQ comparison against either 1984 CBS/Fox Video VHS [missing the Mink Glove section] and 1993 MGM/UA "Connery Collection Vol. 2" [Mink Glove section retained and No Dom Pérignon error])

 

[JoshZ]

If MGM is right about this, then what's different between the 2025 UHD Remastered Mono and 2008/2012 BD Mono?

The 4K UHD discs do not claim to have "remastered mono." The audio tracks are labeled as:

- "English (Remastered)" - This is the Atmos mix.
- "Original Theatrical English" - This is the mono.

I'm not sure that the mono was actually remastered at all. However, it is authored in lossless DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 format, which is a big improvement over the heavily compressed Dolby Digital mono on the prior Blu-rays.

For both Dr. No and Russia I listened to the new Atmos audio. Both sounded very clean to me. I should go back and sample the original audio mixes for both films….

Being "clean" is part of the problem. The Atmos mixes have a lot of heavy-handed noise reduction in order to scrub all the hiss out of them. The downside to this is that it also removes a tremendous amount of auditory detail and life in the process.

 

[SwatDB]

The 4K UHD discs do not claim to have "remastered mono." The audio tracks are labeled as:

- "English (Remastered)" - This is the Atmos mix.
- "Original Theatrical English" - This is the mono.

Yeah, I know.

Without Alt description: US/International Mix [Mix B] or is it 1996 Mix (post-1995)
With Alt description: UK Mix [or what collectors refer it as Mix A] brought back after the "1993 Connery Collection Vol. 2" LD

I'm not sure that the mono was actually remastered at all. However, it is authored in lossless DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 format, which is a big improvement over the heavily compressed Dolby Digital mono on the prior Blu-rays.

My preliminary countdown (not final and not meant to be conclusive but to give an idea on what and how the following mixes sound like):

Mix A [UK]:

3. 2025 WBDHV UHD Mono [Alt] *
2. 1993 MGM/UA "Connery Collection Vol. 2" LD
1. 1984 CBS/Fox Video Hi-Fi VHS [Mink Glove section MIA]

* Not sure of where I would place it though, as further investigation (sharpening of ears [no offense]) may be need for a more reliable finding before going

Mix B [US/INT] (post-1995) [Not counting LD Stereo upmix]:

2. 2008/2012 MGM BDs
1. 2025 WBDHV UHD Mono

I'd be happy hear your thoughts and comments.
Thank you

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

The main mono track on Thunderball is impressively dynamic. The Alt a little less so, but still very good.

 

[JoshZ]

My preliminary countdown (not final and not meant to be conclusive but to give an idea on what and how the following mixes sound like):

Mix A [UK]:

3. 2025 WBDHV UHD Mono [Alt] *
2. 1993 MGM/UA "Connery Collection Vol. 2" LD
1. 1984 CBS/Fox Video Hi-Fi VHS [Mink Glove section MIA]

* Not sure of where I would place it though, as further investigation (sharpening of ears [no offense]) may be need for a more reliable finding before going

Mix B [US/INT] (post-1995) [Not counting LD Stereo upmix]:

2. 2008/2012 MGM BDs
1. 2025 WBDHV UHD Mono

I'd be happy hear your thoughts and comments.
Thank you

Honestly, as much as I love these movies, I'm just not invested enough to go comparing the mono audio across multiple editions on multiple video formats. The mono tracks on the 4K discs sound very good to me - better than the Atmos mixes on the same discs, and better than the compressed Dolby Digital mono on the Blu-rays. That's enough to satisfy my needs.

I still own the Criterion Laserdiscs for Dr. No, FRWL, and Goldfinger, as well as the THX Laserdisc box sets for Goldfinger and Thunderball, but I sold off all my other Bond Laserdiscs and DVDs a while ago. My Laserdisc player isn't even working very reliably these days.

 

[SwatDB]

Honestly, as much as I love these movies, I'm just not invested enough to go comparing the mono audio across multiple editions on multiple video formats.

We already have "Moshrom" the blog creator in question, I'm happy to be inspired by him including others I've come across over the years, with the likes of Leonard Maltin [History], Bob Burns [Archivism], Martin Hart [Aspect Ratio Lore], Nick Redman [Film Music], etc. since I developed an interest in Blu-ray Disc (since 2009) [later home video as a whole in terms optimization, experience, bonus completion and most importantly, film authenticity/purism] so you may see me as an eccentric "Fortune Hunting Nature Boy" when it come to entertainment, where I tend to follow their educational leads or example (including comparisons, essays, lectures and commentary [audio or PiP]) and then afterwards keep it in my and let the necessary reliable info last as long as I can

The mono tracks on the 4K discs sound very good to me - better than the Atmos mixes on the same discs, and better than the compressed Dolby Digital mono on the Blu-rays. That's enough to satisfy my needs.

I still own the Criterion Laserdiscs for Dr. No, FRWL, and Goldfinger, as well as the THX Laserdisc box sets for Goldfinger and Thunderball, but I sold off all my other Bond Laserdiscs and DVDs a while ago. My Laserdisc player isn't even working very reliably these days.

"That's very sensible."
- Pussy Galore.

 

[Jack P]

I've gone through five of the films (I have to in the interests of continuity watch OHMSS before I watch DAF). Transfers are great (loved toggling back and forth on the "Thunderball" tracks to hear the different end credits music and have that option at last). I am getting a reminder though of some of the weaknesses of the films as films and how some of these weaknesses I think tend to get obscured simply because of the longstanding preference for the Connery era overall.

1-"From Russia With Love" has a very confused and muddled plotline that I blame on the decision of the producers to introduce SPECTRE into the plot with this "play both sides against each other" game that was their way of trying to avoid tying Bond to waging the Cold War fight. Frankly this causes the film to avoid getting to the point for far too long and creates too much confusion. This would have worked far better with the original, simpler dynamic of Bond vs. Russians. The SPECTRE element was far less obtrusive in "Dr. No" and I have no problem with it there. (And "Dr. No" is IMO a superior film). The set pieces of the film in terms of the location photography, the great supporting performances and the memorable train fight scene I think tends to obscure the fact the script has some weaknesses.

2-"Thunderball". Starts out great (notwithstanding IMO the distasteful Pat Fearing scenes) and then drags in its finale with the tedious underwater fight scenes. This is also my chance to rebuke the Fleming purists who always insisted that Rik Van Nutter was the best Felix Leiter. They said this only because of Van Nutter's physical resemblance to the literary Leiter (and even then Raymond Benson, the worst of the purists was mad that Leiter wasn't being shown with a steel hook and wooden leg because of his maiming in the "Live And Let Die" novel as if we were supposed to think that was important!) and overlooked the fact that Van Nutter has the personality of a block of wood and just serves the role of a yes-man for Bond whereas Jack Lord (unfairly ripped by Benson in his book) was playing a Leiter who you could believe was just as good an agent as Bond (and Lord later proved he was capable of some Bondian style adventures on "Hawaii Five-O"!) IMO, David Hedison was the only other Leiter who belonged in Lord's class but Van Nutter IMO is the worst of them (Cec Linder and Norman Burton were miscast IMO but at least they have personalities).

3-"You Only Live Twice". This is the film I think you could easily skip if you were watching everything from the beginning to DAF (including OHMSS). It's not so much the fact that reversing the literary order with OHMSS necessitated a different plot, I think the real problem is that this is the first Bond film Richard Maibaum didn't contribute to and his touch was IMO needed to try and craft a new story from a few book elements. Roald Dahl I think churned out a very formulaic script that shows too many signs of copycatting previous films. Connery's boredom with the part by this point doesn't help either and after the mysterious build-up with the unseen Blofeld in FRWL and Thunderball, Donald Pleasence is an absolute bust coming off as the cartoon like figure parodied later in the Austin Powers films. (Telly Savalas is IMO the only credible Blofeld of those we saw on-screen because he at least could present a physical challenge to Bond). At any rate, I think YOLT is a lot easier for me to pass over compared to the Moore films (save for "A View To A Kill") in the future.

BTW, one little bit of interesting YOLT trivia. The uncredited actor playing the US President is Alexander Knox who in 1944 was the star of the big-budget Fox movie "Wilson" that failed miserably at the box office. When you first see him there is even a photograph of Wilson on the wall behind him in what I can't believe was a mere coincidence.