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

[Gerani53]

It's funny. With all my kvetching about 4K, I'll be delighted to purchase Universal's follow-up release (we presume) for next Halloween, where the Mummy, the Creature, the Phantom of the Opera, and the Bride of Frankenstein will be up at bat. 4K won't allow for a 3D CREATURE, however, which is kind of a shame.

 

[Johnny Angell]

It's funny. With all my kvetching about 4K, I'll be delighted to purchase Universal's follow-up release (we presume) for next Halloween, where the Mummy, the Creature, the Phantom of the Opera, and the Bride of Frankenstein will be up at bat. 4K won't allow for a 3D CREATURE, however, which is kind of a shame.

In a way, 4K kinda, sorta, does since you have to have 4K to have passive HD 3D.

 

[Gerani53]

I have some friends who refuse to watch CREATURE in anything other than actual 3D, which does indeed look lovely if you're set up for it. I've always enjoyed the film either way, having grown up with it as a 2D experience. As a matter of fact, my first professional writing job called for me to impersonate "Gill"...

 

[Nelson Au]

Guys, there’s two threads on this Universal Monsters collection. Tough to decide which one to post to, but since this one discussed the image of the new 4K release the most, I’ll try this one.

Late last year I upgraded to a new 4K display that was purchased and calibrated by Value Electronics, by D-Nice himself I’m told. And this release was one I was particularly interested in seeing how it would look.

i purchased the steel book version of Frankenstein, though I’ll be interested in the other three titles too. I’ve been watching other 4K discs before watching Frankenstein so I could get used to the images. What i thought of Frankenstein was that the image had a great density. It was just what I thought, like great black and white still photography. There was one scene that I thought worked especially well and I can imagine in 1931, giving the audience quite a shock. It’s when Frankenstein is up in his laboratory and they hear the creature walking up the stairs and it enters the lab. His back to the camera as he enters and slowly turns to show his face. The heightened level of mid tones and inky blacks really helped to hide his face until the right moment. People complain the image is dark, I didn’t get that sense. It looked great to my eye. I also paid attention to scene when the creature is on the run and meets Maria. That scene looked great. The fingers are all there. The final sequence as the creature was trapped in the burning windmill was still very effective at evoking emotions for the creature and I’ve seen this movie many many times.

After the movie was over, I played the standard blu ray version. In terms of clarity and image sharpness, it was hard to tell, but in some shots, close-ups of Colin Clive it was clear the 4K was slightly sharper. The lines on his face, his hair and the fabrics in his jacket in the scene right before he asks victor to look over Elizabeth as he went to search for the creature. What surprised me is the Blu ray looked overly bright!! Especially the scene when the creature finds Maria. It looks like a modern film shot in black and white. The 4K looks more correct to me, and I of course do not know what the original film is supposed to look like. It just felt right. The best word that keeps popping up in my head is the density of the image is greater in the 4K. My theory is the Blu ray was mastered based in the limitations of the Blu ray and it’s standards. There is nothing wrong with that, but perhaps it meets those standards because standard high definition cannot render the level of gray scale a 4K display can. We are simply seeing more levels of gray in the 4K image.

 

[crissrudd4554]

Frankenstein’s audio could be better. Yes this video (not mine) uses the 2012 BD for comparison but it’s identical to the 4K.

 

[cda1143]

Frankenstein’s audio could be better. Yes this video (not mine) uses the 2012 BD for comparison but it’s identical to the 4K.

Thanks. A pity. And far from the only example. On films of 40+ years it seems more common than not. Warner Archive and Kino seem to be the exception - meaning they do not ruin perfectly good soundtracks.

This Is far too common a problem which should receive much more attention than it does.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Sounds like they lost some high frequencies trying alleviate the heavy noise and cackle from the poor quality optical source.

Six in one half dozen in another.

 

[aPhil]

I'm not taking a side since I haven't seen the UHDs as yet but, in fairness, hasn't it already been determined that THE WOLF MAN blu ray was not a restoration like the others were? I don't think it's fair to compare that to the UHD disc since it's obviously from a blu-ray master that was not afforded the same amount of care that the others were. Sharpening would likely be a given in that case and the UHD disc should naturally have a strong advantage, don't you think?

Maybe all these have been answered, but I don't know where to search --

So, at this point, does anyone know if the original Blu-ray of The Wolf Man was not from a 4K scan like some of the other Universal monsters?

And, the HD Blu-ray in the new UHD package is still the same one as 2012 ?

And, the UHD is from a newer 4K scan ?

 

[Dave H]

Maybe all these have been answered, but I don't know where to search --

So, at this point, does anyone know if the original Blu-ray of The Wolf Man was not from a 4K scan like some of the other Universal monsters?

And, the HD Blu-ray in the new UHD package is still the same one as 2012 ?

And, the UHD is from a newer 4K scan ?

The original Wolfman BD was from a 2K source. The UHD BD is a big upgrade.

 

[Dave H]

On a side note, I watched The House of Dracula BD from the Frankenstein BD set the other night. Wow. This disc almost looked 4k! Clearly it stemmed from 4K, but amazingly sharp and detailed.