UHD Review The Umbrellas of Cherbourg – Criterion UHD Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[Garysb]

The streaming version is available to purchase on iTunes and is 4K. I don't know if it is the new transfer or not as I don't own it.

 

[BaronVH]

At least the Svet dude there didn’t review it. He would have given it 3.5 stars and sound like an AI wrote it.

 

[Garysb]

The Criterion Channel has the new restoration. I don’t think they stream in 4K but it should give an idea what the new disc will look and sound like.

 

[dpippel]

The Criterion Channel has the new restoration. I don’t think they stream in 4K but it should give an idea what the new disc will looks and sounds like.

You're correct - they do not stream in 4K.

 

[haineshisway]

At least the Svet dude there didn’t review it. He would have given it 3.5 stars and sound like an AI wrote it.

Except the Svet dude DID review it.

 

[lark144]

Except the Svet dude DID review it.

Yes. He recommends everyone keep the old Blu-Ray.

 

[mskaye]

\

Yes. He recommends everyone keep the old Blu-Ray.

A minority opinion.

 

[tenia]

The "just in" blu-ray.com 4K review of Umbrellas goes into details regarding what I observed above. The reviewer concludes that the older BR transfer included with the new 4K is a superior viewing experience.
While I didn't do a comparison of the 2 discs directly as this reviewer has done, this was my feeling as well.

Which is utter BS, since the BD presentation has an arguably debatable grading AND is notably sharpened and not so well compressed at that. I doubt the UHD isn't better at least on the sharpening and the compression.

The blu-ray com reviewer in question is a notorious buffoon. He is the one who keeps saying over and over again that all the colour gradings are wrong, because they aren't what he remembered they looked from the cinema 30 years ago, or match his 20 year old DVD.

The issue with Svet is that he's now gone on a crusade, and I'm choosing this particular word because it has a political subtext to him since it often allows him to deploy the America-first / anti-EU worldview he developed over the past decade. He IS right about plenty of color gradings that absolutely, without a doubt, can't be right and are down to the lab who performed the grading and that left an intrusive color signature overpowering everything else. However, because of his crusade, he's unwilling to point this in a nuanced precise and matter-of-fact way, instead adopting a "one rant fits all" approach that frequently leads him to mix-ups and inconsistancy.

It makes his reviews use-less, because of the lack of consistancy. Actually, I'm surprised he's saying the old BD is fine, even better than the UHD, because if he was to review it today, he's tear it into pieces. Instead, you get this, Eclair mixed up with Hiventy, and incorrect statements around "gamma" and color grading affecting fluidity or whatnot (he also clearly doesn't know how Dolby Vision works), and all this get very negative scores so no readers can gather from it if the issue is light or heavy.

And because it makes it look like the figment of imagination of a rambling man, it minimizes a real and long-standing (going on for more than 15 years now) issue that yet has to be tackled by the industry.

It's a shame because he knows better, he clearly isn't that un-knowledgeable, but he chose not to care anymore and to use his reviews like this instead.

 

[Jeff Fearnside]

@tenia, what you write is interesting. It's probably best not to take this conversation too far afield from the UHD-BD reviewed here (or instead to continue the conversation in a different, more appropriate thread). I will say that what you wrote is exactly why I don't rely on just one reviewer and enjoy collating reviews, so to speak, filtering through what I know about the reviewers' preferences and, yes, biases too, and compare that to what I'm looking for in a product. Regarding The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, the main concerns to me are: 1. Is the new restoration better than the old one, and 2. If so, by how much? Obviously, we don't have a unanimous take on that, but the consensus seems to be (at least so far) "yes" and "at least a little."

 

[mskaye]

@tenia, what you write is interesting. It's probably best not to take this conversation too far afield from the UHD-BD reviewed here (or instead to continue the conversation in a different, more appropriate thread). I will say that what you wrote is exactly why I don't rely on just one reviewer and enjoy collating reviews, so to speak, filtering through what I know about the reviewers' preferences and, yes, biases too, and compare that to what I'm looking for in a product. Regarding The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, the main concerns to me are: 1. Is the new restoration better than the old one, and 2. If so, by how much? Obviously, we don't have a unanimous take on that, but the consensus seems to be (at least so far) "yes" and "at least a little."

1-a clear yes for me but I can also say that if the older restoration was the best we would ever get because of the limitations of the original elements, it would be fine too. But that is not the case, and going back to the original negative is a big improvement. This is not a blu of the The Searchers vs. the new 4k level of improvement but what is? there are many blu that I am 100% content with despite their place in my pantheon. Days of Heaven for example.
2-25% at least

 

[lark144]

\

A minority opinion.

A very Svet opinion. He said the same about Belle de Jour & Cercle Rouge.

 

[tenia]

@tenia, what you write is interesting. It's probably best not to take this conversation too far afield from the UHD-BD reviewed here (or instead to continue the conversation in a different, more appropriate thread). I will say that what you wrote is exactly why I don't rely on just one reviewer and enjoy collating reviews, so to speak, filtering through what I know about the reviewers' preferences and, yes, biases too, and compare that to what I'm looking for in a product.

I tend to think some people are more objectively discerning than others. Several, if not most, aspects of producing an accurate AV review can be broken down into objective markers, like is it filtered, is it correctly encoded, does it bear an obvious out-of-topic color signature, etc, and some people are just better at looking at these than others. Some couldn't notice sub-par compression even if hit in the face with it (and Svet is kinda hit-or-miss - possibly willfully - on this), others can spot chroma issues.
Over the time, I got to find out which are more discerning, and which aren't, and I don't need much more reviews than the ones from those who are - that might be 2 or 3, sometimes just 1, but I grew to know it's accurate (and exhaustive). And even if they're biased over a certain look (which they tend not to be, actually), they know it and adjust accordingly, meaning you still get something accurate.

The issue with Svet is that he threw all this down the drain. He doesn't care anymore about consistency, or usefulness, or accuracy. He'll give a near-perfect score to something that's sourced from an old sharpened HD master, and then give 2 out of 5 to something because it's from a European lab and it has a very slight yellow-ish touch or because it doesn't look like the decades-old magenta-pushed-to-hell DVD he has. All of this make his reviews more and more useless over the time : the comparisons he make offer little insight to the readers, his scoring scale is all over the place, and he can't properly place the causes of what he sees and mixes things up instead. But accurate tech reviews, especially the more advanced mediums become, are becoming more and more of a rarity anyway.

 

[mskaye]

A very Svet opinion. He said the same about Belle de Jour & Cercle Rouge.

He's a Franco-phobe.

 

[Indy Guy]

It still comes down to how a film makes you feel. Having gone to movie theaters my whole life, I do recall dirty & splicy prints, out of focus & dim projection and bad sound issues creating disappointing experiences

In the case of the new release of Umbrellas of Cherbourg this is not the case of either the Blu or the 4K. I can't believe how this has shifted to attacking opinions of people or reviewers expressing their personal thoughts.

Nobody has said either pressing is bad...both versions provide a deeply emotional experience. For those of us who do not wheel out technical equiptment to measuring levels that may or may not influence the actual viewing experience, the fanaticism can seem to be an obsession.

Both versions are included in Criterion's release. Beyond data points, peaks and limitations of clarity and color, whichever version is more personally pleasing to watch will be the version most of us reach for in the future.

I have dropped back to the BR's of Blue Hawaii and Funny Girl for their better ability to handle pure reds and truer colors on my projection equiptment. The 4K's of course outdistance the BR bit rate and resolution, but if I want Fanny's crimson red dinner date with Nick, or Elvis's ruby red sportscar to flash with awesome reds, the BR's of both films are still my go to.

I know I am choosing the lesser "potential" discs, but if what shows up on the screen is more emotionly pleasing to me in my personal viewing situation, that's my choice.

 

[tenia]

Beyond data points, peaks and limitations of clarity and color, whichever version is more personally pleasing to watch will be the version most of us reach for in the future.

I think the debate would be on whether one equates "more pleasing" to the more, how could I say it, "eye candy", or whether what is more likely to be faithful to how the movie was made to look, which brings us back to objectively assessable data points.

In my case, I'll always aim for the theoretically more faithful version, and as it is, an electronically artificially sharpened version or one on which the lab left an intrusive overpowering color signature can't be it. Again, both objectively assessable things.

And if it turns out the UHD has more of these than the BD, it's not so much a matter of the lesser "potential" disc vs the higher one, but the one disc that objectively is better. That's why I'm still sticking with the BD of some movies (eg Terminator 2) because their more recent presentations objectively just have too many issues.

 

[Indy Guy]

I have an older collection of films that I pass on to my mountain cabin. After viewing both versions of Criterion's "Umbrellas" release at home, I decided to watch portions of the 2014 Studiocanal region B copy stored up at the cabin for comparison.
Instead of checking out a few key scenes as intended, I ended up watching the entire film again. The combination of the Studiocanal region B pressing and the flat panel at the cabin was breathtaking... in many ways preferable to both Criterion discs when viewed down home.
All things are relative and personal taste is a major factor, but to me the look is striking and I feel Demy was striving for the romantic style of a Hollywood Technicolor musical in the first place.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I have an older collection of films that I pass on to my mountain cabin. After viewing both versions of Criterion's "Umbrellas" release at home, I decided to watch portions of the 2014 Studiocanal region B copy stored up at the cabin for comparison.
Instead of checking out a few key scenes as intended, I ended up watching the entire film again. The combination of the Studiocanal region B pressing and the flat panel at the cabin was breathtaking... in many ways preferable to both Criterion discs when viewed down home.
All things are relative and personal taste is a major factor, but to me the look is striking and I feel Demy was striving for the romantic style of a Hollywood Technicolor musical in the first place.

What type of display are you viewing at home?

 

[tenia]

The 2014 UK and Criterion BDs are pretty much identical, though.

 

[Indy Guy]

What type of display are you viewing at home?

It is a 5K (scope) Barco Balder projector with a Lumagen processor. It struggles with some 4K Dolby Vision releases from Paramount, but is otherwise stunning. As I said, Umbrella's is not a problem 4K, it just struck me as a bit reserved from what I experience with the older BR's. If Demy wanted a Technicolor look, the Blu's deliver!

 

[Robert Crawford]

It is a 5K (scope) Barco Balder projector with a Lumagen processor. It struggles with some 4K Dolby Vision releases from Paramount, but is otherwise stunning. As I said, Umbrella's is not a problem 4K, it just struck me as a bit reserved from what I experience with the older BR's. If Demy wanted a Technicolor look, the Blu's deliver!

I asked because you watched that old Blu-ray on a flat panel while watching this newer disc on your projector. Anyhow, your opinion regarding both discs is well noted. I hope others can charm in with their opinions as I find the difference of opinions quite interesting.