Mystery Men - Coming soon from Kino

[gates70]

KLStudioClassics
@KLStudioClassic
Coming Soon!
Brand New 4K Master from the Original Camera Negative!

Mystery Men (1999) Starring Ben Stiller, Hank Azaria, Janeane Garofalo, Eddie Izzard, Greg Kinnear, William H. Macy, Lena Olin, Paul Reubens, Geoffrey Rush, Wes Studi and Tom Waits – Directed by Kinka Usher.

https://twitter.com/KLStudioClassic/...779488266?s=20

[jkoffman]

I just bought it on BD. You're welcome!

[joonskeezle]

Originally Posted by jkoffman

I just bought it on BD. You're welcome!

Lol same. I don't mind though, it was cheap.

[Cruel Angel]

If you do not 4k master your blu ray, your blu ray will become your master.

[dylrichard02]

Never bought the old release, but this sounds like fun. Probably a future KLSC sale purchase.

[meremortal]

Hopefully more titles will be licensed to KL and subsequently get a new 4k scan. Universal themselves can't seem to be bothered to do it on their own for catalog titles unless they're releasing a uhd.

[Hubunkey]

4k master but no 4k release?

[BunyipPouch]

Originally Posted by Hubunkey

4k master but no 4k release?

I mean, that's not uncommon at all.

[jstxanothrxstory]

Hopefully it’ll have all of the special features from the DVD. The HD DVD had most of them, but the Blu-Ray dropped a handful of them.

[jstxanothrxstory]

Originally Posted by Hubunkey

4k master but no 4k release?

Unfortunately seems to be common nowadays.

[danny24]

I'll buy it but really would prefer a UHD from them the Universal BD just went OOP and this explains why.

[Rizor]

Hey, almost ordered this from the Target sale last week!

[danny24]

Originally Posted by Rizor

Hey, almost ordered this from the Target sale last week!

The Universal BD isn't bad or anything but yeah a 4K remaster is going to thump it.

[Trekkie313]

Great...I still have my old copy sealed.

[Albie989]

And cue Smash Mouth.

[Bk_Tan]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Hopefully more titles will be licensed to KL and subsequently get a new 4k scan. Universal themselves can't seem to be bothered to do it on their own for catalog titles unless they're releasing a uhd.

How much does a 4K scan cost?

How does it make financial sense for Kino/boutique labels to cover the cost of the scan/restoration for Universal when the rights remain with Universal and they only get to sell it for a limited time?

Shouldn't the studio cover the cost? How does it work?

Is it the same for all boutique labels licensing content from studios? For example Criterion etc always talk about new restorations but who is funding the cost for those when the studio is the one who gets the most benefit (licensing fee + no restoration costs + future licensing/releases etc.) with seemingly no downsides?

[Crowbar_Faith]

Originally Posted by Cruel Angel

If you do not 4k master your blu ray, your blu ray will become your master.

This didn’t get the love it deserved, lol.

I wonder how improved this version will be over the bluray release already out? It’s a shame it’s not going to be a 4K UHD release. I bet the colors and textures in this movie would really pop.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Bk_Tan

Is it the same for all boutique labels licensing content from studios? For example Criterion etc always talk about new restorations but who is funding the cost for those when the studio is the one who gets the most benefit (licensing fee + no restoration costs + future licensing/releases etc.) with seemingly no downsides?

Perhaps the cost of licensing is worked out against the expense of restoration. As Aclea has often pointed out, for most big player studios, the money they get from a boutique label license for individual titles is peanuts compared to what they earn from their own distribution networks (satellite, streaming) or large library licenses to various distribution channels.

And while studios like Criterion and others do carry out restorations, the bulk of their big-ticket releases are not in-house restorations, but licensed masters where the resto was arranged for by the rights-holder.

[fiendish_thingy]

This is a film that has some great moments but is anything but a great film. Still, I'll probably pick it up because I have absolutely no self control when it comes to this bluray thing.

[Bk_Tan]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Perhaps the cost of licensing is worked out against the expense of restoration. As Aclea has often pointed out, for most big player studios, the money they get from a boutique label license for individual titles is peanuts compared to what they earn from their own distribution networks (satellite, streaming) or large library licenses to various distribution channels.

And while studios like Criterion and others do carry out restorations, the bulk of their big-ticket releases are not in-house restorations, but licensed masters where the resto was arranged for by the rights-holder.

Isn't restoration work quite expensive though?

For example if it cost $1m, and they sold at $20, then you'd need 40,000 copies to breakeven which I think is a tall ask. Even if licensing was nothing given they would have to restore it since the studio doesn't.

That said, how many times does a film need to be restored? Surely it's a once and done cost if you do it right the first time and in the case of films released this millennium surely none need to be restored. There's only so much back catalogue the studios have right?

And after all their profits, they still haven't scanned/restored everything they own? Seems irresponsible. Having said that, I guess there's the whole 2K vs 4K scans, but that should be sort of final, and even 2K is good enough isn't it rather than nothing.