Back to the Future Trilogy 4K UHD (1985-1990)

[Wally Q]

Originally Posted by Rizor

I saw "Multiplicity" in theaters in '96. I then saw it was showing on TV a while later and was bothered because I was pretty sure there were more shots where you saw multiple Michael Keatons at the same time, and what was with this weird panning camera? That's how I learned about widescreen. Lol.

I want to say it was this and A League of Their Own is an obvious tell of Pan and Scan.

[tylergfoster]

When I worked at Best Buy on the front end, I would often convince customers to get widescreen DVDs instead of full screen by explaining the difference quickly. Vast majority took my advice, I'm sure some people politely declined, but one or two got really irritated and swore their loyalty to full screen.

I also encouraged a good 10-20 people over the holiday season I worked to go Blu-ray over HD-DVD. In January, Warner dropped HD-DVD and the format war ended. I wondered if any of them (especially the 2-3 that declined to switch) remembered our interaction when they read the news.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Even when I was a kid I hated pan and scan. Hated it. Widescreen video first started to become a thing when I was in my teens and I replaced as many of my P&S tapes as I could. So even then, even on crappy old VHS I was already starting to discern what set X version apart from Y. "Start as you mean to carry on", as the saying goes.

How about PAL speedup? That drives me bonkers. Pan & Scan and speeded up sounds.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You're right, there's definitely a bit more headroom in those 4:3 shots now I've looked at them again. Still seems very extreme though.

Less "unseen" VFX to render.
ILM would do 2:1 at the most when doing VFX for Super35 films. I imagine other VFX studios were similar. I remember Independence Day being cropped to hell during any shot with VFX because those shots were done 2.35 and no less.

[Viking61]

North American release date is October 20. With a pricetag of CAD 94.99 it must surely be the trilogy, right?

BackToTheFuture-CA.JPG

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

How about PAL speedup? That drives me bonkers. Pan & Scan and speeded up sounds.

If it's all you knew, both on broadcast and on video, then you wouldn't know it was sped up. Only now, many years later, do I understand, but having had my brain already 'trained' then when I watch an old favourite in 50Hz (like if it's on TV) it doesn't seem so jarring.

Less "unseen" VFX to render.
ILM would do 2:1 at the most when doing VFX for Super35 films. I imagine other VFX studios were similar. I remember Independence Day being cropped to hell during any shot with VFX because those shots were done 2.35 and no less.

I thought 2:1 was a Cameron thing derived from his usage of a custom S35 frame? But yes, fair point, although 1.78 versions of S35 shows where they just throw open the 2.39 mattes are quite common.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

A lot of these examples and explanations you guys are posting are half truths, if that. To be fair, any picture example should have the widescreen shot at half resolution.

Back in those days, anything full screen was lumped in with P&S. A significant portion of full screen movies were open matte, or hybrid open matte. Where full resolution is retained and there’s actually more picture information present over widescreen. The widescreen movement back in the analog days was mostly a marketing gimmick to sell all of these movies again at half the resolution.

Serious collectors were always hunting for open matte transfers and there were tons of them available throughout multiple analog formats. For those who know, Carrie and Titanic are especially nice in open matte. RoboCop. T2. The Abyss. True Lies. And hundreds more. All open matte, all as intended by the directors. There’s even a great hybrid open matte version of Back to the Future.

Oh good Geoff's alt account is back

[Geoff D]

Yes, I'm like Dr Geoffy and Mr Mij

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by Viking61

North American release date is October 20. With a pricetag of CAD 94.99 it must surely be the trilogy, right?

[Show spoiler]Attachment 242934

Has to be. Hopefully Ausland gets the individuals day one.

[The Edge]

Originally Posted by Viking61

North American release date is October 20. With a pricetag of CAD 94.99 it must surely be the trilogy, right?

Attachment 242934

$69.95 USD — which will significantly drop just before release.

[TXMoviebuff77]

I will become broke in the fall but all these releases are worth it, especially BTTF.

Now I’m no expert but can someone explain to me why the BD Trilogy is so hated on here? I watched the first one last night & it looked decent to me.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

Now I’m no expert but can someone explain to me why the BD Trilogy is so hated on here? I watched the first one last night & it looked decent to me.

I think the first one looks okay, edge enhancement aside. I've always thought the other two were straight-up shit, though. I don't know if Universal were trying to overcompensate for the amount of opticals and in-camera effects, but the sequels were beaten to death with the DNR stick.

[Malagant]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

I can’t believe that people still prefer “filling up screen” over watching things as intended.

Perhaps some people simply feel there was a reason why they bought a 65' tv, to enjoy the gloriously huge screen image, instead of using just 48' of it even if it means slightly impaired image?

Same as some people prefer a movie 'remixed' in Atmos sound instead of watching it in its orginal sound as purists would prefer.

People are different and for many this will be a subjective thing. What suits one person, perhaps does not suit another. Personally I think people should watch and enjoy in the way they prefer themselves.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

I will become broke in the fall but all these releases are worth it, especially BTTF.

Now I’m no expert but can someone explain to me why the BD Trilogy is so hated on here? I watched the first one last night & it looked decent to me.

They look much too processed (contrast boost, EE, DNR).

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I thought 2:1 was a Cameron thing derived from his usage of a custom S35 frame?

I know Backdraft and Star Trek VI were also delivered by ILM at 2:1 - all in 1991 with T2...big year for Super35 I guess.

1990s were fun - I spent hours comparing widescreen LaserDiscs with rented P&S VHS tapes and seeing how much they were cropped/opened up. A movie like The Addams Family almost all full frame 1.33 except for matte paintings which were hard matted 1.66-ish. Thank the maker those days of not having OAR are far behind us. I was ahead of the curve, took 15 years for the rest of the video-watching world to catch up.

[TXMoviebuff77]

Originally Posted by Malagant

Perhaps some people simply feel there was a reason why they bought a 65' tv, to enjoy the gloriously huge screen image, instead of using just 48' of it even if it means slightly impaired image?

Same as some people prefer a movie 'remixed' in Atmos sound instead of watching it in its orginal sound as purists would prefer.

People are different and for many this will be a subjective thing. What suits one person, perhaps does not suit another. Personally I think people should watch and enjoy in the way they prefer themselves.

I prefer to see movies as they were originally intended to be seen on my gloriously huge 65” thank you very much. The black bars don’t bother me at all.

[TheDarkBlueNight]

Wait a minute! 95 Canadian dollars!

That’s heavy, Doc!

[MrMahn]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

I prefer to see movies as they were originally intended to be seen on my gloriously huge 65” thank you very much. The black bars don’t bother me at all.

If ya really wanted to see movies as intended it would be from a projector

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I know Backdraft and Star Trek VI were also delivered by ILM at 2:1 - all in 1991 with T2...big year for Super35 I guess.

1990s were fun - I spent hours comparing widescreen LaserDiscs with rented P&S VHS tapes and seeing how much they were cropped/opened up. A movie like [The Addams Family almost all full frame 1.33 except for matte paintings which were hard matted 1.66-ish. Thank the maker those days of not having OAR are far behind us. I was ahead of the curve, took 15 years for the rest of the video-watching world to catch up.

They all had 70mm showings..

[Brightstar]

Tomorrow marks the 35th anniversary for Back to the future it was released on 3rd July 1985

[sapiendut]

---Quote (Originally by Malagant)---
Perhaps some people simply feel there was a reason why they bought a 65' tv, to enjoy the gloriously huge screen image, instead of using just 48' of it even if it means slightly impaired image? —-

Funny. My first TV was 24” CRT and I had no problem watching scope that only fills 18” of my TV