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

[Indiana Jones]

Originally Posted by wildphantom

The U.K. BTTF 4K set has digipack fold out packaging with the discs in plastic trays, just like the Alien set did.

The original UK Alien Anthology release came as a digipack but this was replaced shortly after but a regular plastic case and it sounds like bobbyh64 got the re-issue.

[greendemoncustoms]

Received GRUV eBay set. It was pretty crushed sent in bubble mailer. If I didn't already have the BBY steels I would be pissed even for 10 bucks

[keithabbott]

Originally Posted by Indiana Jones

My TV can only display HDR10 and I thought all three looked fantastic.

Have you compared them against the 30th anniversary BD set?

[kemba15]

Got mine yesterday from Target. Very disappointed on how damaged these Universal sets come. I'm not one to complain but these sets are horribly built.

[Bolty]

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. My eBay Gruv set came in mint condition and movie One played with no problems and had no scratches. Movies 2 and 3 I haven't watched yet but don't appear to have any scratches.

I transferred the three UHD discs to separate cases so I won't have to put them in and out of the digipak ever again.

[BStecke]

I got my replacement Steelbook set from Best Buy and the replacement set had no issues with skipping on the first film. I’m going to do a quick scan of two and three just to make sure there are no issues with those, but maybe there’s a bad batch of discs out there.

[Bluyoda]

Mine arrived from amazon.com today, and this is what the spine looks like.
_MG_7621sm.jpg

Don't really care for this slip anyway. The Digibook is quite beautiful though.

For safety sake I put the new disc with the wonderful disc art in the 25th anniversary edition, and those in turn into the Digibook.
Definitely much more convenient, and both the BTTF III BD and the bonus disc fit behind the UHD. I know some will call it sacrilegious, but I am more practical oriented. Who else has done it this way?
_MG_7622sm.jpg

[chip75]

Originally Posted by keithabbott

How does the 4K disc look like with HDR10 and no Dolby Vision? Any better than the BD disc? My 4k projector doesn't support Dolby Vision so I'm curious how this stands up to the previous release. I don't have Dolby Atmos either. I really like the color saturation in the BD set. From the videos I've seen finer detail seems to be more apparent in night scenes rather than day scenes.

The previous release was a relatively awful dated master with filtering and edge enhancement. You should be able to see a nice difference between the new remastered BDs and the UHDs as well.

[Bluyoda]

Just started watching the first 20 minutes, and it's incredible, especially the audio, which is so much more immersive. The picture quality is worlds better as well, of course.

[steel_breeze]

Originally Posted by keithabbott

How does the 4K disc look like with HDR10 and no Dolby Vision? Any better than the BD disc? My 4k projector doesn't support Dolby Vision so I'm curious how this stands up to the previous release. I don't have Dolby Atmos either. I really like the color saturation in the BD set. From the videos I've seen finer detail seems to be more apparent in night scenes rather than day scenes.

Originally Posted by chip75

The previous release was a relatively awful dated master with filtering and edge enhancement. You should be able to see a nice difference between the new remastered BDs and the UHDs as well.

I agree with chip75... and I'm only watching the 4K disc on a 1080p projector, down-rezzed with my Oppo 203; so I'm watching in good ol' SDR and not getting any HDR benefits, DolbyVision or otherwise. Even watched at 1080p SDR, the new 4K disc absolutely smokes the old BD for natural "filmic" detail, grain, and lack of edge enhancement. For whatever it's worth, this is the only 4K disc I own that doesn't require any gamma or brightness adjustments, when watching in 1080p SDR. I find that interesting. I have a database of individual settings I have to change on literally every other UHD, carefully tweaked by using the waveform monitor built into my projector... but this 4K disc is "mapped" perfectly into SDR by my Oppo 203, right out of the box.

[Nothing371]

This is an obvious candidate for a $20 or $25 sale at Target or whomever sometime in Nov.-Dec. I'm looking forward to buying it then.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

This is an obvious candidate for a $20 or $25 sale at Target or whomever sometime in Nov.-Dec. I'm looking forward to buying it then.

[Bluyoda]

So, I decided to watch the entire movie afterall, and I am very happy with it. It makes the original BD release look like DVD. Here we have better natural detail, adequately natural-looking grain, beautiful shadow detail, lovely, albeit a little reserved use of HDR (DV), but I definitely noticed lots of colours that I had never paid any attention too. All in all, this is by far the best presentation of the film on home media, and most likely the best it will ever be. I was a bit worried after Geoff's review, but nothing dampened my viewing pleasure at any point, despite a handful of more managed shots. I had expected far worse.

The audio is fantastic. The opening finally sounds the way I always thought it should, with super discrete surround sound. The songs are marvellous, and sound like Pink Floyd or Queen surround sound albums. Love it.

PQ: 4/5
AQ: 4.5/5

[leocan]

I have noticed what I believe can be a sign of DNR. See the image (if it was uploaded successfully). I don't know if anybody else has noticed that too. It's at the end of Part II and the artifact is consistent.

* This is my first post after a number of years of reading this forum.

[rick88]

I just finished watching the first film. I thought it looked great, and it played flawlessly on by Sony UBP-X800.

Speaking of the X800, I have had it for 3 years this month. It has had a good bit of use and it has been trouble free. I've read where some have had issues with freezing up with some discs but this has not happened once with mine.

[SpazeBlue]

Originally Posted by leocan

I have noticed what I believe can be a sign of DNR. See the image (if it was uploaded successfully). I don't know if anybody else has noticed that too. It's at the end of Part II and the artifact is consistent.

* This is my first post after a number of years of reading this forum.

That's ghosting. And yeah, it was mentioned here:

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Remember that bit in the UHD of JAWS where you get some ghosting on-screen for a split second as the helicopter flies over the beach? Same thing happens during BTTF Part II's Dolby Vision output though NOT in the main body of the film (though I could swear some of the background details are visible through Marty's face for a split-second after he pushes Griff in the cafe), it happens on the trailer for Part III in the shot where Doc swings his rifle into action, the barrel of the gun visibly 'ghosts' as he swings it around. It's not subtle and this artefact is categorically not there on the HDR10 layer, here are some photos:

Dobly

[Show spoiler]

HDR10

[Show spoiler]

Also, welcome to the forum!

[sockableclaw]

Originally Posted by levcore

Yeah if only BTTF had included a downer like that at the end, what could've been...

Why do you act as though I disagree with you? Haha. Of course I loved the ending that we got and I wouldn't change it for anything. All I was doing was just bringing up the possibility that somewhere down the line Marty will discover that things aren't as perfect as they seem in this new 1985.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by leocan

I have noticed what I believe can be a sign of DNR. See the image (if it was uploaded successfully). I don't know if anybody else has noticed that too. It's at the end of Part II and the artifact is consistent.

* This is my first post after a number of years of reading this forum.

Hi Leo. To add to the above post, where I didn't actually explain why it's doing that: the ghosting is a result of corruption in the encoding of the Dolby Vision enhancement layer which is why it 'lags' like that.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

There never was one of those. That was just "our" Marty. He remembers how things were but to everyone else he grew up in that timeline.

One of the things that made the filmmakers realize that Eric Stoltz wasn't going to work as Marty was because when he read the script he lamented that how sad and depressing the ending is that everything and everyone Marty knew was changed from how he remembered it.

I’ve never thought about this before, but I believe the 1985 Marty at the end of the first film that the original Marty sees is an alternate Marty. He grew up with “cool” parents so he’s a different Marty. Who knows what happens when he goes back to 1955. Maybe he has to do the same thing but it’ll be slightly different and he’ll be surprised that his dad is a nerd.

Another thing I’ve wondered is why are Doc and Marty in the future in Part II? When they went in the DeLorian in 1985 to travel to 2015, they removed themselves from Earth and should’ve been declared missing. This is how time travel in the movie The Time Machine is handled if I remember correctly. I guess in BTTF it’s more like they’re seeing how the future will be once they get back and live out their lives.

[Maxwell Everett]

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

Another thing I’ve wondered is why are Doc and Marty in the future in Part II? When they went in the DeLorian in 1985 to travel to 2015, they removed themselves from Earth and should’ve been declared missing. This is how time travel in the movie The Time Machine is handled if I remember correctly. I guess in BTTF it’s more like they’re seeing how the future will be once they get back and live out their lives.

An excellent point. Marty and Jennifer should either not be there in 2015, or if they are there, they should remember that this is the day and year they travelled to when they were teenagers. In other words, Old Jennifer shouldn't be surprised to see Young Jennifer.