Mission: Impossible 1-5 4K UHDs (1996-2015)

[tim_p]

Originally Posted by svenge

Technically not all bonus discs, as the bonus features found on the M:I-3 Best Buy exclusive bonus DVD from 2006 have never been re-released to date anywhere in the world. Its contents are actually pretty substantive, at least compared to other store-exclusive discs of the era.

Never been re-released is probably correct but that bonus disc was available on the initial Australian limited edition 3 disc dvd set. I’ve got it and it’s part of my Frankensteined set consisting of the Scandinavian AVC/DTS-HDMA disc 1 and UK disc 2 blu rays, and Aus bonus dvd.

[obriensg1]

The 20% off sale at Target currently works on pre-orders, but don't wait. I often see Paramount correct that mistake quickly with Target.

https://www.target.com/p/mission-imp...08#lnk=sametab

https://www.target.com/p/mission-imp...27#lnk=sametab

[MovieGuy999]

Home Video History of Mission Impossible (1996) - YouTube

Good info on the original audio.

[King Crimson]

I just wanted to clarify if I'm missing any special features from the series if I own the recent 6 uhd steelbook releases, the mi3 bby bonus DVD, and mi2 DVD?

[Schwartzy]

Originally Posted by MazeRunner

The latex masks have to be the cringiest things about the movies though.

If and when cruise starts to look too young we know what tech hell be using instead of plastic surgery

[StingingVelvet]

I feel like Tom Cruise will never allow digital de-aging to be done to him. Just a gut feeling.

[King Crimson]

I'm sure he would take it as an insult and I'm surprised most actors ego allows it.

[Schwartzy]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I feel like Tom Cruise will never allow digital de-aging to be done to him. Just a gut feeling.

Maybe its makeup but he did look alot younger in the dead reckoning than the red carpet and interviews etc

[Cobalt Blu]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I feel like Tom Cruise will never allow digital de-aging to be done to him. Just a gut feeling.

Originally Posted by King Crimson

I'm sure he would take it as an insult and I'm surprised most actors ego allows it.

He already is having subtle de-aging done to him. He looks noticeably younger in Top Gun: Maverick and Dead Reckoning than on the press tours for those movies.

[koberulz]

Dead Reckoning was in the can for a couple of years, wasn't it? Stands to reason he'd look older.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by Cobalt Blu

He already is having subtle de-aging done to him. He looks noticeably younger in Top Gun: Maverick and Dead Reckoning than on the press tours for those movies.

Those films were significantly delayed by several years though between filming and press tour. At least for MI7.

[Okiephile]

Watched MI in 4K. Pretty good but I thought the colors were blown out, turned down the settings on my projector. Anyone else see what I was seeing. Tom looked like he had lipstick.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Okiephile

Watched MI in 4K. Pretty good but I thought the colors were blown out, turned down the settings on my projector. Anyone else see what I was seeing. Tom looked like he had lipstick.

I remember thinking faces looked a little flushed. Doesn't mean it's not accurate though really, who knows. It's a surprisingly vibrant looking movie in general.

[Rayjg]

Just watched the first film for the first time in who knows how long. It holds up really well. I like

[Show spoiler]how the team gets wiped out early on

, the betrayals and double crosses, and the great locations. The tech is laughably dated though. Anyone know what changes were done after De Palma turned in his cut? I assume the

[Show spoiler]flashbacks to what really happened to the team

were originally placed somewhere else in the film and were added to the train station scene later. I imagine they originally appeared much later in the film, probably during the train sequence, in De Palma's cut.

[Ben_UK]

I bought all these (I’ve never seen most of them) myself and the wife are working our way through these, we watched the third film last night. It was pretty enjoyable, way better than the second film.

I just can’t get over how relatively poor these films look, the colour is (to me) quite smudgy and the films thus far have a very “digital” appearance to them. Am I alone in thinking this?

[DR Herbert West]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I bought all these (I’ve never seen most of them) myself and the wife are working our way through these, we watched the third film last night. It was pretty enjoyable, way better than the second film.

I just can’t get over how relatively poor these films look, the colour is (to me) quite smudgy and the films thus far have a very “digital” appearance to them. Am I alone in thinking this?

Take a look at the blu-rays for the first two.

[7Mile]

I thought the 4K's looked fine.

[Ben_UK]

Originally Posted by 7Mile

I thought the 4K's looked fine.

The first film looks very good, I presume that one had a OCN job done. I am not sure what the source is / was for the others because they look super processed and muddy looking to me.

[Modren]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

The first film looks very good, I presume that one had a OCN job done. I am not sure what the source is / was for the others because they look super processed and muddy looking to me.

2 should also be an OCN scan, but I know 3 was based from a 2K DI and already had a kinda garish color grade. So I imagine the age of the scan and the overbaked color is responsible for the processed/muddy image you saw. For what it's worth, Ghost Protocol had a 4K DI and should look much better, though weirdly Rogue Nation went back to 2K.

[Ben_UK]

Yea 2 doesnt look too bad, but 3 looks pretty awful.

Whats with this aliasing?
https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=3&x...6&l=0&i=5&go=1

Again, lots of what looks like video noise, or is it clumpy grain? Was Ghost Protocol from a filmout?
https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=2&x...9&l=0&i=7&go=1