The Shining 4K UHD (1980)

[TheWalkingDead]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Toys, tennisball is yellow instead of pink, like user OgamiittoMcJ mentioned as well.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=2252

Actually it was a pink slazenger tennis ball, Emilio D'Alessandro auctioned that and other items from the set.

[jerclay]

Originally Posted by Colson

SO I am sitting here syncing the theatrical audio (courtesy of the LaserDisc) to the 4K, which is rather tedious and it falls in and out of sync. Interestingly, during the "Redrum"/"Danny's gone away" scene, the heartbeats are not synced up to the scene in the same way in the new audio mix. In the new mix, they are a split second later; this is clear because the dialogue remains in sync between the two tracks.

Not really anything too important, just a small change that is likely a mistake.

Edit: typed "audio" when I meant "dialogue"

So, are you saying you can't sync the original mono with the UHD by just dropping both on MKVToolNix? Need to do some editing yourself?

[Colson]

Originally Posted by jerclay

So, are you saying you can't sync the original mono with the UHD by just dropping both on MKVToolNix? Need to do some editing yourself?

That's correct. I had to go throughout the movie and occasionally do some trimming or legnthening to the original track when it would fall out of sync at a scene change. This is fairly typical when a new transfer is made from a different source than that of an older transfer (original negative vs a print, for example), as there will sometimes be a frame or two missing from one or the other. It's no big deal.

As for the assertion that the heartbeat timing was a mistake in the original, that seems basically impossible, as the difference is to tiny that it makes literally no difference in effect, and there's no way I'd even recommend fixing, except for the sake of absolute purism. I wouldn't bother with it until the next time they release the movie, or at all, if I were the studio. I mean seriously, it's a tiny difference. I merely pointed it out because I thought it was a bit humorous.

[Transdimensional]

Originally Posted by jrcorwin3

Tedious. Asinine. Either one would be applicable in a scenario where someone is doing this.

For anyone interested in this kind of stuff, there is a whole forum of us tedious asinine people over at FanRes discussing differences in original soundtracks and restoring them

[Colson]

Originally Posted by Transdimensional

For anyone interested in this kind of stuff, there is a whole forum of us tedious asinine people over at FanRes discussing differences in original soundtracks and restoring them

Yup! I love me some fanres I'm not as active as I used to be, but it's a great forum.

I just discovered that I bungled my sync job at some point, and I'm going to have to do it all again, so that's unfortunate. Maybe someone else over there will hope on it before I get the chance.

Edit: Nevermind, I am just a dumb dumb. Looks like my sync is good. I'll have to watch the whole film through, though, just to be sure

[KubrickKurasawa]

I noticed when they cut from the bloody elevator to Jack it seemed all to short...WB just sucks. They can't do anything right imho. It's nice you get clarity and better colors. But even that aspect ratio is to tight. If you watch the flight when Halloran is on it the plane at the last second is out of frame, and Kubrick just doesn't do that. There are a lot of minor errors in this release and no Mono or no Ultimate cuts. WB sucks. I give up on a perfect release of The Shining. It is what it is. I'm a big fan of this movie and it was not well cared for. That was just a first watch who knows how many things people will spot over the next weeks. It doesn't necessarily ruin the movie you just see how people in the mastering and editing rooms do not take their job seriously. They just half ass everything over there imho. I'm buying it just disappointed at its execution and also know that they won't do an Ultimate correct edition ever and this is the best we have for another 10-30 years so that's that.

Post 122 . 9-16-19
I know The Shining...probably watched it 100x on DVD and br. There is milliseconds missing for some reason. Said something about it months ago....quoted my quote because why not? Everything done on computers now? I'm not sure. I love seeing people complain about issues now. I watched it lazily first time so excited...and just... so much jumped out at me as incorrect. It makes me so �� sad. My favorite horror film and still a version I can't come to terms with...12.99 2nd just so I can watch it and wish to correct instead of enjoy....why what's why! Wahhhhhh lol

[Member-222782]

Diabolik has this in stock. I couldn't wait so I ordered a copy for $35 knowing full well this will be half that by Black Friday (or earlier). In this case, I think the extra $$ is worth it. Or, should I say, hopefully it's worth it

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

Diabolik has this in stock. I couldn't wait so I ordered a copy for $35 knowing full well this will be half that by Black Friday (or earlier). In this case, I think the extra $$ is worth it. Or, should I say, hopefully it's worth it

From the caps I have seen and the fact that the BD has the new transfer I would say this is easily worth $30.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

Diabolik has this in stock. I couldn't wait so I ordered a copy for $35 knowing full well this will be half that by Black Friday (or earlier). In this case, I think the extra $$ is worth it. Or, should I say, hopefully it's worth it

They chopped some frames out, and skewed the Aspect ratio, didn't add mono or other cuts. But it has more accurate colour, HDR, clarity, and they fixed the tennis ball.

But those chopped frames are garbage. And that is not Kubricks intended aspect ratio either. Maybe it's a minor issue for the casuals, and major for the hardcore fans or just a couple of us. It's just another imperfect WB release by a long shot, but has some definite improvements in image clarity/quality/tennis ball, (which I do love) but that's it. There's some definite downsides to this release. I don't care if it sells well now. I'm over it.

[oddbox83]

What an extreme reaction. Though I'm curious to know what, if anything, is actually missing. I mean, if the negative is A/B rolls, minor differences are going to be easily introduced (or bigger ones, see 2001 where they forgot to digitally replicate a fade, later corrected for the 2nd US edition).

[ROSS.T.G.]

Argh I can’t wait till Tuesday. Start my horror movie October fest off with a bang.

[OgamiittoMcJ]

Originally Posted by TheWalkingDead

Actually it was a pink slazenger tennis ball, Emilio D'Alessandro auctioned that and other items from the set.

cool story
did he sell the pink toys and Danny's Jumper with pink stars too

[Patsfan123]

Originally Posted by KubrickKurasawa

They chopped some frames out, and skewed the Aspect ratio, didn't add mono or other cuts. But it has more accurate colour, HDR, clarity, and they fixed the tennis ball.

But those chopped frames are garbage. And that is not Kubricks intended aspect ratio either. Maybe it's a minor issue for the casuals, and major for the hardcore fans or just a couple of us. It's just another imperfect WB release by a long shot, but has some definite improvements in image clarity/quality/tennis ball, (which I do love) but that's it. There's some definite downsides to this release. I don't care if it sells well now. I'm over it.

This is a really a horrible take. With attitudes like this, I'm not sure why we ever went past VHS. It seems like the same transfer was used year over year and now they've gone back to scratch and redone it. Who knows what they had to deal with like taking a few frames out which unless you play it back to back.. or remuxed audio, no one would have ever figured out.

Every release people clamor for years, then it finally comes out and it's in the trash before the street date. It's really making me lose interest in these forums.

[TitusTroy]

Originally Posted by Patsfan123

Every release people clamor for years, then it finally comes out and it's in the trash before the street date. It's really making me lose interest in these forums.

so you're happy with just having classic movies released on 4K regardless of quality?...you don't want to hear about any video/audio issues?...hear no evil, see no evil?

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by TitusTroy

so you're happy with just having classic movies released on 4K regardless of quality?...you don't want to hear about any video/audio issues?...hear no evil, see no evil?

That's it! Back to DvD.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by TitusTroy

so you're happy with just having classic movies released on 4K regardless of quality?...you don't want to hear about any video/audio issues?...hear no evil, see no evil?

I dont even know how people can champion UHD as a videophile format when it doesn't even have lossless theatrical audio in most cases(for older films not originally mixed in Atmos/X) Which BTW if Criterion or Arrow decided to not include would be blasted and reported on negatively almost universally. But somehow if its a catalog studio release, it gets a free pass. Makes ZERO sense.

[ROSS.T.G.]

I am so happy this isn't getting an overrated overpriced Criterion release.

[Colson]

Originally Posted by KubrickKurasawa

They chopped some frames out, and skewed the Aspect ratio, didn't add mono or other cuts. But it has more accurate colour, HDR, clarity, and they fixed the tennis ball.

But those chopped frames are garbage. And that is not Kubricks intended aspect ratio either. Maybe it's a minor issue for the casuals, and major for the hardcore fans or just a couple of us. It's just another imperfect WB release by a long shot, but has some definite improvements in image clarity/quality/tennis ball, (which I do love) but that's it. There's some definite downsides to this release. I don't care if it sells well now. I'm over it.

For the record, in many cases, there are more frames in the new version, at least compared to the LaserDisc. This is confirmed by my need to duplicate some silence in the LD track in order to sync the audio.

The opposite was sometimes true, of course, but this seems to be the nature of two releases sourced from different elements.

Overall the new release is quite stunning, visually.

Originally Posted by King Crimson

I dont even know how people can champion UHD as a videophile format when it doesn't even have lossless theatrical audio in most cases(for older films not originally mixed in Atmos/X) Which BTW if Criterion or Arrow decided to not include would be blasted and reported on negatively almost universally. But somehow if its a catalog studio release, it gets a free pass. Makes ZERO sense.

It is a shame when the theatrical audio is not included. That said, I'd like to repeat that despite my efforts of syncing the theatrical audio, I do support this release more generally, because it is a huge step up from the Blu-ray. It's not perfect, of course, but it is great.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

I am so happy this isn't getting an overrated overpriced Criterion release.

4K's on average(especially WB) are the same price(if not more) than Criterion so, ok sure.

[orac1971]

To quote Brian, "you don't need to follow me, you don't need to follow anybody."

Make up your own mind... if you prefer a previous release of a film then its up to you.

Use these forums to see how new releases shape up, but no one is being made to buy this or that...