Mother! 4K UHD (2017)

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Just watched this. Ker-azy movie but in the best possible way. Is it a look at fame, religion, the creative process? All of the above? Wow.

And the verdict is?

[Geoff D]

mother! is an incredible film (you know something's managed to speak to you when you're still mulling it over days later) but what about dat dere UHD disc? The movie was shot primarily on Super 16 with 35mm and RED used for VFX plates and exteriors, Aronofsky wanting something that had a prominent sense of texture and DP Larry Fong noted that modern 35mm stocks are so clean (to compete with digital) whereas using 16mm would be an "automatic read" for the grain.

So, yeah. This thing has grain by the truckload, but what's interesting about the comparison between Blu-ray and UHD in HDR10 is how it looks finer and more regimented on the Blu-ray. Not that it still isn't plenty grainy in 1080p SDR but it looks tidier and more polished, almost 35mm-like which is probably why when I first saw Aronofsky's The Wrestler on Blu I assumed it was 35mm that had been grunged down a bit (it's not, it's Super 16 just like this and Black Swan). But on the 2160p (2K upscaled) HDR version the grain is coarser and livelier, bringing with it a more intense feeling of texture and the detail somehow looks tighter despite the grain being more overt. Not that 16mm is going to give you boundless sharpness yet the image just looks sharper anyhow on the UHD.

I really liked the application of dynamic range, it's not one to show off to friends and neighbours and yet it brings back a significant amount of information vs the SDR Blu-ray nonetheless. This production wasn't shot on a soundstage, they used a real location with real backdrops outside each window and the SDR version loses that feel because so much highlight detail is burned out on the windows. It feels more hemmed in, more stagey, whereas whenever you see out of the windows on the UHD you can really SEE out of the windows, you know? This is what I've meant before about HDR bringing back "realism" to an image despite other aspects of it being decidely "unreal", like the heavy grain in this case. Those two aspects of a presentation don't necessarily have to be at loggerheads with each other. The shots when the screen "whites out" at various moments look proper bright in HDR, too.

Couple of photos, most of the time this was a 'mare to try and get a photo of so don't pay too much attention to the brightness of the surrounding areas, just look at the windows which have not only more range but more colour. Something I also liked was that the grain was still very much visible in those brighter areas on the UHD whereas it gets nuked away on the SDR, I guess that's also what contributes to the 1080p feeling a bit more polished and a bit slicker in terms of conventional picture quality attributes.

[Show spoiler]
BD



UHD




BD



UHD

The black levels have been brought up quite a bit vs the SDR Blu-ray which has dense, detail-sucking darkness but is more of a milky greyness on the UHD. You get more shadow detail on the UHD for sure like on people's hair and clothing, and the movie was actually shot underexposed for the first two acts so milkyness like this is truer to that intent. But for the third act they wanted more contrast and punch while the UHD maintains that greyness which I'm not sure was the way to go. And yet given how much I detest this trend for thin black levels I never felt it was a major issue during the film, it's got such a stylised look anyway that it still seems to work.

Compression doesn't suffer for the more bountiful grain, quite the opposite: I reckon the improved temporal compression is likely what helps the UHD's image look tighter and more focused than the BD's. With sources like this you're always having the grain fight the detail during the encoding, for as good as AVC is it sometimes comes off second best but with HEVC well applied you can have both a grainier presentation and finer retention of detail. No banding to report either.

Not a disc for grainophobes to go hunting down then but it's got a surprisingly effective and naturalistic HDR presentation.

[bradnoyes]

Had a chance to watch this again last night with my wife and it was just as interesting with the second viewing. This was her first time viewing the film and she was left feeling that it was about something entirely different (

[Show spoiler]patriarchy, the "replaceable/interchangeable" nature of women in a man's world, denying a woman's control of her own body, etc...

) than I thought it was about the first time I saw it (

[Show spoiler]fairly straight allegory of God/mother nature's relationship with humanity, and the creative process

), and in my second viewing I had yet another completely different interpretation of it (

[Show spoiler]what it feels like to be an atheist living in a world of religious fanatics

).

Can't wait to see what I think about the next time I watch it. Also, lovely audio track. Some of the dynamic effects in the Atmos track really freaked us both out last night.

[bookcase]

I watched this for the first time last night on my Apple TV 4K in Dolby Vision -- not the best PQ I've witnessed on my Apple TV, but still very strong. As for the movie, I'm not a fan. I thought J-Law was miscast, and felt the last act was a mess. It just didn't coalesce for me. But I thought Michelle Pfeiffer was a standout.

[LordoftheRings]

I understand why Jennifer is the lead actress. It's all good.

Me too I would have like to check other actresses for that role, my imagination is rolling and with it some beautiful pictures, scenes, faces... for an overall possibly more impacting ... punch.

I'm glad to read other's acknowledgement on the music score and audio effects; it is first rate.

And happy to see a film connoisseur like Geoff appreciating the work of Mother! by a master filmmaker and his entire crew and cast. The wild ride is a bonus, so this film shines on many aspects of film cinema entertainment. ...This is high caliber filmmaking with great dedication and hard work. You can tell that the full cast was into it...kuddos to the cast and crew and film director and director of photography and music composer and sound engineer and film editor.

Set decorators designers, cast director, location, costume designer, lights and mikes, 3 2 1 and action!
Prime seat @ the theater, with professional theater actors.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

I'm sure she is the sole reason that this movie was even greenlit. if you tried making it with any other actress it would have been a hard pass. But seeing as big a star she is nw. that's why it was made.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Jennifer Lawrence Fan

I'm sure she is the sole reason that this movie was even greenlit. if you tried making it with any other actress it would have been a hard pass. But seeing as big a star she is nw. that's why it was made.

You might have a strong point here, Jenny. Love and friendship can do that sometimes.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

You might have a strong point here, Jenny. Love and friendship can do that sometimes.

I think she even said in a interview that the movie lived and died on her.

[SexySamSosa67]

Originally Posted by Jennifer Lawrence Fan

I'm sure she is the sole reason that this movie was even greenlit. if you tried making it with any other actress it would have been a hard pass. But seeing as big a star she is nw. that's why it was made.

Then why did the movie flop with such a superstar?

[Mr. Chaverria]

Getting greenlit and making bank are not always hand in hand.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by SexySamSosa67

Then why did the movie flop with such a superstar?

Because it’s a very strange movie that the studio just didn’t know how to market (hence why it was marketed as a horror movie). It also released just after IT ensuring it was going to get crushed.

[d514]

I saw this at the cinema and didn't really know what to think about it. As the days went by I kept thinking of some scenes in the movie and realized that I liked it more than I thought. Yesterday I watch the UHD BD and... what a great movie!

Picture quality is good. I was surprised about the detail in Jennifer Lawrence's face for a grainy 16mm 2K upscale. Like Geoff explained I also noticed how clearly the trees outside were visible. Atmos has some great moments, too. For example there is a scene with Lawrence at the foot of the stairs while someone else is going upstairs. You can here the sound of the steps going around you and getting higher. Nice.

[BluRayHiDef]

I Just ordered this from Amazon due to being shocked but intrigued and entertained by a clip that I watched on YouTube. The clip is horrifying but in a very emotional and psychological, and it makes me want to see the whole affair.

[BluProofie]

Jennifer’s Razzie nomination and the reaction to this movie from her dumb, obsessive fan base will probably make her decide to stick with popcorn flicks over challenging and different work. A shame as she is truly phenomenal in this film.

[Geoff D]

Yep, that's one of the best performances I've seen from her in a while, perhaps ever. She's kinda like a lot of big superstar actors in that you rarely feel that they're playing a character, it's just another variation on their own actorly schtick, but here you forget you're watching a megastar at work and quickly get lost in the character.

[tyrok]

Doesn't everyone know the Razzies are a joke? They wouldn't get in the headlines if they gave out awards to the real worst movies/performances because they would be for things no one has ever heard of.

[LoSouL]

I think she was a great fit. Soft, bosomy, loving, fruitful, convincingly disoriented and concerned... everything it needed. Perfect combination of caged songbird and fertility goddess. That served the themes well and contrasted/complimented Javier Bardem nicely imo.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by tyrok

Doesn't everyone know the Razzies are a joke? They wouldn't get in the headlines if they gave out awards to the real worst movies/performances because they would be for things no one has ever heard of.

Still, even within their proper purview of filmmakers who 'should know better', it would be nice to see them "honoring" something other than this. Even if Mother! is not to your personal taste or didn't work for you, we should all be able to agree that it's a bold and challenging movie that went out on an artistic limb and at least tried something. Failing to clear a high bar is always a more worthy endeavor than just setting it low and sleepwalking over it. I'm disappointed in the Razzies (which seem to have been getting progressively lamer over the last few years) for this nomination that seems to me completely unwarranted.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by tyrok

Doesn't everyone know the Razzies are a joke? They wouldn't get in the headlines if they gave out awards to the real worst movies/performances because they would be for things no one has ever heard of.

That's the same exact thing I said. There are far worse movies out there. But thy nominate big actress and actors for the headlines.

[Indy64]

Originally Posted by Jennifer Lawrence Fan

That's the same exact thing I said. There are far worse movies out there. But thy nominate big actress and actors for the headlines.

You're sounding a bit (a lot) biased. I think you need to remove your rose colored glasses and take a minute to research how the Razzies came about and who votes etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Raspberry_Awards