The Shining 4K UHD (1980)

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

Road House gif. This is why we get along.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Not at all. 1990-1991 were still very much like the late 80s in their overall style - a lot of neon, a lot of dance music. There was a tonal shift around 1992 when grunge broke out into the mainstream, so while I agree that the 90s as a decade found its footing a little quicker, there was still an 80s influence in the very early part of the decade.

The thing with that is Grunge broke in 1991 and became widespread by March of 1992. The dance music and neon were pretty much gone by 1991 aside from one big break out act. College rock (later on to be alternative rock) was starting to dominate the airwaves fairly heavily in march with R.E.M.'s Out of Time and Losing My Religion. The shift tonally started early in 1990 and the movies were really reflecting that pretty early on. The big action blockbusters were already so different that what proceeded in the '80s.

I don't know exactly why, but the decade of the '90s more so than other shifted gears almost immediately musically. With everything else following very quickly. A really good example of this is Straight Talk which came out in spring of 1992. That was very much reflective of the '90s. Another one was Scenes From a Mall that came out in spring of 1991. And Father of the Bride in the fall of 1991. They both reflected that style of movies being done in the comedy genre throughout the '90s. Comedies took a huge change in direction in the '90s from what they were in the '80s. HUGE.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

Opinions are like Patrick Swayze. Everyone tries to be like him, but many fail to measure up.

[steelstring41]

Originally Posted by SplitScreen

Damn Amazon! Waiting all day to get my copy and finally it clunks through the letterbox only to turn out to be some random drivel called Booksmart. Jeez....now Ive got to wait for the replacement coming tomorrow and waste time returning this nonsense teen flick....grrrrrrrrr

Dude, I'm so sorry. That is really poor quality control and if Amazon pulled that shite with me on a huge release like this I would be pissed as all hell.

[jasonmiles2014]

Originally Posted by steelstring41

Dude, I'm so sorry. That is really poor quality control and if Amazon pulled that shite with me on a huge release like this I would be pissed as all hell.

I ordered a bike rack from Amazon a few months ago and was sent a box of diapers instead.

[Weirded Wonder]

Originally Posted by jasonmiles2014

I ordered a bike rack from Amazon a few months ago and was sent a box of diapers instead.

I would have shit myself.

[Matt89]

Lol knock yourselves out.

~Matt

[bradnoyes]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

No, I'm with Matt89 on this one... having grown up in the 80s, it didn't really start to feel like its own decade until about '84. The early 80s did have their own look and feel with the New Wave stuff, but a lot of pop culture and styles including film and TV were a holdover from the late 70s, it was very much a transitional period as one would expect. You can't really use a movie like Raiders as a gauge anyway as it's a period piece.

Agreed. And in much the same way I don't think the 90's really kicked into full gear until late 1992, or even early '93. By that time Nirvana's Nevermind and Dr. Dre's The Chronic had time to completely change the music industry, while films like Terminator 2, Silence of the Lambs, and Malcolm X changed the movie industry. A lot of stuff from 90-92 felt like an extension of the 80's but by 1993 most of the big movies and albums felt very much 90's.

Sadly, I feel like the 90s burned too bright and too fast. In retrospect it feels like we started transitioning out of the 90's and into the early millennium culture by 1998 or so and there's really just about a 5-6 year period of golden era 90's goodness.

Anyway, to keep this somewhat on topic, I'm reading Doctor Sleep right now and it's reminding me just how different King's writing is from this film. It's also reminding me how vastly different some of the plot elements are, to the point that I'm finding myself somewhat surprised that they're using elements of the original Shining to promote Doctor Sleep.

[fighthefutureofhd]

I'm finding it a bit surprising myself as well considering the differences in writing. Though, I feel like Doctor Sleep is a natural progression from The Shining. At least in terms of movie story to book story, as I've never read The Shining. You'll love Doctor Sleep. It's great.

Originally Posted by Matt89

Lol knock yourselves out.

~Matt

Those ARE some short shorts.

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by moviebuff75

As far as the width goes, it is common width. 1.85 isn't wider, it is shorter.

Not when they crop the sides of 1.85:1 to make 1.78:1 it isn't.

[jasonmiles2014]

Originally Posted by Weirded Wonder

I would have shit myself.

I did. I can still feel the trickle down my leg.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Lol knock yourselves out.

~Matt

Ummm... are you David Koresh?

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

Ummm... are you David Koresh?

Striking similarities, really.

~Matt

[chad_1138]

Just finished watching. It was one of the most glorious 4K titles I have viewed. I threw my old Blu-ray in right after and looked at a few scenes. It looked like a flipping DVD. It was so disgusting looking after watching this new scan. Totally worth the $24.99

[Scottishguy]

Watching the Making The Shining featurette again. Can't help but think Kubrick deliberately made Shelley feel useless and worthless to get her into character.

I'm surprised she never had a full on mental breakdown.

[TwoTecs]

Originally Posted by moviebuff75

The aspect ratio is correct. The old bd took the full width of the frame, then opened up the top and bottom for 1.78. The new version presents the width as projected, with a sliver more top and bottom. The reason the old bd had more top and bottom image was because the width of that framing was too wide, so it had to be opened up more vertically.

Why do you say the framing was too wide on the previous BD?

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by moviebuff75

You want it down to the pixel, but that isn't how composing and projecting work.

No, I don't. I want the correct, intended ratio. In this case, the discrepancy is small and, yes, it's probably smaller than theatrical exhibition tolerances tended to be when the movie was new. However, there's no reason a modern video release should need to settle for a "thereabouts" aspect ratio. It's just as easy for a colorist to get it right but, in this case, the colorist is up against Warner's "house style" policy that favors filling the screen over accuracy when the ratio is deemed "near enough" to 1.78:1.

I don't want "pretty good" framing; I want correct framing.

Originally Posted by moviebuff75

The difference is about two or three scan lines on a television.

Not in 2160p, it isn't.

[kchrules]

If the movie was 1.85:1 and re-framed to pan-and-scan 1.33:1 for the 4k release and cropped over 1/3rd of the movie out, then anger would be justified. But the difference of 1.85:1 to 1.78:1 is negligible, even if it was cropped. You would have to be watching both side by side or laid on top of each other to notice it. Also depending on your TV and it's picture settings, 1.85:1 movies tend to get cropped to 1.78:1 anyways.

Not including the theatrical mono audio track is worse by far, but like the review says it's pretty much laziness on WB's part. I know a lot was changed for Batman 1989 since Tim Burton hated the original mix, but were any sound effects, music cues, or dialogue changed/deleted in the new Shining mix? If not, it's not as bad as other WB movies like Batman, or the Dirty Harry movies which had their original sound effects and music cues scrubbed and replaced with new effects and foley.

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Watching the Making The Shining featurette again. Can't help but think Kubrick deliberately made Shelley feel useless and worthless to get her into character.

I'm surprised she never had a full on mental breakdown.

I mean she kinda did later in life, and claims that working on The Shining is what pushed her over the edge. Personally I think she probably had other things going on and there were likely other factors that contributed to her current mental state but yeah I remember being slightly taken aback by how hostile he is towards her in the doc. He really didn't treat her very well and it's quite obvious in the documentary.

~Matt

[Shawn Elestren]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Watching the Making The Shining featurette again. Can't help but think Kubrick deliberately made Shelley feel useless and worthless to get her into character.

I'm surprised she never had a full on mental breakdown.

Um...she did.

https://youtu.be/nfCxKppdO3I