Predator Trilogy 4K UHD (1987-2010)

[NDcowboy]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

But it'll never look "great," so adhering it to some "Sony" standard goes against the knowledge of how the film was shot and edited. It will always be grainy and somewhat dull, and all the zoomed opticals make grain in some scenes chunky and ugly. And that's how it's always looked.

All we crave is the same level of scanning and restoration as Sony(for instance) uses. Although realizing that the original camera elements aren't very good, a proper scan with the best technology is still needed for best possible results.

As far as digital cameras go, Sony keeps its best sensor designs exclusively in-house for its own cameras..and sells it older sensors to Nikon..which are still better than Canon's sensors.

So a person could surmise that Sony(for instance) has better film archiving tech than Fox(who may or may not have some kid scan Predator in his parents basement)

[Indiana Jones]

Originally Posted by AngelGraves13

If it's the same transfer as the Ultimate edition, I'll pass.

Give it a new 4K scan from the o-neg for the love of god.

They did a new 4K scan last year for the 30th Anniversary and that is now available on AppleTV (and looks great) so surely the UHD will use that?

[Ben_UK]

I'd love to see Cliffhanger's NC17 cut, sadly there is zero chance of that I feel.

Predator is one of two 80s movies that I watched far too young. I was about 7 or 8 years old when I saw Aliens and Predator, absolutely scared the c*** out of me - but for that, I love them both.

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

When a benchmark has been set then the others need to step up. Not going to reward those who put out a product that could look better.

A benchmark being set is not then tantamount to "meeting the spec" of 4K UHD for everyone else. No studio needs to "step up to the plate" for your weird logical leaps -- Sony are EXCELLING in their field. Good on them -- Does not mean 20$ for Saving Private Ryan, or any of the other Paramount offerings is not worth your time and money! What a weird dichotomy

The entitlement for your $$$ in these boards is hideous. Sony has some of the best to enjoy. Doesn't mean other offerings are suddenly incapable of enjoyment.

[Kingchin]

Originally Posted by NDcowboy

All we crave is the same level of scanning and restoration as Sony(for instance) uses. Although realizing that the original camera elements aren't very good, a proper scan with the best technology is still needed for best possible results.

As far as digital cameras go, Sony keeps its best sensor designs exclusively in-house for its own cameras..and sells it older sensors to Nikon..which are still better than Canon's sensors.

So a person could surmise that Sony(for instance) has better film archiving tech than Fox(who may or may not have some kid scan Predator in his parents basement)

And what has digital photography camera's got to do movies Predator was shot in the eighties using old school film camera's. Sony doesn't have better film archiving tech than Fox or anyone else for that matter, yeah they have done a few good restorations for blu rays and a couple of 4k blu rays but they are not the messiah for picture quality like people make them out to be! Of my over 800 blu rays the Sony discs aren't even the best picture quality of older catalogue and newer releases.

Glory, Leon, Fifth Element are good Sony blu ray releases but Braveheart, Thief and Once upon a time in the west are all better catalogue blu rays picture wise. Not knocking Sony as they do put out some good quality releases but they are no way the A standard infact no one is as all studios have good and bad releases.

[NDcowboy]

Originally Posted by nick4amber

The entitlement for your $$$ in these boards is hideous. Sony has some of the best to enjoy. Doesn't mean other offerings are suddenly incapable of enjoyment.

Doubt anyone here intentionally is trying to be a schill for a single company. We just got burned on the last 2 releases of Predator(coolest movie of all time). Most of us bought Die Hard 4k because it’s s great movie at a fair $20. Most will buy Predator 4k even if it’s a 1% upgrade over the 2008 disc. Hoping it looks like Braveheart, while knowing it’s theoretically impossible based on the poor film stock used.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I'd love to see Cliffhanger's NC17 cut, sadly there is zero chance of that I feel.

Predator is one of two 80s movies that I watched far too young. I was about 7 or 8 years old when I saw Aliens and Predator, absolutely scared the c*** out of me - but for that, I love them both.

You can see the workprint if you like the look of a vhs tape that has never heard of tracking.

[NDcowboy]

Originally Posted by Kingchin

And what has digital photography camera's got to do movies

Nothing. A ccd SENSOR is commonly used to create a digital copy of film. Certain companies manufacture CCD sensors.

[Nagamura]

I can't wait to grab this, been holding out on the regular blu since I heard it wasn't a great transfer. Just bought a LG C7 yesterday, so I'm excited since this is one of my favorite movies.

[erixon20]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I'd love to see Cliffhanger's NC17 cut, sadly there is zero chance of that I feel.

Predator is one of two 80s movies that I watched far too young. I was about 7 or 8 years old when I saw Aliens and Predator, absolutely scared the c*** out of me - but for that, I love them both.

NC 17 cut-extreme gore?

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

When a benchmark has been set then the others need to step up. Not going to reward those who put out a product that could look better.

A benchmark being set is not then tantamount to "meeting the spec" of 4K UHD for everyone else. No studio needs to 'step up' for your weird logical leaps -- Sony are EXCELLING in their field. Good on them -- Does not mean 20$ for Saving Private Ryan, or any of the other Paramount offerings is not worth your time and money! What a weird dichotomy

Entitlement strikes again.. Sony has some of the best to enjoy. Doesn't mean other offerings are suddenly incapable of enjoyment.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Nagamura

I can't wait to grab this, been holding out on the regular blu since I heard it wasn't a great transfer. Just bought a LG C7 yesterday, so I'm excited since this is one of my favorite movies.

Let me know what you think of the TV when you get a chance to watch some UHD movies. I am seriously debating getting a C8 myself.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by erixon20

NC 17 cut-extreme gore?

Of cliffhanger? #bunnyexplosion

[Kingchin]

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

When a benchmark has been set then the others need to step up. Not going to reward those who put out a product that could look better.

Benchmark.... Sony weren't even the benchmark for blu rays let alone 4k blu rays, Fifth Element 4k blu ray could of been better than what Sony actually delivered. No Sony blu ray release comes close to the picture quality of Samsara blu ray, even the ancient 2009 Seabiscuit blu ray with inferior VC1 video has better picture quality than most Sony AVC blu ray films.

Yes some studios need to raise their game for 4k blu ray releases mostly older catalogue releases, example Terminator 2 4k blu ray should of been amazing but instead it had poor picture quality botched transfer. On the good side recent catalogue releases from lots of different Studio's Braveheart, Die Hard, Gladiator, Saving Private have all had excellent transfers for the picture.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by erixon20

NC 17 cut-extreme gore?

Yes, they cut back on some graphic gore shots - like the icicle through the eye.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Yes, they cut back on some graphic gore shots - like the icicle through the eye.

You mean......the eye-cicle.



I'll get my coat.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Yes, they cut back on some graphic gore shots - like the icicle through the eye.

Very common for violent R rated movies. Listen to the commentary track on Predator, the director mentions a couple cuts in order to get an R (though he feels they were fairly fair and minor, the matter of just cutting some frames from the most violent moments)

[Deric2014]

Originally Posted by Kingchin

Benchmark.... Sony weren't even the benchmark for blu rays let alone 4k blu rays, Fifth Element 4k blu ray could of been better than what Sony actually delivered. No Sony blu ray release comes close to the picture quality of Samsara blu ray, even the ancient 2009 Seabiscuit blu ray with inferior VC1 video has better picture quality than most Sony AVC blu ray films.

Yes some studios need to raise their game for 4k blu ray releases mostly older catalogue releases, example Terminator 2 4k blu ray should of been amazing but instead it had poor picture quality botched transfer. On the good side recent catalogue releases from lots of different Studio's Braveheart, Die Hard, Gladiator, Saving Private have all had excellent transfers for the picture.

Not Die Hard

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Deric2014

Not Die Hard

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Deric2014

Not Die Hard

I have to admit, the reviews aren't making me run out and buy the disc.