The Matrix Trilogy 4K UHD (1999-2003)

[Geoff D]

I know the two metadata values are not the same thing, which is why I said "should the content extend that far anyway". But I never said that the two iterations are fundamentally "different" grades, I said it depends on what goes into what layer. You do know that the HDR10 layers are actually created from the DV masters, right? The same metadata to be put onto the disc is used to first derive the HDR10 version, which if they were mastering to 1000 nits (some do, some don't) could include capping the highlights according to that level and/or adjusting other features to suit. This also applies to studios who are using DV at source level but who don't always issue DV on disc, i.e. their HDR10-only discs are in fact DV offshoots already, and by mastering to 4000-nit MaxMDL anyway (mostly Warners, Sony) they can reduce the amount of time needed to trim the HDR10 pass while others rigidly stick to the 1000-nit trim (Paramount, Universal).

Primary DV trim controls:



Secondary controls:



You're taking this too literally, the point is that they're not two entirely separate "grades" but that they can - and do - have differences between them because of how the trim metadata is reshaping the image for the specified output, and this includes the HDR10 pass. It's not a coincidence that there are several HDR10-only discs with 1000 nit MaxMDL which also have MaxCLL pegged at exactly 1000 nits, mostly from Universal and Lionsgate, who have been mastering in DV at source level from the start. It's a shame that Paramount and Disney don't put MaxCLL on their discs at all, otherwise we'd know what peaks they were aiming for in their 1000-nit base layers on their Dolby Vision discs.

[KSS1992]

Couldn't decide if I liked the UHD or remastered BD better. Theres scenes in the 4k that seem abit dim (like the real world scenes on 2 and abit on 3) but then some scenes on the remastered blu ray that are way bright lmao; i think the 4k is overall better probably

[Roy Batty]

For full disclosure, I am not 4K / Dolby Atmos equipped, so I am playing the remastered BD with the Dolby TrueHD 7.1 remixed track, but I must say I am feeling quite disappointed so far (I have only checked the first movie).

The newly scanned image looks much, much better regarding grain and the overall definition, no question there. Gone are all that innecessary, intrusive filtering and the harshness and halos from edge enhancement.

But they have tinkered way too much with contrast levels, highlights are ridiculously blown, and despite the more organic look from the 4K scan, the final result looks more like video than actual film on many instances because of that. The rooftop scene shows this in painful evidence; it is not just that it looks like video, it looks like a videogame. Was that the intention? I don't know, but it is very annoying and distracting. Also, they botched up the BD transfer, because brightness levels are also pumped up, adding to the excess of light from the contrast boost and producing washed out blacks (judging from screencaps, the 4K UHD image shows much more solid blacks).

Same for the Dolby TrueHD 7.1 mix. While pinpoint location is better than on the old 5.1 mix, sound is too harsh, as if lacking midrange, and separate sound effects sound artificially distinct, as if they were being recreated as Foley on the fly in your living room, instead of being integrated in the movie itself.

Am I alone here in my assessment?

[imsounoriginal]

I can only speak for the first Matrix, but I had an unpopular opinion back when it came out that if you're still only watching Blu-rays, you're better off with the older disc. The new transfer was clearly made to be seen in 4K/HDR, and when seen that way it's spectacular. But it doesn't look very good in SDR, mainly because of how blown-out it is. Again, I reiterate: the UHD of the first Matrix is stellar, but if you're still rocking BD, stick to the old disc. It may be less accurate to the intended look from a color standpoint, but overall it just looks better IMHO.

[StingingVelvet]

Like I said in the 2001 BD thread, it's pretty typical for studios to focus on the new format and crap the bed with a cheap and quick down-conversion to the old format. It sucks for those still waiting to upgrade, but it's nothing new.

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I know the two metadata values are not the same thing, which is why I said "should the content extend that far anyway". But I never said that the two iterations are fundamentally "different" grades, I said it depends on what goes into what layer. You do know that the HDR10 layers are actually created from the DV masters, right? The same metadata to be put onto the disc is used to first derive the HDR10 version, which if they were mastering to 1000 nits (some do, some don't) could include capping the highlights according to that level and/or adjusting other features to suit. This also applies to studios who are using DV at source level but who don't always issue DV on disc, i.e. their HDR10-only discs are in fact DV offshoots already, and by mastering to 4000-nit MaxMDL anyway (mostly Warners, Sony) they can reduce the amount of time needed to trim the HDR10 pass while others rigidly stick to the 1000-nit trim (Paramount, Universal).

Primary DV trim controls:



Secondary controls:



You're taking this too literally, the point is that they're not two entirely separate "grades" but that they can - and do - have differences between them because of how the trim metadata is reshaping the image for the specified output, and this includes the HDR10 pass. It's not a coincidence that there are several HDR10-only discs with 1000 nit MaxMDL which also have MaxCLL pegged at exactly 1000 nits, mostly from Universal and Lionsgate, who have been mastering in DV at source level from the start. It's a shame that Paramount and Disney don't put MaxCLL on their discs at all, otherwise we'd know what peaks they were aiming for in their 1000-nit base layers on their Dolby Vision discs.

There's no reason to trim anything from DV to HDR10 though, that's my point. Both formats allow up to 10,000 nits regardless of metadata and there's no reason to cap that. If studios are doing that, then they're being stupid.

[Vangeli]

I forgot how much Revolutions feels so much like a James Cameron movie.

Anyway, one of my favourite trilogies and the UHDs while not perfect are fantastic.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by morphinapg

There's no reason to trim anything from DV to HDR10 though, that's my point. Both formats allow up to 10,000 nits regardless of metadata and there's no reason to cap that. If studios are doing that, then they're being stupid.

I know there isn't a reason to cap it but when the spiel on Dolby's own website makes the absurd claim that "generic HDR" i.e. HDR10 is limited to 1000 nits then it's not so strange that people would follow that way of thinking, from consumer to professional alike, and I'm saying that some studios are following that advice and some aren't. You and I know that PQ is based around a 10K nit 2020 gamut container regardless of it being HDR10, HDR10+ or DV, but the amount of times I've read on tech blogs & websites that HDR10 is limited to 1000 nits and P3 gamut - them clearly drinking from the Dobly Kool-Aid - drives me absolutely crazy.

[nick4Knight]

Well isn't it more about mastering standards they can all actually monitor on the displays they use for HDR10, than kool-aid drinking on the actual spec?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

Well isn't it more about mastering standards they can all actually monitor on the displays they use for HDR10, than kool-aid drinking on the actual spec?

Not really, because they have things like waveform analysis and temporary tone mapping that can help them to visualise content all the way up to 10,000 nits on a 1000 nit monitor, should they wish to do so.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

I forgot how much Revolutions feels so much like a James Cameron movie.

Anyway, one of my favourite trilogies and the UHDs while not perfect are fantastic.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

[ROSS.T.G.]

I actually enjoyed Revolutions this time around. Must be pushing 40 because movies a hated before are growing on me.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

I actually enjoyed Revolutions this time around. Must be pushing 40 because movies a hated before are growing on me.

Been a good long while since I revisited (heh) the Matrix sequels but yeah, I'd always disliked Revolutions a lot just for it cack-handed storytelling (

[Show spoiler]killing off Trinity was so dumb as it'd been telegraphed in the second movie, we'd already kinda gone through it so when it actually happened I found myself not giving a shit

) but the last time I watched it I found myself enjoying it. Got me a strange feeling I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of both sequels when I finally get around to watching them.

[Sky_Captain]

It's Reloaded that I always had issues with, (the stakes might be higher, but the sense of danger is absent for me), but stuck it on last Sunday afternoon and had a blast with it.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Been a good long while since I revisited (heh) the Matrix sequels but yeah, I'd always disliked Revolutions a lot just for it cack-handed storytelling (

[Show spoiler]killing off Trinity was so dumb as it'd been telegraphed in the second movie, we'd already kinda gone through it so when it actually happened I found myself not giving a shit

) but the last time I watched it I found myself enjoying it. Got me a strange feeling I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of both sequels when I finally get around to watching them.

Yeah that bit always irritated me too although this time it didn’t. I also found the final conflict with Smith to be meh but I dug it now. Watching them back to back helped I think and the excellent PQ and AQ definitely brought it to the next level.

[OutOfBoose]

Looks like people are coming around regarding the sequels.

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

Looks like people are coming around regarding the sequels.

Man, I have always loved Reloaded ever since I saw it in theaters. Revolutions was great also. Never understood the hate for either movies. I personally cannot watch the first without the sequels.

[nick4Knight]

I was always about Reloaded -sans the cave dance number, and the "twins" aesthetic- but I can see the excellent treatment here bringing me around on Revolutions as well So that watching all on consecutive days might be a yearly go-to because of 4K.

[TM2-Megatron]

I had a similar experience with the sequels 2 or 3 years ago, watching them again for the first time since seeing them in the theatre. I liked them a lot more than I remembered... time/age tempered my harsh initial judgement of them, I guess. And the history shown in The Second Renaissance probably helped too, as it yields a lot of insight into why the machines behave the way they do.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

It's Reloaded that I always had issues with, (the stakes might be higher, but the sense of danger is absent for me), but stuck it on last Sunday afternoon and had a blast with it.

Opposite for me, I may have been bored out of my gourd when Merv was waffling on in Reloaded (it's like listening to me blather on about HDR, compression blah blah, minus any chocolate orgasm cakes of course) but the action in Reloaded is magnifique. I can still remember sitting there in the cinema as the opening scene unfolded (with Trin blasting through the glass) and I was absolutely stunned by it, I'm actually getting tingles just thinking about revisiting that in 4K. I may well have been baked when I saw it in the cinema but even so, I kinda dug it and I still do.

Mind you, I always thought it was a bit Star Wars prequel-y in the way that a perfectly self-contained original that's as tight as a drum got expanded with a flabbier follow-up that spunked a load more cash on dat VFX and seemingly indulged every whim of its newly-crowned superstar directors, not always for the good of the film. Discussing this reminds me of that Indian dude on the DVD Forums who defended the shit out of these movies every chance he got.