Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

They managed to fupk the BD, so let's see

I actually watched that BD recently and for 2009 standards, I didn't think it was that bad. For today, sure, lots of room for improvement.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Maybe I just built up this release way too much in my head haha. I was probably expecting something a lot more than was ever going to be on the cards. It's been a good few years since I've seen Superman, so I think I'd forgotten how diffused it looked.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

I actually watched that BD recently and for 2009 standards, I didn't think it was that bad. For today, sure, lots of room for improvement.

It was good but keep in mind Batman had a 2K scan back in 2005 for the Special Edition DVD and that's it. They used the same transfer for the Blu-ray in HD obviously.

Since 2005 digital tools have improved quite a bit....

[mar3o]

Punisher has the distinct feel of a troll.

[notops]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

I watched this last night.

It's such a confusing release. It changes from looking great to just passable every few seconds. For every shot that looks fantastic, there's some that... well don't. The shots of the Statue of Liberty in the Flying Sequence stick out like a sore thumb because they look tons better than the rest of the film. Now I'm sure there was limitations of film stock and cameras and such they had to work around to make this release, but it's strange that this film just looks passable when other catalogue titles from the same era look stellar. Halloween was released in the same year and had a much lower budget, but it's UHD looks a thousand times better than this. I dunno. Who knows what happened here?

But when it looks good, it looks REALLY good. But most of the time it just looks ok. And personally I think looking ok just isn't enough for a title of this calibre. Imagine if Sony had done this with Close Encounters?

The film still holds up really well and thankfully is engrossing enough that you can sort of forget about the picture quality.

I'm underwhelmed. I really expected a lot more from this. And this makes me worried Batman might suffer the same fate next year.

The movie is practically a conga-line of optical fx shots (chroma key, fades, dissolves, etc.). No matter how great the scan is, the optical shots will always be a step (or several) down in quality. It is the nature of the beast and inherent in the finished source material.

[punisher]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Punisher has the distinct feel of a troll.

How does s troll feel??

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

It was good but keep in mind Batman had a 2K scan back in 2005 for the Special Edition DVD and that's it. They used the same transfer for the Blu-ray in HD obviously.

Since 2005 digital tools have improved quite a bit....

Of course, which is what I was essentially alluding to. Hopefully they do a 4K scan of the ON with a proper color timing.

[y2jman]

just want to say I finally got this today from best buy can't wait to watch this

[Conan The Barbarian]

I think the disk looks fine. Nothing to ohh and ahh about, but its a nice release.

Those who redeem in movies anywhere, when you open the movie from itunes, there are no extras as far as behind the scenes stuff, but you do get the 3 hour tv cut. So for those who missed out, its there.

[captainsolo]

Seeing as Batman 89 and Returns have been brightened for every home release, and we're still dealing with the 2005 SE transfers there is definitely room for improvement. They were the best yet at the time but still outdated.

89 and Returns could make excellent 4K releases if kept properly dark as the theatrical release was intended, and if they have their original sound mixes. 89 lost the low end of the LD 2.0 and flipper DVD 5.1 on the newer 5.1 mix, and Returns should have both 2.0 and the DD 5.1 which was the official format premiere. (However it only played in a handful of theaters so most everyone heard the 2.0.) I'm also praying that Forever gets revisited but know I'm in the minority on that one and especially for an official extended cut that reverts back to the original intent.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

And yet many films now (not with home mixes) still do directional dialogue

Gravity...that's one hell of a mix. Anyway, not to dig up a can of worms, but Disney Animation's The Black Cauldron from 1985 was six-track 70mm, and the DVD retains the directional dialog. Can't speak for the Blu-Ray...because there isn't one.

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Of course, which is what I was essentially alluding to. Hopefully they do a 4K scan of the ON with a proper color timing.

I'm sure they will. If Warners are willing to give Superman a fresh 4K scan, there's no reason why they can't give Batman and Batman Returns - both superior films - the same treatment.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by notops

The movie is practically a conga-line of optical fx shots (chroma key, fades, dissolves, etc.). No matter how great the scan is, the optical shots will always be a step (or several) down in quality. It is the nature of the beast and inherent in the finished source material.

The irony is that the fades and dissolves aren't opticals, they were done during printing/transfer from the A & B rolls so as to retain 1st gen quality, but according to Thau there are so many other opticals threaded throughout because of Stuart Baird's trick editing that the quality is affected regardless, as well as a few shots of Supes as expected (though many are front projection).

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Maybe I just built up this release way too much in my head haha. I was probably expecting something a lot more than was ever going to be on the cards. It's been a good few years since I've seen Superman, so I think I'd forgotten how diffused it looked.

I agreed with your post 100%. The photography is what it is, but I don't think it explains all this disc's issues. The soft, "dreamy" photography can look great and proper for one shot, then low-contrast and low-gamma flat crap in another shot. No one should expect it to look like Leon, but I do think something went wrong in certain shots. Toss in the matte lines on the ship and whatnot and it's just kind of ugly.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by punisher

How does s troll feel??

Empty, jealous, insecure, angry, and when eventually suspended or even banned, lonely.

[punisher]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Empty, jealous, insecure, angry, and when eventually suspended or even banned, lonely.

thanks for sharing...

[y2jman]

so what's the verdict on the 70mm mixed 5.1 is the sound good i'm about ready to fire up this movie just not sure 7.1 atmos or this sound

[Qaenos]

Originally Posted by y2jman

so what's the verdict on the 70mm mixed 5.1 is the sound good i'm about ready to fire up this movie just not sure 7.1 atmos or this sound

70mm 5.1 is the best one. In fact it's the best this film has sounded on any home format.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by y2jman

so what's the verdict on the 70mm mixed 5.1 is the sound good i'm about ready to fire up this movie just not sure 7.1 atmos or this sound

Depends on your preference.

5.1 DD is good and represents the original sound design.

Atmos is based on the 2000 remix. It's more aggressive and expansive, but also has the mostly recreated sound effects.

[y2jman]

Originally Posted by BNex99

Depends on your preference.

5.1 DD is good and represents the original sound design.

Atmos is based on the 2000 remix. It's more aggressive and expansive, but also has the mostly recreated sound effects.

interesting well tonight i'm going to watch it on 5.1 70mm