Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

I'm confused. I thought everyone was anxious to get a new remastered disc in the new box set because the original release had bad color. Now that it's known the picture hasn't been changed everyone is desperate to get the old pressing with the bad color just to get the original soundtrack? Why does it matter if the sound is correct if the picture is supposedly terrible?

Not terrible terrible, but deeply flawed in certain spots (it's just got a lack of 21st century polish) which it was hoped that the rumoured remaster would correct. But here's the thing about the audio: that 70mm split-surround 5.1 mix was the shining jewel of that release, it was completely unheralded by official channels and most if not all "pro reviewers" but is a legendary mix that has been unheard since 1978, if it ever got a public outing at all. It was an utter shock to get it on that UHD but it made the disc worth owning just for that. Think of it as the Holy Audio Grail for long-time STM fans.

Warners, in their infinite wisdom, have now reauthored the disc - presumably so that the audio options now match the other three Supes movies on their impending UHDs, yet only STM will have Dobly Vision so how's that for inconsistency? - without updating the video transfer but have removed the key audio feature that literally made it worth owning as said. It wouldn't be so bad if the OG 2.0 they've replaced it with wasn't as craptacular as it is, I don't think I've heard a worse audio track for such a major movie and that they've junked the 70mm audio for that piece of chit feels like Warners twisting the knife.

Also, there's no guarantee that the Ruined Remastered Edition™️ will contain the 70mm track, the Warners regime of 2023 seemingly being oblivious to its existence and/or inclusion on the 2018 UHD, so there's no harm in seeking out (or in my case, keeping) that 2018 disc especially as Warners are quietly phasing it out of existence by shipping the reauthored 2.0 disc with the same packaging and barcode as the 5.1. Very sneaky.

What I don't understand re: the Ruined Remastered Edition™️ though is why Warners are not doing it THIS year, which is the 45th anniversary of STM after all. Paramount proved that you can release multiple editions of a movie that don't cannibalise sales of the others with their various editions of Star Trek TMP, so why not release the RRE™️ alongside the tat steelie Supes set? I'd buy the shit out of a 4K package that had the SE, theatrical and TV cuts included.

[oddbox83]

It's ridiculous that the big studios can't get this right, when the Indies release 4ks with almost ludicrous numbers of audio options. Look at Arrow's Robocop, for frigs sake.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Also, there's no guarantee that the Ruined Remastered Edition™️ will contain the 70mm track, the Warners regime of 2023 seemingly being oblivious to its existence and/or inclusion on the 2018 UHD, so there's no harm in seeking out (or in my case, keeping) that 2018 disc especially as Warners are quietly phasing it out of existence by shipping the reauthored 2.0 disc with the same packaging and barcode as the 5.1. Very sneaky.

In the long run, how many are going to want to watch substantially worse video quality just for a 5.1 mix?

What I don't understand re: the Ruined Remastered Edition™️ though is why Warners are not doing it THIS year, which is the 45th anniversary of STM after all. Paramount proved that you can release multiple editions of a movie that don't cannibalise sales of the others with their various editions of Star Trek TMP, so why not release the RRE™️ alongside the tat steelie Supes set? I'd buy the shit out of a 4K package that had the SE, theatrical and TV cuts included.

Pretty simple IMO. People will buy this set for the sequels. Warner also releasing only rocky 1-4 shows they just wanted to make some cash this year instead of definitive releases.

When would be a better time to sell it?

IMDb: : Superman: Legacy
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5950044/

When better to (re)sell the original than when there is huge marketing on the franchise - aka not now, but when the reboot that starts the new DCU is released?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Ruined

In the long run, how many are going to want to watch substantially worse video quality just for a 5.1 mix?

People still keep laserdiscs just so's they can rock whatever audio mix. Keeping a 4K UHD for that purpose isn't quite so outlandish. And it's not "just for a 5.1 mix", what you simply don't understand is that it's a legendary piece of STM arcana that we fans never thought we'd *ever* get to hear. It means nothing to you but everything to some other people which is why we're so disappointed Warners have binned it.

Originally Posted by Ruined

Pretty simple IMO. People will buy this set for the sequels.

When would be a better time to sell it?

IMDb: : Superman: Legacy
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5950044/

Oops, completely forgot about a new Supes movie! Primo tie-in opportunity though the same could be said for all the Reeve movies, but it's the reauthoring of the first movie that's the head-scratcher. If this set is just for the sequels then why mess with the first movie at all? Why not just leave it be? If you're gonna just recycle a disc then fookin recycle it, don't contrive to make it worse!

[Chad Rouch]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Not terrible terrible, but deeply flawed in certain spots (it's just got a lack of 21st century polish) which it was hoped that the rumoured remaster would correct.

Still don't understand all the hubbub, then. If it's "deeply flawed," then why worry about the soundtrack at all? To me, deeply flawed means it's not worth watching, let alone owning.

It's a bit hyperbolic, honestly. And with this level of fickle hyperbole we're supposed to wonder why studios don't pay attention when we have actual complaints? I think we could all agree "Batman Begins" has a tad too much DNR applied and could use a do-over. But why would WB listen to those complaints if they're raked over the coals for a release being "deeply flawed" but then highly sought after a few weeks later.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

Still don't understand all the hubbub, then. If it's "deeply flawed," then why worry about the soundtrack at all? To me, deeply flawed means it's not worth watching, let alone owning.

What do you care?
Why are you arguing with other people's preferences and choices?
Worry less about what their doing and start enjoying your own preferences.

[SpacemanDoug]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

Still don't understand all the hubbub, then. If it's "deeply flawed," then why worry about the soundtrack at all? To me, deeply flawed means it's not worth watching, let alone owning.

It's a bit hyperbolic, honestly. And with this level of fickle hyperbole we're supposed to wonder why studios don't pay attention when we have actual complaints? I think we could all agree "Batman Begins" has a tad too much DNR applied and could use a do-over. But why would WB listen to those complaints if they're raked over the coals for a release being "deeply flawed" but then highly sought after a few weeks later.

The Nolan 4K Batman trilogy releases in general sucked and had DNR problems, though Begins was definitely the worst affected

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

Still don't understand all the hubbub, then. If it's "deeply flawed," then why worry about the soundtrack at all? To me, deeply flawed means it's not worth watching, let alone owning.

It's a bit hyperbolic, honestly. And with this level of fickle hyperbole we're supposed to wonder why studios don't pay attention when we have actual complaints? I think we could all agree "Batman Begins" has a tad too much DNR applied and could use a do-over. But why would WB listen to those complaints if they're raked over the coals for a release being "deeply flawed" but then highly sought after a few weeks later.

For many enthusiasts, I bet they consider audio half of the experience. So yeah, kind of important. I would still argue that despite the flaws of the UHD BD visually, it's still superior to the BD at least for the theatrical version.

For others, they don't care. So long as 'sound' is coming out of their TV, they're okay with it. To each their own.

To my understanding, Batman Begins was supervised by Nolan so it is what it is.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

Still don't understand all the hubbub, then. If it's "deeply flawed," then why worry about the soundtrack at all? To me, deeply flawed means it's not worth watching, let alone owning.

It's a bit hyperbolic, honestly. And with this level of fickle hyperbole we're supposed to wonder why studios don't pay attention when we have actual complaints? I think we could all agree "Batman Begins" has a tad too much DNR applied and could use a do-over. But why would WB listen to those complaints if they're raked over the coals for a release being "deeply flawed" but then highly sought after a few weeks later.

The VISUALS are "not terrible terrible, but deeply flawed in spots", while the AUDIO features an OG mix not heard since 1978. It's an absolute gem of audio history and I can live with an iffy transfer to get that luvverly 70mm audio. Exact same story with Grease, they put the 70mm mix on the UHD - supplanting the dreadful 5.1 remix from before - but the video transfer is downright weird...and yet I'll live with one to get the other. But I guess you're just being contrary for the sake of it, so I'll leave it there.

[Dr. T]

The 2018 Superman UHD isn't some visual disaster on the level of Platoon or T2. It has issues that should be corrected, but the disc shouldn't be thrown out because the picture isn't quite what it could be. And as Geoff and others have pointed out, the 5.1 70mm sound on it is spectacular, the best it's ever sounded on home video. So what would you rather own, a disc with an okay picture and great sound or a disc with the exact same okay picture and worse sound?

I'll tell you where I land. If they ever do reissue Superman with an improved picture and the 2.0 audio, I'm sticking with the 2018 disc. The Atmos track is not an option for me and the 5.1 is too good to ignore.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Oops, completely forgot about a new Supes movie! Primo tie-in opportunity though the same could be said for all the Reeve movies, but it's the reauthoring of the first movie that's the head-scratcher. If this set is just for the sequels then why mess with the first movie at all? Why not just leave it be? If you're gonna just recycle a disc then fookin recycle it, don't contrive to make it worse!

3 reasons:

1. Match the other discs in the set in authoring style

2. Make Atmos the default track since it is the primary mix and Atmos soundbars are more prevalent now

3. After Atmos, 2.0 track is a higher priority than 5.1 to cater to all the 2.1 soundbar people out there b/c dynamic downmixing doesn't always sound great on bottom tier equipment (eg unintelligible dialogue, no bass)

So if they were reauthoring the disc to match the set and wanted to keep it to two tracks for cost reasons, the two they picked make the most sense on modern day mainstream equipment

[dlbsyst]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

I'm confused. I thought everyone was anxious to get a new remastered disc in the new box set because the original release had bad color. Now that it's known the picture hasn't been changed everyone is desperate to get the old pressing with the bad color just to get the original soundtrack? Why does it matter if the sound is correct if the picture is supposedly terrible?

I just never got around to picking up the original release but planned to. Also, not everyone thought the transfer was terrible. I thought it was pretty spectacular myself. The color looked fine to me and since the new release omitted the 70mm Dolby 5.1 mix I decided to grab a copy.

[Chad Rouch]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

What do you care?
Why are you arguing with other people's preferences and choices?
Worry less about what their doing and start enjoying your own preferences.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The VISUALS are "not terrible terrible, but deeply flawed in spots", while the AUDIO features an OG mix not heard since 1978. It's an absolute gem of audio history and I can live with an iffy transfer to get that luvverly 70mm audio. Exact same story with Grease, they put the 70mm mix on the UHD - supplanting the dreadful 5.1 remix from before - but the video transfer is downright weird...and yet I'll live with one to get the other. But I guess you're just being contrary for the sake of it, so I'll leave it there.

As previously explained, it's an element of the boy who cried wolf. When you complain about something largely non-existent, when there is a real problem it won't be fixed (see: Batman Begins).

But, echo chamber away, if you must.

[Jlouisbarrett]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The VISUALS are "not terrible terrible, but deeply flawed in spots", while the AUDIO features an OG mix not heard since 1978. It's an absolute gem of audio history and I can live with an iffy transfer to get that luvverly 70mm audio. Exact same story with Grease, they put the 70mm mix on the UHD - supplanting the dreadful 5.1 remix from before - but the video transfer is downright weird...and yet I'll live with one to get the other. But I guess you're just being contrary for the sake of it, so I'll leave it there.

I thought you only have a 2.0 setup? Isn’t playing a 70mm surround mix through stereo speakers kind of defeating the purpose?

[starmike]

Originally Posted by Ruined

3. After Atmos, 2.0 track is a higher priority than 5.1 to cater to all the 2.1 soundbar people out there b/c dynamic downmixing doesn't always sound great on bottom tier equipment (eg unintelligible dialogue, no bass)

So if they were reauthoring the disc to match the set and wanted to keep it to two tracks for cost reasons, the two they picked make the most sense on modern day mainstream equipment

Mmmm, no. Soundbars were around in 2018. Your logic is flawed. It was possibly a mistake in authoring. The 5.1 mix from the 70mm tracks are worth preserving for people that care about that sort of thing.

I told you about DTS laserdiscs that still fetch a high price and you ignored it.
I told you about the Gravity Diamond Luxe edition still selling for $300 and you ignored it.

People have hit you with some pretty hard facts, and somehow, you keep making the same baseless statements.

[gpn]

Originally Posted by BigDmo531

Nah it didn't come with a slip unfortunately. I was hoping it would cuz I knew the digital copy meant it was the OG

It still might be the original release without the slipcover. I ordered mine about six months ago and it came without a slipcover. It did come with a digital copy code though, but when I tried to redeem it, it was expired. Seeing that the slipcover mentions the digital copy, I think they were removed since the code isn't good any more.

[unsung122212]

Originally Posted by gpn

It still might be the original release without the slipcover. I ordered mine about six months ago and it came without a slipcover. It did come with a digital copy code though, but when I tried to redeem it, it was expired. Seeing that the slipcover mentions the digital copy, I think they were removed since the code isn't good any more.

No, the reason for the case artwork not mentioning DC is so it makes it easier for WB to remove the codes at a later time (especially when they set aside copies for Black Friday sales). This also makes it easier to make newer pressings without having to change the case artwork or make a new UPC barcode. They just recently expired this code (and most of the other WB codes past the expiration date on the slip), so them removing the code has nothing to do with the code being expired.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

I thought you only have a 2.0 setup? Isn’t playing a 70mm surround mix through stereo speakers kind of defeating the purpose?

Even downmixed to stereo, it's still much better than the Atmos with changed sound effects...

The 2001 mix was a Michael Tau's creation.

IT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL MOVIE AUDIO

[Matt89]

Well I'm certainly happy I decided to skim through this thread. I've had the UK UHD since 2018 and it's been sitting in my sell pile ever since I pre-ordered the upcoming box set. Back on the shelf it goes. I had no idea that WB silently re-authored the disc and removed the 70MM 5.1 and replaced it with the 2.0 mix, although not entirely surprising considering the silent reissues of Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. Except in those instances, the changes were improvements.

[KC-Technerd]

Originally Posted by Chad Rouch

But why would WB listen to those complaints if they're raked over the coals for a release being "deeply flawed" but then highly sought after a few weeks later.

That's about 226 weeks, between "deeply flawed" visually because of some of the HDR and color grading, and "highly sought after" because it is no longer available with the best audio option.

My choice for the best currently available of the original theatrical cut would be the Blu-ray included with the 4K in the US for video, combined with the Dolby Digital 5.1 audio from the previously available 4K disc. The previous 4K disc is highly desirable for the audio alone.