Halloween II 4K UHD (1981)

[LSK]

Originally Posted by mar3o

This may be the last physical format this is released on. Any visual glitch like this should have been caught in QC and redone. They introduced a visual glitch during an unfortunate moment that has never existed before on any other video release of this film, ever. It's a shame that some don't find a problem with that. This is why they don't bother doing replacements for some titles. Not enough complaints.

I'm sure Universal have some plans for Halloween II.

Halloween II (1981) | The Fiery 'Death' of Michael Myers in 4K HDR - YouTube

[biggquis]

Okay... I like this better than the first one

And these movies should be required to be watched together

[Jay Mammoth]

Originally Posted by biggquis

And these movies should be required to be watched together

Lol no they shouldn’t, the original is a classic film. Part II is an above average slasher sequel.

[biggquis]

Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth

Lol no they shouldn’t, the original is a classic film. Part II is an above average slasher sequel.

I can respect that opinion. I just mean they take place on the same night.

[TheSweetieMan]

Originally Posted by tazz13

I guess it can be debated if someone thinks it's significant or not. But here's a wild idea, how about Shout just releases stuff with no errors like a normal company.

This has been my issue with them so far. There are some discs that look genuinely great from start to finish, especially recent stuff like 'Child's Play' and 'Army of Darkness'. But what they did with the encode for Cundy's one and true restoration for the SF 'Halloween' UHD should be considered a crime against humanity.

I am getting the reminder of the Halloween UHD collection over the next couple weeks, and I'm already panicking over how they're going to look after how poorly compressed the Carpenter classic was.

[Jay H.]

Originally Posted by Jay Mammoth

Lol no they shouldn’t, the original is a classic film. Part II is an above average slasher sequel.

I wouldn't even go that far. Great cinematography, cool music score, and a script that is insultingly bad. Oh, and let's not forget what a bad choice they made in casting Michael Myers. Seriously, couldn't they find anyone with a similar body type to Nick Castle?

[Jay Mammoth]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

I wouldn't even go that far. Great cinematography, cool music score, and a script that is insultingly bad. Oh, and let's not forget what a bad choice they made in casting Michael Myers. Seriously, couldn't they find anyone with a similar body type to Nick Castle?

Yeah I wish Nick would have played Micheal again in part II.
Sometimes I skip part II but I’m watching them all just to check out these beauty’s Scream Factory released on my new OLED.

[Armakuni]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

This has been my issue with them so far. There are some discs that look genuinely great from start to finish, especially recent stuff like 'Child's Play' and 'Army of Darkness'. But what they did with the encode for Cundy's one and true restoration for the SF 'Halloween' UHD should be considered a crime against humanity.

I am getting the reminder of the Halloween UHD collection over the next couple weeks, and I'm already panicking over how they're going to look after how poorly compressed the Carpenter classic was.

Could you please tell me more? I'm on the fence regarding upgrading my Lions Gate UHD to Shouts UHD.

[dj_intrepid]

Originally Posted by Armakuni

Could you please tell me more? I'm on the fence regarding upgrading my Lions Gate UHD to Shouts UHD.

The SF Halloween releases are fantastic. I've been watching Halloween 1&2 since I was a kid in the days of VHS. I even owned the Criterion LD of the original. The Lionsgate UHD was from an interpositive with a completely revised color grading that stripped away it's original look. It was so dramatically different that I couldn't watch it more than once. The SF release is from the OCN and restores the color back to where it should be and now parts 1&2 visually blend more seamlessly. I had zero issues with any of the SF Halloween titles I bought. Even the pixelation issue in one scene in Halloween 2 that many people experienced is not present on my copy, and I don't have Dolby Vision capability.

Regardless, I love the SF Halloween 4K releases. They are beautiful visually and I'm a fan of the Atmos mixes they did. I highly recommend them.

[TheSweetieMan]

Originally Posted by Armakuni

Could you please tell me more? I'm on the fence regarding upgrading my Lions Gate UHD to Shouts UHD.

So no disrespect to the user above me, but he is objectively wrong.

The SF UHD for Carpenter’s Halloween, while featuring the best restoration of the film yet, is still riddled with encoding errors galore, with some of the worst macroblocking you will find in a UHD. It’s so distracting that it will remove you from the experience of the film.

And while the Lionsgate UHD may not be as ‘warm’ as the SF edition, it’s still from an OCN scan that Cundy personally approved back during that period of its restoration — so there’s not some visual discrepancy occurring — or at least not enough — to justify watching the SF edition over the Lionsgate edition, especially when the latter of which has a flawless encode with significantly better encoding methods.

[LanceL]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

So no disrespect to the user above me, but he is objectively wrong.

The SF UHD for Carpenter’s Halloween, while featuring the best restoration of the film yet, is still riddled with encoding errors galore, with some of the worst macroblocking you will find in a UHD. It’s so distracting that it will remove you from the experience of the film.

And while the Lionsgate UHD may not be as ‘warm’ as the SF edition, it’s still from an OCN scan that Cundy personally approved back during that period of its restoration — so there’s not some visual discrepancy occurring — or at least not enough — to justify watching the SF edition over the Lionsgate edition, especially when the latter of which has a flawless encode with significantly better encoding methods.

I'm pretty sure the Lion's Gate UHD was an interpositive, not an OCN.

[dj_intrepid]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

So no disrespect to the user above me, but he is objectively wrong.

The SF UHD for Carpenter’s Halloween, while featuring the best restoration of the film yet, is still riddled with encoding errors galore, with some of the worst macroblocking you will find in a UHD. It’s so distracting that it will remove you from the experience of the film.

And while the Lionsgate UHD may not be as ‘warm’ as the SF edition, it’s still from an OCN scan that Cundy personally approved back during that period of its restoration — so there’s not some visual discrepancy occurring — or at least not enough — to justify watching the SF edition over the Lionsgate edition, especially when the latter of which has a flawless encode with significantly better encoding methods.

The Lionsgate was from an Interpositive and the color grading was changed by Cundy for that specific release. And there was absolutely no macro blocking or encoding errors on the copies of SF's Halloween titles that I have. In fact, with the exception of the pixelization issue that people experienced on H2, none of the reviewers on the sites that review disc titles had any negative encoding observations or experiences, even when watching them on a large screen from a projector.

[brainofj72]

Originally Posted by dj_intrepid

The Lionsgate was from an Interpositive and the color grading was changed by Cundy for that specific release. And there was absolutely no macro blocking or encoding errors on the copies of SF's Halloween titles that I have. In fact, with the exception of the pixelization issue that people experienced on H2, none of the reviewers on the sites that review disc titles had any negative encoding observations or experiences, even when watching them on a large screen from a projector.

All of the discs are the same encode. Just because you didn’t notice the encoding issues doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dj_intrepid

The Lionsgate was from an Interpositive and the color grading was changed by Cundy for that specific release. And there was absolutely no macro blocking or encoding errors on the copies of SF's Halloween titles that I have. In fact, with the exception of the pixelization issue that people experienced on H2, none of the reviewers on the sites that review disc titles had any negative encoding observations or experiences, even when watching them on a large screen from a projector.

...which doesn't surprise me in the least. Often those who watch on large screens from a projector" are the least cultured when it comes to spotting compression nastiness, or indeed any kind of artefacts in general. Ditto for "the reviewers on the sites that review disc titles", most wouldn't know their arse from their elbow.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Armakuni

Could you please tell me more? I'm on the fence regarding upgrading my Lions Gate UHD to Shouts UHD.

Shout's version is highly recommended by virtually every review out there, and even by voting members of this site.

If you look at the thread for the first film - 86% of people (467) think it is the better version, and 14% (76) do not. That is pretty overwhelmingly in favor.

The only negative things you will find pretty much anywhere on the Internet about it are a number of posters here who feel it has a "terrible encode". That wasn't my personal experience, and I have been unable to find anywhere else on the internet people are complaining about it.

I don't doubt they see what they are seeing, but the rest of the world apparently cannot, and the disc is considered excellent by pretty much every quantifiable metric available.

[dj_intrepid]

Originally Posted by brainofj72

All of the discs are the same encode. Just because you didn’t notice the encoding issues doesn’t mean they aren’t there.

If these encoding issues were as dramatically bad as people on this forum claim they are, then these would be easily spotted by not just me, but all of those people who review the discs for a living on the various websites and publications. I'm not new to this and I can clearly see things for myself.

[dj_intrepid]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...which doesn't surprise me in the least. Often those who watch on large screens from a projector" are the least cultured when it comes to spotting compression nastiness, or indeed any kind of artefacts in general. Ditto for "the reviewers on the sites that review disc titles", most wouldn't know their arse from their elbow.

[brainofj72]

Originally Posted by dj_intrepid

If these encoding issues were as dramatically bad as people on this forum claim they are, then these would be easily spotted by not just me, but all of those people who review the discs for a living on the various websites and publications. I'm not new to this and I can clearly see things for myself.

Haha, uh, gonna go ahead and say this is just objectively false, but you do you.

[grodd]

Originally Posted by dj_intrepid

While SF is a vastly superior disc than the Lionsgate 4K Interpositive Scan, the compression could have been better. DV however does help, especially on H2 1981.

Geoff tends to be one of the more valuable members here. You don't have to agree with him on everything, but I find he is usually correct. Especially on his last quote.

[TheSweetieMan]

I have a 65-inch OLED. Hardly the biggest screen.

There is 100% encoding issues on Carpenter’s Halloween UHD disc from SF.

Even surprised by Geoff’s post in here, considering he noticed them as well in the Halloween 1979 thread.

There is macroblocking galore going on on the interiors of Tommy’s house whenever a strong light source is present.

This is a 100% undeniable fact.