Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by JimboTHX1138

Challenge accepted. The final flying scene. I mean look at his face. It's just awful.

Attachment 266587

It looks like a digital double even if it's not.

[moviebuff75]

I wonder if they fixed the glitch on Reeve's opening credit.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

You need practical mixed with some digital. Not all digital. You have to ground the CG with in-camera effects so they blend together seamlessly, as Stan Winston used to do. It forces the CG artists to go for photorealistic work rather than something working outside of the bounds of physics.

Bulloney.

There are tons of all digital productions in both cinema and television that look more or less perfect - so perfect you're not aware they are digital.

The dragons in Game of Thrones for example. No practical dragons were built.

[starmike]

Originally Posted by JimboTHX1138

Challenge accepted. The final flying scene. I mean look at his face. It's just awful.

Attachment 266587

"In that" - the plane sequence. You took out the context. Good job.

[LexInHD]

Originally Posted by JimboTHX1138

Challenge accepted. The final flying scene. I mean look at his face. It's just awful.

Attachment 266587

You will notice that the animation in that shot bears a striking and odd resemblance to the animation from The Polar Express, as Sony Pictures Imageworks did both the animation for that particular shot and all of The Polar Express. Originally, it was supposed to be a standard comp shot of Routh doing what Superman does, but Singer just wasn't satisfied with what was coming together with the camera footage, so the shot was done with full CGI instead. Arguably, it's the worst digital double work in the film, as the stuff for the Airplane Rescue and Metropolis Disaster scenes was far more realistic and superior in every way, but they clearly didn't use that model for the end shot where he flies through the clouds.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Bulloney.

There are tons of all digital productions in both cinema and television that look more or less perfect - so perfect you're not aware they are digital.

The dragons in Game of Thrones for example. No practical dragons were built.

Maccettes were sculpted, however.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Maccettes were sculpted, however.

Maquettes are sculpted for a lot of CG items/characters.

For the ships of Rogue One they even scanned in model kit parts similar to the ones the ILM model shop used on the original film. And while people harp on Tarkin & Leia the ships and environments in that film are...for lack of a better word...perfection.

[ShellBeacher]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

Idk, looks fine to me. You could say the effects look hokey and silly in Superman ‘78, and many actually do…

People can say what they want. Key difference: Christopher Reeve sold every shot he's in, no matter how "hokey" it may seem to some. He and Donner and Mankiewicz and the Oscar-winning crew who created the flying effects (Derek Meddings and others) are why we're all still talking about this movie 40+ years later. Superman Returns is already forgotten about by the general public -- and Warner Bros. seemingly doesn't even care about treating it respectfully on Blu-ray. Singer replacing nearly all of Routh's flying shots with CG doubles in the movie reads: director disappointed in the actor's performance, even though he hand-picked him.

[starmike]

Originally Posted by ShellBeacher

People can say what they want. Key difference: Christopher Reeve sold every shot he's in, no matter how "hokey" it may seem to some. He and Donner and Mankiewicz and the Oscar-winning crew who created the flying effects (Derek Meddings and others) are why we're all still talking about this movie 40+ years later. Superman Returns is already forgotten about by the general public -- and Warner Bros. seemingly doesn't even care about treating it respectfully on Blu-ray. Singer replacing nearly all of Routh's flying shots with CG doubles in the movie reads: director disappointed in the actor's performance, even though he hand-picked him.

Yet here we are....talking about it...

[ShellBeacher]

Originally Posted by starmike

Yet here we are....talking about it...

I love Superman '78 and that's what we're here to talk about!

...And as far as that other misfire...we in this forum aren't the "general public."

[starmike]

Nobody in my "general public" has talked about Superman '78 in a very long time. And SR isn't a "misfire", as several people here have said.

[hoejunter]

Would you guys say that the 4K is worth a buy if I already have the standard Blu? The reviews I’ve read are… mixed

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by hoejunter

Would you guys say that the 4K is worth a buy if I already have the standard Blu? The reviews I’ve read are… mixed

Better than the Blu-ray? Yes. A 4k restoration as good as it could have been? No.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by starmike

Nobody in my "general public" has talked about Superman '78 in a very long time. And SR isn't a "misfire", as several people here have said.

S78 is iconic, everybody still goes on about it

(not that I have anything against SR)

[hoejunter]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Better than the Blu-ray? Yes. A 4k restoration as good as it could have been? No.

Yeah, that’s pretty much what I’ve been reading in reviews. I’m just not sure whether it’s worth the £20 to upgrade

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by hoejunter

Would you guys say that the 4K is worth a buy if I already have the standard Blu? The reviews I’ve read are… mixed

Yeah, it's still superior to the standard Blu-ray, plus a great Atmos track using the six-track mix as the basis.

[david_blu]

Originally Posted by hoejunter

Would you guys say that the 4K is worth a buy if I already have the standard Blu? The reviews I’ve read are… mixed

I don't think the 4k is better, my review is earlier in this thread, the atmos and original mix combined with the Blu Ray visual is my best combination. Or if possible a cut down of the extended cut back to the Theatrical as that has a really nice look to it on the 3 HR blu ray.

Too many things annoy me with the transfer in 4k. It feels like an early WB effort at 4k where they hadn't completely figured out what they were doing. Or they let an intern do it who wasn't paying attention during some of the scenes with the changes they have implemented.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Yeah, it's still superior to the standard Blu-ray, plus a great Atmos track using the six-track mix as the basis.

The Atmos is based off of the existing 5.1 'special edition' remix with several added sound effects, it's got nothing to do with the OG 6-track mix. Not saying you can't like it - I've got a soft spot for the SE remix on this - but the actual 6-track test mix with the split surrounds and directional dialogue is on the UHD and it's worth it just for that IMO.

Originally Posted by hoejunter

Yeah, that’s pretty much what I’ve been reading in reviews. I’m just not sure whether it’s worth the £20 to upgrade

If you can get it in a 2fer or 3fer offer then it's worth having a look see. I think the image is badly flawed in certain parts - some of which is due to the elements used, some of which is on the transfer itself - but it's more good than bad, and if you're a fan of original audio in any way shape or form then having the 6-track 70mm mix is worth its weight in gold. Or Kryptonite.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

I actually like how the Krpton scenes at the start play on the UHD although I know some don't like the UHD for that.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

I actually like how the Krpton scenes at the start play on the UHD although I know some don't like the UHD for that.

I'm getting used to it, I have to say. I'll always miss how bright and blown out their shiny suits looked on like every previous transfer ever, and the skin tones still look rather jaundiced, but yeah: it still looks otherworldly, just a different kind of otherworldly.