Close Encounters of the Third Kind 4K UHD (1977) (40th Anniversary Edition)

[nekromantik]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

How close to release are they planning to give us a full press release? I'd love this, but only if it has all the cuts of the film. I have a sinking feeling that it won't for some reason.

I hope they dont screw us again like they did with Terminator 2. Different studio but still a UHD of old film only having theatrical cut.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by nekromantik

I hope they dont screw us again like they did with Terminator 2. Different studio but still a UHD of old film only having theatrical cut.

I wound up preordering the 3D blu-ray of T2 from amazon U.K. instead. I'd like the 4K edition, too, but I decided that having all three cuts of the film in 3D had more value for me personally.

[nekromantik]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

I wound up preordering the 3D blu-ray of T2 from amazon U.K. instead. I'd like the 4K edition, too, but I decided that having all three cuts of the film in 3D had more value for me personally.

Only the theatrical is 3D.
The 3D package contains a 2nd BD disk with 2D film in all 3 cuts.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

I wound up preordering the 3D blu-ray of T2 from amazon U.K. instead. I'd like the 4K edition, too, but I decided that having all three cuts of the film in 3D had more value for me personally.

Press release is very vague, I wouldn't bank on getting all three cuts on the 3D disc...

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Press release is very vague, I wouldn't bank on getting all three cuts on the 3D disc...

Even still, I do assume all of the cuts will be remastered. And I do want to see the 3D version, Cameron working on the conversion seals the deal. Titanic 3D looked incredible. Sorry, I meant to type "all three cuts of the film AND 3D".

[Indiana Jonezzz...]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

Even still, I do assume all of the cuts will be remastered. And I do want to see the 3D version, Cameron working on the conversion seals the deal. Titanic 3D looked incredible. Sorry, I meant to type "all three cuts of the film AND 3D".

Apparently only the theatrical cut is remastered, unfortunately.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by Indiana Jonezzz...

Apparently only the theatrical cut is remastered, unfortunately.

Wow, that really sucks. Honestly not sure I want EITHER release at this point. The only thing that would be worth it would be a 4K / 3D blu package, and they're not doing that unless you get the stupidly expensive U.K. version. Not remotely interested at that price point.

[HeavyHitter]

Interesting to see how these studios will handle multiple cuts if we assume UHD BD is the last physical format. Some studios might only want to release one cut initially and release the other versions later. Studios will need to milk out the format as long as they can.

[Indiana Jonezzz...]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

Wow, that really sucks. Honestly not sure I want EITHER release at this point. The only thing that would be worth it would be a 4K / 3D blu package, and they're not doing that unless you get the stupidly expensive U.K. version. Not remotely interested at that price point.

Yeah I'm kind of amazed James Cameron didn't just go the whole hog and remaster all the footage, like Aliens, it seems strange. It's possible it's a mistake though, but that's what I'd read elsewhere on this forum.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Is the theatrical re-release supposed to be the original cut or the special Spielberg edition?

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I've only known Sony/Columbia to release the Director's Cut

Most likely, it will be the Director's Cut. The trailer has a couple of shots from the Cotopaxi scene, and I can't imagine it being the Special Edition that they're putting out.

However, the original version is currently playing/streaming on Starz, so they're not exactly hiding the other versions.

I personally prefer the Director's Cut (a rare case of this happening), but I hope all three are on the UHD.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Indiana Jonezzz...

Yeah I'm kind of amazed James Cameron didn't just go the whole hog and remaster all the footage, like Aliens, it seems strange. It's possible it's a mistake though, but that's what I'd read elsewhere on this forum.

It's possible, but honestly Aliens was more the exception for this kind of thing, rather than T2. Usually remasters for new formats and whatnot are done on the theatrical cut only.

[Croweyes1121]

Wow, Close Encounters is down to $22. Awesome price drop.

[PerryD]

I decided to order the Steelbook from Best Buy for only $3 more.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/close-en...?skuId=5957508

[Dubstar]

I honestly can't justify buying the expensive uber set or the BB steel considering the UK bluray steelbook I own will do quite nicely, I'll just hand off the extras discs to friends and family (minus the artwork and packaging).

[Skeezix]

Originally Posted by formoso.lucas

I watched this trailer on my tv, and the picture looks washed.
Where are the grains?

Don't worry too much about grains, if you can help it. They're only potential tells of too much DNR, but not guarantees of it. 35mm film came to roughly 6K 'pixels' horizontally, compared to the 3840 we'll get on UHD at home. Step film down from 6K for a negative to positive transfer, and factor in film speeds, and 4K at home is at least more than half of film's possible resolution, but:

1 - You still may not see grain in many shots
2 - Some of the grain you see may be interpolated. I certainly think this is the case with many blu-rays that are called pleasingly grainy. I had the privilege of projecting some of these films, and they did not look like their blu-rays. Criterion's first blu, The Third Man, was a pretty good example of this. To oversimplify, the grain of a film is random, not laid out in a nice grid. If a particularly dark, errant grain would happen to fall over a digital corner, where four digital pixels meet, its darkness would be factored into all four pixels. For that 1/24th of a second, we wouldn't have 1 super dark pixel, but rather four less darkened ones. That event of grain would be dimmer, but also comparatively huge, many times the size of an actual piece of film grain (10X wouldn't be unheard of). A sharp 35mm picture could look more like a projected 16mm film in such a case. This is why some very controlled DNR can be a good thing, when it carefully eliminates only these micro-explosions of grain presence.

This is why, by the way, 2001:A Space Odyssey, and other camera to screen 70mm films, will make our eyes pop out of our heads once again when they hit UHD, and like the blu-rays, we will probably see amazing new details in the picture, but often no grain at all. You're looking at roughly 12000 horizontal pixels with 65mm film, or traditional IMAX, at least on the camera negative.

[starkrogersthor91]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I honestly can't justify buying the expensive uber set or the BB steel considering the UK bluray steelbook I own will do quite nicely, I'll just hand off the extras discs to friends and family (minus the artwork and packaging).

Again, zero chance the box set will be that expensive on release.

[Skeezix]

Originally Posted by BNex99

I don't know, to me it puts her on a more bumpy emotional roller coaster. Her husband seems to realize something's wrong with him, and then quickly turns oblivious, and they have a huge fight. She sleeps in the kids' room, and the next morning she's ready to talk it out again, but before she can say anything he's shoveling dirt into their kitchen. Having all that together makes her decision to leave more understandable, and our sympathy for Roy more complicated. I'm not sure if that was the intention, but that's the way it comes across to me.

It works logically as you explain it. It was closest to necessary in the Special Edition, where the tossing into the house of dirt and bricks had been excised. Her levaing then would have come out of nowhere. But I have to say, it is the only genuinely mean-spirited scene in any version of the movie, and it's so tonally out of place that it has often taken me out of the film's magic. It's hard to even respect Roy, only there, Ronnie's reaction is brittle and hysterical, and his son is doing something that must have felt great in the editing room, but makes no real sense. That's all left-brained stuff, but ultimately, it's just always hit me as wrong.

For the Special Edition, it was replacement of preferred stuff, which is why I initially thought I'd resented it, but then in the Director's Cut, there it was. For me, it's extraneous if Roy is tossing in the dirt. I was never confused by her leaving in the '77 cut. The camera spends a lot of time on her face as he does what he does. She's not just herding ducks, she's having a serious realization right there, right on camera. It's a great moment, because we've seen what he's seen, so we do believe him, but we also, right then, see how she could see him as she does, and why she takes the kids away. It was a complex bit of audience identification, balanced on a thread, but it always worked. The argument makes them just a standard couple, rather than a specific one.

So for me, the only version I can get through uninterrupted is the '77. It helps that I like the power station scene, the conference, the quicker introduction to the Nearys (not that the train scene is bad) - I think most of the Neary household stuff is better selected in the '77. I wouldn't call the other cuts of the film rushed, but those choices make it feel more like a real world. Even little moments like the one where he looks out his window at his neighborhood while crusted with mud from sculpting his mountain, looking at a world that seems increasingly foreign to him, or maybe that he wishes he wasn't losing, those are good moments. And I really like the elements of local color, especially in the Wyoming section. This is a second cousin to the first third of Jaws in those places. Comparatively, I only miss the Cotopaxi scene a little, though "Where is Lacomb" always hovers over it.

But that's all icing. It's all down to that bathtub scene for me, which is such a sore thumb. I've watched the Director's Cut twice, once when I projected it, and again to check out the DVD, where I think I skipped it, but ever since the '77 has been available, that's been the way to go for me.

[rallymonkey]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

Wow, Close Encounters is down to $22. Awesome price drop.

Bullmoose.com has Close Encounters 4K and Starship Troopers 4k at $19.97 each and Terminator 2 4K at $15.97.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by rallymonkey

Bullmoose.com has Close Encounters 4K and Starship Troopers 4k at $19.97 each and Terminator 2 4K at $15.97.

Do they charge immediately or upon shipment?

EDIT: Sorry, it was right there in their FAQ. Right before it ships. I just ordered Close Encounters ($20), the E.T. box set ($30 - they have the regular edition for $25), and Blade Runner ($32) with free shipping.

GREAT prices, thanks for the heads up!!

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Skeezix

It works logically as you explain it. It was closest to necessary in the Special Edition, where the tossing into the house of dirt and bricks had been excised. Her levaing then would have come out of nowhere. But I have to say, it is the only genuinely mean-spirited scene in any version of the movie, and it's so tonally out of place that it has often taken me out of the film's magic. It's hard to even respect Roy, only there, Ronnie's reaction is brittle and hysterical, and his son is doing something that must have felt great in the editing room, but makes no real sense. That's all left-brained stuff, but ultimately, it's just always hit me as wrong.

For the Special Edition, it was replacement of preferred stuff, which is why I initially thought I'd resented it, but then in the Director's Cut, there it was. For me, it's extraneous if Roy is tossing in the dirt. I was never confused by her leaving in the '77 cut. The camera spends a lot of time on her face as he does what he does. She's not just herding ducks, she's having a serious realization right there, right on camera. It's a great moment, because we've seen what he's seen, so we do believe him, but we also, right then, see how she could see him as she does, and why she takes the kids away. It was a complex bit of audience identification, balanced on a thread, but it always worked. The argument makes them just a standard couple, rather than a specific one.

So for me, the only version I can get through uninterrupted is the '77. It helps that I like the power station scene, the conference, the quicker introduction to the Nearys (not that the train scene is bad) - I think most of the Neary household stuff is better selected in the '77. I wouldn't call the other cuts of the film rushed, but those choices make it feel more like a real world. Even little moments like the one where he looks out his window at his neighborhood while crusted with mud from sculpting his mountain, looking at a world that seems increasingly foreign to him, or maybe that he wishes he wasn't losing, those are good moments. And I really like the elements of local color, especially in the Wyoming section. This is a second cousin to the first third of Jaws in those places. Comparatively, I only miss the Cotopaxi scene a little, though "Where is Lacomb" always hovers over it.

But that's all icing. It's all down to that bathtub scene for me, which is such a sore thumb. I've watched the Director's Cut twice, once when I projected it, and again to check out the DVD, where I think I skipped it, but ever since the '77 has been available, that's been the way to go for me.

Some good points. I think for most of us it comes down to either the theatrical or director's cuts, though the special edition does have some value as well. I know many hate the "inside the mothership" scene, but I wouldn't mind it if it wasn't so jarringly cut in. It's too obvious it was tacked on later. It just doesn't blend right, and it breaks up the wonderful music as well, right at it's most important part.

You really don't see much of the inside, so I never really had an issue with that aspect. It's a beautiful piece of film on it's own, and it gives you a glimpse inside without seeing it all. If they had filmed that in the beginning and it was part of the original theatrical release, I wouldn't have minded it at all. It's just the awkward cut that bothers me with that scene, and the fact that he doesn't even look the same when it cuts to that scene.

I also miss the scene in the special edition when he is shoveling the dirt inside the house. Without that scene, there's suddenly a mountain in his living room, and that scene does help to justify his wife freaking out and leaving. On the other hand, I miss several moments in the director's cut that are in the theatrical cut. Yet I do enjoy some of the added scenes in the director's cut.

I think this is why it's important that all 3 cuts are on the disc, all in the same UHD quality. If this is only a single cut, I will be very disappointed. They did it right on the blu-ray, other than a few audio mistakes. They even included a nice guide to all the different scenes. They should do it right again for UHD. It's not much of a premium release if we actually get less than last time.