The Matrix 4K UHD (1999)

[MooneyRara]

Originally Posted by bradnoyes

I don’t have many people on my Ignore List. Nearly all of them are active in this thread.

This disc looks great.

Agreed on the disc. It is incredibly spectacular.

I don't keep a list. I find the audacity of their claims to be flat-out comical.

[Yojimbo68]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That was before. But now it looks different again to every prior version, so if Bill Pope is going to maintain consistency between the movies (if not from shot to shot ) then the sequels will shirley be graded with the same kind of overriding colour scheme as the first movie got. And TBH I can't wait to see them because 1) I loved the shit out of how Matrix looks on UHD and B) the amount of complaining from certain members up in here that "the green got changed!!" in the sequels is going to be EPIC.

I honestly never liked that overly green push on the original Matrix Blu-ray. I loved, loved, the new UHD transfer. It's about as close as we're likely to get to the look of the original theatrical release. I hadn't seen the film in years and it was great to revisit this movie. I wish more "blockbusters" were like this flick. Great action but with some mind bending ideas and characters and a story that you really care about.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, time to add another I think.

Where's the fun in that though? Part of what makes coming here so enjoyable is the crazy meltdowns. Just like reading comments on certain news articles. The comments are always more interesting the articles themselves.

[takeshi2010]

Just got my copy and watched it. I watched the UHD through madVR on an SDR screen... I know. I just don't have a working 4K screen at the moment. Anyway I thought it looked rather good in most scenes. I do have a few reservations regarding color saturation (too saturated for me in some scenes). Also, I think maybe they messed with the colors too much...Some elements that appeared white in the notoriously green 2004 BR are now tinted green/cyan (i.e. the rain falling from the bridge in the shot where Trinity picks up Neo in the limo) but I'd have to watch it again properly to be sure, as madVR is probably at fault here. I'm sure I'll enjoy it even more on proper equipment.
EDIT: Ok forget my reservations. I fine tuned madVR and got a much better result IMO. The highlights are right back where I like them. I expect it's much closer to what I'll see with real HDR. Ahhhh! This movie is so awesome I'm liable to watch it again right now with these settings.

I did notice some framing anomalies, I don't know if they were brought up before (I skimmed through a few dozen pages of this topic, found nothing, sorry if it's been discussed before). One example is at 01:42:48. It's the shot where Neo, who was backed behind a pillar in the previous shot, storms out, machine guns blazing straight at the camera. The UHD frames the shot higher than the 2004 BR. I don't know which is more accurate (the BR feels more accurate, because less dead space, but I don't know). I included two screenshots of the exact same frame.

[OutOfBoose]

Yeah, framing is spoiled on UHD. It was mentioned in this thread, but some fellas enter Hulk mode when anyone dares to criticize the greatest restoration (no less) ever.

[Cook]

If I didnt visit these forums I'd have never known that the framing was different. Its different, sure, but its nothing that spoils the film or stands out on it's own.

[nick4Knight]

^ True. If it wasn't scrutinized over, you have to wonder really how many would notice, let alone spoil their enjoyment? Not to mention that the transfer was supervised by Bill Pope.

[Pans]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

^ True. If it wasn't scrutinized over, you have to wonder really how many would notice, let alone spoil their enjoyment? Not to mention that the transfer was supervised by Bill Pope.

The poster wasn't saying it spoiled their enjoyment (how that could be read from their post I have no idea, they literally posted it was 'awesome'), just pointing out framing differences they noticed. I'm always appreciative of posts detailing such things as it's kind of the reason I browse here to gather impressions and comparisons (and once upon a time places like DVDBeaver to compare transfers).

[OutOfBoose]

It spoiled my enjoyment, because I watched the old BD to death. But as with any other "re-framed" releases, it depends on if you're familiar with a different version.

[Pans]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

It spoiled my enjoyment, because I watched the old BD to death. But as with any other "re-framed" releases, it depends on if you're familiar with a different version.

I see, didn't notice your wording at first which I suppose the previous posters were replying to rather than takeshi. And yeah, familiarity with a particular version would have an effect on the impression for sure.

Are there that many framing differences though?

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by Pans

Are there that many framing differences though?

The entire film is framed differently. Frame is lower on UHD (more information on the bottom and less on top). But some shots are altered further, like on the example above.

[VonMagnum]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

The entire film is framed differently. Frame is lower on UHD (more information on the bottom and less on top). But some shots are altered further, like on the example above.

Hmmm, doesn't that imply the movie was actually shot and finished in 1.78:1 or something closer to it (parts at least) and then matted later for 2.39:1? How else could they reframe so severely?

Hell, IF the movie was actually made in 1.78, I'd want THAT version (black bars for black bars sake don't interest me. I'd rather have a larger picture, especially if there's more detail not less).

It's bad enough we got the cyan push, but changing some of the visual shots too? Geebus. Just remember that it's the best 4K remaster EVER made and WAY closer to the original theatrical release than previous versions!!!

It seems people see whatever they want to as long as they get something they want. After all, we apparently can't remember anything so maybe it was the previous home releases that changed the shots and his one fixed them!!!

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by VonMagnum

Hmmm, doesn't that imply the movie was actually shot and finished in 1.78:1 or something closer to it (parts at least) and then matted later for 2.39:1? How else could they reframe so severely?

Hell, IF the movie was actually made in 1.78, I'd want THAT version (black bars for black bars sake don't interest me. I'd rather have a larger picture, especially if there's more detail not less).

It's bad enough we got the cyan push, but changing some of the visual shots too? Geebus. Just remember that it's the best 4K remaster EVER made and WAY closer to the original theatrical release than previous versions!!!

It seems people see whatever they want to as long as they get something they want. After all, we apparently can't remember anything so maybe it was the previous home releases that changed the shots and his one fixed them!!!

It was shot in Super 35. And composed for 2.40.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35

[seagal]

Part 2 and 3 will be released in 3 weeks. I hope it will be the same quality as part 1.

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by seagal

Part 2 and 3 will be released in 3 weeks. I hope it will be the same quality as part 1.

In 9 days actually.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

In 10-15 years there will be another remaster of the trilogy and it's gonna look different again. Supervised and approved by The Wachowskis, Bill Pope and Christopher Nolan.

You lost me a christopher nolan LOL!

I need to buy this UHD it's phenominal!

[infiniteCR]

Nolan will restore the green again


But we might end up with orangey yellow agents.

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by Pans

The poster wasn't saying it spoiled their enjoyment (how that could be read from their post I have no idea, they literally posted it was 'awesome'), just pointing out framing differences they noticed.

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

It spoiled my enjoyment, because I watched the old BD to death. But as with any other "re-framed" releases, it depends on if you're familiar with a different version.

Oops, on your part...

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by VonMagnum

After all, we apparently can't remember anything so maybe it was the previous home releases that changed the shots and his one fixed them!!!

If that was aimed at me lol It's not that we can't remember anything. It's reliable that you claim you saw a movie back then, you probably can't be questioned. Even what cinema and generally where you sat I'll grant reliability -- It's that the certainty with which many people claim a 20 year old memory about colour timing to be correct? So dubious, if nigh unbelievable. There's a reason eye witness testimony is now considered one of the most flawed and easily thrown out pieces of evidence in criminal proceedings/trials.

Science can spoil our self-importance, for sure. It annoyed the hell outta me when it discovered you can't "catch up on sleep". Say for instance doing 4 hour nights then having a big sleep at the end of the week. It's not cumulative rest that keeps you healthy, its consistent amounts each sleep. Unless you're having 6 (minimum, preferably uninterrupted) hours every night you are doing damage to your brain and body slowing longevity.

Sleep is super important, memory is ridiculously fallible. Here endeth the lesson

[VonMagnum]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

It was shot in Super 35. And composed for 2.40.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35

Super 35 could use anything from 4:3 to 2.40:1. It depends on how the framing was handled whether you could get a non-matte 4:3 or 16:9 out of it unmarred (clearly wasn't anamorphic or they could not reframe those shots). The problem with the "composed" bit is that if they altered the UHD release, that means the original composition was altered and we're getting a non-theatrical release in that regard (in addition to the color changes).

It'd be interesting to know if they could release a 16:9 version without anything getting in the frame that might cause issues.

Certainly plenty of matted 4:3 movies have been made with both versions available (e.g. Johnny Mnemonic had a full frame DVD and 1.85:1 Blu-Ray). Some like full frame better if they get to see more of the original picture; director "intent" is secondary to them. Certainly, full frame is preferable to P&S, IMO. My Johnny Mnemonic special edition set has the full frame 1.33:1 version, the 1.85:1 theatrical version in Auro-3D, the extended version in Dolby Atmos (1.85:1) plus the Japanese uncut theatrical version (1.78:1). All total it had 4 versions included (not available in North America so far; I got it from Germany). Sadly, the open matte and Japanese versions are only SD (squeezed onto 2-disc Blu-Ray set as extras).