Zulu (1964) - January 22, 2014 - Limited to 3,000 copies

[monque]

Originally Posted by jawsfan1975

i'll stick with my uk version which looks superb.

+1

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Having no grain is one thing, but to my eyes the textures look very strange indeed. Faces look incredibly smooth, bizarrely so, like they've had some of the Son'a's skin-stretching treatments from Star Trek Insurrection.

The image does pop, boy does it pop, but once that superficial wow factor is overcome I just can't stop thinking about how off-kilter it looks.

Hopefully TT's transfer will retain the detail whilst also restoring a modicum of true filmic quality.

it's the red coloring that's eye searing

[Akijama]

A teaser cover for one of our all-time favorite films!

[MifuneFan]

That's awesome

[vdmello]

Originally Posted by jawsfan1975

I'll stick with my UK version which looks superb.

Ditto. I also use the Optoma HD 20, and the UK version just screens 'superb' with it (DNR or not). And I loooove my steelbook edition.

[ditcin]

I also have the UK Paramount release. It is absolutely gorgeous, and it was that same disc I used to demo the Samsung OLED TV prior to purchasing one.
PQ is such I can't image it being any better. However, the sound is questionable. On it's own it sounds fine, just fine. It was a 4-track mix so it should have MONO surround. But when I compare it to the Criterion Laserdisc the Blu-ray isn't as "wide" sounding. In the beginning there is a nice pan as the camera moves showing a burning wagon - that pan isn't as noticeable on the Blu-ray. In the liner notes for the Criterion Laserdisc it states the stereo mix was use din Roadshow engagements.
If there was a 6-track mix for the 70mm prints than perhaps if found it can be used in the making of a 5.1 release on Blu.
- Scott

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I'm positive this will be a hotly debated topic when it's released. The Paramount release does have DNR, but it's still a gorgeous transfer. Looking at the MGM DVD, the colors look very different, with more of a yellow hue. Once this is out, I think color timing will be the most notable thing talked about, aside from the grain vs DNR debate.

The color timing on the Paramount BD is incorrect, pumped up beyond belief in garish hues. Hopefully this different transfer hasn't been unduly altered.

[tylergfoster]

Great re-design of the poster art for the cover. Is that the cover cover or the booklet cover?

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by Dex Robinson

Adding a technical note...which I don't want to be seen as a defense of DNR.

Just remember that ZULU was shot in Super Technirama 70 and 70mm prints were made for projection (at the properly equipped theaters). This is not a film that would have displayed much grain. So it can't be judged by the same standard that we use for the vast majority of movies. ZULU should be much more free of grain.

Now, I've got the UK release and I'm quite pleased with it. Honestly, I really don't know how much of the "cleanliness" is the result of DNR and how much is the natural product of large format filming. My eye isn't that well trained and, again, I don't want to be seen as defending DNR. But I caution that many people will judge DNR mainly on how much grain they see...and ZULU shouldn't have much grain.

Completely agree. In essence, a double 35 mm frame equals a 70 mm so those who expect Zulu to have more grain should have a look at how little is visible on the spotless Lawrence of Arabia BD. Analysing the UK BD frame by frame there is fluctuation of grain between one frame and the next. If the transfer had been DNR'd to hell as some claim, there wouldn't been any, especially in the clear blue skies (the easiest way to spot grain in motion). Yes, there is DNR but then again every BD has it or else there wouldn't be room for a full movie on a single disc. If people are expecting BD's to have the same amount of grain as film negative, then they'll have to wait until true 4K discs are produced (and then again, only a handful will be able to project them large enough to see the difference). There is fine grain present and quite honestly, I don't expect the TT disc sourced from MGM to be any better. It will include a lossless audio track but most likely mono (MGM couldn't find any stereo masters on their vaults for their DVD) and it will be colour-timed darker. I find it especially funny how some people here claim the Paramount colour is wrong, as if they'd ever seen the film theatrically. Zulu was filmed in Technicolor back when that meant three-strip colour incredibly saturated.

Also, the MGM transfer includes their bloody logo, as if the film had ever been shown theatrically with the MGM logo. MGM doesn't own a single pre-1986movie from their own library and they stick their logo at the start regardless who the original distributor was. Honestly, when they bought UA they should've kept that name instead of MGM. They ride on UA's glory (the classic catalogue, the franchises) to this day.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The color timing on the Paramount BD is incorrect, pumped up beyond belief in garish hues. Hopefully this different transfer hasn't been unduly altered.

Oh, are they? I never read that before. The colors look absolutely stunning in the caps so even if they're wrong, they look more appealing to me.

[Yojimbo]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

I don't understand why this would need a new Bluray, since it has already been released, and almost less than half the price of Twilight Time.

Are you possibly referring to that "Amazon Exclusive" version that was available for $8.00 or so a while back? I don't believe that was ever actually a legit blu-ray.

[Nailwraps]

Notice the MGM 90th anniversary logo there.

[ditcin]

Here are some pics from the Paramount UK release - Note: these are not screengrabs but simply taken by my Nokia phone of the TV. ...still the quality is stunning. I'm only curious about the sound on the TT release.

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by ditcin

Here are some pics from the Paramount UK release - Note: these are not screengrabs but simply taken by my Nokia phone of the TV. ...still the quality is stunning. I'm only curious about the sound on the TT release.

[Show spoiler]

That's one of the new OLED TVs isn't it?

[ditcin]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

[/spoiler]

That's one of the new OLED TVs isn't it?

Yes, it's the Samsung. Although I live in NY I had to travel over almost an hour into NJ to see the TV on display in a store. Oddly, I brought ZULU in hopes to demo knowing the PQ of the disc. It sold me right off. The slight curve gave an extra theatrical quality to the presentation - not to mention the incredible clarity, contrast values and color. The wide vistas in the film seem to spread out more due to the curve of the screen.

I love this edition of the film, but really hope the new one will be just as good but with improved sound.
- Scott B.

[Akijama]

Extras:

Isolated Score Track / Audio Commentary with Film Historians Lem Dobbs and Nick Redman / Original Theatrical Trailer

[MifuneFan]

Redman wasn't kidding about this being a passion project for TT

[mr nostromo]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The color timing on the Paramount BD is incorrect, pumped up beyond belief in garish hues. Hopefully this different transfer hasn't been unduly altered.

Having seen a Technirama 70 presentation back in the day, the Technicolor(R) was absolutely gorgeous, and I feel that the Uk presentation is an accurate replication.

[Maggot]

Have to agree, I just bought and watched the UK version of Zulu about 2 weeks ago and it looks amazing. But it's not surprising as it was shot in large film stock.

[tama]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Redman wasn't kidding about this being a passion project for TT