The Beatles Get Back on the 11th of July

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Sarcasm or not, I actually busted the resolution down to 576 when watching it. Made it look softer but in a good way, it ‘cut off’ some of the ghastly smudginess. Still looked wildly over-processed, just not as bad as watching it in HD.

Maybe we can do a S-VHS tapeout at Tapeokem and get it to look more organic.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Maybe we can do a S-VHS tapeout at Tapeokem and get it to look more organic.

Dude! I hope one of the more film-oriented, uh, filmmakers takes the Blu-ray of this over to FotoKem and says "record this onto the grainest mf'ing stock you have"

[Deciazulado]

Well could do a Kubrick and photograph it frame by frame on your still camera using 110 cartridges to make a dupe if you don't have a 16mm or Super-8 camera.

[qw0aszx]

I think that awful texture was caused not only by DNR, but also the AI "enhanced" technology. It just generated so many unnatural movements and details, making everything worse.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by qw0aszx

I think that awful texture was caused not only by DNR, but also the AI "enhanced" technology. It just generated so many unnatural movements and details, making everything worse.

There's a lot of shit going on there, yeah. That's what makes it so frustrating, if Jackson just wanted to remove the grain then there are algos and processes out that can retain a hell of a lot more detail and texture than this, even with creaky old 16mm, but the smeariness to both texture and movement makes it look astonishingly unnatural. People would say that real life doesn't have grain, true enough, but real life doesn't look like a moving waxwork either.

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Well could do a Kubrick and photograph it frame by frame on your still camera using 110 cartridges to make a dupe if you don't have a 16mm or Super-8 camera.

Great! So at 24 shots per cartridge for 8 hours of footage all I'd need is 28,800 cartridges!

[LeftHandedGuitarist]

The complete lack of any kind of extras on this makes me think that a typical Jackson extra special edition is planned for later down the line.

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by LeftHandedGuitarist

The complete lack of any kind of extras on this makes me think that a typical Jackson extra special edition is planned for later down the line.

There was talk of the complete rooftop performance without all the crowds looking up and police arriving guff, just showing The Beatles in action. Dunno how that relates to the 60 minute IMAX movie being released, or if that's the same thing.

[LaserD]

Originally Posted by LeftHandedGuitarist

The complete lack of any kind of extras on this makes me think that a typical Jackson extra special edition is planned for later down the line.

Absolutely. I'll stick with my bootlegs for now and wait for a decent edition with bonus features. There's so much they could add if they wanted:

• restoration process interviews
• production interviews
• the shorter premiere version, with Jackson audio commentary
• footage and interviews from the premieres
• audio commentary on the full series by a Beatles scholar

[LaserD]

Originally Posted by LaserD

Absolutely. I'll stick with my bootlegs for now and wait for a decent edition with bonus features. There's so much they could add if they wanted:

• restoration process interviews
• production interviews
• the shorter premiere version, with Jackson audio commentary
• footage and interviews from the premieres
• audio commentary on the full series by a Beatles scholar

I'll respond to my own post here with a recent favorite among Beatles scholars who would do a fabulous job of commentary on either the Let It Be or Get Back films. Scott Freiman's Deconstructing the Beatles lecture series are educational and fun, and always reveal something new. If you're not familiar, here' s the website https://www.beatleslectures.com/

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by LaserD

Absolutely. I'll stick with my bootlegs for now and wait for a decent edition with bonus features. There's so much they could add if they wanted:

• restoration process interviews
• production interviews
• the shorter premiere version, with Jackson audio commentary
• footage and interviews from the premieres
• audio commentary on the full series by a Beatles scholar

For the bolded they might as well show us a clip of PJ shitting on the film. Literally shitting on it.

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

For the bolded they might as well show us a clip of PJ shitting on the film. Literally shitting on it.

1 director 10 film canisters

[RazorwireRyan]

A different perspective here. I'm not a Beatles fan. I've always enjoyed Lennon's solo work but never got into the Beatles for some reason. I found the DNR and especially the AI upscaling process, to be literally disgusting. Not even so much as watching it disgusted me, the footage was so compelling I just put up with it after a while, but just knowing that he'd done it was really bothering me. The YouTube featurette that shows how "amazing" their restoration process came across as quite disengenuous to me, because footage from those sessions has been seen elsewhere in very good quality, but the before/after comparison made the original footage look like something found in a bin from the silent era.

At the end of the day, this documentary made me a fan of The Beatles, and I absolutely loved it. Fascinating stuff, really. So I loved it for what it was, and actually thought the editing overall was brilliant, but the restoration is pretty unforgiveable stuff. I suppose it's not so surprising when this is the man who got all giddy about putting GoPro shots in a Middle Earth movie.

The worst part about the restoration, and I almost shake my head called it a restoration, is that I'm assuming it was born out of wanting to appeal to modern viewers. Blown up to 16:19, given as clean and digital a look as possible upscaled to "4K Ultra HD" and everything else. I don't think anyone really cares, and most people don't even notice how rough the digital tinkering is. Which means if it was *gasp* retained in it's OAR and left grainy but carefully restored, most people wouldn't have noticed or moaned then either. So ultimately it's just another example of Jackson losing his way with being more interested in the technology.

Actually, the real worst part is that they applied DNR to the footage, essentially removing a lot of the detail... and THEN used AI upscaling and sharpening tools to... get more detail. Absolutely bonkers.

[Geoff D]

Some "restoration" demos tend to do that, they show the literal raw scan with no colour correction or dirt/scratch removal and then the restored version. It's always a wee bit disingenuous as the neg is not supposed to be viewed in such a context, especially for colour. But PJ gonna PJ, I felt a twinge of sadness watching that "restoration" demo on Get Back because the 'before' footage looked lovely with that grain in there. It's even sadder when you realise that the only people who saw most of this footage looking like that were the people who then proceeded to digitally disfigure it.

[daycity]

Originally Posted by RazorwireRyan

A different perspective here. I'm not a Beatles fan. I've always enjoyed Lennon's solo work but never got into the Beatles for some reason. I found the DNR and especially the AI upscaling process, to be literally disgusting. Not even so much as watching it disgusted me, the footage was so compelling I just put up with it after a while, but just knowing that he'd done it was really bothering me. The YouTube featurette that shows how "amazing" their restoration process came across as quite disengenuous to me, because footage from those sessions has been seen elsewhere in very good quality, but the before/after comparison made the original footage look like something found in a bin from the silent era.

At the end of the day, this documentary made me a fan of The Beatles, and I absolutely loved it. Fascinating stuff, really. So I loved it for what it was, and actually thought the editing overall was brilliant, but the restoration is pretty unforgiveable stuff. I suppose it's not so surprising when this is the man who got all giddy about putting GoPro shots in a Middle Earth movie.

The worst part about the restoration, and I almost shake my head called it a restoration, is that I'm assuming it was born out of wanting to appeal to modern viewers. Blown up to 16:19, given as clean and digital a look as possible upscaled to "4K Ultra HD" and everything else. I don't think anyone really cares, and most people don't even notice how rough the digital tinkering is. Which means if it was *gasp* retained in it's OAR and left grainy but carefully restored, most people wouldn't have noticed or moaned then either. So ultimately it's just another example of Jackson losing his way with being more interested in the technology.

Actually, the real worst part is that they applied DNR to the footage, essentially removing a lot of the detail... and THEN used AI upscaling and sharpening tools to... get more detail. Absolutely bonkers.

You only have to look at other forums, YT etc. to see the general consensus about the restored footage ... "stunning", "beautiful" aplenty.

I'm dreading how The Frighteners 4K is gonna turn out.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by daycity

You only have to look at other forums, YT etc. to see the general consensus about the restored footage ... "stunning", "beautiful" aplenty.

I'm dreading how The Frighteners 4K is gonna turn out.

As much we're appalled by how horrible this looks, I'm not surprised that there's been no kind of public calling out of it by consumers and critics alike. They fell over themselves to gush over how lovely it looks and that's just where we're at with the wider populace. So many people have the DNR, sharpness, and motion interpolation cranked up on their TV that Get Back likely looks entirely normal to them, and boy do I wish I was joking. Bet it looks way more awesome on a phone that it does on a giant telly too.

Jackson is basically Joe Sixpack in movie director form.

[CelestialAgent]

BFI IMAX are screening the Rooftop Concert, hope it gets screened a little more widely.

I just hope the unrestored rushes remain preserved in some form.

[Rizor]

I listened to Peter Jackson on the Marc Maron podcast a few weeks back and he discusses the restoration at around the 44 min mark. At a bit before the 47 min mark, he even acknowledges "film grain enthusiasts" having negative opinions on what they've done.

[Marv Inc.]

Originally Posted by daycity

You only have to look at other forums, YT etc. to see the general consensus about the restored footage ... "stunning", "beautiful" aplenty.

I'm dreading how The Frighteners 4K is gonna turn out.

This is the problem, I regularly read the yt and facebook comments and its seldom you see anyone complaining.

The masses this was aimed at the the exact ones who call it "stunning, looks like it was shot yesterday, how is this 50 years old" For PJ and Disney this will be exactly the confirmation they want, that why they have done is fine and loved by Joe Public and those who love all there movies to look diigtal and like a Marvel film.

[RazorwireRyan]

What bugs me more than the "it looks amazing" comments are when they say "the footage was so old this was probably the only way the footage could be salvaged, I heard it was in rough shape" and I just think about some of the films I've seen restored from like.. the 1890s that look more natural.

[RazorwireRyan]

Originally Posted by Rizor

I listened to Peter Jackson on the Marc Maron podcast a few weeks back and he discusses the restoration at around the 44 min mark. At a bit before the 47 min mark, he even acknowledges "film grain enthusiasts" having negative opinions on what they've done.

This'll come off like a petulant exaggeration, but that comment is almost like taking every painting off the wall, scanning it digitally, printing it out in perfect reproductive quality and putting the originals in a cupboard, then saying "well the canvas enthusiasts aren't very happy with it, but we need to feel like these paintings were created today."