Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[monstermidget]

The problem for me with this AI upscaling stick, is that for one, it's completely unnecessary, a redundant step added to the restoration process to give a worse end product (that probably won't stop Cameron shilling the idea to the uninformed, that liberal use of these tools is absolutely neccessary to allow these old timey, archaic, anologue relics of the late 80s and 90s to pass muster in this bold new UHD world, nevermind that catalogue UHDs have been the best looking titles of the format since its inception*).

And B, once you've played with said AI tools, or are even mildly conversant with the look they deliver, you can't help but see it. If all you had was a digibeta tape or some low resolution digital video, sure, you can get very impressive results, you'll still have the upscaled look, there's really no escaping it, but the trade off is worth it when dealing with lesser sources...but when you have access to a lovely new negative scan...why bother?

We've finally climbed out of the hole of all that processing, edge enhancement and sharpening of the bygone eras of home video and certain filmmakers are trying to plunge us back in again, with the help of cutting edge AI! (avisynth users have been getting these kind of upscaling results before the words "AI upscaled" had passed a Hollywood directors lips or a reddit posters fingers for that matter... it's almost as if its still the same old tools).


*I'd be interested to know if Cameron or Jackson had actually ever seen a good catalogue UHD displayed on a large high end tv or projector, before they came to the conclusion that heavy processing and upscaling was the way forward. Jackson seems to hate the look of film in general these days so it would probably have no impact...but I wonder about Jimbo.

[Geoff D]

Yeah, that's the point of all the forums pushback really. When should a 26-year-old film shot to the state of the art at the time ever require AI enhancement tomfoolery to make it look "good"? It's not like we're talking about American Graffiti where its grainy low budget origination could be used as possible mitigation. But a movie that was literally the most expensive ever made at the time (and equates to almost $400M (!) in today's money)? Hmmm.

But that's just it: what looks "good" to some people isn't what looks "good" to others, Cameron has very specific taste and I gets the feeling he no longer wants to be constrained by the technology that he had. That's why he added selective HFR to Titanic for the recent 3D re-release after all, it's no different from blitzing away the grain.

[KMFDMvsEnya]

The finer grain structure of the film stock used for Titanic really helped reduce the prominence of the processing artifacts but there are some shots in Aliens in which this newfangled technological terror really fooks things up.

Assuming the Vudu HDX is reflective of higher quality streams.

[videopat]

Originally Posted by Jowiko96

I’m just stating my opinion after reading this thread for the past week and wishing it was better.

I don't know, man. I've personally found this thread to be pretty useful, informative and entertaining.

[Jowiko96]

Originally Posted by EliWallou

People may like it, that it is fine. But this should at least be on the table for open discussion, without insecure accusations of "nitpicking", "negativity", "bias against Cameron" or whatever.

If people can't handle their purchases being picked apart by those who put more importance to the treatment of the film grain, or colors, or else, they shouldn't read through a thread about a UHD release. I want to know what quality of transfer I'm buying, and can handle buying imperfect ones. I could care less about slipcovers and would prefere not seeing numerous posts about them. But I understand it's part of threads about physical releases.

You are absolutely right and I don’t disagree with everything you posted. I love open discussion about this stuff and respectful debate is what I strive for.

I want to make it clear that I am not upset about the discussion, but the numerous comments always talking about T2 transfer and incorporating that into this release (which is not NEARLY as bad) irritated me.

Some of these comments are also just how discussions are conducted over the internet anymore and I probably should leave it be.

[Rolling Dice]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Eagle is just the distributor, it's Disney's disc

What about the German UHD? Leonine Films is just the distributor, too?

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by monstermidget

*I'd be interested to know if Cameron or Jackson had actually ever seen a good catalogue UHD displayed on a large high end tv or projector, before they came to the conclusion that heavy processing and upscaling was the way forward. Jackson seems to hate the look of film in general these days so it would probably have no impact...but I wonder about Jimbo.

Oh no, I'm pretty sure Cameron does not need to watch any catalogue UHDs, because he knows exactly how the untouched 4K version of Titanic looks on a large screen and that's also the very reason why that untouched master was not simply ported onto UHD. You or me, we would probably s*it our pants looking at that beauty, but not Jim.

He has his fetishes, he has his taste, we can call it whatever we want. He definitely doesn't care about preserving the original look of his movies, respecting when and how they were shot. A 1997 period drama or fancy, mostly CG sci-fi spectacle - he wants them to look sharp, hyper-real even and I understand him to a certain degree. It doesn't mean he has to worship the holy look of 35mm film, that's only our idea of him being a perfectionist. I still consider him to be one, even if I disagree with his choices.

[dcx4610]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Lol at anybody calling Leo's acting "pretty bad" in this.

I think it's more the writing than his acting to be fair. He's a little too pretty and well kempt to be homeless vagabond. The dialogue is also corny. He does a fine job with what he's given but I feel like you could have really put anyone in that role and you would have gotten the same performance. That said, he has good chemistry with Kate and you could see how she would fall for him so there's that.

[dcx4610]

I certainly agree that they shouldn't even be using AI as part of the restoration process. It is quite simply going to led to artifacts and issues. The one shot of old Rose looking down through the water at the nude picture confuses the hell out of the AI and just smeared her face. You don't get that with the 35mm print.

So while the complaints are valid, I do think they are overblown. Compare this shot of the 35mm vs. the UHD:

https://slow.pics/c/hIxs5Xsj

Would I have preferred just the 35mm print slapped on UHD with minimal processing? Yes. Is there a ton of difference between the UHD? No. The UHD is slightly sharper likely due to AI but I do prefer the color timing on UHD which looks more natural to me. Also, despite AI being a "hack", it is very good these days and the 2nd picture does look sharp and detailed. Is it oversharpened and "fake" detail? That is for you to decide but I don't think it's an abomination by any means.

I'm guessing Cameron and team felt the movie looked a little soft and being a tech guy, of course they used AI. I do think it's minimal tampering though and the UHD looks outstanding. Is it an absolutely purist version of the 35mm? Nope but it's close and I think only the most discerning eyes are going to have a problem with it. You need to see it in motion.

[samlop10]

Originally Posted by punisher

I f history of movies for home viewing has taught us anything, it's that none of them are perfect. No matter the format, it's hard to capture what you experience in the theaters seeing it on a huge screen and all that goes with it. There's no denying that the tinkering being done because of new technologies can make one scratch their head. Some movies just aren't meant to be 4K'd while others look fantastic. Titanic had me readjusting my settings on my projector to bring out the best of the disc. Then it looked damn good and provide a great night watching it. I think that if you are a fan of the movie, it's a must buy, especially for projector folks like myself. If you are a fussy/critique observer, well you might pass on this as well as the majority of 4K releases..lol. I was on the edge, but made the purchase and glad I did.

That makes no sense, as imo a lot of 4K disc releases look great and it’s not difficult to see the restorations were more ‘respectful’ to the source, with decent to excellent compression, and thus there’s less controversy on whether they’re overall good or not. You do have the usual suspects which usually give iffy compression results (Paramount, among others), but then you have other ones like Arrow, WB, Sony, and Universal whose great majority of 4K releases are really good to excellent. So saying “well you need to pick this up if you like most 4K releases” makes no sense.

It is true that whenever there is a more controversial release there is a greater fuzz in the forums. But if the release is great then things stay relatively more calm. But that’s just the nature of any forums site. This might make it seem like more releases than not are controversial, but that’s not the case.

The thing with this one, as been said many times, is that all that digital processing went well beyond just a restoration, using not only the Lowry method but then Park Post as well, with artificial sharpening and digital tinkering of the details and film grain in the source. The majority of 4K releases do not go through that. So another reason why that statement doesn’t make sense.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Canadian edition doesn't come with a slip unfortunately. Paramount stopped producing slips for their Canadian UHDs. Rosemary's Baby, Trading Places, Scrooged, etc. all don't come with them. I think the last one to have a slip was Ferris Bueller's Day Off. They stopped right around then anyway.

Titanic 4K disc comes in a plastic case. Paramount is funny, Canada is funny too.

Originally Posted by ilenewoodsfan99

A question for those who've experienced Titanic in most if not all available home video formats: What would you say is your definitive ranking of Titanic on home video (VHS, Laserdisc, DVD, Blu Ray, etc)? I'm just curious over what formats would be worth seeing it on?

I think it's fun to collect them all when you're a hard-core movie fan, just for collective fun sake. ...Including the 3D Blu-ray version, and this latest 2D/4K transaction, slipcase or not. ...VHS, DVD, Laserdisc, ... the full rainbow umbrella.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Canada stopped wasting paper? Good news.

Canada is funny with paper, plastic and straws.
Paramount Pictures is cheap. ...No Blu-ray feature film in the 4K package. ...Greed.
The cardboard slipcover is an integral part of the movie 4K/BR purchasing experience, same as the steelbook. The package does matter, as the film playing on the screen.

Santa is coming soon to town ...

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Rolling Dice

What about the German UHD? Leonine Films is just the distributor, too?

Yes, of course

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

Film is the key word here.

I don't need a time machine to know which of these two screenshots is the accurate representation of a movie shot on 35mm:

She was aboard the Titanic?

* The top photo (orange skin) is all cleaned up and waxy looking.
I don't remember seeing her in this flick; was she an immigrant dancer in the lower part of the boat?

[GasmaskAvenger]

ngl Cameron could've cast Elizabeth Berkley in Titanic if he really wanted to and STILL get a big box office hit.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

She was aboard the Titanic?

I think she was Billy Zane's sister.

[Matt89]

My copy was just delivered from WowHD. In case others were wondering, mine came with the slip.

Gonna check it out after I'm finished work. Kinda nervous lol.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

I don't remember seeing her in this flick; was she an immigrant dancer in the lower part of the boat?

She was cut from the film, I believe she had one scene where she pushed a woman off the deck to get to the lifeboat. Cameron decided her wig and BDSM costume was not very 1912.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

She was cut from the film, I believe she had one scene where she pushed a woman off the deck to get to the lifeboat. Cameron decided her wig and BDSM costume was not very 1912.

It's the scene of her shagging Captain Smith in the Turkish Baths that really turned off test audiences, as well as using the ship's mast as a stripper pole

[teddyballgame]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Every time I check this thread there's like 3+ pages added lol.

gotta enjoy it while it lasts because eventually it will only get bumped like once a week with the old "sooo, is this a good disc or not?"

[HenryNOTCavill]

Sigh, I dunno if I was just influenced by the complaints here but I really can’t unsee the dnr and sharpening, especially when my 3D blu looks better converted, except for maybe some color looking better on the 4k. I guess I expected more from Cameron’s arguably most famous film.