Offical Neon Genesis Evangelion Info/Update Thread

[veritas]

Originally Posted by BigOnAnime

Yes, the 3 versions of Fly Me to the Moon were removed from the later printings.

So apparently I have these two:
1. Digipak with Fly Me to the Moon extras (R0).

3. Standard Blu-ray case version without Fly Me to the Moon extras and DVD logo at the bottom (don't get how they made that mistake)

[Spoofer]

I've long been wanting to track down the FMttM extras version for myself as well, haha, but have yet to make the effort.

[gpn]

Originally Posted by BigOnAnime

BTW, for those that have the first printing, what Anime Source volume came with it, and what titles are advertised on the front of it?

IN_BLURAY_K

Titles on front: Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood Part 1 05.25.10, Guyver Complete Boxset 06.22.10, Rin - Daughters of Mnemonsyne 07.20.10

[Tylerfan]

Can those FMTTM extras be found on YouTube

[Catbug]

Originally Posted by BigOnAnime

There's actually more like 3 versions.

1. Digipak with Fly Me to the Moon extras (R0).
2. Digipak without Fly Me to the Moon extras (R1).
3. Standard Blu-ray case version without Fly Me to the Moon extras and DVD logo at the bottom (don't get how they made that mistake).

If you have the Fly Me to the Moon extras on the digipak version, that will be more valuable, though lots of people are unaware the extras were removed.
https://forum.evageeks.org/thread/10...-later-prints/

BTW, for those that have the first printing, what Anime Source volume came with it, and what titles are advertised on the front of it? On the back, it'll say "In Anime-[Letter of the alphabet]". It would help me figure out what copies likely have the extras from the first print run as I've been wanting to find the digipak version with those extras as I have the third version. I have the digipak-sized booklet as mine came without a booklet, contacted FUNi, and they sent me the wrong-sized booklet.

I have a sealed copy I bought off eBay years ago. Is there any way to check what digipak pressing I have without opening it?

[svenge]

Originally Posted by Catbug

I have a sealed copy I bought off eBay years ago. Is there any way to check what digipak pressing I have without opening it?

Since the disc repressing was an unplanned running change, I don't believe that Funimation made any alterations to the original digipak packaging specifically for the FMttM-less variant.

The thing is that even without said FMttM trailers the revised disc still had three versions of the "Beautiful World" trailer and the "News Flashes" teasers, which meant that the digipak's original back cover listing of included bonus features (which among other things mentioned unspecified "Trailers" but not which ones or exactly how many) would've still been technically accurate.

As such, my conjecture is that Funimation decided to take the path of least resistance and simply change the disc pressing while still using its then-current stock of empty digipaks that were already printed in order to fulfill retailer orders with a minimum of disruption. After all, there was nothing legally mandating that they draw attention to the reduction in trailer count since the remaining content still fulfilled the vague description on the outer packaging.

[Catbug]

Originally Posted by svenge

Since the disc repressing was an unplanned running change, I don't believe that Funimation made any alterations to the original digipak packaging specifically for the FMttM-less variant.

The thing is that even without said FMttM trailers the revised disc still had three versions of the "Beautiful World" trailer and the "News Flashes" teasers, which meant that the digipak's original back cover listing of included bonus features (which among other things mentioned unspecified "Trailers" but not which ones or exactly how many) would've still been technically accurate.

As such, my conjecture is that Funimation decided to take the path of least resistance and simply change the disc pressing while still using its then-current stock of empty digipaks that were already printed in order to fulfill retailer orders with a minimum of disruption. After all, there was nothing legally mandating that they draw attention to the reduction in trailer count since the remaining content still fulfilled the vague description on the outer packaging.

I went ahead and opened up my sealed copy and it was a bust. But, I managed to find a used copy with the trailers on eBay for a decent price. Messaged a bunch of sellers and only one listing actually had it. One seller had like 12 copies of the digipak Blu and still couldn’t find them. So if anyone wants a basically brand new copy I’ll prolly sell my old one to make back what I spent…

[Tylerfan]

https://twitter.com/EvaMonkey/status...43808013033473

Originally Posted by Eva Monkey

Some screenshots from EVANGELION:3.0(-46h), from the upcoming home video release of #Evangelion 3.0+1.11, coming out on March 8th.

[CommanderNagisa]

Originally Posted by Tylerfan

https://twitter.com/EvaMonkey/status...43808013033473

Neat, I seem to remember them talking about the possibility of doing a full movie for this time period, which I think would have been cool to see, as this is likely just a 10 to 25 minute bonus. Still interested to see what's in store though.

[svenge]

I ran the updated product listing for 3.0+1.11 through Chrome's machine translation, and it seems to indicate that the 4K disc will be SDR (i.e. BT.2020) just like the 4K release of Evangelion 3.333 from last year. Disappointing, but frankly it's not unexpected given the prior precendent.

Other details that I gleaned from the listing are that it'll have an array of bonus features that are typical for the Rebuild films (i.e. "Rebuild of Evangelion 3.0+1.11" showing in-progress renderings of multiple scenes, theatrical trailers, TV spots, etc.) alongside the previously announced Evangelion:3.0(-46h), as well as a 28-page booklet.

[Naiera]

Disappointing? That’s great news!

[professorwho]

Tell me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them without telling me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them.

Hint, hint, I already explained it before here, (and I'll elaborate that having it in DV specifically forces the player and TV to more accurately represent it than if left alone in SDR, I mean read these comments about the Violet Evergarden movie: that film is meant to be hella dark in points and HDR/DV faithfully replicates that, but with SDR you are FAR more able to f**k up the image- in this case make it brighter than it is supposed to like that poster is doing- and go away from the creator's artistic intent than if HDR/DV forces you to) but the anti-HDR crowd either won't learn out of ignorance or are just plain inept I guess.

[Glorian]

Originally Posted by professorwho

Tell me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them without telling me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them.

Hint, hint, I already explained it before here, (and I'll elaborate that having it in DV specifically forces the player and TV to more accurately represent it than if left alone in SDR, I mean read these comments about the Violet Evergarden movie: that film is meant to be hella dark in points and HDR/DV faithfully replicates that, but with SDR you are FAR more able to f**k up the image- in this case make it brighter than it is supposed to like that poster is doing- and go away from the creator's artistic intent than if HDR/DV forces you to) but the anti-HDR crowd either won't learn out of ignorance or are just plain inept I guess.

Your first link basically just says you think it's better, if used in moderation, for older titles. Then you segue into a discussion of newer titles, noting the artistic intent. Beyond the point about artistic intent on newer titles, that's just an opinion you're providing, without anything to back it up. And even you admit it's not always the right choice, and that preferably a SDR version should also be available, so how much can you really criticize someone who wants an SDR version?

I'm not strongly against HDR, but I'm skeptical in about it three major ways.

First, for older titles, it seems revisionist. I have a really hard time seeing how it could be anything but an alteration of the original work. For something modern, sure, it was made with that in mind, but not something from decades ago.

Second, the darkness of the image relative to SDR. I'll admit I haven't tried it myself, but that's partly because I've seen people make comments about it needing to be in a dark room to look like it should, and sunlight making it unwatchable. Well, I've got a viewing environment that's never going to be dark, with lots of windows, so if that's true, the format's useless.

Third, it seems like it's a sloppily implemented mess. I hear lots of comments about wild variations depending in setup, and in some areas (like video games), being implemented so badly that it's broken or unwatchable.

There's nothing to 'learn' from your comments or links, because they don't address any of those points, they just state your opinion. Calling people "ignorant" or "inept" isn't changing my mind, or anyone's; your opinion isn't an inherent fact.

[professorwho]

Originally Posted by Glorian

There's nothing to 'learn' from your comments or links, because they don't address any of those points, they just state your opinion. Calling people "ignorant" or "inept" isn't changing my mind, or anyone's; your opinion isn't an inherent fact.

This is way longer than expected, but I had both quite a lot and little to say.

You're not wrong, and I do think I worded it rather strongly without thinking it over, but you raised the best point of all: it's all opinion based. I wasn't particularly great at making this clear,

[Show spoiler]and of course many will view this as a complete turn against what I said; of course people will

but there's no 100% correct answer... but there are things which are I feel are just plain wrong.

The problem is that with the introduction of HDR, there always have and will be those who view it as a gimmick or crayons or whatnot (note that I am not accusing you of this, I want to make that clear) because it weirdly always happens when a major transition from one format standard to the next happens (see film vs digital, a debate directors and DPs still have to this date with no objectively "correct" winner) for whatever reason.

You're doing a great job in poking holes in my opinions, because there's no correct answer. Aha, you got me! You exposed me for the sham I am! But, there will always be those who take advantage of this curious situation to misconstrue how it works, and that was where my angle of approach was.

Yes, I have said that it would be ideal to provide both SDR and HDR presentations of content on home video in the best technical quality, as I really do feel that for certain titles it would not benefit much, if at all from a re-grade within an HDR container which attempts to go well above, say, 100 nits. However, I simultaneously think that presenting a master as-is within HDR would be a good idea to better replicate the intended look of the material... which brings up yet another can of worms.

Was this (HDR) intended? In the case of older films, obviously not. In fact, one could just as easily make the case that for the oldest of films, home video as a concept was never intended and goes against the intentions of the creators. Home video itself can never 100% replicate the intended experience of older films for various reasons if one wants to go akshully and disregard it all. It's true. It's always been a compromise to watch what we love at home, and that viewing environment itself is yet another one (yes, HDR works best in pure darkness, but so does SDR; we just are so used to cranked up brightness in SDR that when HDR forces the viewer to see it how the colourist of the master intended it to look, it often takes on by surprise, which no doubt has contributed to the perception of HDR being universally darker for many a title than SDR, one which has some truths and some misunderstanding), so unless sitting in a cinema, and watching a theatrical print or DCP, one can never 100% replicate the true experience the filmmakers intended- a concept that most of us have accepted. It just won't happen.

UHD as a format created many more issues than it fixed, that cannot be denied (removal of legacy features, resolutions, codecs, etc), but like Blu-ray, when used correctly, it can bring one closer to the material than away. I say "can" because obviously it still needs work. Blu-ray sure as hell wasn't perfect, as one can look at titles from its launch period and see that its full potential wasn't reached yet because everybody was still adapting to the new HD standards for home video, so outside of then newer releases, catalog titles were a mess because now that the "full resolution" of HD was seen, you couldn't hide older practices like before due to that added clarity. UHD and HDR is much the same way. I alluded to that myself in the first post I linked to where I said, "HDR is neither good or bad. It’s simply a tool that can be used, abused, or not used." It really is just a tool at the end of the day. So, you're not wrong to mention its implementation issues: they do exist, and denying them would be incorrect, but it ultimately is still relatively early for the format in an ironic sense despite having launched in 2016. It took boutique labels years to jump onboard after observing the format, debating its viability within the collector's market, and beginning to (and still!) learn how it all works. You can never be 100% perfect out the door, so it's always getting closer to that period where a common understanding is there. It took years for how to get there in HD, but with UHD, along with TVs and sound systems getting better each year, there are more moving targets than ever before. It's impossible to reach perfection.




On a side (and a little personal) note, I weirdly don't like writing posts like this anymore. I used to love writing stuff about how x disc looks, or how y company made a major fail or victory, or why z is something important or whatnot... I really did like writing them. But then it stopped being fun. Mainly because of negativity which isn't as appealing anymore. Things changed, and I'm in a weird place where I love talking about these subjects, yet not actually talking about them due to a variety of factors, most of which are due to maturity. I grew the hell up. I made many mistakes, and ultimately found the best way to avoid the pitfalls of the past is just to keep my mouth shut. It's so damn hard, trust me, and this was mainly from the mistakes I made IRL that led me to realise this, implement them, and ultimately I would hope I'm a much better person for it.

So why did I even mention that? Sympathy? Not really. I just let my guard down, vented, and when rightfully and decisively called out for it, feel oddly compelled to say something about it. It's weird. I see so many things that frustrate me all the time, but for whatever reason, I just decided to go all out.

What relevance does this have to HDR, SDR and everything? I really don't know to be completely honest. There is so much we all will never learn, and with the new standards making it harder to "catch up" due to new progress at a faster rate than before, I came to accept that one can never gain a huge understanding of everything, especially when one has not even mastered content within those spaces and learns from those who do and other resources (I'm talking about myself here), and opinions subconsciously reinforced by those you believe and trust. I have many opinions on the topics discussed here, but they're just that: opinions. Even experts just go off of opinion, there really is no objective fact, sadly.



Thus ends my Episodes 25-26 revelation, introspection, and discovery. Goodbye all of Evangelion, and hopefully I'm not full of sh*t and something here I said makes sense. The tone shift was a bit drastic, but I'm not sure how to change it really. I'll admit, I was a little more defensive at first, although "owning" this debate wasn't my goal at all, but it's not fun to be negative, so I ultimately transitioned into a more neutral tone, which is where I prefer to be, honestly.

[Show spoiler]This is why I stopped posting longform content here, so while I'll probably do more eventually, I don't really miss it despite wanting to do it. Ah well, c'est la vie !

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by professorwho

Tell me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them without telling me you don't know why HDR/DV even for originally SDR films is the best way to present them.

HDR doesn't work well on projectors. Even with a $5000 scaler doing a sort of HDR in an SDR container, never having HDR in the first place is still better.

[svenge]

I finally got around to watching the new promo reel (below) and its end card indicates that Evangelion 3.0+1.11 will have the same 155 minute runtime as its previous 3.0+1.0 and 3.0+1.01 incarnations. Of course this begs the question of what exactly is changing in order to justify the incremented version number, but I guess we won't find out until March 8th.

Probably should've mentioned that in my previous post, but I was so focused on the bonus features that I failed to notice that its runtime was also stated in the product listing as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s4r3KHNvJI

[Hydra Spectre]

It’s interesting that Sony PCL somehow found a way to stick BT.2020 in an SDR container.
Meanwhile, Embracer Group had to basically stick BT.2020 SDR in an HDR10/Dolby Vision container for their Wong Kar Wai 4K UHDs in Germany.
At least Criterion’s 4K of In the Mood for Love is proper BT.2020 SDR like the Evangelion UHDs. And I love how the WKW 4K restorations look. (I really wish Ashes of Time, My Blueberry Nights, and The Grandmaster had similar 4K restorations)

Going back to Eva, I wonder if 3.0+1.11 will just have 2.0+5.1 audio mixes like 3.333, or if there will also be an Atmos mix. According to IMDb (which is not that reliable, tbh), it did have an Atmos mix.
And the film also apparently had a Dolby Vision grade for the Dolby Cinema release, but it was probably just SDR tonemapped in a Dolby Vision container, and it’s not like Belle or Violet Evergarden, which had real Dolby Vision HDR grading.

[svenge]

Originally Posted by Hydra Spectre

Going back to Eva, I wonder if 3.0+1.11 will just have 2.0+5.1 audio mixes like 3.333, or if there will also be an Atmos mix. According to IMDb (which is not that reliable, tbh), it did have an Atmos mix.

The product listing only mentions LPCM 5.1 and LPCM 2.0 mixes, so I wouldn't expect anything fancy like Atmos on this release.

[Kyle15]

Wasn't mixed in Atmos so tbh it's not really a big deal.

[Hydra Spectre]

["Shin Evangelion Theatrical Version EVANGELION:3.0+1.11 THRICE UPON A TIME" 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc Specification Information]
This UHD video material is produced with the same specifications as those mastered for IMAX® screening.

Looks like 3.0+1.11 will be IMAX Enhanced just like 3.333.
This is great. However, the previous version 3.0+1.01, was not shown in IMAX. All IMAX screenings so far have been the original 3.0+1.0 version.
I wonder if they would rerelease the film in IMAX with the 3.0+1.11 version.

Also, this is great that we're getting more IMAX Enhanced on disc, since most IMAX Enhanced releases nowadays are just BRAVIA Core and Disney+ streams, and mostly MCU movies. Glad to see Studio Khara doing what Disney can but won't.

Lastly, I wonder if the recap at the beginning would finally be fullscreen for the 1.11 and 2.22 footage, and not in that weird windowboxed presentation that was on the Amazon streams.