Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (Director's Cut)

[Geoff D]

It says "digitally remastered in high definition" to be exact, it doesn't even mention anything about 4K.

Still, when this hits we'll be able to compare it to the existing Blu-ray and even if the grading, grain management etc is different the framing might give the game away; if it's lined up exactly the same (or near as dammit) as the previous Blu then that's a pretty big indicator it's the same underlying film-to-video transfer as before.

[dudeabides34]

Interesting cover art. Is this new? As I've never seen it before..

[willo007]

Originally Posted by Lava_Lander

Hey hey: http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/04/rem...now-available/

STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN Director’s Edition Blu-ray
The Blu-ray is presented in 1080p high definition with English 7.1 Dolby TrueHD, French 2.0 Dolby Digital, Spanish Mono Dolby Digital and Portuguese Mono Dolby Digital with English, English SDH, French, Spanish and Portuguese subtitles. The disc includes the following:
◾Director’s Edition in high definition
◾Theatrical Version in high definition
◾Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer (Director’s Edition & Theatrical Version)
◾Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer and Manny Coto (Theatrical Version)
◾Text Commentary by Michael and Denise Okuda (Director’s Edition)
◾Library Computer (Theatrical Version)
◾The Genesis Effect: Engineering The Wrath of Khan — NEW!
◾Production ◾Captain’s Log
◾Designing Khan
◾Original interviews with DeForest Kelley, William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy and Ricardo Montalban
◾Where No Man Has Gone Before: The Visual Effects of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
◾James Horner: Composing Genesis

◾The Star Trek Universe ◾Collecting Star Trek’s Movie Relics
◾A Novel Approach
◾Starfleet Academy: The Mystery Behind Ceti Alpha VI

◾Farewell ◾A Tribute to Ricardo Montalban

◾Storyboards
◾Theatrical Trailer

[MattPerdue]

What in the hell is with that cover?

[stvn1974]

Shatner must not know that he has the third biggest profile on the cover art.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by MattPerdue

What in the hell is with that cover?

it's a mondo type cover. i like it..

edit: Oh, i'm sorry. the article already mentions it.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett

Thanks! And notice how the official press release says "digitally remastered." It says nothing about a new 4K scan. When TWOK first came out on Blu-ray, it was the only one that said "Digitally Restored." Now it's just remastered (from the previous 4K scan).

So, i assume they will change the colors again so that they can justify the "remastered" part and for people to be able to see a difference?

[MattPerdue]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

it's a mondo type cover. i like it..

I like it too. As a poster...

In any case I'm waiting for the UHD release since I already have the boxset.

[HeavyHitter]

st2.jpg

So much better.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

So much better.

yes, original posters are ALWAYS much better.
But i'm thankful that we at least get a mondo one and not something like this

[Show spoiler]

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by Lava_Lander

Hey hey: http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/04/rem...now-available/

Not bad.

Reminds of the Reservoir Dogs steenbok.

But unless I hear people raving about the new transfer like it's the greatest thing ever...there's no way in hell that I'm giving up my beloved steenbok.

...that thing is freaking gorgeous.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Doesn't have to be an existing master. An archived raw scan with the requisite headroom (10-bit and up) would be fine.

From my research, scanners from 2008/2009 did not have High Dynamic Range capabilities.


In any case, both the Digital Bits and TrekCore have confirmed it's a brand new scan.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

From my research, scanners from 2008/2009 did not have High Dynamic Range capabilities.

Hmmm. I guess they'd better junk the archival negative film-outs that they did for The Godfather from the 2008 4K restoration then. Thank God we've now got HDR scanners to put right what they've been doing wrong all these years. Who needed 12 or 16-bit scanning which was intended in the first place to capture all that range on the film, now we've got HDR to save us!

In any case, both the Digital Bits and TrekCore have confirmed it's a brand new scan.

I won't speak for Mr Hunt, but I don't see much in the way of confirmation in the Trekcore article, just them saying it's a brand new scan when linking to a piece that mentions nothing whatsoever about a new transfer, just Meyer signing off on an HDR pass.

[BIGRED1977]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

it's a mondo type cover. i like it..

edit: Oh, i'm sorry. the article already mentions it.

Art work by Tyler Stout....big fan of his work and I have about 8 of his prints hanging around my house....his Star Wars and Big Lebowski prints are my favorite......I missed out on his The Thing print! It goes for crazy money these days.

Must say I'm surprised they are using it for this release though

[Maxwell Everett]

Wow! I'm absolutely shocked (in a good way) that Paramount would spring for yet another 4K scan of this film. Thanks! I was obviously wrong. As Geoff D pointed out, if the framing is unique then that would be visual confirmation that it is indeed a new image harvest from the camera negative.

So weird that the press release wouldn't tout this fact. Oh, well!

[worldchmps]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

Not bad.

Reminds of the Reservoir Dogs steenbok.

But unless I hear people raving about the new transfer like it's the greatest thing ever...there's no way in hell that I'm giving up my beloved steenbok.

...that thing is freaking gorgeous.

Had this. Sold it. Hate the cover. Looks like a drunk guy painted that. Khan's eyes are different colors. Very ugly!

[Maxwell Everett]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

From my research, scanners from 2008/2009 did not have High Dynamic Range capabilities.

So I'm genuinely curious, what is this special magic that modern day film scanners are doing that make them HDR capable beyond scanning the o-neg at 10-bit or higher color depth? Are they scanning the film in more color wavelengths beyond RGB or something? Help me understand here, because there is obviously some reason Paramount had to do a new image harvest.

Either they did it because they had to scan the additional 35mm o-neg material anyway to re-construct the Director's cut, or they didn't have access to the raw 10-bit files from 2009, or there truly is a qualitative HDR difference between scanners seven years ago and today.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett

So I'm genuinely curious, what is this special magic that modern day film scanners are doing that make them HDR capable beyond scanning the o-neg at 10-bit or higher color depth? Are they scanning the film in more color wavelengths beyond RGB or something? Help me understand here, because there is obviously some reason Paramount had to do a new image harvest.

Either they did it because they had to scan the additional 35mm o-neg material anyway to re-construct the Director's cut, or they didn't have access to the raw 10-bit files from 2009, or there truly is a qualitative HDR difference between scanners seven years ago and today.

From one new HDR scanner solution:

Traditionally, HDR scanning is done using a multiple exposure method during which a scanner ‘stops the film’ to
capture images at different exposure levels. Images are subsequently recombined into a single HDR image, a process that significantly slows the rate of scanning

So unless they had made a specific HDR pass back then, then the previous scan is not HDR compatible.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Ugh, that cover art.

If only the studios knew how little effort would need to be put in to make us happy on this front.

[SpaceMind]

Can't wait to get this and replace the version in my current set. That new cover is hideous.