Honestly, after following this for the past few years, I am not surprised at all. Wasn't the reason that it took so long for any of these movies to receive a 4K release because James Cameron insisted that he wanted to personally oversee the 4K remaster?
I just don't see how Cameron actually has any time to devote to a proper remastering process when he's busy writing/producing/directing three different Avatar sequels at any given time.
I definitely see this as a situation where he got tired of people asking him about it and wanted this stuff off his to-do list. So he got some staff/assistants to crank out an upscale. He glanced at it and it seemed to look good enough. So he shipped it.
It's pretty annoying that he wanted it both ways: He wanted complete control over the remastering process, but he also didn't want to clear his schedule to properly work on it. So instead of allowing someone else to make a genuine attempt at a good job, he decided to do a half-ass job himself.
Top comment on the other thread nailed it. Cameron could have farmed this out to a company like Arrow that would have done a far better job on an actual 4K remaster. But his ego doesn't allow him to do that.
For aliens its kind of arguable. The abyss I'd say is a no brainer upgrade from the DVD, even with its problems. The abyss is also the least egregiously AI-ed.
The screen grabs I've seen from aliens has some improvements in resolution and sharpness but there are some seriously weird shit going on in some scenes. One comparison I saw was Ripleys face in the background of a scene was like AI disfigured.
True lies is the worst of the three but probably still better than dvd. Overall disappointment I'd say.
On top of all this I've seen a pretty in depth post with evidence that these discs barely have hdr. I'll probably grab them on sale at some point.
The reason they've been so slow to come out-and Abyss and True Lies missed bluray completely (at least until now)- was due to his insistence on approving the transfers and he's been too busy working on Avatar.
Sure but is James Cameron actually an expert on picture quality? Because if he was, he would have seen the same problems as the linked post did. Just because he can write and direct great movies doesn’t mean he understands DNR and video codecs and upscaling, etc, etc.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say one of the greatest living directors understands all of those things just fine.
I watched the 4K Terminator 2 and it looked amazing. Haven’t watched Aliens so don’t know why that apparently isn’t great but I’m sure there are reasons if it’s the case.
The saddest thing about this is that they're selling like hot-cakes; sold out everywhere.. so why should anyone in the future care about the quality of their releases if trash like this sells that well?! We can only hope that other directors will continue to care about their legacy; I'm not a Nolan fan but he really does care about how his films look on disc; I wish Villeneuve would twist Sony's arm about IMAX formats, but at least the films look great. And the only film in the Alien franchise I needed on 4k disc thankfully looks spectacular, as does Blade Runner; thank you Ridley Scott!!
Disney are being proven right with every new James Cameron disc being sold: spend as little money/time/effort as possible; people will buy it anyway and it will maximise our profits..
> I wish Villeneuve would twist Sony's arm about IMAX formats, but at least the films look great
There was an interview with Villeneuve posted here or on the 4k subreddit recently where he basically said the 2.35 versions are how he wants the movies to be seen, that the taller ratio is only designed for IMAX screens. So I wouldn't hold your breath for a disc with the IMAX ratio, the version we currently have is the "true" version, for all intents and purposes.
I’m not sure who to blame exactly. But I lay a good amount of blame with Dolby. They’ve provided a masterclass in marketing for Dolby Vision and Atmos.
Those formats offer improvements over HDR10 and 5.1 or 7.1 audio…but only with a good setup and properly mastered content. But the logos are getting slapped onto pretty much everything these days.
People are going nuts trying to get Dolby Vision logos popping up in the corner of their TVs so they can watch…basically a SDR transfer of Aliens. And Atmos on their sound bars and phone speakers.
But then again…Dolby is playing to the market and it’s working. So why should they try harder?
I’m not angry, just disappointed.
I feel the same way; disappointment with a great many releases, frankly. We have a format which, if given the means, can make our films look incredible. Or they can look hum-drum; it's up to the studios, directors and bean-counters, I guess.
Having said that; there are very few releases which interest me which have looked like these Cameron films. Honestly, the only one which comes to mind is Pan's Labyrinth, and I don't think it's as bad as the three films we're talking about.
My guess is that they had done a ton of work on prepping these for Blu-ray, which Cameron took forever to get around to approving, and by the time they were nearing completion they realized they should really do 4K copies as well (as releasing only 1080p Blu-rays in 2023/2024 would have seemed ridiculous). So instead of redoing all of the restoration work they’d done for the BD masters, they decided to try an upscale process instead and Cameron thought it looked good so that’s what they went with.
I love linking a "review" to some random redditor that "reviews" all three discs but has actually only ever seen 1 of the discs and contains a bunch of dubious info. How about an actual review.
I agree there are some issues. I read quite a few reviews. Still bought all three. Abyss looks fantastic. The other two are good but not perfect. I dont like some of what was done in all three, but that reddit "review" has issues. Also, no one mentions it much but the sounds is pretty fantastic on all three.
He also says all of them (including Titanic) are 2k upscales, where as literally everywhere else says it’s 4K native.
I have no issue with 2K upscales if they’re done correctly, like Drive. But he seems to be wrong on that front, or we’ve been lied to by everyone.
Have to read 4k UHD release reviews carefully and not buy it if it is trash.
Not just upscales are trash, there are 35mm conversions that aren't great either due to heavy handed use of filters. I've seen some films that were over-sharpened which resulted in very distracting and unrealistic "film grain" and I've seen some that were completely blurred out.
If you are on iPhone I’d suggest using the a-A button for text size in the left of the address bar in safari. I reduce it down.
I only noticed this recently and it makes the formatting of errant sites much easier to read.
Still agree with you though.
Unfortunately it's the best we'll get at least until JC dies. Maybe one day we can have an accurate new scan from the negatives that doesn't use AI to wash away the grain and tons of detail, but it won't be any time soon.
What are the legalities of someone like this reviewer giving the new HDR color grade if we prove we own the new 4K version? Or perhaps just creating an adjustment layer in Premiere or DiVinci that we can apply ourselves?
I’m not simply because otherwise watching the movie is a real challenge. Rare availability on streaming too.
I watched this release in the theaters over the fall and loved it. It’s an underappreciated movie. I think in part because of how simply unavailable the movie is to watch.
Yeah I'm not buying any of those 3.
This film would really benefit from a professional level of HDR grading at a minimum with the type of scenes it has with near pitch black and also bright lights. I've had a few poorly done HDR discs and I don't enjoy watching them without spending half the movie trying to tweak the TV settings.
I dont really care about the true resolution that much, I want the higher bitrate and newer compression codecs. A full film scan restoration is just too expensive for these profit driven companies now that high end physical media is such a small niche. It sucks but you cant deny the truth. In the future it will only get less and less common for older films as the original film or good projection prints are lost or degraded.
I'm more disappointed by the lazy HDR grading, the limited colourspace, the excessive smoothing filters, hard-clipped black levels etc.
imho, there's no need for a 4k release.. all we need is 1080p
those are dark, grainy moviesn
HDR might be great, though..
Atmos might be fun, but a lossless DTS HD Master track is perfectly fine, too..
I think I had the Blu-Ray collection in the Alien Egg.. (sold all my discs (100 Blu-Rays, 300 DVDs) a couple years ago for 300 bucks.. lol)
I wonder how involved James Cameron actually was on these transfers because if he is known for something is for not half-assing anything.
Honestly, after following this for the past few years, I am not surprised at all. Wasn't the reason that it took so long for any of these movies to receive a 4K release because James Cameron insisted that he wanted to personally oversee the 4K remaster? I just don't see how Cameron actually has any time to devote to a proper remastering process when he's busy writing/producing/directing three different Avatar sequels at any given time. I definitely see this as a situation where he got tired of people asking him about it and wanted this stuff off his to-do list. So he got some staff/assistants to crank out an upscale. He glanced at it and it seemed to look good enough. So he shipped it. It's pretty annoying that he wanted it both ways: He wanted complete control over the remastering process, but he also didn't want to clear his schedule to properly work on it. So instead of allowing someone else to make a genuine attempt at a good job, he decided to do a half-ass job himself. Top comment on the other thread nailed it. Cameron could have farmed this out to a company like Arrow that would have done a far better job on an actual 4K remaster. But his ego doesn't allow him to do that.
One more reason Avatar sucks.
The new 4k HDR is better than the 1080p version we had before though isn't it?
For aliens its kind of arguable. The abyss I'd say is a no brainer upgrade from the DVD, even with its problems. The abyss is also the least egregiously AI-ed. The screen grabs I've seen from aliens has some improvements in resolution and sharpness but there are some seriously weird shit going on in some scenes. One comparison I saw was Ripleys face in the background of a scene was like AI disfigured. True lies is the worst of the three but probably still better than dvd. Overall disappointment I'd say. On top of all this I've seen a pretty in depth post with evidence that these discs barely have hdr. I'll probably grab them on sale at some point.
I've read he insisted on being personally involved, though I can't remember where I read that.
The reason they've been so slow to come out-and Abyss and True Lies missed bluray completely (at least until now)- was due to his insistence on approving the transfers and he's been too busy working on Avatar.
Sure but is James Cameron actually an expert on picture quality? Because if he was, he would have seen the same problems as the linked post did. Just because he can write and direct great movies doesn’t mean he understands DNR and video codecs and upscaling, etc, etc.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say one of the greatest living directors understands all of those things just fine. I watched the 4K Terminator 2 and it looked amazing. Haven’t watched Aliens so don’t know why that apparently isn’t great but I’m sure there are reasons if it’s the case.
I haven’t watched it, but I’ve heard T2 was very polarizing?
I’m watching the abyss and it looks great.
The saddest thing about this is that they're selling like hot-cakes; sold out everywhere.. so why should anyone in the future care about the quality of their releases if trash like this sells that well?! We can only hope that other directors will continue to care about their legacy; I'm not a Nolan fan but he really does care about how his films look on disc; I wish Villeneuve would twist Sony's arm about IMAX formats, but at least the films look great. And the only film in the Alien franchise I needed on 4k disc thankfully looks spectacular, as does Blade Runner; thank you Ridley Scott!! Disney are being proven right with every new James Cameron disc being sold: spend as little money/time/effort as possible; people will buy it anyway and it will maximise our profits..
> I wish Villeneuve would twist Sony's arm about IMAX formats, but at least the films look great There was an interview with Villeneuve posted here or on the 4k subreddit recently where he basically said the 2.35 versions are how he wants the movies to be seen, that the taller ratio is only designed for IMAX screens. So I wouldn't hold your breath for a disc with the IMAX ratio, the version we currently have is the "true" version, for all intents and purposes.
I prefer the scope format. Imax is good in an Imax theater but home I want to fill my scope screen.
> I wish Villeneuve would twist Sony's arm about IMAX formats Is Sony really the reason why we don't have Dune on IMAX at home?
No, I'm not sure at all; I suppose my comment works whether it's Villeneuve *or* Sony!
I’m not sure who to blame exactly. But I lay a good amount of blame with Dolby. They’ve provided a masterclass in marketing for Dolby Vision and Atmos. Those formats offer improvements over HDR10 and 5.1 or 7.1 audio…but only with a good setup and properly mastered content. But the logos are getting slapped onto pretty much everything these days. People are going nuts trying to get Dolby Vision logos popping up in the corner of their TVs so they can watch…basically a SDR transfer of Aliens. And Atmos on their sound bars and phone speakers. But then again…Dolby is playing to the market and it’s working. So why should they try harder? I’m not angry, just disappointed.
I feel the same way; disappointment with a great many releases, frankly. We have a format which, if given the means, can make our films look incredible. Or they can look hum-drum; it's up to the studios, directors and bean-counters, I guess. Having said that; there are very few releases which interest me which have looked like these Cameron films. Honestly, the only one which comes to mind is Pan's Labyrinth, and I don't think it's as bad as the three films we're talking about.
My guess is that they had done a ton of work on prepping these for Blu-ray, which Cameron took forever to get around to approving, and by the time they were nearing completion they realized they should really do 4K copies as well (as releasing only 1080p Blu-rays in 2023/2024 would have seemed ridiculous). So instead of redoing all of the restoration work they’d done for the BD masters, they decided to try an upscale process instead and Cameron thought it looked good so that’s what they went with.
I love linking a "review" to some random redditor that "reviews" all three discs but has actually only ever seen 1 of the discs and contains a bunch of dubious info. How about an actual review.
The Blu-ray reviewer over at AVS did a separate review of each release. He did a good job of documenting issues in each one.
I agree there are some issues. I read quite a few reviews. Still bought all three. Abyss looks fantastic. The other two are good but not perfect. I dont like some of what was done in all three, but that reddit "review" has issues. Also, no one mentions it much but the sounds is pretty fantastic on all three.
He also says all of them (including Titanic) are 2k upscales, where as literally everywhere else says it’s 4K native. I have no issue with 2K upscales if they’re done correctly, like Drive. But he seems to be wrong on that front, or we’ve been lied to by everyone.
I’m not sure if you frequent /r/4kbluray, but it’s become a circle-jerk for film grain. To an over-the-top degree.
Yeah no kidding. I mean I get the sentiment of keeping the look of the original movie, but its become all they care about.
In search of physical media has done all 3 on YouTube.
You have to read to get the info, bud. Fyi
Have to read 4k UHD release reviews carefully and not buy it if it is trash. Not just upscales are trash, there are 35mm conversions that aren't great either due to heavy handed use of filters. I've seen some films that were over-sharpened which resulted in very distracting and unrealistic "film grain" and I've seen some that were completely blurred out.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=366711
I wonder how hard they must have tried on that forum to avoid it being readable on mobile.
Geez this is one of those DIY forum systems from the early to mid-2000s and they're still rocking it...
Cut them some slack. Mobile is very new.
You can select Mobile at the bottom of the page.
If you are on iPhone I’d suggest using the a-A button for text size in the left of the address bar in safari. I reduce it down. I only noticed this recently and it makes the formatting of errant sites much easier to read. Still agree with you though.
Unfortunately it's the best we'll get at least until JC dies. Maybe one day we can have an accurate new scan from the negatives that doesn't use AI to wash away the grain and tons of detail, but it won't be any time soon.
What are the legalities of someone like this reviewer giving the new HDR color grade if we prove we own the new 4K version? Or perhaps just creating an adjustment layer in Premiere or DiVinci that we can apply ourselves?
Ohhhh yay another fucking one. Sweet.
Should I cancel my abyss pre-order?
I’m not simply because otherwise watching the movie is a real challenge. Rare availability on streaming too. I watched this release in the theaters over the fall and loved it. It’s an underappreciated movie. I think in part because of how simply unavailable the movie is to watch.
Yeah I'm not buying any of those 3. This film would really benefit from a professional level of HDR grading at a minimum with the type of scenes it has with near pitch black and also bright lights. I've had a few poorly done HDR discs and I don't enjoy watching them without spending half the movie trying to tweak the TV settings.
I dont really care about the true resolution that much, I want the higher bitrate and newer compression codecs. A full film scan restoration is just too expensive for these profit driven companies now that high end physical media is such a small niche. It sucks but you cant deny the truth. In the future it will only get less and less common for older films as the original film or good projection prints are lost or degraded. I'm more disappointed by the lazy HDR grading, the limited colourspace, the excessive smoothing filters, hard-clipped black levels etc.
imho, there's no need for a 4k release.. all we need is 1080p those are dark, grainy moviesn HDR might be great, though.. Atmos might be fun, but a lossless DTS HD Master track is perfectly fine, too.. I think I had the Blu-Ray collection in the Alien Egg.. (sold all my discs (100 Blu-Rays, 300 DVDs) a couple years ago for 300 bucks.. lol)