|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 11, 2018 0:29:29 GMT -5
Caped wonder's website released that there's a 4k version of STM on the way--- but, honestly.... I would trade that in for SII extended tv cut on blu. (but then again, I don't have a 4k tv)
I hope this and the Supergirl release isn't the whole 'surprise' teased for the 40th from WB.... I'm greedy. I want MORE!
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 11, 2018 11:16:37 GMT -5
I want more but I’m happy with this too. Seen a lot of anniversaries arrive and they didn’t do jack. I think the thing to do is really spread the word and help these two releases sell well. That way we will get more. It really needs to be the year of Superman though. Lots of Superman anniversaries and big milestones.
Seems like WB is once again going back to the well to embrace the Reeve era and is moving away from the Snyder era. Started with JL after BvS didn’t turn out the way they hoped. Ghostbusters 35th anniversary is coming up so I hope that gets a nice updated release too.
Maybe I’m getting old but as the new stuff isn’t doing it for me I’m feeling nostalgic for that era when everything wasn’t as formulaic because they were still figuring out the blockbuster formula.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2018 17:05:54 GMT -5
I wonder if this film would benefit all that much from a 4K transfer - Superman The Movie was filmed with such a soft focus that I can't imagine all that much detail showing through. Maybe the better dynamic range will make it worthwhile?
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Jul 11, 2018 20:38:55 GMT -5
I want more but I’m happy with this too. Seen a lot of anniversaries arrive and they didn’t do jack. I think the thing to do is really spread the word and help these two releases sell well. That way we will get more. It really needs to be the year of Superman though. Lots of Superman anniversaries and big milestones. Seems like WB is once again going back to the well to embrace the Reeve era and is moving away from the Snyder era. Started with JL after BvS didn’t turn out the way they hoped. Ghostbusters 35th anniversary is coming up so I hope that gets a nice updated release too. Maybe I’m getting old but as the new stuff isn’t doing it for me I’m feeling nostalgic for that era when everything wasn’t as formulaic because they were still figuring out the blockbuster formula. WB are becoming Reeve Only People!!! |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 11, 2018 22:58:45 GMT -5
I wonder if this film would benefit all that much from a 4K transfer - Superman The Movie was filmed with such a soft focus that I can't imagine all that much detail showing through. Maybe the better dynamic range will make it worthwhile? Good point! |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Jul 14, 2018 22:32:33 GMT -5
Really stoked about this news  The blu rays were mastered from a 2K Interpositive scan(1 generation removed from the original negative). On a purely technical level this new scan should refine the grain structure(eliminating the digital artefacts that were present on the blu ray) and provide more latitude with regards to dynamic range. But on an aesthetic level: Technical studies conducted in the early 2000s concluded that 35mm release prints(such as those used in the 70s) contained roughly 500-600 lines per picture height(lph) …..the equivalent of 720p. For a flick like STM, the lack of sharpness actually helps to maintain the illusion. More sharpness means that you can clearly see the distinction between the foreground and background plates ect…...which ruins the effect. I have the original 1979 VHS and in some weird way....I can enjoy that more than watching the blu ray(upscaled to 4K with the sony1000es) on my 110 wide projection screen......simply because of the aforementioned contradiction. An example would be when Supes hops off the balcony in Lois's flat.The background plate of New York was produced by rear projection......and on the blu ray you can clearly see this. On the 1979 VHS tape , the lower resolution masks that effect......and it actually looks more realistic as a real skyline. Sometimes less is more |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 8:42:19 GMT -5
An example would be when Supes hops off the balcony in Lois's flat.The background plate of New York was produced by rear projection......and on the blu ray you can clearly see this. On the 1979 VHS tape , the lower resolution masks that effect......and it actually looks more realistic as a real skyline. Sometimes less is more Yes! Even on the DVDs, I was left wondering how that effect was done. Then I watched the Blu-ray on my projector, and the effect was totally ruined. I'm curious how it would have looked on an original 35MM release print - would it have been convincing with all the extra film grain? |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jul 15, 2018 9:51:45 GMT -5
An example would be when Supes hops off the balcony in Lois's flat.The background plate of New York was produced by rear projection......and on the blu ray you can clearly see this. On the 1979 VHS tape , the lower resolution masks that effect......and it actually looks more realistic as a real skyline. Sometimes less is more Yes! Even on the DVDs, I was left wondering how that effect was done. Then I watched the Blu-ray on my projector, and the effect was totally ruined. I'm curious how it would have looked on an original 35MM release print - would it have been convincing with all the extra film grain? I still don't know how they got from superman flying away to clark knocking on the door in one cut. Lois walks from the balcony to the door in one unbroken cut. How the heck was that done? |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 10:13:34 GMT -5
I want more but I’m happy with this too. Seen a lot of anniversaries arrive and they didn’t do jack. I think the thing to do is really spread the word and help these two releases sell well. That way we will get more. It really needs to be the year of Superman though. Lots of Superman anniversaries and big milestones. Seems like WB is once again going back to the well to embrace the Reeve era and is moving away from the Snyder era. Started with JL after BvS didn’t turn out the way they hoped. Ghostbusters 35th anniversary is coming up so I hope that gets a nice updated release too. Maybe I’m getting old but as the new stuff isn’t doing it for me I’m feeling nostalgic for that era when everything wasn’t as formulaic because they were still figuring out the blockbuster formula. WB are becoming Reeve Only People!!! I’m not really a Reeve only person but...sh!t...they aren’t giving us any very good alternatives! |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 10:19:18 GMT -5
Really stoked about this news The blu rays were mastered from a 2K Interpositive scan(1 generation removed from the original negative). On a purely technical level this new scan should refine the grain structure(eliminating the digital artefacts that were present on the blu ray) and provide more latitude with regards to dynamic range. But on an aesthetic level: Technical studies conducted in the early 2000s concluded that 35mm release prints(such as those used in the 70s) contained roughly 500-600 lines per picture height(lph) …..the equivalent of 720p. For a flick like STM, the lack of sharpness actually helps to maintain the illusion. More sharpness means that you can clearly see the distinction between the foreground and background plates ect…...which ruins the effect. I have the original 1979 VHS and in some weird way....I can enjoy that more than watching the blu ray(upscaled to 4K with the sony1000es) on my 110 wide projection screen......simply because of the aforementioned contradiction. An example would be when Supes hops off the balcony in Lois's flat.The background plate of New York was produced by rear projection......and on the blu ray you can clearly see this. On the 1979 VHS tape , the lower resolution masks that effect......and it actually looks more realistic as a real skyline. Sometimes less is more The movies from that era were never meant to be shown in HD. Like you said the limitations of the medium hid the seams. Everything from wires to matte lines. It’s one of the things that actually keeps me from rebuying a lot of old optical fx heavy movies on Blu-ray. Some I have to have it others I’m content with on dvd. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 15, 2018 10:32:36 GMT -5
Yes! Even on the DVDs, I was left wondering how that effect was done. Then I watched the Blu-ray on my projector, and the effect was totally ruined. I'm curious how it would have looked on an original 35MM release print - would it have been convincing with all the extra film grain? I still don't know how they got from superman flying away to clark knocking on the door in one cut. Lois walks from the balcony to the door in one unbroken cut. How the heck was that done? My first viewing was on a big screen (I was very lucky) with '70mm' and all the shots using green screen made the backgrounds look pretty blurry compared with the foreground detail. At the time I was expecting Star Wars- level sharpness of backgrounds, so I admit that in some shots in the fx department I was a little disappointed, but the rest of the film was such an unexpected surprise, that STM was much more than just a movie with one big effect to me. That unbroken shot is so amazing- that, and many other shots that I feel that Donner's ambition and push for perfection has made it a classic. Newsweek magazine even touched upon it- the cutaway could EASILY have been shot in two takes (as many times other shots could have been done the same), but it's that ambition that takes it to another level. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 10:52:05 GMT -5
I still don't know how they got from superman flying away to clark knocking on the door in one cut. Lois walks from the balcony to the door in one unbroken cut. How the heck was that done? My first viewing was on a big screen (I was very lucky) with '70mm' and all the shots using green screen made the backgrounds look pretty blurry compared with the foreground detail. At the time I was expecting Star Wars- level sharpness of backgrounds, so I admit that in some shots in the fx department I was a little disappointed, but the rest of the film was such an unexpected surprise, that STM was much more than just a movie with one big effect to me. That unbroken shot is so amazing- that, and many other shots that I feel that Donner's ambition and push for perfection has made it a classic. Newsweek magazine even touched upon it- the cutaway could EASILY have been shot in two takes (as many times other shots could have been done the same), but it's that ambition that takes it to another level. That’s what made STM better than the rest at least visually. The Salkind sequels were always bettering the techniques but they never pushed the boundaries of what to do with the technology. Donner didn’t want to be limited in the kinds of shots and camera angles he could do and got creative. Lester’s stuff was more standard and flat. Even Jeannot Szwarc tried to be more creative visually imo. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jul 15, 2018 12:59:29 GMT -5
I was also lucky enough to see STM.on.the big screen. It was my first time ever in a cinema. I was 5 and it was back in 1978. It's true: back then, going to a cinema was like riding in a Rolls Royce. I was totally blown away.
I also remember seeing S2 on the big screen. Bizarrely, South Africa got S2 ahead of many other countries. I remember being totally spellbound. Any flaws and Donner vs Lester was totally a non issue. I remember the audience clapping and cheering when those newspapers started blowing and Superman reappeared.
Those movies were not made to be watched over and over and dissected.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jul 15, 2018 13:04:24 GMT -5
My first viewing was on a big screen (I was very lucky) with '70mm' and all the shots using green screen made the backgrounds look pretty blurry compared with the foreground detail. At the time I was expecting Star Wars- level sharpness of backgrounds, so I admit that in some shots in the fx department I was a little disappointed, but the rest of the film was such an unexpected surprise, that STM was much more than just a movie with one big effect to me. That unbroken shot is so amazing- that, and many other shots that I feel that Donner's ambition and push for perfection has made it a classic. Newsweek magazine even touched upon it- the cutaway could EASILY have been shot in two takes (as many times other shots could have been done the same), but it's that ambition that takes it to another level. That’s what made STM better than the rest at least visually. The Salkind sequels were always bettering the techniques but they never pushed the boundaries of what to do with the technology. Donner didn’t want to be limited in the kinds of shots and camera angles he could do and got creative. Lester’s stuff was more standard and flat. Even Jeannot Szwarc tried to be more creative visually imo. So how was that unbroken shot actually done? Was Lois actually alone, with the footage of Superman flying away added later? In other words, was Superman also part of the background, not just thf buildings? It's incredible when you think of it. Another shot which remains a mystery is the girl running towards the mirror in Contact. Still no idea how Zemeckis did that. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Jul 15, 2018 13:42:29 GMT -5
An example would be when Supes hops off the balcony in Lois's flat.The background plate of New York was produced by rear projection......and on the blu ray you can clearly see this. On the 1979 VHS tape , the lower resolution masks that effect......and it actually looks more realistic as a real skyline. Sometimes less is more Yes! Even on the DVDs, I was left wondering how that effect was done. Then I watched the Blu-ray on my projector, and the effect was totally ruined. I'm curious how it would have looked on an original 35MM release print - would it have been convincing with all the extra film grain? Yup....the shot of Supes flying away was accomplished by rear projection.So Margot Kidder was effectively watching a pre-shot movie of Chris Reeve taking off and flying into the distance. On my: 1979 VHS(NTSC-USA) 1981 VHS(PAL-UK) 1983 Laserdisc(USA) 1991 Laserdisc(1st Widescreen release-USA) The background of the New York skyline merges with the foreground of Lois's apartment more realistically than on the 2001 DVD and in particular ,the 2011 Blu ray. It's a contradiction to a degree.....the illusion is maintained if the sharpness is diminished. Increase the sharpness and the illusion is unmasked. i would wager this is also a problem for CGI laden flicks of the last 20 years too. i personally don't think the original Lord Of The Rings hold up well in HD.......you can clearly see the rigid cumbersome movements of the attacking CGI Uruk-ai's in the Two Towers or the lumbering CGI Orcs in Return Of The King.Takes me right out of the movie. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 13:54:44 GMT -5
Everything in the background is projected. Including Superman.
I remember shows and magazines back then with the title movie magic or describing special effects as movie magic and it really was true. There were multiple techniques used and most people didn’t know how it was all done. Now your average ten year old understands it because we see one way doing things used the most. To me that really shows that the “magic” is dead. Digital effects can look great but it’s not really movie magic if you know how the trick is done. Miss those days.
Special effects are still a draw but not in the same way. It’s more about how good they look instead of the wonder of “how did they do that?” It’s crazy to think about how much the avancements in technology not only changed the industry but slow down or kill certain genres.
One could argue that it was cgi and then later the rise of superheroes that killed the classic 80s action heroes we tend to think of. Michael Keaton’s rubber muscle suit bypassed what Arnold did with hard work in the gym. We went from Norris and Lee to Keanu Reeves bullet time. We went from real squibs and explosions to digital ones. What Van Damme and his stunt men did with physical ability can be replaced with digital doubles. We went from Sly to Damon. Now any actor can be an action hero. Willis was kind of a middle ground back then while Rock is the closest thing to a throwback we have now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 13:58:31 GMT -5
Yes! Even on the DVDs, I was left wondering how that effect was done. Then I watched the Blu-ray on my projector, and the effect was totally ruined. I'm curious how it would have looked on an original 35MM release print - would it have been convincing with all the extra film grain? I still don't know how they got from superman flying away to clark knocking on the door in one cut. Lois walks from the balcony to the door in one unbroken cut. How the heck was that done? Superman in that shot is projected and part of the background. There are two elements in that shot, Lois in the foreground and the projected background that includes Reeve and the city/terrace. Edit - Sorry, I missed that other people addressed this already. Sorry! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 14:08:13 GMT -5
i would wager this is also a problem for CGI laden flicks of the last 20 years too. i personally don't think the original Lord Of The Rings hold up well in HD.......you can clearly see the rigid cumbersome movements of the attacking CGI Uruk-ai's in the Two Towers or the lumbering CGI Orcs in Return Of The King.Takes me right out of the movie. I've heard others voice this same complaint on Lord of the Rings, though I remember the CGI looking pretty dodgy in the theaters as well. The effects that really bothered me on Blu-Ray were the blue screen/compositing effects. Yuck. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Jul 15, 2018 14:20:42 GMT -5
Everything in the background is projected. Including Superman. I remember shows and magazines back then with the title movie magic or describing special effects as movie magic and it really was true. There were multiple techniques used and most people didn’t know how it was all done. Now your average ten year old understands it because we see one way doing things used the most. To me that really shows that the “magic” is dead. Digital effects can look great but it’s not really movie magic if you know how the trick is done. Miss those days. Special effects are still a draw but not in the same way. It’s more about how good they look instead of the wonder of “how did they do that?” It’s crazy to think about how much the avancements in technology not only changed the industry but slow down or kill certain genres. One could argue that it was cgi and then later the rise of superheroes that killed the classic 80s action heroes we tend to think of. Michael Keaton’s rubber muscle suit bypassed what Arnold did with hard work in the gym. We went from Norris and Lee to Keanu Reeves bullet time. We went from real squibs and explosions to digital ones. What Van Damme and his stunt men did with physical ability can be replaced with digital doubles. We went from Sly to Damon. Now any actor can be an action hero. Willis was kind of a middle ground back then while Rock is the closest thing to a throwback we have now. Totally agreed. I will give you an interesting example. The much derided live Spiderman TV show of the late 70s involved a real guy climbing a real building with a then revolutionary /portable 35mm film rig attached to his head so you could get a first person view. Yes Spidey looks a bit slow as he scales those heights.....but fuck....that is one heck of a stunt.....and that show was full of such stunts....one of which where he actually climbed up the Empire State Building. Nowadays you get people who get more of a kick out of watching a digital Spidey climbing up a digital building doing all the famous Spidey comic poses …...but it does not exist in the real world...it's just 1 and 0's on a computer......it looks cool...but it is fake as fuck. Sure the 70s Spidey was less cool......but he was real. I will take that any day of the week. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 14:25:46 GMT -5
i would wager this is also a problem for CGI laden flicks of the last 20 years too. i personally don't think the original Lord Of The Rings hold up well in HD.......you can clearly see the rigid cumbersome movements of the attacking CGI Uruk-ai's in the Two Towers or the lumbering CGI Orcs in Return Of The King.Takes me right out of the movie. I've heard others voice this same complaint on Lord of the Rings, though I remember the CGI looking pretty dodgy in the theaters as well. The effects that really bothered me on Blu-Ray were the blue screen/compositing effects. Yuck. That’s the problem with cgi if it’s not incredible to begin with. Cgi is always advancing but so is the quality of the picture. I didn’t think the original Jumanjis cgi was very good in 1995 but I really cringe now when I see it in HD. Been a while since I’ve watched the prequels but some shots probably have a cartoony looking quality. Blades another one. The CGI never looked great but now in hi def it looks considerably worse. Even the ashing/skeleton effects. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Jul 15, 2018 14:31:10 GMT -5
I was also lucky enough to see STM.on.the big screen. It was my first time ever in a cinema. I was 5 and it was back in 1978. It's true: back then, going to a cinema was like riding in a Rolls Royce. I was totally blown away. I also remember seeing S2 on the big screen. Bizarrely, South Africa got S2 ahead of many other countries. I remember being totally spellbound. Any flaws and Donner vs Lester was totally a non issue. I remember the audience clapping and cheering when those newspapers started blowing and Superman reappeared. Those movies were not made to be watched over and over and dissected. Absolutely. That was part of the magic.....the fact that you could not see these flicks at home...….you had to go and line up in those long ques and effectively memorise them once you exited the cinema. In a cinema, you can't fast forward or rewind or pause.....you just gotta take it all in.....and if it's something as mesmerising as Superman or Star Wars......well that is an experience that can no longer be replicated in the current environment where flicks are available to buy on home video literally weeks after exiting the theaters. I would also add that home viewing back then(in the 70s or early 80s) on small CRT TVs obviously never held a candle to big screen 35mm or 70mm presentations. Now you can watch better presentations on Blu ray or UHD....than what you see in the local multiplex. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 14:31:19 GMT -5
Everything in the background is projected. Including Superman. I remember shows and magazines back then with the title movie magic or describing special effects as movie magic and it really was true. There were multiple techniques used and most people didn’t know how it was all done. Now your average ten year old understands it because we see one way doing things used the most. To me that really shows that the “magic” is dead. Digital effects can look great but it’s not really movie magic if you know how the trick is done. Miss those days. Special effects are still a draw but not in the same way. It’s more about how good they look instead of the wonder of “how did they do that?” It’s crazy to think about how much the avancements in technology not only changed the industry but slow down or kill certain genres. One could argue that it was cgi and then later the rise of superheroes that killed the classic 80s action heroes we tend to think of. Michael Keaton’s rubber muscle suit bypassed what Arnold did with hard work in the gym. We went from Norris and Lee to Keanu Reeves bullet time. We went from real squibs and explosions to digital ones. What Van Damme and his stunt men did with physical ability can be replaced with digital doubles. We went from Sly to Damon. Now any actor can be an action hero. Willis was kind of a middle ground back then while Rock is the closest thing to a throwback we have now. Totally agreed. I will give you an interesting example. The much derided live Spiderman TV show of the late 70s involved a real guy climbing a real building with a then revolutionary /portable 35mm film rig attached to his head so you could get a first person view. Yes Spidey looks a bit slow as he scales those heights.....but frack....that is one heck of a stunt.....and that show was full of such stunts....one of which where he actually climbed up the Empire State Building. Nowadays you get people who get more of a kick out of watching a digital Spidey climbing up a digital building doing all the famous Spidey comic poses …...but it does not exist in the real world...it's just 1 and 0's on a computer......it looks cool...but it is fake as frack. Sure the 70s Spidey was less cool......but he was real. I will take that any day of the week. Yeah I know exactly the shots you’re talking about. There are some shots that when you can’t see the cable/harness it looks incredibly impressive for 70s television. Stan Lee didn’t like the show but I thought it had its moments. I’ve wanted Marvel studios to give Hammond a cameo in one of the new movies. Maybe as one of Peters science teachers. That would be great. |
|
dejan
New Member
Posts: 850
|
Post by dejan on Jul 15, 2018 14:43:19 GMT -5
Totally agreed. I will give you an interesting example. The much derided live Spiderman TV show of the late 70s involved a real guy climbing a real building with a then revolutionary /portable 35mm film rig attached to his head so you could get a first person view. Yes Spidey looks a bit slow as he scales those heights.....but frack....that is one heck of a stunt.....and that show was full of such stunts....one of which where he actually climbed up the Empire State Building. Nowadays you get people who get more of a kick out of watching a digital Spidey climbing up a digital building doing all the famous Spidey comic poses …...but it does not exist in the real world...it's just 1 and 0's on a computer......it looks cool...but it is fake as frack. Sure the 70s Spidey was less cool......but he was real. I will take that any day of the week. Yeah I know exactly the shots you’re talking about. There are some shots that when you can’t see the cable/harness it looks incredibly impressive for 70s television. Stan Lee didn’t like the show but I thought it had its moments. I’ve wanted Marvel studios to give Hammond a cameo in one of the new movies. Maybe as one of Peters science teachers. That would be great. I have been steadily acquiring the Japanese laserdiscs(which were only ever released in Japan) of the live TV 1970s Spidey show. They have their weaknesses.....but also some very impressive moments......which is definitely amplified by the advantage of resolution afforded by laserdisc relative to VHS.....but still less sharp than HD....which of course maintains that all important illusion. Going back to Superman....Chris Reeve did some incredible work....when he takes off at the prison or when he shoots up to save Lois past the pimp and his chicks(ahem!) Sure it may not be fast like the rocket effect take offs(and landings-Superman Returns) in MOS.....but those Reeves take offs are still real....and I think your brain registers that on some sub conscious level. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 15, 2018 17:03:17 GMT -5
Snyder’s films are the biggest offenders although SR was guilty of it too. You see some wire landings in both but they don’t look nearly as good. It’s not even subconscious because in those take offs it’s obviously a digital double. In BVS you see very few mid range shots of Superman flying. It’s like Snyder finds the flying scenes embarrassing or corny. I’m sure some were cut for time but even in the extended cut you usually see him take off and land with the occasional wide shot thrown in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2018 18:11:20 GMT -5
Batman V Superman actually has one of my favorite flying moments - the long shot that follows Clark and Lois after Lois was pushed from the skyscraper - it gets me every time. It leaves me feeling like a bystander, trying to capture the moment on my own camera and I can barely keep up. It just gave it a very real quality vs the typical medium and close shots, and gave Clark a gentle quality to his flight compared to the earlier sonic boom flying sequences.
|
|
