Ok, so there's the 4k STM, but.... I want MORE!

[Deleted]

Maybe if Whedon gets another shot, he'll be the wise-cracking sidekick. 

[Metallo]

Why would Whedon be dumb enough to work for the sh!tfactory that is DC films when he’s got other more promising jobs lined up and has a chance to go back to the Marvel team?

[Deleted]

Jul 20, 2018 19:49:17 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Why would Whedon be dumb enough to work for the sh!tfactory that is DC films when he’s got other more promising jobs lined up and has a chance to go back to the Marvel team?

For real? I thought he was going back to television. What's he got going on? 

[Metallo]

He’s said he’s got some films in development but the most recent announcement was a reboot of Buffy.

[dejan]

So I nerded out(more than I usually do) and did a 6 way split test using my 1080p  projection system on every(or nearly every) official STM home video release to date.



Using my 1080p projector(projecting in the 4:3 aspect ratio to retain native fidelity to the source material) I viewed the balcony scene from STM(from the moment Lois looks at her watch to the point where Supes and Lois fly past the statue of liberty and ascend into the clouds) using(in the following order):





The 1979 VHS(NTSC)



The 1981 VHS(PAL)



The 1983 Laserdisc(NTSC)



The 1991 Laserdisc(NTSC)



The 2001 DVD




The 2011 Blu ray.





Actually took a couple of hours with a few breaks in-between .



My personal conclusions in aesthetical(how well is the illusion maintained) as well as technical(picture quality) terms:



The 1979 VHS is very dark in the darkest scenes with almost complete loss of shadow detail. Looks like it was telecined from a 16mm(or even 8mm) non anamorphic reduction(from the 35mm original) print.

So when Supes stands on the balcony with his arms crossed("oh I am sorry did you have plans this evening") the contours of the buildings that form the NYC background are practically indistinguishable

…...but the illumination from the windows of the same building is very intense....almost like whoever was mastering this telecine in 79' was jacking up the contrast levels to the max(almost like HDR before HDR—lol!)In terms of the picture quality it is poor(especially by 2018 standards) but in terms of the illusion of depicting a real cityscape backdrop.....well it does work as Superman is well rendered in the foreground and the background does blend in seamlessly.

Someone watching this back in in 79/80 and who would not have known better...would probably have thought that Reeve was standing on a real balcony on a high rise somewhere in NYC.



Technical : 2/10

Aesthetic : 10/10



The 1981 PAL VHS was the first release here in the UK and is superior(although that is not difficult) to the 1979 NTSC VHS tape in every regard. Amazing to see how this embryonic technology was making big strides forward even back then.

Looks like it was telecined from a 35mm print as you can see the cigarette burn marks (that denote 35mm reel changes) at various points. Colors are well rendered too as opposed to the slightly desaturated look of the 79’ VHS tape. In fact such is the quality of the transfer that you can see the increased grain levels when Supes scans Lois’s lungs(due to this being an optical dupe).

In terms of the city scape behind Supes as he stands on the balcony……you can clearly make out the individual buildings this time but again…… the contrast levels are high meaning that you do get some overblown whites resonating from the illumination of the windows/lights/cars.

Aesthetically this creates a nice sensation…..you can’t quite tell if it is a projected backdrop or if it is real……but it is already starting to be borderline.

VHS being VHS you suffer from image instability as well as chroma bleed so I conclude:

Aesthetics: 8/10

Technical : 5/10







The 1983 laserdisk is a revelation compared to both the 1981 and 1979 VHS tapes. I did not realise it before but this is actually the same master as that used for the 1981 UK PAL VHS. Contrast levels are lower meaning less clipping of the whites. But image stability is excellent as is resolution(and not far off the blu ray as I mentioned before).

Regarding the balcony, you start to get an impression that the NYC cityscape is indeed a projected background but not to the point that it is a distraction. This transfer retains just the right amount of balance between foreground and background to preserve the illusion of a highrise backdrop.

Obviously this is still Pan & Scan which keeps it from rising up the technical scale but this is still an excellent transfer(even by 2018 standards).

Aesthetics: 8/10

Technical : 6/10





Wow…..watching the 1991 laserdisk is a revelation having just overdosed on 3 Pan and Scan transfers!

It’s fantastic to see the entire widescreen scope of the image open up for the first time….but it does have it’s drawbacks. Image detail is compromised as less resolution is utilised to accommodate the 2:35 aspect ratio on a 4:3 platform(especially compared to the 1983 laserdisc). Also the colors are desaturated compared to both the 81’ VHS and 83’ laserdisc. Looks like they used an ageing(at this point 12 years old) 35mm interpositive for this transfer(which is technically higher in resolution than a release print) which also has an orange teal to the image…..a tell-tale sign of an untreated interpositive in use.

Regarding the balcony scene and the NYC backdrop…..what you gain in widescreen breadth….you lose in image detail which does preserve the illusion.

Aesthetic: 7:10

Technical : 5:10



The 2001 DVD……and the birth of the modern home viewing environment on 16:9 panels. I remember watching this for the first time in late 2001 and being blown away by the picture quality.

But yeah…..I could not help but notice that the background is projected which is detrimental to the the preservation of the illusion. Technically(for 2001) it looked fantastic…..not so much by 2018 standards though……some digital jaggies are present and there are a few pixelizing artefacts lurking too( I dropped down to 480p on my 1080p projector to avoid any upscaling anomalies) .

Aesthetics 5:10

Technical :6:10



Which brings us to the 2011(theatrical) blu ray. I rescaled to 1080p and 16:9 for this one.

What else is there left to say. Hands down this is the best home video technical transfer to date …..but it is not without it’s faults. There are digital artefacts present(possibly caused by the digital scrubbing of dirt on the image).

The blu ray is probably sharper than any release print(be it 35mm or 70mm) that we saw back in the 70s or 80s.And you heard me right….sharper than the 70mm release prints….which were just blow ups of the 35mm negative…..and which still suffered generational loss with each print being struck. Back then, 70mm blow ups were principally utilised to take advantage of the 6 track magnetic stripes that could generate discreet surround soundtracks. The picture quality was of secondary importance…..other than the fact that it was much larger….so more immersive but not necessarily with any more detail.

In terms of the NYC backdrop on the blu ray……yeah it’s just too obvious that it is a projected background….you can even see the weave / judder inherent with rear projection. Would you have noticed this on a big screen back in 78/79.Probably not…. because 35mm release prints were barely above 720p in terms of actual resolution…that may shock some people…but scientific studies that researched the efficacy of the 35mm photochemical workflow confirmed this back in 2002.

So that projected backdrop would have been at least partially obscured in a 35mm release print…..just as the 1983 laserdisc obscures it. Also a 1978 cinema going audience would have been blown away by the big screen experience(compared to their cruddy 25 inch CRT tvs—lol).

Technical : 9/10



Aesthetic : 5/10



So looking forward to the UHD…..that’s a tough one…….it may be subjecting STM to the type of visual scrutiny that Unsworth would not have predicted back in 1977.

[Metallo]

Wow that’s a great in depth comparison/analysis. I think you covered most if not all of the majors releases of the theatrical cut.

Just goes to show that when people say old movies don’t hold up in terms of the technical aspects it’s not entirely fair.

The films hold up to a point but they were never meant to be enhanced by modern technology that show the seams. One of the drawbacks of everything being clearer, sharper, higher def, etc. one reason I have no desire to own every old movie in 4K

Explains why I notice things now I never noticed in these movies as a kid. It wasn’t just about me.

When Star Trek TNG finally got a Blu-ray release I wondered about all kinds of things like that. The effects were updated but I even wondered if some of the make ups and prosthetics would hold up to scrutiny.

[dejan]

Jul 21, 2018 8:24:15 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Wow that’s a great in depth comparison/analysis. I think you covered most if not all of the majors releases of the theatrical cut.

Just goes to show that when people say old movies don’t hold up in terms of the technical aspects it’s not entirely fair.

The films hold up to a point but they were never meant to be enhanced by modern technology that show the seams. One of the drawbacks of everything being clearer, sharper, higher def, etc. one reason I have no desire to own every old movie in 4K

Explains why I notice things now I never noticed in these movies as a kid. It wasn’t just about me.

When Star Trek TNG finally got a Blu-ray release I wondered about all kinds of things like that. The effects were updated but I even wondered if some of the make ups and prosthetics would hold up to scrutiny.

Thanks - Nice to know someone is interested in this stuff.

I have to confess, I only realised the inverse relationship that a sharper image has with the integrity of the fabric of a catalogue title.....after I obtained a 4k projector.
It's something the marketing divisions of the high end Tvs and Projectors ect are not willing to divulge. That a sharper image does not necessarily amplify the aesthetic quality of an older flick .In fact it can have a detrimental effect.

It's actually interesting that Supergirl is getting released next week on HD. There is a shot of her flying against a set of horses.....as well as the backdrop of Chicago....these are all fantastic shots that emphasise how skilled Roy Fields was when it came to optical compositing. I am hoping that the HD will uphold that illusion but logic dictates that the discrepancy between the foreground and background plates will be exacerbated by the increase in resolution......these shots looked cool on VHS and look good on the 2006 DVD. 

We will see.

[Metallo]

Yeah those are some of my favorite flying shots in the franchise. Whenever the film is criticized it’s often not brought up how good some of the special effects are.

For people who want films from that era updated in the newest best looking format I understand but be careful what you wish for because they might not hold up. Got to take the good with the bad in cases like that because they can only do so much before you’ve altered the film.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 21, 2018 2:48:50 GMT -5 dejan said:

So I nerded out(more than I usually do) and did a 6 way split test using my 1080p  projection system on every(or nearly every) official STM home video release to date.



Using my 1080p projector(projecting in the 4:3 aspect ratio to retain native fidelity to the source material) I viewed the balcony scene from STM(from the moment Lois looks at her watch to the point where Supes and Lois fly past the statue of liberty and ascend into the clouds) using(in the following order):





The 1979 VHS(NTSC)



The 1981 VHS(PAL)



The 1983 Laserdisc(NTSC)



The 1991 Laserdisc(NTSC)



The 2001 DVD




The 2011 Blu ray.





Actually took a couple of hours with a few breaks in-between .



My personal conclusions in aesthetical(how well is the illusion maintained) as well as technical(picture quality) terms:



The 1979 VHS is very dark in the darkest scenes with almost complete loss of shadow detail. Looks like it was telecined from a 16mm(or even 8mm) non anamorphic reduction(from the 35mm original) print.

So when Supes stands on the balcony with his arms crossed("oh I am sorry did you have plans this evening") the contours of the buildings that form the NYC background are practically indistinguishable

…...but the illumination from the windows of the same building is very intense....almost like whoever was mastering this telecine in 79' was jacking up the contrast levels to the max(almost like HDR before HDR—lol!)In terms of the picture quality it is poor(especially by 2018 standards) but in terms of the illusion of depicting a real cityscape backdrop.....well it does work as Superman is well rendered in the foreground and the background does blend in seamlessly.

Someone watching this back in in 79/80 and who would not have known better...would probably have thought that Reeve was standing on a real balcony on a high rise somewhere in NYC.



Technical : 2/10

Aesthetic : 10/10



The 1981 PAL VHS was the first release here in the UK and is superior(although that is not difficult) to the 1979 NTSC VHS tape in every regard. Amazing to see how this embryonic technology was making big strides forward even back then.

Looks like it was telecined from a 35mm print as you can see the cigarette burn marks (that denote 35mm reel changes) at various points. Colors are well rendered too as opposed to the slightly desaturated look of the 79’ VHS tape. In fact such is the quality of the transfer that you can see the increased grain levels when Supes scans Lois’s lungs(due to this being an optical dupe).

In terms of the city scape behind Supes as he stands on the balcony……you can clearly make out the individual buildings this time but again…… the contrast levels are high meaning that you do get some overblown whites resonating from the illumination of the windows/lights/cars.

Aesthetically this creates a nice sensation…..you can’t quite tell if it is a projected backdrop or if it is real……but it is already starting to be borderline.

VHS being VHS you suffer from image instability as well as chroma bleed so I conclude:

Aesthetics: 8/10

Technical : 5/10







The 1983 laserdisk is a revelation compared to both the 1981 and 1979 VHS tapes. I did not realise it before but this is actually the same master as that used for the 1981 UK PAL VHS. Contrast levels are lower meaning less clipping of the whites. But image stability is excellent as is resolution(and not far off the blu ray as I mentioned before).

Regarding the balcony, you start to get an impression that the NYC cityscape is indeed a projected background but not to the point that it is a distraction. This transfer retains just the right amount of balance between foreground and background to preserve the illusion of a highrise backdrop.

Obviously this is still Pan & Scan which keeps it from rising up the technical scale but this is still an excellent transfer(even by 2018 standards).

Aesthetics: 8/10

Technical : 6/10





Wow…..watching the 1991 laserdisk is a revelation having just overdosed on 3 Pan and Scan transfers!

It’s fantastic to see the entire widescreen scope of the image open up for the first time….but it does have it’s drawbacks. Image detail is compromised as less resolution is utilised to accommodate the 2:35 aspect ratio on a 4:3 platform(especially compared to the 1983 laserdisc). Also the colors are desaturated compared to both the 81’ VHS and 83’ laserdisc. Looks like they used an ageing(at this point 12 years old) 35mm interpositive for this transfer(which is technically higher in resolution than a release print) which also has an orange teal to the image…..a tell-tale sign of an untreated interpositive in use.

Regarding the balcony scene and the NYC backdrop…..what you gain in widescreen breadth….you lose in image detail which does preserve the illusion.

Aesthetic: 7:10

Technical : 5:10



The 2001 DVD……and the birth of the modern home viewing environment on 16:9 panels. I remember watching this for the first time in late 2001 and being blown away by the picture quality.

But yeah…..I could not help but notice that the background is projected which is detrimental to the the preservation of the illusion. Technically(for 2001) it looked fantastic…..not so much by 2018 standards though……some digital jaggies are present and there are a few pixelizing artefacts lurking too( I dropped down to 480p on my 1080p projector to avoid any upscaling anomalies) .

Aesthetics 5:10

Technical :6:10



Which brings us to the 2011(theatrical) blu ray. I rescaled to 1080p and 16:9 for this one.

What else is there left to say. Hands down this is the best home video technical transfer to date …..but it is not without it’s faults. There are digital artefacts present(possibly caused by the digital scrubbing of dirt on the image).

The blu ray is probably sharper than any release print(be it 35mm or 70mm) that we saw back in the 70s or 80s.And you heard me right….sharper than the 70mm release prints….which were just blow ups of the 35mm negative…..and which still suffered generational loss with each print being struck. Back then, 70mm blow ups were principally utilised to take advantage of the 6 track magnetic stripes that could generate discreet surround soundtracks. The picture quality was of secondary importance…..other than the fact that it was much larger….so more immersive but not necessarily with any more detail.

In terms of the NYC backdrop on the blu ray……yeah it’s just too obvious that it is a projected background….you can even see the weave / judder inherent with rear projection. Would you have noticed this on a big screen back in 78/79.Probably not…. because 35mm release prints were barely above 720p in terms of actual resolution…that may shock some people…but scientific studies that researched the efficacy of the 35mm photochemical workflow confirmed this back in 2002.

So that projected backdrop would have been at least partially obscured in a 35mm release print…..just as the 1983 laserdisc obscures it. Also a 1978 cinema going audience would have been blown away by the big screen experience(compared to their cruddy 25 inch CRT tvs—lol).

Technical : 9/10



Aesthetic : 5/10



So looking forward to the UHD…..that’s a tough one…….it may be subjecting STM to the type of visual scrutiny that Unsworth would not have predicted back in 1977.

That is a great review. I did see the original releases in the theatre on the bigscreen (I should have snuck in an audio recorder to capture the audience reactions way back when)- but the 'soft focus' of the backgrounds for the greenscreens was always noticeable and was never a perfect illusion, with expectations for fx through the roof with "Star Wars" and "Close Encounters" only a couple of years prior.

The magic of STM to me was the love and care of everything else onscreen- I never was quite convinced of the background fx in the movie, but what's ironic is that with newer superhero films, the CGI might make the fx more convincing, but the characters and the rest of the film might not be nearly as good. (and often aren't).

[dejan]

@cam


Could not agree more with you there regarding the fact that CGI looks cool but it comes at the expense of the other  elements that you referenced.

I also wanted to clarify my own stand point regarding the effect of the aesthetics in that balcony scene that I was referring to earlier(the foreground and background plates).
When you have great cinematography, editing ,acting/chemistry, music, pacing and storytelling , any slight deficiency in any one of these areas(i.e the projected background of NYC) is overcome by the effect of the collective whole.
In other words that balcony scene(along with the rest of the movie) is a classic.

Contrast that with the rather drab(sorry CAM I know you like SR ) scene on top of the Daily Planet with Routh and Bosworth or the equally truncated prison interview  with Cavill and Adams in MOS and you get the gist .

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 29, 2018 10:10:43 GMT -5 dejan said:

@cam


Could not agree more with you there regarding the fact that CGI looks cool but it comes at the expense of the other  elements that you referenced.

I also wanted to clarify my own stand point regarding the effect of the aesthetics in that balcony scene that I was referring to earlier(the foreground and background plates).
When you have great cinematography, editing ,acting/chemistry, music, pacing and storytelling , any slight deficiency in any one of these areas(i.e the projected background of NYC) is overcome by the effect of the collective whole.
In other words that balcony scene(along with the rest of the movie) is a classic.

Contrast that with the rather drab(sorry CAM I know you like SR ) scene on top of the Daily Planet with Routh and Bosworth or the equally truncated prison interview  with Cavill and Adams in MOS and you get the gist .

No worries. I'm totally fine with civil disagreements.

I do find SR fascinating (and underrated) because from a distance, it's the first time I'm aware of, where you had one great director continuing the work of another one while also remaking it, to a degree. I'm annoyed that it didn't hit closer to the mark creatively (more and more the Lex half of the movie really bogged down the film or at least was underwhelming)- but I do love a great number of sequences from it.

With STM- I thought that more than one backdrop and effect looked fake- or not quite convincing as a kid, but the eye candy and the whole package made it not matter. At the time comics weren't well-regarded, so to have a multi-million dollar picture devoted to a superhero made my jaw drop. (Now it's oddly commonplace). The Salkinds Brought the money to the table, but Donner of course made it magical.

[Metallo]

SR cherry picks from Donners films what it wants to use in a new film without recreating the tone. Most of what Singer took was some design cues, story beats, and the music. SRs problem is it’s trying to be modern (and failing at that to an extent) but lost what really made STM work at its core so it misses the mark from both directions.

Mad Max Fury Road is what Singer should have been among for. Keeping what worked but adjusting it for a modern film. It’s very much a mad max film but it’s also very much of today. Singer was like a kid taking someone else’s toys and making up his own adventure.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 29, 2018 20:31:45 GMT -5 Metallo said:

SR cherry picks from Donners films what it wants to use in a new film without recreating the tone. Most of what Singer took was some design cues, story beats, and the music. SRs problem is it’s trying to be modern (and failing at that to an extent) but lost what really made STM work at its core so it misses the mark from both directions.

Mad Max Fury Road is what Singer should have been among for. Keeping what worked but adjusting it for a modern film. It’s very much a mad max film but it’s also very much of today. Singer was like a kid taking someone else’s toys and making up his own adventure.

For me, SR was amazing- but, I've always said that it did have big flaws. For sure, with Singer giving up X-men 3- he did pay a price for what was a dream project for him.

Much like (what I feel was) the under-rated Star Trek: Generations, trying to take this project on with particular parameters always made it a tougher task to succeed in.

It would have been incredibly easy for Singer to jettison it all and do full-on reboot, but I admire the difficulty it had creatively to try to incorporate STM/SII as 'canon' so we didn't have to see the origin story again, but at the same time (a) sell you on the new cast immediately (or enough), and (b) move the story & characters forward at the same time.

Getting Routh I thought was an amazing find- with the physical requirements and evoking Reeve was an impossible task, but I do feel that Singer did it.

I think Singer (and his writers) did do something very smart in having Superman be away for several years to be able to: (1) re=introduce the DP cast and Ma Kent/etc. with fresh eyes, as he gets re-acquainted, so does the audience, and (2) it allowed creatively for Superman to have been away during stuff like 9/11 so that he could retain more of a sense of innocence and not seem foolish perhaps to some people if he was sort of 'in the real world'.

I do think SR works, but the tone is definitely different- but the heart is still there. It's at its core a bittersweet romance, within the STM Donner design and Reeve mold.
The world is darker under Singer, but there are still flashes of light and humor (Jimmy Olsen and some very nice comedic character moments here and there)-

Does SR work as well as it could have? No, I do think it missed the mark by not making the Lex side nearly as interesting or as plausible, and the action is pretty underwhelmingly designed.

On the flip side- writingwise and characterwise- I thought it was far more interesting and daring to put Superman in the situation it did from a dramatic point of view than what many of the Superman comics offered in the last 20 years.... it's always been a point of Superman getting to a certain spot with him arriving in Metropolis, meeting Jimmy & Lois- and then shortly after things reach a certain point where nothing REALLY changes for him.

The Lois/Clark marriage in the comics to me was a big bore-
So having Singer & his writers come up with the twist of having a kid could have been disastrous, but I thought Singer's use of the kid more touching and moving.

Did Singer & company write themselves into a box at the end? I would like to think that they would have been able to continue to progress the characters if there was a sequel, but unfortunately it looks like we won't really ever know until Singer talks about it. (Though it seems like he's in some sort of sad exile right now irl).

Anyhow- I digress. I will admit that I really don't know if SR works as a standalone and to anyone who hasn't seen ANY Superman films. I'm way too biased to say I'd know with certainty. For me, it works enough and loved that we would have seen Donner's version (versus Snyder's version) of Superman brought back for awhile, had the sequels happened. Oh well... will be curious to see where it goes from here....

[Metallo]

SR has this feeling of a story that was thrown together very quickly. I think Singer had the basic idea of leaving earth in his head for a while but the script just seemed cobbled together on short notice. That’s why it sticks to that framework of STM And to a lesser extent Superman II so closely. Singer just took that framework and laid his own stuff on top of it problem is it didn’t quite fit. Maybe it’s supposed to mirror STM but it’s too obvious. STM is an origin but SR isn’t. SRs concept is more the end of a series not the relaunch or the beggining of one. It falls into a lot of the same traps MOS did too.

Funny enough the Supergirl tv show does a better job of making Kara relatable than Singer or Snyder’s films did. you don’t just make him relatable by making him feel like an outcast different from humans. You make him relatable by giving him the same problems we have. He’s just like us emotionally. Even Lois & Clark got that. He wants to have a normal life just like everyone else. Superman II got it too. It’s not about being tortured it’s about his humanity. Singer was on the right track with him coming back only to see Lois had moved on but it all got lost somewhere among other things.

[crazy_asian_man]

Jul 31, 2018 9:28:47 GMT -5 Metallo said:

SR has this feeling of a story that was thrown together very quickly. I think Singer had the basic idea of leaving earth in his head for a while but the script just seemed cobbled together on short notice. That’s why it sticks to that framework of STM And to a lesser extent Superman II so closely. Singer just took that framework and laid his own stuff on top of it problem is it didn’t quite fit. Maybe it’s supposed to mirror STM but it’s too obvious. STM is an origin but SR isn’t. SRs concept is more the end of a series not the relaunch or the beggining of one. It falls into a lot of the same traps MOS did too.

Funny enough the Supergirl tv show does a better job of making Kara relatable than Singer or Snyder’s films did. you don’t just make him relatable by making him feel like an outcast different from humans. You make him relatable by giving him the same problems we have. He’s just like us emotionally. Even Lois & Clark got that. He wants to have a normal life just like everyone else. Superman II got it too. It’s not about being tortured it’s about his humanity. Singer was on the right track with him coming back only to see Lois had moved on but it all got lost somewhere among other things.

Rushed and cobbled together, I won't argue with.... but some of the pieces are really fantastic in SR imo- and you can feel at times the weightiness of it having to be both an intro and a sequel at times. It's such a pity that the sequel didn't happen- after all, the differences between Spiderman to Spiderman 2 and X-men to X-men 2 are remarkable. I feel like SR 2 would have been amazing and be more properly balanced.

I felt that SR was ok in using the 'different from humans' bit because of the bit with wondering about Krypton and other survivors opening up that small part of him. By the end, Supes is still the same character, but the price he paid in leaving to Krypton was the relationship with Lois- and I thought that was an interesting new avenue that could have been done well--- as, again, I've been seeing Superman stuck in a rut storywise in the comics for quite some time... and I thought the changes Singer did didn't violate who the character was (though some disagree) while Snyder's version did.

[Metallo]

Jul 31, 2018 11:48:18 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Rushed and cobbled together, I won't argue with.... but some of the pieces are really fantastic in SR imo- and you can feel at times the weightiness of it having to be both an intro and a sequel at times. It's such a pity that the sequel didn't happen- after all, the differences between Spiderman to Spiderman 2 and X-men to X-men 2 are remarkable. I feel like SR 2 would have been amazing and be more properly balanced.

I felt that SR was ok in using the 'different from humans' bit because of the bit with wondering about Krypton and other survivors opening up that small part of him. By the end, Supes is still the same character, but the price he paid in leaving to Krypton was the relationship with Lois- and I thought that was an interesting new avenue that could have been done well--- as, again, I've been seeing Superman stuck in a rut storywise in the comics for quite some time... and I thought the changes Singer did didn't violate who the character was (though some disagree) while Snyder's version did.

Singers a great director when he’s at his best. He’s got to have a strong script though. We’ve seen what happens when he doesn’t on X-men films too. Spider-Man 1 and X-men 1 got to be their own thing though. SR didn’t. It’s in this weird middle ground that just made things confusing for some people. It didn’t truly get to have its own clear identity the way those movies did. Those films also didn’t face comparisons to previous movies.

The kid and Lois left them in a corner. I liked the idea but where do you go from there? Breaking the status quo is fine for me if there’s room to grow. The comics giving him a wife and son left room to grow. With SR it was left kinda awkward unless they were going to totally abandon the romance with Lois and create a new age nuclear family with Lois Jason Richard and co parent Superman. But I feel you lose something when that’s the start of a new series which WB hoped SR WOULD BE.

You can have Superman feel like an outcast but you can’t dwell on it too much. Yeah he’s not human but he’s been raised by humans. The whole outcast thing throughout the movie at that point with an established hero doesn’t work as well because he just comes off as mopey. It works with a teenage Clark character or Martian manhunter because he’s not human and has no idea about our ways. By the time Superman’s in his 30s he should either be a little more adjusted or he should be kinda nuts.

SR does stay truer to the character than MOS though. Singer didn’t make him a total mopey hypocrite @sshole. I didn’t mind the killing in MOS just the way it was done. In MOS hes just like Ang Lee’s Bruce Banner: such a f*cked up downer that a lot of people can’t root for him. You’ve got to give people a reason to like the guy and not be turned off by him. Routh did get to show some of the inspiring optimistic Superman and some levity as Clark. If hed been given as many shots as Cavill I think he’d have made a lot more of it. He would have done far better with that justice league material because he plays that kind of stuff better.

[dejan]

 Hi folks

You may have seen this already on CapedWonder....but if you have not then this article from 1981 is interesting because it describes how "grainy"  both STM and SII  looked on the big screen:



One thing to bear in mind:

This reviewer in 1981 would have been viewing a 4th generation 35mm(or 70mm) release print which by it's very nature has less resolution than the original camera negative(which is what is going to be used for the 4K UHD).




 

[crazy_asian_man]

Aug 12, 2018 12:50:23 GMT -5 dejan said:

 Hi folks

You may have seen this already on CapedWonder....but if you have not then this article from 1981 is interesting because it describes how "grainy"  both STM and SII  looked on the big screen:



One thing to bear in mind:

This reviewer in 1981 would have been viewing a 4th generation 35mm(or 70mm) release print which by it's very nature has less resolution than the original camera negative(which is what is going to be used for the 4K UHD).




 

I could see that criticism more for the sequel- Lester said somewhere said that filters were put on SII so that actors who had aged considerably between STM and SII wouldn't look that different. Ilya was asked to comment on it, but wouldn't (I assume as that topic is probably touchy for actors)-
Newsweek's review said how beautiful the cinematography was for STM but washed out for SII. In any case, I wish that That laid off on 'color correction' on the Fortress scenes as it really doesn't match the color grading choices on STM. (Same for the moon scenes).

[Kamdan]

Been getting the early drop on the upcoming 4K transfer details. It sounds like the Atmos track is sourced from the Thau cut, but the default audio is a 5.1 mix of the original track taken from the 70mm print. I'm hoping that the Fantom screening uses this original track so I can truly experience the film like those in 1978 did.

[Kamdan]

Here’s some screencap comparisons. I frankly prefer the Blu-ray transfer over the 4K disc.

caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=12539&d2=12538&s1=124664&s2=124647&i=0&l=0&a=0

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 3, 2018 15:27:23 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

Been getting the early drop on the upcoming 4K transfer details. It sounds like the Atmos track is sourced from the Thau cut, but the default audio is a 5.1 mix of the original track taken from the 70mm print. I'm hoping that the Fantom screening uses this original track so I can truly experience the film like those in 1978 did.

Cool to hear you're attending!

A few things would be closer in line to the original viewing- which may or may not occur:

Would be great if these happened but highly unlikely (or impossible):

#1: The theatre drapes synchronization: in the original first run showings out here, the theatre had the drapes in the prologue synched up to match the prologue- (the film drapes' image projected on top of the theatre's real drapes)- so when the drapes pulled open, you could hear the drapes in the theatre move to the side just like the film- and then the titles' 3d effect REALLY came through.

Unfortunately, they didn't bother with the second run theatres. Nowadays, I don't know of any theatres in the area that still do drapes that I'm aware of. Would be cool if the theatre did today, but I'd be giantly suprised if any theatre did it.

#2: In mimicking the original theatre experience, I do remember at least one person whispering 'Green?" aloud during the Hoover dam sequence where the colors got screwed up momentarily for Superman's suit. Unless they're using material from the un-fixed original- I actually would love seeing that mistake again just for odd nostalgia - as well as the odd 'green tint' on Jor-el's appearance in the FOS that seemed to be on the original view back in the day.
(Similarly, the original Black on Red WB logo).

#3: People actually bonding while waiting in line over shared geek factor. This seems to have disappeared a long time ago (or decreased gigantically), but since this is a special event, only STM fans are going to show, so who knows? I'll bring my Capedwonder 40th anniversary pin and maybe go buy a Supes tv shirt (sadly there's no current Reeve ones that I know of) to wear to the event.

I doubt there will be any 'newbies' so there might not be fresh laughter/ excitement, but I do expect giant cheers during the helicopter rescue. If not, I'll have to be louder.

[booshman]

Nov 4, 2018 5:36:21 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

Here’s some screencap comparisons. I frankly prefer the Blu-ray transfer over the 4K disc.

caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=12539&d2=12538&s1=124664&s2=124647&i=0&l=0&a=0

Did they mis-label screen cap 4?

[Kamdan]

#3: People actually bonding while waiting in line over shared geek factor. This seems to have disappeared a long time ago (or decreased gigantically), but since this is a special event, only STM fans are going to show, so who knows? I'll bring my Capedwonder 40th anniversary pin and maybe go buy a Supes tv shirt (sadly there's no current Reeve ones that I know of) to wear to the event.

I doubt there will be any 'newbies' so there might not be fresh laughter/ excitement, but I do expect giant cheers during the helicopter rescue. If not, I'll have to be louder.

Eh, I could do without the “bonding” with audience members. I used to go to a lot of classic film screening hoping I’d come across a group of people to talk movies with, but they’re all glued to their phones nowadays and don’t wanna give social interactions in person a shot. If I go to a screening of this, I’ll be driving 2 and 1/2 hours away for it and I have no idea if the theater is up to my standards of movie watching. Plus, you’re opening yourself up to people talking and saying quotes out loud like the theater is their living room. Had that happen to me at a screening of Conan the Barbarian.

The look of this transfer has been making me want stay away from it. It’s lost all of its vibrancy and, to me, that was a key factor in the film’s appeal. When I saw the 2001 Thau version, a film print, over ten years ago, that felt like a major step up from VHS and DVD. With today’s home video technology, it’s not that impressive to see what you can at home.I think I’ll be better off watching the three hour cut on the actual anniversary. Here’s another couple of screen caps to compare to.

diff.pics/JTascwjgUunY/1

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 5, 2018 8:37:40 GMT -5 Kamdan said:

#3: People actually bonding while waiting in line over shared geek factor. This seems to have disappeared a long time ago (or decreased gigantically), but since this is a special event, only STM fans are going to show, so who knows? I'll bring my Capedwonder 40th anniversary pin and maybe go buy a Supes tv shirt (sadly there's no current Reeve ones that I know of) to wear to the event.

I doubt there will be any 'newbies' so there might not be fresh laughter/ excitement, but I do expect giant cheers during the helicopter rescue. If not, I'll have to be louder.

Eh, I could do without the “bonding” with audience members. I used to go to a lot of classic film screening hoping I’d come across a group of people to talk movies with, but they’re all glued to their phones nowadays and don’t wanna give social interactions in person a shot. If I go to a screening of this, I’ll be driving 2 and 1/2 hours away for it and I have no idea if the theater is up to my standards of movie watching. Plus, you’re opening yourself up to people talking and saying quotes out loud like the theater is their living room. Had that happen to me at a screening of Conan the Barbarian.

The look of this transfer has been making me want stay away from it. It’s lost all of its vibrancy and, to me, that was a key factor in the film’s appeal. When I saw the 2001 Thau version, a film print, over ten years ago, that felt like a major step up from VHS and DVD. With today’s home video technology, it’s not that impressive to see what you can at home.I think I’ll be better off watching the three hour cut on the actual anniversary. Here’s another couple of screen caps to compare to.

diff.pics/JTascwjgUunY/1

I hear you on the risks.

Generally when chatting it up- either at a convention or at a fannish show, it's been pleasant and haven't run into anyone that was going to be a stalker. It's limited bonding, as I'm a busy dude anyways.

I would have loved it if the three=hour version was shown instead, as THAT would be pretty awesome to see on the giant screen.

Hopefully the show is financially successful enough that it encourages Fathom events to do more. The theatre I'm seeing it at is half-full (reserved seating) so that's cool...

[dejan]

Bought the 4k STM and gave it a spin

But first a few caveats that relate to my viewing set up:

I have a 4K native front projector with an anamorphic lens(means  there are no black bars at the top of the image) and that the 2160 X 4096 pixels are utilised(the full resolution and brightness capability of the projector).

So far, it seems that a lot of the negative feedback from various sources stems from the wide variety of display devices being used(mainly TV flat panels:- LCD, OLED ) and the environments they are watching them in(ambient light coming from windows or backed /lights out-watching at night)…..all of which effects the influence of HDR.

Front projectors can't match the luminescence and contrast(especially OLEDs)generated by TV panels.....but just by virtue of the fact that image is much bigger....you see more detail that is simply too small on the average flat panel(55-65 inches)…….my projector screen is 115inches in width.

Front projectors use a tone mapping algorithm that optimises the HDR expression to the maximum capability(brightness and colour) of the device. 

With that out of the way....my personal verdict....and on my set up:

This is a great release so long as you check your expectations at the door.(This is not going to look like the UHD of Infinity War!).
And for the record I have nearly every home video release(from the 1979 VHS to the 2011 blu ray) at hand to contrast and compare.
This is the best this film has ever looked on home video .Period.
Resolution and fine detail is very well delineated(the wheat fields in Calgary,the creases in the glowing suits of the kryptonians,the cracks and crevices of the hoover dam ect ect).
Contrast(inky blacks) is also better than the corresponding blu ray.....the space field on krypton( when the dome opens) is now black(as opposed to  the light black/grey on the blu ray) and the night time scenes have more pop.
And even the opticals(supes flying up the daily planet with the helipoter + Lois) are rendered with more finely resolved grain fields.

Here in the UK stm was premiered way back in 1983 on ITV.Remarkably ,ITV used the same telecine for the best part of 30 years up until roughly 2012 (when channel 5 acquired the rights) whenever they broadcast stm.
The telecine was from a 35mm theatrical release print(full of specks, tears,)but it had a very good colour reproduction(better than the 80s VHSs or 80/90s laserdiscs). Problem was whenever I recorded this broadcast back in the 80s either on the Philips V2000 or VHS(in the 90s) it lost a whole load of quality(when compared to the original broadcast quality)
In 2007 I recorded this broadcast using standard definition DVD ….for the first time preserving the color reproduction and resolution as seen in the original broadcast.

I would argue that the ITV broadcast had better color expression than even the blu ray(where a different color palette / hue was added by the fellow who mastered it---confirmed by Jim Bowers) 

This UHD tracks the ITV broadcast very closely(whilst obviously having vastly superior resolution)…..indicating it is faithful to the original look as seen in theatres back in the 70s/80s but again with more sharpness than would have been physically possible with theatrical prints way back then. 



I say bring on Superman II(theatrical).