monkeyjb1988

DrDre said:

Having looked at the 1997 reference williarob shared in the past in some detail, it is clear, that the colorist clearly used the 1997 SE as a color reference for the OT. It’s also pretty obvious, that the 1997 SE prints are not as vibrant as for example a technicolor print.

Still better than the 2004/2011 coloring. I watched parts of the 4K77 and 4K83 restorations and the 2019 restoration look very similar (minus 97 additions & recuts).

I don’t see the problem with hidden adult jokes if they go far enough over a kid’s head. I was over 20 when I saw the 89 Batman and the Joker said “[Gotham City] needs an enema” and my dad explained why he laughed out loud at that (Granted, 89 Batman may not be the best “kids’ movies” example and that joke not really obscure but still, flew over my head despite multiple viewings).

Swift S. Lawliet said:

monkeyjb1988 said:

I just watched The Sword in the Stone on Disney+. Definitely NOT one of Disney’s greatest works (just a, admittedly humorous, series of events before Arthur pulls the sword after not being mentioned for most of the film) but that’s not why it’s brought up on this board so often.

I watched it because I know its DNR reputation and I’ve seen the results. I also saw it was one of the films available in 4K, which I took to mean a new restoration/not using the flawed Blu-Ray master. So, I made it a point to watch it (AFTER I got some Star Wars in my system, including The Mandolorian 😃 )

In short, it looks FAR better than the Blu-Ray/streaming screenshots I’ve seen. Granted, the linework is wonky, but it’s too sharp to be the fault of anything other than the xeroxing done to make the cels. It’s hard to just see in these screen shots but the lines change and you can see the pencil markings that made it to the cels and film. In short, the films looks great… er, in a “replicates the original art” way rather than “replicates the film” way. (Keep in mind I can only get screenshots off a laptop that’s not 1080p; please account for that, it looked great on my TV).

https://imgur.com/88APyO8
https://imgur.com/RPngbTH
https://imgur.com/UeuGneL

Also, I saw this Hollywood Reporter story. In summary, people seem to be warming to the “Contains Outdated Cultural Depictions”; they want more but I don’t think we have to worry about films getting edited as of yet (the crows are still in Dumbo)

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-outdated-cultural-depictions-disclaimer-raises-questions-say-advocacy-groups-1255284?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=THR Breaking News_2019-11-16 11:07:00_tberesford&utm_term=hollywoodreporter_breakingnews

I saw that The Black Cauldron is also in 4K Dolby Vision, which is interesting since Disney pretty much treats it with the cold shoulder and has never released it on Blu-ray, let alone 4K UHD.

Also, the linework is supposed to be wonky, considering it’s a xerox-era film.
The terrible DNR on the Blu-ray was supposed to combat the wonkiness inherent to the xerography technology.
A good restoration of a xerox-era film should embrace the wonkiness.

I figured the wonkiness was ok, I just wanted to run it by all of you to make sure it wasn’t something new. Yeah, I figured everything was ok and it certainly didn’t look like what screencaps of the Blu-Ray say it would. Very glad to know Sword in the Stone was one of the first 4K remasters on Disney+ due to it’s “well-loved” Blu-Ray.

I just watched The Sword in the Stone on Disney+. Definitely NOT one of Disney’s greatest works (just a, admittedly humorous, series of events before Arthur pulls the sword after not being mentioned for most of the film) but that’s not why it’s brought up on this board so often.

I watched it because I know its DNR reputation and I’ve seen the results. I also saw it was one of the films available in 4K, which I took to mean a new restoration/not using the flawed Blu-Ray master. So, I made it a point to watch it (AFTER I got some Star Wars in my system, including The Mandolorian 😃 )

In short, it looks FAR better than the Blu-Ray/streaming screenshots I’ve seen. Granted, the linework is wonky, but it’s too sharp to be the fault of anything other than the xeroxing done to make the cels. It’s hard to just see in these screen shots but the lines change and you can see the pencil markings that made it to the cels and film. In short, the films looks great… er, in a “replicates the original art” way rather than “replicates the film” way. (Keep in mind I can only get screenshots off a laptop that’s not 1080p; please account for that, it looked great on my TV).

https://imgur.com/88APyO8
https://imgur.com/RPngbTH
https://imgur.com/UeuGneL

Also, I saw this Hollywood Reporter story. In summary, people seem to be warming to the “Contains Outdated Cultural Depictions”; they want more but I don’t think we have to worry about films getting edited as of yet (the crows are still in Dumbo)

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-outdated-cultural-depictions-disclaimer-raises-questions-say-advocacy-groups-1255284?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=THR Breaking News_2019-11-16 11:07:00_tberesford&utm_term=hollywoodreporter_breakingnews

LordZerome1080 said:

Interestingly George’s resolve looks to be cracking.
https://comicbook.com/starwars/2019/07/01/star-wars-special-edition-original-screening-70mm-rare-lucasfilm/

I just read that somewhere too. Very cool.

Just watched some Grindhouse versions from your site. Rough to be sure but decent. Can’t wait for 4K80 😃

I see it but I’ll let it pass. Maybe if a certain studio scan some film material in their archives… 😄

Until then or Harmy’s 3.0, I’ll overlook any minor errors. With all the tricks he had to pull, I’m impressed by how good it is 😃

TV’s Frink said:

I think the invite system is ridiculous. I put all my stuff on MEGA and no one needs an invite, all they need are the links.

I agree. I would only go on my myspleen to get the isos, so I won’t even ask for an invite. I do wish for Mega or Nyaa links though. Still good work though 😃

Possessed said:

I’m not sure if roku fully supports 5.1 or not, but I can tell you that if your 5.1 system has a pro logic setting the 2.0 tracks will still give great surround. They are matrix encoded to be compatible with dolby surround/pro logic and you will get legitimate surround, as in actual surround effects where they are supposed to be not just ambience. Use movie mode. In fact the 5.1 mixes present in de specialized are basically just doctored pro logic mixes anyway.

CatBus said:

Some players don’t know what to do with DTS-MA audio in an MKV (even if they deal with it fine in other media formats). Converting to AC3 will give you a (lossy) 5.1 track. Burning to a Blu-ray will give you a lossless 5.1 track, but not in an MKV. Or you could try PC software playback, etc.

Understood. Thank you guys. Yeah, my 5.1 doesn’t really play back in lossless, so I’ll try AC3 first. If that doesn’t work, then Pro Logic (that was DEFINITELY mention in the manuel). Thank you Possessed and Catbus.

First off, great work Harmy. Turning a bunch of different sources into one cohesive whole, and in HD no less, is pretty darn awesome. Thumbs up.

I have a question directed to all of OriginalTrilogy.com: I have a Roku with a USB port and that is how I usually watch Harmy’s Star Wars cuts, converted from MKV to MP4 with the best 2.0 audio track. Recently, I got a 5.1 speaker system and reconverted the MKV file using the 5.1 audio. When I plugged the USB into my Roku, NO sound came out. I had the audio settings set the same as the original audio (in terms of bit rate and that) but nothing. If anyone knows what happened because it happened to them or just know I would appreciate it.

FYI, because my dad was with me and wanted to hear Return of the Jedi (I know this is the Empire thread, I just figured what works for one file works for the others) in 5.1 (like me), I had to play my 2011 blu-ray (don’t feel sorry for me; I actually tolerate the special editions. I just prefer the originals/Harmy’s).

Is true. No love for Scrubs. 😦 Still a great show. 😃

digitalfreaknyc said:

I can definitely cap!

But I wouldn’t count on it being 16x9. I just checked Hulu and they’re still 4x3

I checked as well, that’s true. Our best hope is that Comedy Central just has exclusiveness for a while. The promo looked promising but it did have a border on 3 sides so I couldn’t tell for sure (only watching on my phone probably doesn’t help).

I can’t. I feel bad for not being able to because you just made my day.

I found a promo on Comedy Central, but it’s pillared box with a border for the channel to promote it. However, it does look like it 16:9. Hope someone can confirm and see if Scrubs got a long awaited remaster 😃

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/1krgkh/the-best-of-scrubs-marathon

Anyone have an idea why Nolan or WB would even alter the film like this? I’m just curious as to the thinking.

RU.08 said:

Hi monkeyjb- guessing from your username you of course couldn’t have appreciated this film in its original run! I was able to see it in 2015 projected from a theatrical print, and I can tell you 100% it looked nothing like the DVD or bluray. 😃

Aladdin looks pretty much correct compared to the theatrical prints. Not perfect, but not different enough that I would worry as much about it as I do BATB. You are more than welcome to have a crack at restoration, it will be scanned in Prores format, but all you would need to do is load a clip in Resolve and export .TIFs.

And I’m still waiting for some high-res preview images! I’m a little surprised it’s taking so long given that Face/Off has been scanned and can’t move anywhere until this scan gets done (sorry face/off fans lol).

Yeah, I was 3 (but already awesome 😃). Still one of my top 5 favorite films and my favorite soundtrack.

I don’t have Resolve but I do have Blender and I know how to turn a clip to Tiff files 😃

Lord Starfish said:

I remember seeing a complaint against the BD’s colors in that the brightness made the Beast’s design far too discernable in the early scenes, taking the impact out of the “Step into the light” scene, which was originally the first time the audience gets a clear view of what he looks like…
Being that this movie is older than me and I never saw it in theaters though, I obviously can’t say for sure. But the idea of a 35mm scan of the film still appeals to me because I really don’t like how the BD looks. It looks to me like they applied some rather aggressive edge enhancement or something to it, and the gradients look really messed up at points.

‘‘Almost’’ the same for me: it was the first movie I saw in theaters but the first I ‘‘remember’’ is a little film starring a cowboy and an astronaut where they and others, including a dinosaur, a stretchy dog, and a mutant potato, worship a deity. Points if you can guess what it is (I promise you’ll laugh 😄)

Anyway, I can’t judge how Beauty and the Beast should’ve looked, but I never really had a problem with the DVD or Blu-Ray (although if you’re making the accusation, maybe I remember a little less of a blue tint. I don’t know shrug). I wish you luck on funding and scanning, and I’d be more than happy to help clean it up if you want (I have GIMP, so it’ll have to be TIFF frames). I’d appreciate a comparison video, just to see what changes there are.

Downloaded the mp4 versions of 1.0 and watched a few bits. Great work. I noticed a little wobble in the subtitle masking, but barely noticeable and better than what I could do. Also, great job upscaling the SD footage. It’s not a perfect match to the HD footage from Kraken’s Blu-Ray, but certainly better than what I was expecting. Again, great work.

I didn’t realize the Monsters HD copy had different music from the theatrical copy. I don’t care in any case, I just don’t understand why they just replace the Def-Con music for release. Does the VHS copy have Japanese music or is that from the Monsters HD only?

In any case, thanks for helping me find this version. First Godzilla film I ever saw and I wanted to give it another chance despite me remembering I wasn’t too big a fan. I’m rewatching because I like the Japanese cut and I just want to see what’s different; been a LONG while I saw this version. Also, I was surprisingly pleased by the Raymond Burr version of the 1950’s Godzilla and I wanted to see Steve Martin again… er, not THAT Steve martin 😄

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Sure they could. Could you imagine the ire, though? I think, generally, people who care about the OOT also tend to care about physical media.

I know I do. I might get the digital releases if that did happen, but it would be a pain.

Swift S. Lawliet said:

monkeyjb1988 said:

mutantchair said:

I found a better source for the 2020 figure… Disney’s official SEC filings for Q4 FY2013:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1001039/000100103913000164/fy2013_q4x10k.htm

“Prior to the Company’s acquisition, Lucasfilm produced six Star Wars films (Episodes 1 through 6). Lucasfilm retained the rights to consumer products related to all of the films and the rights related to television and electronic distribution formats for all of the films, with the exception of the rights for Episode 4, which are owned by a third-party studio. All of the films are distributed by a third-party studio in the theatrical and home video markets. The theatrical and home video distribution rights for these films revert back to Lucasfilm in May 2020 with the exception of Episode 4, for which these distribution rights are retained in perpetuity by the third-party studio.”

Well, THAT’S definitive. I’m sure Disney will work out something to include IV with any movie set, but I’m sure the accountants will want to wait until May 2020 to ONLY worry about IV.

Disney will never release Star Wars individually, even if the rest of the Saga and/or Original Trilogy will be released by Disney.

Fox will probably release Star Wars and maybe it will have matching artwork but Disney won’t do it.

Disney can, however, include Star Wars with the rest of the Saga and/or Original Trilogy in a box set as long as they have permission from Fox.

Disney already did it with The Incredible Hulk (Universal) in the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase One box set and with Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro (Eastern Star Media/Discotek) in The Collected Works of Hayao Miyazaki box set and they had permission from the companies that distributed the respective films from their respective box sets as well as the fact that Disney owns every other movie in said box sets.

In The Incredible Hulk, Disney didn’t author a new disc, they just recycled the same content from Universal’s disc.

Though with Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro, they did author a new disc just so it will have the same menu style as the other Studio Ghibli Blu-rays by Disney and so it won’t have bonus features like the other movies in the Hayao Miyazaki box set.
They also used a DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 version of the remastered audio mix from the 2014 Japanese remastered theatrical reissue which was only in a lossy form in the US standalone and Japanese Blu-rays.
And they also upmixed the Streamline dub to 5.1 for their box set but they only duplicated the mono channel in all of the speakers.

So maybe the Star Wars Blu-ray by Fox can be also authored similarly to the other movies.

I know it won’t be on it’s own. I’m just saying, waiting until May 2020, Disney can release their set and only need to pay Fox for one.

mutantchair said:

I found a better source for the 2020 figure… Disney’s official SEC filings for Q4 FY2013:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1001039/000100103913000164/fy2013_q4x10k.htm

“Prior to the Company’s acquisition, Lucasfilm produced six Star Wars films (Episodes 1 through 6). Lucasfilm retained the rights to consumer products related to all of the films and the rights related to television and electronic distribution formats for all of the films, with the exception of the rights for Episode 4, which are owned by a third-party studio. All of the films are distributed by a third-party studio in the theatrical and home video markets. The theatrical and home video distribution rights for these films revert back to Lucasfilm in May 2020 with the exception of Episode 4, for which these distribution rights are retained in perpetuity by the third-party studio.”

Well, THAT’S definitive. I’m sure Disney will work out something to include IV with any movie set, but I’m sure the accountants will want to wait until May 2020 to ONLY worry about IV.

nickyd47 said:

mutantchair said:

nickyd47 said:

mutantchair said:

Fang Zei said:

Quick side question:

I’m just throwing this out there for anyone who might have the answer, but do we know exactly why Fox loses the rights to the other five movies in 2020 as opposed to some other time?

Just to clarify, I’m not asking for an explanation of why they’re losing the rights. That much has been made clear. I’m just wondering why it’s happening in 2020 and not some other time. I’m also curious how we were able to figure this out in the first place. There was an article written on some website shortly after the Disney deal that gave the 2020 date, but I don’t think it was ever explained how the writer knew it was 2020.

This article in the Hollywood reporter is the main source for the 2020 date, which is a solid source for industry reporting. A “fox insider” was apparently interviewed for the article.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tangled-rights-could-tie-up-384541

It’s also worth remembering that Disney has digital distribution rights to all but ANH.

So what? They have to give Fox money every time a digital copy of the Special Edition of a New Hope sells.
What would waiting till 2020 change? Nothing. They’ll have to give Fox money for every sale of Star Wars, Special Edition
or not.

Actually, Disney can’t sell ANH digital copies at all. You can’t buy ANH on the Disney Movies Anywhere platform.

Right, I have forgotten about this. Still, Disney has nothing to wait for, as Fox owns Star Wars forever, correct?

True, but I can totally see their reasoning to wait until 2020 so they have to pay Fox for ONLY A New Hope. 2020 means they can release the other 5 with impunity, so they may be waiting to minimize payments to Fox.

Do I like it or agree with it? Heck no. They’re raking it in with The Force Awakens and Rogue One and will do it again for The Last Jedi. I’m just saying, I can see what Disney might be thinking.

yoda-sama said:

Seems appropriate: http://cheezburger.com/1348101/guy-cant-find-his-screen-in-star-wars-return-of-the-jedi-and-its-hilarious

Bwah hahaha! Thank you for sharing 😄

Shokara said:

imperialscum said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

imperialscum said:

What is this crap about digital being bad? Digital medium is by far superior in terms of storage and preservation. Unlike analogue recording (film), which starts to degrade/change from the point it is being recorded, the digital recording is basically time-invariant. For example, the colour encoding of digital video is strictly defined, while in analogue film it varies based on the current conditions.

Of course, you might still want to use analogue film camera for some reason to shoot the film, but in any case you should digitalise the film as soon as it shot (in highest possible resolution).

Who here has lobbied for not preserving film elements digitally? As far as I can tell this conversation is all about capture mediums.

Still, I do not see why wouldn’t you immediately record it digitally. If you use analogue film to record a scene, by the time you transfer it to digital medium it will not be the same as it was originally recorded. Not to mention conditions of transformation process which requires projector (use different lighting during the projection and you have different results, etc.)

If you originally record it digitally, you have it completely preserved. You carve that digital recording into stone inside a cave and aliens will still be able to read it tens of thousands of years after we will destroy each other in the exact form as it was originally recorded.

The reason is that 35mm film still has inherently higher resolution than digital cinematography does. Each time we invent new video technologies with higher resolutions, 35 mm film still continues to surprise us by how much previously hidden detail was captured when we make updated digital scans and transfers of those film reels. However, digital photography and cinematography provides no such surprises. We know their respective resolutions from the get-go, and those remain constant despite whatever new resolutions come along with new technologies. Something shot in 4K will remain in 4K twenty to thirty years an so on. However, whenever we think we’ve wrung as much detail as modern technology possibly can from film, it always manages to catch us off guard.

Also, digital is not as robust as you make out. Film is still the go to for movie preservation as digital storage can falter or become unreadable over time. Film can last for 100+ years if properly preserved while digital only has 50+ at the most. You’d have to convert it and move it to new storage over time, but even then it can cause rot (the term is ‘bit rot’). Heck, Disney is printing it’s CURRENT films to separation masters to preserve them:

http://www.disneydigitalstudio.com/preserving-our-movies/

IF (ie, I understand there is NO proof either way we may get the OOT this year) Disney restores Star Wars, it’s gonna make a new archival master and have that and the original as back up. Star Wars is gonna end up back on film under Disney.

My God, my heart is pumping. I’ll keep some skepticism until we get official word but, as a digital Carrie Fisher said in Rogue One,… “Hope.”

Shoot, part of me wants to take the plunge and pay for Jedi, just to see.

Checked Google Play: The film is the dreaded 134 minute version… BUT, Lapti Nek is listed instead of Jedi Rocks and samples of that and the finale are of the original music 😃

It’s been my hope Disney would release the OUT, but I saw this Digital Bits article:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/022417-0100

I don’t know if anyone else saw this, but my hope for an OUT release this year dropped. Don’t delete your Harmy files yet. I sincerely don’t get why Disney just doesn’t do the restoration, especially since they’ve been otherwise sympathetic to fans otherwise.

Someone earlier said the more popular films seem to not get as much love. I don’t believe that to be completely true, but somedays it DOES feel like that.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

This article is comical. What does it even mean that the effects won’t hold up in HD? Does the author realize that for its first few years, Star Wars was only available in better-than-HD quality? (I.e. Film)

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/feb/28/george-lucas-special-edition-star-wars-disney-may-release-unadulterated-version

Facepalm Harmy’s editions look great on my big screen TV and those are 720p. I get that the special editons have better composting, but it’s not like the GOUT’S an eyesore.

It kills me everything someone says something on film can’t look good because “film’s not HD”. No, it’s not… it’s better.

ATMachine said:

I’ve also heard about that, but every copy of the ROTJ novelization I’ve seen has that passage still in it.

My Kindle copy of the trilogy keeps the familial relation. I think the novels are the one thing that doesn’t get endlessly changed.

If that was how the films were treated, this forum wouldn’t exist 😄