Okay, so I just watched the UHD on a 106" screen with a Sony native 4K videoprojector. Colorwise, it's pretty much the 2001 Newline Platinum DVD, except for the finale in the desert which looks more like the 2010 Blu-ray but not as dark. Grainwise, it's very light, but nothing looks like plastic. Nothing looks oversharpened either, not even the Spacey shots behind the grid in the police car near the end. It's pretty much what the 2010 Warner Blu-ray should've looked like, meaning the Dutch Blu-ray with the details of the Warner Blu-ray. Of course there are those shots with invisible cosmetic CGI tweakings. If you can live with those on "Jaws", "Poltergeist", "Aliens", then you'll be fine with this one as well. Still, Fincher shouldn't have done that, or at least call it differently, like "David Fincher's Seven" or "Seven special edition" or "Seven the Final Cut" or whatever since it's not the actual 1995 film. It's even odd that he didn't make a director's cut out of it since he never liked the very end and wanted the film to finish with Mills killing Doe and, bang, black screen, end credits. Additionnal information for the French members: the subtitles have been a little modified on a few occasions.
"Se7en" color timing
|
Thanks given by: dvdmike , borisanddoris
(2025-01-04, 07:32 PM)MrBrown Wrote:Over two hours, 4k, it's about right really(2025-01-04, 07:22 PM)dvdmike Wrote: The DCP is 218gb
2025-01-07, 11:48 AM
That is actually closer to correct, its a shame https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&...90&i=3&l=1
2025-01-07, 11:51 AM
2025-01-07, 03:35 PM
2025-01-07, 04:04 PM
2025-01-07, 06:39 PM
this popped up on blu-ray.com...
Fincher actually went and STABILIZED all natural camera movement he didn't deem too smooth. I almost did not believe it until someone went and did comparison gifs. https://imgur.com/ojQjWxU https://imgur.com/a50zNxI https://imgur.com/i0knetX https://imgur.com/a7r2jbx https://imgur.com/H0H22aH https://imgur.com/TiPvn6s https://imgur.com/nyXi1pP more in this post https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p...count=1800 Thanks given by: Pineapples101
2025-01-07, 10:34 PM
I give up
Thanks given by: borisanddoris
2025-01-07, 11:29 PM
I haven't picked up the 4K yet but probably will. I don't like any of these "fixes and changes" on principle but overall, it does not seem to detract from the viewing of the film like say blinking Ewok eyes or additional scenes. It does not appear to dramatically alter the experience.
I think it's important to continue support of physical media so I likely will get it despite all this. I don't know what is so difficult about scanning a negative or IP and presenting the film as it was. I guess a lot more directors maintain that these films are living beings and can change. Personally, I disagree with it but this isn't the most egregious thing that could have been done. I've given up trying to put any further reasoning behind these.
2025-01-08, 10:21 AM
I cracked and got it. It looks like a recent Fincher film now, with all the camera movements being modern levels of stability. You would think you're watching Zodiac now.
I can't say I don't like it. It looks really good. The only thing bothering me is fixing the broken lamp in Brad Pitt's apartment. I don't get this one. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 46 Guest(s)