It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Which they will, and us Bond suckers will snap them right up and give them more money! CURSE YOU EON!!!!!!!!
The quality of 4k will be worth it for me to repurchase, but it will be awhile, because I'll still have to get a new 4k tv.
And what about UHD Blu Rays? I have an "useless" 49 " 4k TV. UHD discs and players are going to be released this Christmas, but without Bond movies I think I am not going to spend 400 €+ in a new BD player.
There is a drop off due to a mixture of cheaper film stock and the later films being remastered rather than restored. None look bad, as such, but the 60s and Last 3 films are in a different class.
I'd be wary of that, as I'm not convinced we'd be able to tell the difference on home sets.
Agree with @ThePastyKid on that. Saw a 4K presentation in a Sony (I'm a Panasonic man myself) and I can't say I really was impressed. As with HD, anything below a 37inch screen you don't really see the benefit so I'm assuming that pro-rata anything below, say, a 50inch screen you'll not see the benefit from 4K. Plus longer load times and what is there available? Are there any tv stations broadcasting in 4K? I'm pretty made up with blu-ray.
The recent Best of Bond showings in the cinema (here in Blighty that is) were 4K presentations, I went to the first one - Dr No and Goldfinger - and they did look good, but they were on a cinema screen. Just don't think it would be noticeable on a home screen. But if one of the TV giants would like to give me a 4K telly and something to watch on it I'd gladly do a comparison test!
I fully agree @AgentJamesBond007 . That teaser poster deserves a full-blown steelbook treatment. Just have a look at my James Bond-steelbook collection at the moment. They are so lovely.
BUT, I have to agree with some people in here. The "Casino Royale-DeLuxe" BluRay at the moment is the only Bond BluRay which has TWO discs. It's loaded with so many extra's. And all other 22 Bond films don't have that! Just look to The Dark Knight Trilogy steelbook releases. They all have two discs, period!:
There is no extra content on any film ever that´s more bloated than the CR deluxe version.
The John Cork docs are the real thing. Sure there are more tidbits that could be included, but those docs are a prime example of how extra features should be presented, lean, to the point, and exciting. There are too many extra features on too many films that are a waste of time.
It wont. HDR is about camera and display performance, nothing to do with the format itself. Any director or DP with any sensibility will welcome with open arms increased dynamic range.
In terms of "format", filmakers want....no, need 8K at the capture side of things and they need it now, but that's a whole other topic. :)
Personally I dont subscribe to that notion. Factually speaking, BD falls short of 35mm film (flat or scope) in both resolution and color rendition as well as perceived contrast. These notions of seeing things you didn't in the cinema generally stem from the fact that we tend to see a film at the theater once (usually many years ago in this context) compared to many times at home (usually much more recently) where we can pause it, lean in so that your nose is almost touching the screen, and moreover tend to have someone sitting next to you telling you to watch for the artifact they read about online. :) Now if that means that filmakers are under greater scrutiny at home than in the cinema, well, thats not the medium's fault.
PS the real eyes goof was documented well before BD and thus not unique to it.
Never happen for Skyfall. NEVER. It was shot (in my opinion short shortsightedly) at 1080 line. It has, literally, less resolution to work from than Dr. No.
Hold the phone. Are you telling me that Skyfall is a lower resolution than Dr No? I am aghast!
Basically...yes. Skyfall was shot on the Ari, sensor cropped to 1:78:1 (resulting in a raw 2880x1620), and then assembled at 1920x1080 so that's as good as it will ever get. Any claim of a 4K presentation, now or in the future, would be an up-sample (and misleading).
In contrast, Dr. No (et all) were shot on film and while the condition of the negative and the requisite cleanup are a separate topic, the bottom line is that 35mm can (and now frequently is) scanned in at 4K and you are getting 4k worth of detail.
This is why many of us in the biz are pushing not just for 4k, but 8k on the production side of things (NOT consumer side), so that 10, 20, 50 years from now we dont look back on films like Skyfall and lament how they are inferior to movies shot on film decades earlier. The RED 8K sensor is nice because its exactly a 2x multiple of 4K which means you can either shoot 8K (STILL doesn't replace the now defunct IMAX 70mm/15perf) OR shoot 4K and actually get 4K worth of RGB (as oppose to subsampled chroma).
Well I'll be. Dr No is in my top three along with From Russia and OHMSS. I can't wait to upgrade to Bluray for my birthday because I am told that these see the most improvement. This excites me greatly, thanks! :D
To clarify though, all the BDs, from Dr.No to Skyfall, are of course the same 1080 line resolution. The limitation is that Skyfall can never be released or screened any better than that, while Dr. No (etc) may in future be screened at 4K, either in some future UHD format or, perhaps more appropriately, a true 4K cinema presentation.
Hasn´t every film shot in digital less resolution than Dr. No? Because films shot on film don´t have pixels? So naturally, any film shot in the 60s on good film stock will increase details any time the transformation resolution increases, as long as some functioning film roll still exists.