2001: A Space Odyssey (4k UHD) Available for Preorder

3 Stars

FB_IMG_1519785963288.jpg

Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

Published by

Kevin Collins

administrator

1061 Comments

  1. Jeff F.

    $41.99? I love this film, but that's way too pricey. Prices need to come down on 4K titles in order to entice more to join the format.

    This is MSRP. The street price will be between $20 and $30 by release day.

  2. Sam Posten

    Pre-ordered but this is TERRIBLE artwork compared to the iconic HAL one that it seems the UK is getting =/

    Funny as I feel the total opposite. However, so long as we get top notch PQ quality I am fine with any cover.

  3. dpippel

    This is MSRP. The street price will be between $20 and $30 by release day.

    Since it's Warner Brothers, it will probably be a little over $30 and will stay around that price for quite awhile. That was their pattern with Blade Runner and Unforgiven in UHD.

  4. Jeff F.

    $41.99? I love this film, but that's way too pricey. Prices need to come down on 4K titles in order to entice more to join the format.

    I agree; but, with no information from my end; this price could also be an indicator of a rolled out red carpet on both the transfer and much, much more. So, let's wait and see, as I'm thinking that something great just might be ahead.

  5. Just got an email from Amazon with a release date:

    We now have delivery date(s) for the order you placed on February 27, 2018 (Order# 114-3650159-3414669):

    "2001: A Space Odyssey (UHD/BD) (4K Ultra HD) [Blu-ray]"
    Estimated arrival date: May 08, 2018

  6. Unfortunately I got a notice today from Amazon where they said there was no set release date. Only a few weeks ago I got a notice indicating that I would have the disc by mid May. Wonder if there is going to be a delay?

  7. Jim*Tod

    Unfortunately I got a notice today from Amazon where they said there was no set release date. Only a few weeks ago I got a notice indicating that I would have the disc by mid May. Wonder if there is going to be a delay?

    I had the same thing happen to me.

  8. TravisR

    A movie prop replica company called Master Replicas is doing HAL too.

    Yeah, mine's from the same guy. The one I have is what he was making five years ago and the new one is what he is doing now. I'm very curious as to the price.

    —————

  9. I have seen on Film Tech that the 70mm print of Ready Player One has a trailer of 2001 attached.
    No 70mm prints in the UK.:angry:

    So if this is getting a new 70mm release and this is from the 65mm neg and the 4KUHD is from that as well
    we will all be very happy.:)

  10. From that article:

    "According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation."

    I'm pretty sure the 70mm print (prints?) that were struck in 2001 were new prints. Perhaps they came from vintage IPs, but the print wasn't faded and was in great condition. I saw it projected at the Loews Astor Plaza in NYC and it looked gorgeous on their huge screen, even though the theater stupidly removed the intermission.

    Vincent

  11. "Nolan said, “One of my earliest memories of cinema is seeing Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, in 70mm, at the Leicester Square Theatre in London with my father. The opportunity to be involved in recreating that experience for a new generation, and of introducing our new unrestored 70mm print of Kubrick’s masterpiece in all its analogue glory at the Festival de Cannes is an honour and a privilege.

    What a bizarre statement (the unrestored comment). I wonder if this is a sloppy translation of a French-language press release? I imagine what Nolan is actually referring to is the lack of "updated" special effects, and he isn't actually touting a complete lack of restoration as being a good thing?

    Vincent

  12. Yeah, I'm sure there's a mistake or two there. I understand that the originals are not in a great state. If there's an interpos/interneg floating around, they must be a few years old. I'd think it's more likely that a print has been made from the new scan & restoration made by Warner. Whatever, I won't be going to Cannes to see it, but I'm very much looking forward to reading some reviews of the new Blu-ray

  13. Vincent_P

    I'm pretty sure the 70mm print (prints?) that were struck in 2001 were new prints. Perhaps they came from vintage IPs, but the print wasn't faded and was in great condition. I saw it projected at the Loews Astor Plaza in NYC and it looked gorgeous on their huge screen, even though the theater stupidly removed the intermission.

    Likewise, that was a great presentation.

    I think Warner made two prints back for the 2001-2002 domestic re-release. Because many of the venues it played at no longer had 70mm capability, Warner supplied not only the film print but also the 70mm projector to theaters that needed it. If memory serves, there were two new prints struck for that run, and they'd leapfrog from city to city during the revival. (It was scheduled more like a band going on tour, rather than a standard movie release, in that it didn't play simultaneously across the country.) I remember seeing the NYC showing, and then seeing it again in Boston about a month later. The prints looked slightly different, so I presume I saw both of the new prints.

    The Museum Of The Moving Image in Astoria shows 2001 every summer in 70mm — I think they're showing one of the two prints from the 2001-2002 reissue. It's generally in good shape, but has picked up some scratches along the way. They have been showing the same print from year to year, because I recognize the scratching happening in the exact same place. (If you happen to see that print, look out for the green lines appearing during the scene where Bowman is in the pod, arguing with HAL about opening the doors.)

    It would be great if the Nolan presentation was filmed for inclusion in an upcoming disc-based re-release. I am sincerely hoping that the new remaster is presented on regular Blu-ray in addition to UHD. While I will undoubtedly buy it in UHD one day, right now I am still just in HD, and have no plans to upgrade in the foreseeable future – but I'd love to retire the current (underwhelming) Blu-ray.

  14. From Deadline.

    According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation. There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. Nolan worked closely with Warner Bros. throughout the mastering process. The film will also return to U.S. theaters in 70mm beginning May 18, 2018.

  15. Tino

    From Deadline.

    According to Cannes, for the first time since the original film’s release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative meaning it’s a true photochemical film recreation. There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. Nolan worked closely with Warner Bros. throughout the mastering process. The film will also return to U.S. theaters in 70mm beginning May 18, 2018.

    What is a "new printing element"? Thank you.

  16. And there was an interesting feature in the Hollywood issue of Vanity Fair, which I just read.

    I wasn't aware of the extremely complex nature of filming the special effects, to avoid composite shots:

    "One overriding difficulty was that Kubrick insisted there be no second- or third-generation degradation of the film image when shots were composited; thus every element of a given scene—a spaceship, say, plus a star field, and maybe a planet or actor or both—had to be shot on the same film negative, with separate passes through the camera sometimes coming more than a year apart. More complex shots might have 7, 8, even 10 elements. If a new pass was wonky—if stars showed through the edge of a spaceship—the negative would be scrapped and the entire sequence begun over. As Kubrick wrote Clarke, “We are getting magnificent shots, but everything is like a 106-move chess game with two adjournments.”

    http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo…scenes-of-2001-a-space-odyssey-50-years-later

  17. Robert Harris

    Unfortunately, some of that footage no longer survives, and is represented by dupes from b/w masters.

    So these parts of the original negative were worn out so much they were cut and dupes put into the negative? And then the cut pieces were not archived but thrown into the garbage? And this kind of thing was done without aksing or informing Kubrick, behind his back?

  18. Michel_Hafner

    So these parts of the original negative were worn out so much they were cut and dupes put into the negative? And then the cut pieces were not archived but thrown into the garbage? And this kind of thing was done without aksing or informing Kubrick, behind his back?

    I'd think decisions like this would have been made at a really low level. A shot is too damaged to go through a printing machine, so the film lab get in touch with MGM who organize a dupe (or maybe all that's done & decided at the lab), & who wants the damaged shot that's been cut out? No one. And it doesn't help that nearly all the film labs have been closed down now, along with all the vast film vaults. And who wants to get Kubrick involved? I wouldn't. He's moved on, now making films exclusively for Warner.

  19. Billy Batson

    I'd think decisions like this would have been made at a really low level. A shot is too damaged to go through a printing machine, so the film lab get in touch with MGM who organize a dupe (or maybe all that's done & decided at the lab), & who wants the damaged shot that's been cut out? No one. And it doesn't help that nearly all the film labs have been closed down now, along with all the vast film vaults. And who wants to get Kubrick involved? I wouldn't. He's moved on, now making films exclusively for Warner.

    I understand the rationale but in hindsight it's stupid like many other things that were done back then, like tossing all nitrates after copying to "safety". Lack of imagination about what use/worth films could have some decades from then and how technology could progress and make the unthinkable doable.

  20. Yup, & we don't learn. I'm sure it's still happening today with lots of things. The long view is a long ways off, & there's budgets & short term considerations. In fifty years time people will be outraged at what we threw away & pulled down (& then there's the rainforest).

  21. Please keep something in mind when it came to inserting dupes.

    If a lab had an order for 20 70mm prints, they would be struck on optical printers. Probably 2-3 prints per week.

    If there was a tear — I generally received a call from the lab at around 7AM, informing me as to what shots in Lawrence had torn the night before — one had to immediately go to the masters, or shut down printing.

    This was standard lab procedure.

    When a large order was being produced, generally the masters stood by somewhere accessible.

  22. I really wasn't that bothered about this release, I saw it three or four times on the big screen at the Casino Cinerama, London back in 1968, but thought I might find it a bit slow now. Now reading all this stuff online has enthused me, I can't wait to read the reports/reviews on the Blu-ray (especially from Mr Harris). I bought the Taschen book about the making of the film a couple of months ago, only £12 on Amazon UK, it's over £36 now (Amazon must have been clearing out their warehouse).

  23. If the colors in the trailer are indicative of what's in the Bluray (or UHD if you will), I think I'll stick to my current Bluray.
    I already have enough teal and yellow blurays in my collection.

    (reference comparison from bluray.com)
    top: old bluray
    bottom: new trailer of restored film

    [​IMG]

  24. Konstantinos

    If the colors in the trailer are indicative of what's in the Bluray (or UHD if you will), I think I'll stick to my current Bluray.
    I already have enough teal and yellow blurays in my collection.

    Ha, exactly my thoughts on seeing the trailer, & those caps are very damming.

  25. Yet more wreckstoration. Yuk. Every other new release of a vintage film is coming out like this now. I hope this, along with music's loudness wars, is just an extended fad. Perhaps one day this period of madness will be looked back on as a pointless marketing craze, like 1980s-style colorization or "Electronically Reprocessed Stereo" and "Duophonic" recordings of the 1960s and 1970s.

    Regardless, cue the usual confirmation bias-ridden posters who will swear blind 2001 was aways meant to be thoroughly tealed and you can't judge its original colour palette based on years of mistimed home video video releases, blah, blah, blah…

  26. I don't think a quick scan of a newly made trailer released to YouTube should be taken as representative of either the new 70mm prints (created in the analogue realm) or the upcoming UHD release (for which the transfer source hasn't been announced, and may not even have been done yet).

    Also, for what it's worth, the current Blu-ray should not be used as the absolute final word on what the film is supposed to look like. Some of us, myself included, dislike the Blu-ray because it's not at all representative of the 70mm prints.

  27. Since they closed the Ziegfeld several years ago I can't think of a decent sized theater in NYC that could take advange of a 70MM print . Ah for the days before the Rivoli theater was first twined and then torn down.

  28. Josh Steinberg

    I don't think a quick scan of a newly made trailer released to YouTube should be taken as representative of either the new 70mm prints (created in the analogue realm) or the upcoming UHD release (for which the transfer source hasn't been announced, and may not even have been done yet).

    I agree, it's just a trailer, but if the new Blu-ray does look like that flat greeny mess, then there's going to be online fireworks, & I'll save myself a few bob by not buying it.

    …& thinking about it, it is only a trailer, but why not get the colour right for it?

  29. Garysb

    Since they closed the Ziegfeld several years ago I can't think of a decent sized theater in NYC that could take advange of a 70MM print . Ah for the days before the Rivoli theater was first twined and then torn down.

    They could book it into the IMAX screen at Loew's (now AMC) Lincoln Square.

  30. Brent Reid

    Yet more wreckstoration. Yuk. Every other new release of a vintage film is coming out like this now. I hope this, along with music's loudness wars, is just an extended fad. Perhaps one day this period of madness will be looked back on as a pointless marketing craze, like 1980s-style colorization or "Electronically Reprocessed Stereo" and "Duophonic" recordings of the 1960s and 1970s.

    Regardless, cue the usual confirmation bias-ridden posters who will swear blind 2001 was aways meant to be thoroughly tealed and you can't judge its original colour palette based on years of mistimed home video video releases, blah, blah, blah…

    The problem is, Hollywood's adoration of teal and orange has been going on for over a decade, and shows no signs of abating. What an annoyance. The fear is that this is what we'll be stuck with, since it seems unlikely that there will be a subsequent corrected version. This was the title that had me finally seriously considering getting a UHD player, and these screenshots have thrown cold water on it.

  31. Patrick McCart

    I don't get why anyone is getting worked up about the UHD since it's really obvious the trailer uses footage from the existing HD master with color tweaking added.

    It's legitimate to be worried, because it seems there's a real possibility that the colors will be mucked with for the UHD release.

  32. Probably right. I cannot imagine the Kubrick estate, which has been very exacting in the past, would allow anything less than a perfect presentation of the film. Still waiting to see just what venues are going to show this.

  33. Edwin-S

    First. It is a trailer. Second. It is on YouTube. Hardly, the medium for accurate film representation. Thirdly. The trailer is being seen on mostly uncalibrated computer monitors.

    Big differences can be seen in post #54 on "uncalibrated computer monitors".

  34. Edwin-S

    First. It is a trailer. Second. It is on YouTube. Hardly, the medium for accurate film representation. Thirdly. The trailer is being seen on mostly uncalibrated computer monitors.

    Can you give me an example of a trailer of a restored film where the subsequent Bluray had significantly altered colors?
    I can't think of any right now.
    What I see in these trailers I see in the blurays themselves.

    Anyway, we'll be here (hopefully) in a few months where the blurays will be released and we'll see if it was representative or not.

  35. Konstantinos

    Can you give me an example of a trailer of a restored film where the subsequent Bluray had significantly altered colors?
    I can't think of any right now.
    What I see in these trailers I see in the blurays themselves.

    Anyway, we'll be here (hopefully) in a few months where the blurays will be released and we'll see if it was representative or not.

    Videa's first trailer for TLE's 4K restoration of SUSPIRIA used an earlier HD video master.

    Vincent

  36. WHITE TERROR – meaning the fear of a white balance. For anyone who doesn't know, and respecting the level of technical knowledge on this forum, a white balance is when a cameraman presses the white balance button on the camera whilst it's looking at a white card. Any colour cast anomalies created by the location and lighting are cancelled out and white is seen as pure white.

    Colour manipulation is easily achieved by using a warmer or colder card so that the camera compensates.

    My impression is that the development over the last quite a few years of highly colourful but highly manipulated, non-realistic colour in television was caused by creating the new post of POST PRODUCTION COLOUR GRADER/CONTROLLER. The objective became not realism but artistic colour changes.

    That in itself merely copies what has always happened in film and tv – highly detailed colour grading in order to match shots and create a perticular look.

    But readers of this forum know that it frequently goes much too far and results in people asking why a production now has a green, yellow, blue or golden cast.

    Is it a case of misuse of facilities? This will remain controversial but looking at comparisons a few posts further back I'll add my opinion that the current look of 2001, judging from the trailer, exhibits profound WHITE TERROR. A particular cast is administered rather than have any pure white in the picture.

    A most honourable recent exception is MY FAIR LADY. The Ascot scenes are as gloriously white as intended.

    I've seen 2001 many times and always in 70mm and can endorse that its white balance was perfect. I believe that we're constantly seeing the products of immature people who can't resist fiddling to prove how clever they are at playing with the colour temperature.

  37. Malcolm Bmoor

    A most honourable recent exception is MY FAIR LADY. The Ascot scenes are as gloriously white as intended.

    And Spartacus too. Pure blues, pure whites.
    No teals, no yellows!
    Well, this is the outcome of competent and humble (respecting the original films) people.

    Another recent example of color manipulation in the usual color palette (teal) (although not radical – and not in all scenes as it seems – like the Eclair/Ritrovata companies) is found in the recent Criterion of Midnight Cowboy which comes from a new 4K scan.
    Without even comparing with the old release, when i saw that shirt in the Criterion release, it immediately looked unnatural and aligned with the current trends.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

  38. Well I was a colour grader/timer in a film lab for 20 years, only 16mm, industrial & TV, & there was only so much I could do. I only had red green & blue (yellow, magenta & cyan at Techicolor, but the same thing really) & I could make it lighter or darker. And then on to telecine, wow, much more, change the contrast, turn the colour down, change the hue on any individual colour, & SO much more, which is why you now get some weird & wonderful looks on some films & TV programs, & when done well & tastefully it really works a treat. When it comes to older films I have this old fashion view that I want greys to look grey (neutral) & not blue or green, & whites (a lot of the time) should look white, & colours not mucked about with.

  39. Konstantinos

    And Spartacus too. Pure blues, pure whites.
    No teals, no yellows!
    Well, this is the outcome of competent and humble (respecting the original films) people.

    Another recent example of color manipulation in the usual color palette (teal) (although not radical – and not in all scenes as it seems – like the Eclair/Ritrovata companies) is found in the recent Criterion of Midnight Cowboy which comes from a new 4K scan.
    Without even comparing with the old release, when i saw that shirt in the Criterion release, it immediately looked unnatural and aligned with the current trends.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    This is why some of us are so worried about 2001. We know that there is a very heavy predisposition in Hollywood to make these kind of color changes to older films, and we SEE the changes in the trailer. The only basis given so far for saying there's no reason to worry is an assumption that "they wouldn't dare" do it to the film itself.

  40. Robert Harris

    I’d not pre-order. Wait for reviews!

    Uh-Oh. Not getting the warm and fuzzies here.

    I wouldn't want to speak for you, but my gut tells me there's something about this upcoming release that's going to prove to be very controversial.

  41. WillG

    Uh-Oh. Not getting the warm and fuzzies here.

    I wouldn't want to speak for you, but my gut tells me there's something about this upcoming release that's going to prove to be very controversial.

    FILE UNDER: Take heed or take Keir.

  42. I would tend to heed Mr. Harris. Interesting that there is now new packaging though what was put up earlier may have just been a temp thing. Seeing it in 70mm on July 7th at AFI Silver.

  43. Robert Harris

    Let’s be clear.

    I’m not suggesting a problem, but with what’s occurred thus far, the release needs to be viewed before any presumptions of quality might be made.

    As said, I didn’t want to speak for you, but I know you’re a guy “in the know” so you defiantly bump the needle so to speak.

  44. Johnny Angell

    They want $42 before shipping. I’ll wait.

    Robert Harris

    I’d not pre-order. Wait for reviews!

    Osato

    Carry on…in October

    OR: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love…the first day of summer.:)

  45. Things are getting more distressingly interesting. WB’s press release today seems to be conflating the Nolan analogue, with the digital restoration, while they have nothing visually in common.

    The verbiage speaks of one building upon the other.

    More red flags.

  46. Robert Harris

    Things are getting more distressingly interesting. WB’s press release today seems to be conflating the Nolan analogue, with the digital restoration, while they have nothing visually in common.

    The verbiage speaks of one building upon the other.

    More red flags.

    Any chance if you have any contact still with any of the great collaborators at Wb. do you think they would let you see the finished transfer?

    It would just be nice to know are the whites white and has any other color been altered?

    it would be nice just to calm the masses including myself. 2001 is my favorite film of all time right ahead of Lawrence of Arabia so if the 4K doesnt come out looking like it should its just going to be a great disappointment and something that would take years and years for a chance of a re-issue with an all new transfer.

    I hate to say it but if Nolan’s input in any way harms the look of the film for disc Im never seeing or buying another film he is invloved with ever again. Id prob trash the ones I own! Not kidding he can do what he wants with his films fine, but 2001 is NOT his movie.

    Would also be great to confirm info regarding the two 5.1 dts HD MA audio tracks are they 24bit? Thats at least better than the 16bit PCM of the Former BLU but it would have been cool to get a 96K on both tracks. WB i think only did one previous 96K audio with The Right Stuff.

    Really wish an Atmos track was made though, it could have been used moderatly and tastfully as object based.

  47. View attachment 47125

    The price link below will take you directly to the product on Amazon. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

    [parsehtml]
    <iframe style="width:120px;height:240px;" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="//ws-na.amazon-adsystem.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&OneJS=1&Operation=GetAdHtml&MarketPlace=US&source=ss&ref=as_ss_li_til&ad_type=product_link&tracking_id=htfronsposts-20&marketplace=amazon&region=US&placement=B07B12HNJW&asins=B07B12HNJW&linkId=18083d9a3b49974a8a6ac5902a1f7f67&show_border=true&link_opens_in_new_window=true"></iframe>
    [/parsehtml]

  48. Robert Harris

    Things are getting more distressingly interesting. WB’s press release today seems to be conflating the Nolan analogue, with the digital restoration, while they have nothing visually in common.

    The verbiage speaks of one building upon the other.

    More red flags.

    I agree the haphazard and uncoordinated release of info regarding the roadshow and the UHD has thrown all kinds of red flags.

    But the press release does have this statement (emphasis mine):

    "Building on the work done for the new 70mm prints, the 4K UHD with HDR presentation was mastered from the 65mm original camera negative. "

    Immediately before this, the press release mentions the 70mm release that was printed from an element based on the OCN, so they are definitely differentiating the two, from how I read it.

    Is there something I am missing?

  49. YanMan

    I agree the haphazard and uncoordinated release of info regarding the roadshow and the UHD has thrown all kinds of red flags.

    But the press release does have this statement (emphasis mine):

    "Building on the work done for the new 70mm prints, the 4K UHD with HDR presentation was mastered from the 65mm original camera negative. "

    Immediately before this, the press release mentions the 70mm release that was printed from an element based on the OCN, so they are definitely differentiating the two, from how I read it.

    Is there something I am missing?

    You are.

    Every film and video ever created, have all been based upon “the OCN.”

    For the record, the new 4k, will be partially, or substantively mastered from the 65mm original camera negative. Not entirely.

    Possibly just a poorly written, or misinformed press release.

    But there are people at the studio who should know better.

    With all of the previous smoke and mirrors, transparency here is essential.

    There is still the possibility of producing a perfect 4k release.

    At this point, I don’t see it as being probable.

    We’ll call it “the Nolan factor.”

    And if that’s accurate, then it’s still correctable.

  50. Jim*Tod

    It does say the blu ray is remastered, which is somewhat good news depending on how all this comes out.

    It 's all fantastic news. After all the color timing / Nolan BS the past few months, I hope we don't rehash it all summer.

  51. I have it preordered but given Mr Harris’s word of possible caution I will monitor reviews before final final decision 😉 Should have been a slam dunk. Also not one for box of junk would love to have had high quality HAL 900 facial plate or something. Not that Halmark thingy:)

    Regards,

  52. ArnoldLayne

    After all the color timing / Nolan BS the past few months, I hope we don't rehash it all summer.

    I agree, this is one of if the most anticipated title of all time for me. I keep thinking to myself why do I feel this way and I believe that it is the attention to detail Kubrick paid in this film. Reading all the books written about it just makes watching it all the more interesting.

    [​IMG]

    Look at the number of 16mm projectors running in this image to make the displays look like flat panels that were science fiction at the time.

  53. Powell&Pressburger

    The retail price for 4Ks are always pretty high. The pre-order price will drop.

    I've got over 100 UHDs. I don't mind paying market rate. But WB has been way behind the curve when it comes to making reasonable price adjustments down as the format goes more mainstream.

    I'll get it when it hits $20ish.

  54. Robert Harris

    Let’s be clear.

    I’m not suggesting a problem, but with what’s occurred thus far, the release needs to be viewed before any presumptions of quality might be made.

    I saw nothing wrong with the Nolan theatrical print other than it wasn't restored (print damage, elevated black levels). I have no reason to believe that the UHD will be other than perfect. As we have discussed, Warner has plenty of expertise to produce an awesome disc and I can't imagine it won't put the current champion, a 13mb/s VC-1 transfer, to shame…

  55. "We will serve no wine before it's time" – Orson Welles

    If the powers that be are aware of any potential shortcomings; and they have the abilities, advisers and technical resources all at their finger tips both In-House and Out; then why would all involved at WB not want to see things right?

    Let's never mind the release date. Let's get past any invested marketing pressures of its release being all about a 50th Anniversary.
    If need be, I would rather wait until 2019 for its release, in order to have the work done right; with an end result of something special, if not spectacular.

    Lessons were learned from the first and second BD of "My Fair Lady"; or so one continues to hope. The evidence on how to do things correctly was revealed in its second incarnation. As a reminder, "My Fair Lady" was a breath away from its 50th anniversary BD release and suddenly pulled for a good many months. Frustrating? No doubt. As it was, I drove to a Barnes and Noble a good 40 minutes away from my house to be there on a Tuesday morning, upon the opening of their doors. This was the only BD release to which I had ever done this for; and I was awaiting that day for a good few months. I will pat myself on the back; to which I also have witnesses; as I had concluded and stated that this mysterious delay must have happened for very good and special reasons. And I gloat right here on this forum, as I had surmised that maybe someone involved had located the 6-track elements; and later found myself to be right. Bottom line, whatever the overall reasons for the delays; as they may have been other factors beyond unearthing the original sound design; it was well worth the wait. And the benefits of this wait still remains as one of the greatest and most lasting restorative joys to date.

    I'm no insider, I'm not in the fray of decision making and I have zero influence. Nonetheless, if for some crazy reason my post – or any of the other posts written by our members – are collectively being heard, then I would ask that WB dispense with the Anniversary time-lines and simply take from those cues of prior successes. Little doubt that whatever monies are to be made and had for the upcoming 4K release of "2001" could only increase, if the word on the street and on the internet reviews were to report perfections; rather than controversy. With an Ultra-Classic like "2001" the future of 4K and the reputation of product output from WB rests not on the meeting of an announced "anniversary" release date but, rather, on stepping back and really thinking about all that is possible and all that is at hand.

  56. Powell&Pressburger

    I hate to say it but if Nolan’s input in any way harms the look of the film for disc Im never seeing or buying another film he is invloved with ever again. Id prob trash the ones I own! Not kidding he can do what he wants with his films fine, but 2001 is NOT his movie.

    I think I feel the same way. Nolan is pretty much my favorite working filmmaker at the moment, but if it comes to light that the UHD release is less than what it could be because of his input, then that will leave a really bad taste in my mouth. 2001 is not my personal favorite film, but I do consider it the greatest film ever made; and if any film deserves to have a perfect 4K restoration, this is the one.

  57. YanMan

    I think I feel the same way. Nolan is pretty much my favorite working filmmaker at the moment, but if it comes to light that the UHD release is less than what it could be because of his input, then that will leave a really bad taste in my mouth. 2001 is not my personal favorite film, but I do consider it the greatest film ever made; and if any film deserves to have a perfect 4K restoration, this is the one.

    Yup, Nolan remains the talk. And I have no clues as to what is true and what is not, concerning this upcoming 4K. Yet, if Mr. Nolan is somehow involved in less than flattering ways, then someone may want to remind him that – in the end – this is not his film. This film belongs to Stanley Kubrick; and any work conducted on "2001" should avoid becoming a future case-study of eyes wide shut.

  58. I'm kind of puzzled by all the hand wringing over this. The 70mm release was a nice opportunity to see 2001 on film, quite possibly for the last time. Nothing was changed or altered for it, and it was at minimum a small improvement over previous prints that I've seen, some of which already looked very good. And while there was some minor damage, the presentation was labelled as being "unrestored".

    There's nothing to suggest that this new, actually "restored", version will be anything less than excellent. Warner pretty much has a spotless record and while Nolan may be an analogue fetishist, the digital versions of his own films look terrific. I mean, honestly, what's the actual concern here? That he's going to insist they leave the scratches in?

  59. trajan007

    Mr Harris is probably seating in his home theater right now watching the 4K right now with a big smile on his face.

    Brilliant.:thumbs-up-smiley:

    Love it.:)
    The best thought yet.:drum:

  60. Don’t forget there are quite a few of us who have been lucky enough to see the theatrical 4K. And I think I’m right in saying that most if not all that have seen it are very happy with the colour palette. There is no teal, except where one would imagine the director wanted it. As long as the DCP, upon which I would imagine the UHD would have much in common, hasn’t been tinkered with. Honestly, it looked like it had been made recently, and not by CN.

  61. I'd like to hear what Robert Harris thinks of the 70mm theatrical re-release, all the issues I've highlighted are confirmed by various friends who have seen the film theatrically in different parts of the world (me in Australia, Germany, USA all in 70mm), so unless there's different 'Nolan' prints being shown around to the people giving this a 'pass' it's a rather poor anniversary re-release. The new 4K blu-ray might be OK as, someone else noted on this forum, it'll use a digitally restored master, but this new theatrical presentation is definitely botched. A friend in Germany that works in a film lab puts the flaws down to poor lab work from Nolan's company…

  62. Italo

    I'd like to hear what Robert Harris thinks of the 70mm theatrical re-release, all the issues I've highlighted are confirmed by various friends who have seen the film theatrically in different parts of the world (me in Australia, Germany, USA all in 70mm), so unless there's different 'Nolan' prints being shown around to the people giving this a 'pass' it's a rather poor anniversary re-release. The new 4K blu-ray might be OK as, someone else noted on this forum, it'll use a digitally restored master, but this new theatrical presentation is definitely botched. A friend in Germany that works in a film lab puts the flaws down to poor lab work from Nolan's company…

    I think the theatrical print has already been subject to all sorts of analysis. None definitive. e.g., you claimed crushed blacks, I saw elevated black level.
    There's really nothing left to do but celebrate…

  63. Italo

    I'd like to hear what Robert Harris thinks of the 70mm theatrical re-release, all the issues I've highlighted are confirmed by various friends who have seen the film theatrically in different parts of the world (me in Australia, Germany, USA all in 70mm), so unless there's different 'Nolan' prints being shown around to the people giving this a 'pass' it's a rather poor anniversary re-release. The new 4K blu-ray might be OK as, someone else noted on this forum, it'll use a digitally restored master, but this new theatrical presentation is definitely botched. A friend in Germany that works in a film lab puts the flaws down to poor lab work from Nolan's company…

    My 70 MM screening definitely was not botched. It was spectacular. Zero issues.

  64. While the unrestored 70mm was a great experience, I still don’t understand the reasoning behind it. By definition there were some issues with the print, though not nearly as many as I feared. It’s just that there was a fully restored drop dead gorgeous version sitting on the shelf ready to blow us all away, which I saw a couple of weeks later, arebeit on a much smaller screen. The unrestored just looked faded compared to the 4K, which, given its age is exactly what we should expect. Still seems a very strange decision by CN/WB. Why wouldn’t you want to show a film, and this one above all others,in the best possible light?

  65. Mellotronmaniac

    While the unrestored 70mm was a great experience, I still don’t understand the reasoning behind it. By definition there were some issues with the print, though not nearly as many as I feared. It’s just that there was a fully restored drop dead gorgeous version sitting on the shelf ready to blow us all away, which I saw a couple of weeks later, arebeit on a much smaller screen. The unrestored just looked faded compared to the 4K, which, given its age is exactly what we should expect. Still seems a very strange decision by CN/WB. Why wouldn’t you want to show a film, and this one above all others,in the best possible light?

    Google it, there are many articles where Nolan explains his motivations.

  66. Mellotronmaniac

    Don’t forget there are quite a few of us who have been lucky enough to see the theatrical 4K. And I think I’m right in saying that most if not all that have seen it are very happy with the colour palette. There is no teal, except where one would imagine the director wanted it. As long as the DCP, upon which I would imagine the UHD would have much in common, hasn’t been tinkered with. Honestly, it looked like it had been made recently, and not by CN.

    Mellotronmaniac

    While the unrestored 70mm was a great experience, I still don’t understand the reasoning behind it. By definition there were some issues with the print, though not nearly as many as I feared. It’s just that there was a fully restored drop dead gorgeous version sitting on the shelf ready to blow us all away, which I saw a couple of weeks later, arebeit on a much smaller screen. The unrestored just looked faded compared to the 4K, which, given its age is exactly what we should expect. Still seems a very strange decision by CN/WB. Why wouldn’t you want to show a film, and this one above all others,in the best possible light?

    I agree with these comments and am happy that the DCP looked good
    I've seen neither but have seen it in 70mm at the music box a few years ago. It looked warmer than the Blu Ray but still wonderful. As others have also stated why put out for viewing something that has flaws when better is right there ? Nolan's comments regarding his thoughts for presenting the film as such don't make any sense to me personally. Like wearing a worn out suit to a formal when you have a new one on the rack.

  67. Robert Harris

    For the record, No.

    I know that Kaleidescape has had several older films a few weeks before the Blu Ray release, I can hope this will be the case. The UHD Lawrence of Arabia they have had for what will be closer to two years ahead.

    To bad that they pipe dream of you seeing it already is only that.

  68. I'm hopeful for a spectacular release! My only real disappointment is the lack of new extras. I'm hoping that someone, someday, produces the ultimate making-of documentary. This movie certainly deserves it! In the meantime, I'll be checking out the 70mm release in Minneapolis next weekend. It's one of the few movies I'd drive 6 hours to see!

  69. Is there anyone who can get to the bottom of what is going on with this release? Alot of talk is happening and alot of red flags and alarms are going off, and yet no one has seen it. I am getting pissed at Nolan with his digital shouldn't be involved in film restoration attitude. In the Variety piece about the "unrestored" version, he compared what he is doing to what Scorsese and Spielberg did on LOA. They weren't checking the negative and weren't responsible for color timing. RAH knows Ned Price. This is becoming a controversial release and it's not even out yet. I think we need something specific at this point regarding this release, and someone needs to put Nolan in his place and have him stick to releasing his own films the way he wants.

  70. If you go on to the FILM TECH site someone has a picture of an original leader of a 1968 70mm print and it has Cinerama on it.
    He says there was different mix for Cinerama , very intresting.