Spencer, I honestly don’t know how you’re able to stay composed throughout such a lengthy and justifiably scathing analysis of Paramount Video without blowing a circuit. And yet, you still manage to bring a fair amount of humor into it. This is a damnable shame that one of Hitchcock’s greatest achievements, in VistaVision no less, will likely never get a true archival release. Sounds like Paramount would have produced a better product by just scanning an old 35mm film print, warts and all. Olive Films did this consistently, and the result was often pleasing.
@@1165mac To quote Clouseau: “it wasn’t easy.” If we could get the raw 6K scan and the raw audio transfer given to someone else to do just a basic cleanup it would be soooo much better.
This restoration appears to be a mix of newly restored sections with recycling of other sections from 2012 blu-ray. It's bizarre, I don't know how this even happens. That said, it's a testament to the quality of the VistaVision process that this UHD still manages to look gorgeous, with good detail (not what it should be, but still good) and stunning colors. Imagine if we had actually gotten a whole proper new restoration from the negative!
@@matheus5230 It’s bizarre and shouldn’t be this way. It may be the best we’ve had for most of the transfer but even that is compromised. But the audio situation is unforgivable. I wish we could just get the raw 6K scans and a raw transfer of the original audio to give to somebody else to do properly. Even minimal restoration on those would be better than this hodgepodge mess.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusaderI really fans got Access to the raw 6K scans, though I wonder if somehow Paramount lost part of those scans, because I really can't understand why so many parts of the movie are coming from the 2012 blu-ray instead of the 6K scans. If Paramount indeed lost some of the scans, then that's very worrying for the quality of their archival practices. About audio, the standards across the whole industry are so low (almost as low as 4K restorations of anime, which almost inevitably get the heavy DNR treatment, with the Macross film Do You Remember Love being seemingly the latest victim) that I don't give too much thought to it anymore. And when original audio isn't included, I just hope that the new remix is respectful, which is the case in Disney's UHDs of Cinderella and Snow White.
White Christmas is the better Paramount VistaVision UHD from last year. A truly new transfer. The encoding isn't great, but at least it is not awful, especially for Paramount's standards.
Something I noticed on this remaster AND the recent North By Northwest 4k I wanted to mention and see if you noticed as well. There is a scene in the first act where Cary Grant and I think it’s John Williams are standing in front of all the flowers in the street market. It’s a locked down two shot and if you look at the flowers they are all vibrating while the actors are still. I think they somehow stabilized the actors but not their surroundings. I noticed it too in the last act of North by northwest when Grant and Eva Saint Marie are in the wooded area of the national park standing at opposite ends of the picture with many skinny trees between them filling up the frame. Again the actors are stabilized but the trees are vibrating. Sorry to point this out if you didn’t already notice because it looks so odd once you notice. But again it just feels that if they had just taken that little bit of extra care. Perhaps they just don’t have all the time they need but I mean these movies have been around for 80 years what’s another couple days to get it right?
@@TheFellCloud The forest scene in N by NW looks terrible almost as if it was heavily grain managed. The only thing I can figure is in some of these moments where you notice a particular sort of vibrating movement that it could be a symptom unique to VistaVision. Because of the necessary intensive lights, there were times where it would make the actual film almost sort of buckle or warp as it was running through the camera. It’s possible that what we’re seeing with these higher resolution scans in certain moments is actually this particular artifact. But of course, this is merely guess work.
I was saving this 4k for a rainy day but was compelled to watch it after seeing this video. I thought you might be overreacting but holy heck this transfer is a complete mess!! The colors and the over contrasting was the biggest culprit but what is up with that shot of the girl laying on the raft??!! It’s so smoothed out it looks like a xerox of a lithograph. I don’t normally get upset over a little grain scrubbing as long as I can enjoy the movie but this one is so all over the place. And some shots are perfect!? I almost wonder if parts of the film went missing it’s that bad. I’m completely baffled and quite sad since I really love this movie. The Universal remasters are so good. Shame on Paramount for this hatchet job. And the price!! I swear the limited print runs is a tactic to get us all to preorder so that it’s all sold out before the word gets out about how bad it is.
@@TheFellCloud THANK YOU!!! With all the positive reviews this got…when you see the disc yourself you start to wonder if you’re going nuts! If this were just a brand new master that was over processed that would be one thing. But have it continually seem to switch between different masters from different eras and be overprocessed but even that not being consistent is just baffling! For every major improvement that’s here there’s a compromise somewhere else. And the difference in clarity can vary from shot to shot in the same sequence. Top it off with some frozen grain halos, lesser encoding and no original audio with a processed remix of an already processed remix. It just adds up to a frustrating experience for no reason other than people making silly decisions.
Great review, nice there is a film review channel you can trust. As a owner of a Perspecta Stereo Decoder, I am looking high and low, for a copy of TCAT with intact Perspecta sound.
@@mikaelchristensen5433 Thank You! I wish there was a dedicated list of Perspecta mixes somewhere and it’s still hard to discern what films may have had one. Now that we have the ability to have them preserved on disc they should always be made available. Supposedly Paramount restored the Perspecta for Invasion of the Body Snatchers and has never released it.
Excellent review! I ended up grabbing a copy to see the rich colors and tones which can only come through on HDR and I was pleased with that aspect. I wonder if Paramount will ever get serious about preserving film grain. I couldn't care less if a disc looks like a crazy storm of grain inferior displays there's no need to compromise the picture for anyone. The onus is on the end user to step up their game if they want to see it correctly. Then we have the encode robbing us as we try and get out the door 😂TMWKTM is still my gold standard for Hitchcock on 4k so far that was just a pleasant surprise to see how well Universal handled that one.
@@444chroma That’s about all one can get out of this, that at least the image does have improvements over past releases in spite of the severe drawbacks Paramount caused. It really sucks because not only is this Hitchcock but also due to every video release of TCAT having issues.
@@andersb80 I’m trying to come up with a solution for making solid UHD screen caps. Unfortunately, it’s a real headache to try to get solid ones and especially dealing with HDR. I’m hoping to get a specific new drive and set up for at least doing some basic screencaps. The real trouble is in trying to isolate the frozen grain halos. That’s something that’s almost impossible to capture outside of seeing in motion in person.
@@DanKeatis Thanks! I’ve always tried but haven’t been able to nail his sound perfectly. At best I can get some of his delivery style which is what I was aiming for.
I still have the 2012 blu ray which I never upgraded to any version. So is this new 4K UHD better than the 2012 release overall or should I just not upgrade?
@@AlSumait I would pick up this new release on sale since it’s overpriced and sadly likely the best we’re going to get in picture. (Though with severe drawbacks) However, I would say to hang onto the 2012 Blu-ray to at least have some form of the original audio and the version of a master before any of the modern problems were introduced. Unfortunately, no release is without some kind of issue, but you will notice visual improvements in the 4K master when it’s not using some form of an older master for certain sections and has the least amount of processing in some areas.
I'm so tired of Paramount's 4K transfers these days and their restorations. After the amazing remaster of The Crow on 4K, we're back in the crapper again with Paramount.
I would love a review of the Lawrence of Arabia UHD, people have found that the Movies Anywhere encode is actually better than the UHD's! Sony is the last studio that one would expect that to happen (outside of MOD releases, which Sony can be inconsistent with regarding encoding). Nevertheless, all HDR versions of Lawrence of Arabia have the baked-in filtering that makes the fine detail not be as good as it could be, it somehow looks both softer and far grainier than the 4K SDR version that was available on streaming before the UHD release.
@@matheus5230 That’s on my to do list. I don’t stream but definitely need to look at those versions because I find it absolutely baffling that Sony would do something like that. That’s like an extreme example of how Warner will only put Dolby Vision on streaming options.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusaderThe screnshots of the Movies Anywhere stream showing a better encoding than the UHD is an example of how bitrates aren't everything. The UHD's encode is far from a disaster, but it falls short of what we've come to expect from Sony, and it's made even more bizarre by how even though the film is split in two discs, Sony left over 30GBs of free space, and the video encode would fit in a single BD-100. The film was split in two discs not for maximum picture quality, but to cram in a ridiculous amount of audio tracks, 5 being lossless! For the filtering baked-in to the master, the restoration notes say that issues that had been fixed in the 2012 restoration had become visible again with HDR and needed to be addressed. But why apply a filtering to the whole movie instead of just the most problematic parts? Why not go back to the raw scans and rework the most problematic sections? And why not just be more conservative in the HDR grade, so that the grain and artifacts don't get exposed so brutally? Lawrence is far from a light cannon, but it still pushes the brightness quite a lot. The scene of Sherif Ali's entrance is perhaps the one that best showcases the situation of restorations artifacts that weren't visible in SDR now being painfully exposed, as there's frozen grain around the actors walking in front of the sky.
Paramount's home video mastering in general is a mutt. Nobody knows what they're doing. Footloose, Plains, Trains and Automobiles, The Greatest Show on Earth, To Catch a Thief, and on and on. Garbage in. Garbage out. Can't someone just get hired here for quality control; someone who's an archivist, who understands film-based restoration/remastering from the ground up, who does the job right the first time, instead of re-re-re-releasing catalog with minimal upgrades, or, in fact, digital downgrades that continue to plague what should be a basically blind purchase.
@@nickzegarac429 It truly makes no sense. To make matters worse their posturing and official statements make the general public believe they’re doing proper archival work. Worst of all is when they are brought in to speak at official events or given awards for substandard destructive work.
The DVD of To Catch a Thief have is so blurry, I don't think I've ever seen a version of the film which looks good. Which is such a shame because the original clearly looked/looks amazing.
I think you will be surprised if you watch the 4K. I acknowledge the problems but I have to say I didn't notice them that much. Worse masters and especially more distracting masters have been released.
@@gbrading Every time the film has gotten a video release it’s had some kind of problem which is really a shame. This new 4K master is the best we’ve gotten so you will notice a definite improvement, regardless of which DVD version you have. But it’s got its own unnecessary drawbacks so it’s almost as if we went several steps forward while also going several steps backward. And of course they were removed any form of the original audio, which doesn’t help.
Fantastic treatise as usual. I too avoided the 2020 blu-ray and think 4K is mostly up with downs. But you repeat yourself too often - this could have been a 40-minute video.
Agreed, his videos drive me up the wall because he simply goes round in circles saying the same thing ten times over. A pity because he makes valid points and provides a useful criticism of some of these erratic releases. I have to turn off his videos after 10 mins, he needs to start editing himself down to 20 or 25 mins otherwise people will simply switch off...
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader thanks for your response and please be assured I and many others appreciate your good work in highlighting these issues, if you could do it a bit more concisely I think the message would get across more effectively to the film industry people behind many of these flawed "restorations". Keep up the good work 👏
I've seen a print of this. Not sure if it was LPP or IB, but leaning towards LPP. It didn't look much different than what I'm seeing in the screen caps. Now that isn't a good test as the print is generations old but it makes me wonder what sort of elements remain and in what condition. Also, what the negative itself captured. Despite it all, it's a terrific film. Thanks for the review.
@@popcornbobGCC all of the older releases are using direct prints or the new interpositive they struck in the 2000s. So if you look at say the 2012 Blu-ray, it’s coming from that IP they made. The 2020 and 2024 masters are coming from the same new 6K scan of the negative and probably filled in with sections of that 2000s interpositive.
@Mowglibaloo2 Oh geez, Liberty Valance is such a screwy weird transfer I still can’t quite figure out what all they did. Their stupid inflated presents pricing needs to stop. These are not boutique label releases in any way shape or form.
Such a shame about this. I always want to see a better picture with these oldie 4k's with such high prices this feels like we're being cheated. Feels like a half hearted effort for top dollar/pound
@@Steve-l7e5y It’s really frustrating because there are improvements yet all of the new issues were avoidable. What makes it even worse is that they charge a full $40 like this is a premium boutique release.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader goodness me a "premium boutique release"? 🙁 I hope you agree it feels like it's only a half finished piece of work and the boss has said "that'll do. Get it released" It's so not fair, but also means your channel is more important now than ever so we don't fall foul to these terribly expensive releases
Paramount needs to overhaul their transfer and home video department. Have you seen Universal's DUEL (1971)? There is a lot going on in that release, and I mean A LOT, and it's not all good. It FINALLY has the original broadcast version, which the only version worth watching.
@@SpeccyHorace -- indeed, but it's better than nothing. Spielberg's best film. I wonder if he sabotaged it on purpose because he prefers the inferior, expanded version.
I was looking forward to seeing this film on 4K, but that's put me off. The audio issue plus nothing fresh with extras just says it all. Paramount aren't doing themselves any favours.
@@dr.impossibleofcounterpunc1984 since this is likely all we’re going to get I would definitely say wait until it goes on sale so you don’t pay the inflated full price. There is definitely improvement in areas because they’re undoing the terrible 2020 master for the most part and it’s coming from a higher quality source than the pre-2020 releases. But you’ll quickly see that it’s a mess of issues so we’re stuck with all of these compromises.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader I'm stuck with the standard PHE (UK) DVD. Like you said, compromises. I just wish they would do these movies properly. It's becoming very agrivating. That said, thanks for another indepth review.
@ Thanks! Try to pick up the UHD on sale and see what you think. You might want to also pick up a version of the 2012 BD for good measure as well. And to be fully compete you’ll need the 2007/2009 DVD for the dropped commentary.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader 😆 It's beyond laughable. You need 4 versions of To Catch a Thief to have the complete experience. Everything is definitely going backwards these days. Strange that! There was a time when things were done right. You have to wonder...... Must be something in the tap water.
@ Yep it’s pretty much four releases necessary to cobble together your own version. Unfortunately no one’s held to a quality standard or goes through any quality control.
... otherwise it will be the same, but, rubbing more salt on the wound, the european edition here in spain, also from Paramount, of course, has the SD blu-ray and a bunch of printed goodies (a poster with the original artwork, 6 printed stills and more), and for slightly less money, 35 euros.
@@rfsanjurjo Yet another EU release with much better packaging and swag. It sucks that it’ll still be the same screwy disc but I’m not sure why the studios keep doing this. And there are times where these fancier European sets are not only better packages but less expensive than the basic US release.
An unrelated topic, but I wanted to ask if you've thought about playing the new Indiana Jones game? I think it would be cool to hear your thoughts on the story and the gameplay.
Since TO CATCH A THIEF is far from a Hitchcock masterpiece, I've held off on the 4K, particularly since it's overpriced. I'll check out the 4k disc when the price goes down, since even subpar Hitchcock (even the original poster is tacky) is better than none at all. At least getting Lyn Murray's bubbly score in stereo is a major upgrade in the audio presentation.
@@TheVid54 Definitely wait for a sale or the eventual budget reissue of the same disc. The price is inflated to begin with. You’ll definitely notice some visual improvement because this is coming from a 6K scan without the extreme DNR of the 2020 version. But it’s still filled with drawbacks and no original audio. It is more impressive having the score in some form of stereo, but as I pointed out, this is a 5.1 remix of the stereo remix so it’s just been processed further.
Interesting. The person who managed the restoration, on the Perf Damage Podcast, says they only applied grain management in one scene to deal with some moire issues.
You have to keep in mind, this reviewer is a dork who never got laid in high school and probably still hasn't felt the touch of a woman to this day. Take his opinion with a (film) grain of salt.
@@StevenHemingway1 him being a virgin shouldn't affect his opinion~ I love hearing about these new releases on 4k because i like old movies~ and he says things i never wouldve thought of! i sure as hell wouldnt sleep w/ him in a million yrs, but again that doesnt change his stance and opinion!
Would love to see Charlotte go toe-to-toe over this and refute the charges being made here. As for me, I saw this movie screened in a theater in 1983 and have never had much call to watch it again, even though I have the DVD on hand. LIke most people, I won't be examining it with a microscope for static grain but I do prefer restoration to be as close to the original source as possible.
C'mon Spencer calling it a masterpiece are you smoking crack? Hitchcock the master of suspense makes a movie with no suspense in it at all. North by Northwest works so much better imho
@@bonzodog6872 I do consider all Hitchcock films masterpieces. TCAT is a rich yet lighter film by design almost a soufflé of a film. North By. Northwest in contrast was designed as inherently self referential and each film has the individual stamp of their writers. TCAT with John Michael Hayes and Northwest with Ernest Lehman.
Spencer, I honestly don’t know how you’re able to stay composed throughout such a lengthy and justifiably scathing analysis of Paramount Video without blowing a circuit. And yet, you still manage to bring a fair amount of humor into it. This is a damnable shame that one of Hitchcock’s greatest achievements, in VistaVision no less, will likely never get a true archival release. Sounds like Paramount would have produced a better product by just scanning an old 35mm film print, warts and all. Olive Films did this consistently, and the result was often pleasing.
@@1165mac To quote Clouseau: “it wasn’t easy.”
If we could get the raw 6K scan and the raw audio transfer given to someone else to do just a basic cleanup it would be soooo much better.
This restoration appears to be a mix of newly restored sections with recycling of other sections from 2012 blu-ray. It's bizarre, I don't know how this even happens. That said, it's a testament to the quality of the VistaVision process that this UHD still manages to look gorgeous, with good detail (not what it should be, but still good) and stunning colors. Imagine if we had actually gotten a whole proper new restoration from the negative!
@@matheus5230 It’s bizarre and shouldn’t be this way. It may be the best we’ve had for most of the transfer but even that is compromised.
But the audio situation is unforgivable.
I wish we could just get the raw 6K scans and a raw transfer of the original audio to give to somebody else to do properly. Even minimal restoration on those would be better than this hodgepodge mess.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusaderI really fans got Access to the raw 6K scans, though I wonder if somehow Paramount lost part of those scans, because I really can't understand why so many parts of the movie are coming from the 2012 blu-ray instead of the 6K scans. If Paramount indeed lost some of the scans, then that's very worrying for the quality of their archival practices. About audio, the standards across the whole industry are so low (almost as low as 4K restorations of anime, which almost inevitably get the heavy DNR treatment, with the Macross film Do You Remember Love being seemingly the latest victim) that I don't give too much thought to it anymore. And when original audio isn't included, I just hope that the new remix is respectful, which is the case in Disney's UHDs of Cinderella and Snow White.
White Christmas is the better Paramount VistaVision UHD from last year. A truly new transfer. The encoding isn't great, but at least it is not awful, especially for Paramount's standards.
DAMN YOU PARAMOUNT!!!! Still better than an AI upscale.
Something I noticed on this remaster AND the recent North By Northwest 4k I wanted to mention and see if you noticed as well. There is a scene in the first act where Cary Grant and I think it’s John Williams are standing in front of all the flowers in the street market. It’s a locked down two shot and if you look at the flowers they are all vibrating while the actors are still. I think they somehow stabilized the actors but not their surroundings. I noticed it too in the last act of North by northwest when Grant and Eva Saint Marie are in the wooded area of the national park standing at opposite ends of the picture with many skinny trees between them filling up the frame. Again the actors are stabilized but the trees are vibrating. Sorry to point this out if you didn’t already notice because it looks so odd once you notice. But again it just feels that if they had just taken that little bit of extra care. Perhaps they just don’t have all the time they need but I mean these movies have been around for 80 years what’s another couple days to get it right?
@@TheFellCloud The forest scene in N by NW looks terrible almost as if it was heavily grain managed. The only thing I can figure is in some of these moments where you notice a particular sort of vibrating movement that it could be a symptom unique to VistaVision. Because of the necessary intensive lights, there were times where it would make the actual film almost sort of buckle or warp as it was running through the camera. It’s possible that what we’re seeing with these higher resolution scans in certain moments is actually this particular artifact. But of course, this is merely guess work.
I was saving this 4k for a rainy day but was compelled to watch it after seeing this video. I thought you might be overreacting but holy heck this transfer is a complete mess!! The colors and the over contrasting was the biggest culprit but what is up with that shot of the girl laying on the raft??!! It’s so smoothed out it looks like a xerox of a lithograph. I don’t normally get upset over a little grain scrubbing as long as I can enjoy the movie but this one is so all over the place. And some shots are perfect!? I almost wonder if parts of the film went missing it’s that bad. I’m completely baffled and quite sad since I really love this movie. The Universal remasters are so good. Shame on Paramount for this hatchet job. And the price!! I swear the limited print runs is a tactic to get us all to preorder so that it’s all sold out before the word gets out about how bad it is.
@@TheFellCloud THANK YOU!!! With all the positive reviews this got…when you see the disc yourself you start to wonder if you’re going nuts!
If this were just a brand new master that was over processed that would be one thing. But have it continually seem to switch between different masters from different eras and be overprocessed but even that not being consistent is just baffling!
For every major improvement that’s here there’s a compromise somewhere else. And the difference in clarity can vary from shot to shot in the same sequence.
Top it off with some frozen grain halos, lesser encoding and no original audio with a processed remix of an already processed remix.
It just adds up to a frustrating experience for no reason other than people making silly decisions.
Great review, nice there is a film review channel you can trust. As a owner of a Perspecta Stereo Decoder, I am looking high and low, for a copy of TCAT with intact Perspecta sound.
@@mikaelchristensen5433 Thank You! I wish there was a dedicated list of Perspecta mixes somewhere and it’s still hard to discern what films may have had one. Now that we have the ability to have them preserved on disc they should always be made available.
Supposedly Paramount restored the Perspecta for Invasion of the Body Snatchers and has never released it.
Excellent review! I ended up grabbing a copy to see the rich colors and tones which can only come through on HDR and I was pleased with that aspect. I wonder if Paramount will ever get serious about preserving film grain. I couldn't care less if a disc looks like a crazy storm of grain inferior displays there's no need to compromise the picture for anyone. The onus is on the end user to step up their game if they want to see it correctly. Then we have the encode robbing us as we try and get out the door 😂TMWKTM is still my gold standard for Hitchcock on 4k so far that was just a pleasant surprise to see how well Universal handled that one.
There you are again.
@@444chroma That’s about all one can get out of this, that at least the image does have improvements over past releases in spite of the severe drawbacks Paramount caused.
It really sucks because not only is this Hitchcock but also due to every video release of TCAT having issues.
Can we be expecting a UHD review for either The Searchers or Chinatown next month? Also, hope you reach 10k subscribers very soon!
@@OldFashionedCinephile Both actually along with North By Northwest.
Thank you!!
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusaderanything about Hatari? It's one of my dad's favorite movies and hopefully it's not too messed up
Some shoots to show some examples of the issues being stated would have been appreciated….
@@andersb80 I’m trying to come up with a solution for making solid UHD screen caps. Unfortunately, it’s a real headache to try to get solid ones and especially dealing with HDR. I’m hoping to get a specific new drive and set up for at least doing some basic screencaps. The real trouble is in trying to isolate the frozen grain halos. That’s something that’s almost impossible to capture outside of seeing in motion in person.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader ok I see. Thanks for the explanation.
... That's actually a really good Cary Grant impression.
@@DanKeatis Thanks! I’ve always tried but haven’t been able to nail his sound perfectly. At best I can get some of his delivery style which is what I was aiming for.
I still have the 2012 blu ray which I never upgraded to any version. So is this new 4K UHD better than the 2012 release overall or should I just not upgrade?
It is better than the 2012 blu-ray, mainly due to the colors and HDR.
@@AlSumait I would pick up this new release on sale since it’s overpriced and sadly likely the best we’re going to get in picture. (Though with severe drawbacks)
However, I would say to hang onto the 2012 Blu-ray to at least have some form of the original audio and the version of a master before any of the modern problems were introduced. Unfortunately, no release is without some kind of issue, but you will notice visual improvements in the 4K master when it’s not using some form of an older master for certain sections and has the least amount of processing in some areas.
I'm so tired of Paramount's 4K transfers these days and their restorations. After the amazing remaster of The Crow on 4K, we're back in the crapper again with Paramount.
@@movietv20249 The Crow was done by Lionsgate which is why it turned out well. It seems Paramount merely distributed the release.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader That probably makes sense. Seems like Lionsgate has gotten better over the years with their transfers.
I would love a review of the Lawrence of Arabia UHD, people have found that the Movies Anywhere encode is actually better than the UHD's! Sony is the last studio that one would expect that to happen (outside of MOD releases, which Sony can be inconsistent with regarding encoding). Nevertheless, all HDR versions of Lawrence of Arabia have the baked-in filtering that makes the fine detail not be as good as it could be, it somehow looks both softer and far grainier than the 4K SDR version that was available on streaming before the UHD release.
@@matheus5230 That’s on my to do list. I don’t stream but definitely need to look at those versions because I find it absolutely baffling that Sony would do something like that. That’s like an extreme example of how Warner will only put Dolby Vision on streaming options.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusaderThe screnshots of the Movies Anywhere stream showing a better encoding than the UHD is an example of how bitrates aren't everything. The UHD's encode is far from a disaster, but it falls short of what we've come to expect from Sony, and it's made even more bizarre by how even though the film is split in two discs, Sony left over 30GBs of free space, and the video encode would fit in a single BD-100. The film was split in two discs not for maximum picture quality, but to cram in a ridiculous amount of audio tracks, 5 being lossless!
For the filtering baked-in to the master, the restoration notes say that issues that had been fixed in the 2012 restoration had become visible again with HDR and needed to be addressed. But why apply a filtering to the whole movie instead of just the most problematic parts? Why not go back to the raw scans and rework the most problematic sections? And why not just be more conservative in the HDR grade, so that the grain and artifacts don't get exposed so brutally? Lawrence is far from a light cannon, but it still pushes the brightness quite a lot. The scene of Sherif Ali's entrance is perhaps the one that best showcases the situation of restorations artifacts that weren't visible in SDR now being painfully exposed, as there's frozen grain around the actors walking in front of the sky.
How do you feel of the new 4k of NORTH BY NORTHWEST?
@@200wattstudio8 I have a whole list of feels….I’m hoping to get the review edited soon.
Paramount's home video mastering in general is a mutt. Nobody knows what they're doing. Footloose, Plains, Trains and Automobiles, The Greatest Show on Earth, To Catch a Thief, and on and on. Garbage in. Garbage out.
Can't someone just get hired here for quality control; someone who's an archivist, who understands film-based restoration/remastering from the ground up, who does the job right the first time, instead of re-re-re-releasing catalog with minimal upgrades, or, in fact, digital downgrades that continue to plague what should be a basically blind purchase.
@@nickzegarac429 It truly makes no sense. To make matters worse their posturing and official statements make the general public believe they’re doing proper archival work. Worst of all is when they are brought in to speak at official events or given awards for substandard destructive work.
The DVD of To Catch a Thief have is so blurry, I don't think I've ever seen a version of the film which looks good. Which is such a shame because the original clearly looked/looks amazing.
I think you will be surprised if you watch the 4K. I acknowledge the problems but I have to say I didn't notice them that much. Worse masters and especially more distracting masters have been released.
@@gbrading Every time the film has gotten a video release it’s had some kind of problem which is really a shame. This new 4K master is the best we’ve gotten so you will notice a definite improvement, regardless of which DVD version you have. But it’s got its own unnecessary drawbacks so it’s almost as if we went several steps forward while also going several steps backward. And of course they were removed any form of the original audio, which doesn’t help.
@@bened22 That is true it could be worse and Paramount has done worse. But all of these issues were avoidable.
Fantastic treatise as usual. I too avoided the 2020 blu-ray and think 4K is mostly up with downs. But you repeat yourself too often - this could have been a 40-minute video.
Agreed, his videos drive me up the wall because he simply goes round in circles saying the same thing ten times over. A pity because he makes valid points and provides a useful criticism of some of these erratic releases. I have to turn off his videos after 10 mins, he needs to start editing himself down to 20 or 25 mins otherwise people will simply switch off...
@@RodneyAllanPoe I appreciate that. I do try to edit myself down and stay on topic but it’s hard to not have to reiterate certain points throughout.
@@MattST69 Thank you. I do continue to try and work on length as I go so viewer feedback is very much appreciated.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader thanks for your response and please be assured I and many others appreciate your good work in highlighting these issues, if you could do it a bit more concisely I think the message would get across more effectively to the film industry people behind many of these flawed "restorations". Keep up the good work 👏
I've seen a print of this. Not sure if it was LPP or IB, but leaning towards LPP. It didn't look much different than what I'm seeing in the screen caps. Now that isn't a good test as the print is generations old but it makes me wonder what sort of elements remain and in what condition. Also, what the negative itself captured. Despite it all, it's a terrific film. Thanks for the review.
@@popcornbobGCC all of the older releases are using direct prints or the new interpositive they struck in the 2000s. So if you look at say the 2012 Blu-ray, it’s coming from that IP they made.
The 2020 and 2024 masters are coming from the same new 6K scan of the negative and probably filled in with sections of that 2000s interpositive.
This seems like a similar transfer As The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Why are they charging $50 CDN for it...
@Mowglibaloo2 Oh geez, Liberty Valance is such a screwy weird transfer I still can’t quite figure out what all they did.
Their stupid inflated presents pricing needs to stop. These are not boutique label releases in any way shape or form.
Such a shame about this. I always want to see a better picture with these oldie 4k's with such high prices this feels like we're being cheated. Feels like a half hearted effort for top dollar/pound
@@Steve-l7e5y It’s really frustrating because there are improvements yet all of the new issues were avoidable.
What makes it even worse is that they charge a full $40 like this is a premium boutique release.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader goodness me a "premium boutique release"? 🙁 I hope you agree it feels like it's only a half finished piece of work and the boss has said "that'll do. Get it released" It's so not fair, but also means your channel is more important now than ever so we don't fall foul to these terribly expensive releases
Paramount needs to overhaul their transfer and home video department. Have you seen Universal's DUEL (1971)? There is a lot going on in that release, and I mean A LOT, and it's not all good. It FINALLY has the original broadcast version, which the only version worth watching.
The original broadcast version in the 4K release is an atrocious transfer though. Unwatchable.
@@SpeccyHorace -- indeed, but it's better than nothing. Spielberg's best film. I wonder if he sabotaged it on purpose because he prefers the inferior, expanded version.
@@richardweddle3408 I’ve been wanting to do a review of the Duel UHD. That disc is a MESS. And that audio remix is awful!!!
Wonder what you think of CHINATOWN on 4K from Paramount....
@@ScottSullivanTV I’m going to review it as well. Thankfully it’s far better than most Paramount masters but not without issues.
I was looking forward to seeing this film on 4K, but that's put me off. The audio issue plus nothing fresh with extras just says it all. Paramount aren't doing themselves any favours.
@@dr.impossibleofcounterpunc1984 since this is likely all we’re going to get I would definitely say wait until it goes on sale so you don’t pay the inflated full price.
There is definitely improvement in areas because they’re undoing the terrible 2020 master for the most part and it’s coming from a higher quality source than the pre-2020 releases. But you’ll quickly see that it’s a mess of issues so we’re stuck with all of these compromises.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader I'm stuck with the standard PHE (UK) DVD. Like you said, compromises. I just wish they would do these movies properly. It's becoming very agrivating. That said, thanks for another indepth review.
@ Thanks!
Try to pick up the UHD on sale and see what you think. You might want to also pick up a version of the 2012 BD for good measure as well. And to be fully compete you’ll need the 2007/2009 DVD for the dropped commentary.
@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader 😆 It's beyond laughable. You need 4 versions of To Catch a Thief to have the complete experience. Everything is definitely going backwards these days. Strange that! There was a time when things were done right. You have to wonder...... Must be something in the tap water.
@ Yep it’s pretty much four releases necessary to cobble together your own version. Unfortunately no one’s held to a quality standard or goes through any quality control.
... otherwise it will be the same, but, rubbing more salt on the wound, the european edition here in spain, also from Paramount, of course, has the SD blu-ray and a bunch of printed goodies (a poster with the original artwork, 6 printed stills and more), and for slightly less money, 35 euros.
@@rfsanjurjo Yet another EU release with much better packaging and swag. It sucks that it’ll still be the same screwy disc but I’m not sure why the studios keep doing this.
And there are times where these fancier European sets are not only better packages but less expensive than the basic US release.
An unrelated topic, but I wanted to ask if you've thought about playing the new Indiana Jones game?
I think it would be cool to hear your thoughts on the story and the gameplay.
@@tyrannozilla i’ve been dying to. I just don’t have an Xbox. I thought I would wait for the delayed PS5 release as I need to get a PS5 anyway.
@@DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader That's cool, dude. Take your time.
Another take from those who worded on the restoration release: ruclips.net/video/usFuythnoIk/видео.htmlsi=RFuw2RJl5DpR7yWW
@DammFoolIdealisiticCrusader Can you do a blu-ray box set review of smallville the complete series?
Since TO CATCH A THIEF is far from a Hitchcock masterpiece, I've held off on the 4K, particularly since it's overpriced. I'll check out the 4k disc when the price goes down, since even subpar Hitchcock (even the original poster is tacky) is better than none at all. At least getting Lyn Murray's bubbly score in stereo is a major upgrade in the audio presentation.
@@TheVid54 Definitely wait for a sale or the eventual budget reissue of the same disc. The price is inflated to begin with. You’ll definitely notice some visual improvement because this is coming from a 6K scan without the extreme DNR of the 2020 version. But it’s still filled with drawbacks and no original audio.
It is more impressive having the score in some form of stereo, but as I pointed out, this is a 5.1 remix of the stereo remix so it’s just been processed further.
Interesting. The person who managed the restoration, on the Perf Damage Podcast, says they only applied grain management in one scene to deal with some moire issues.
You have to keep in mind, this reviewer is a dork who never got laid in high school and probably still hasn't felt the touch of a woman to this day. Take his opinion with a (film) grain of salt.
@@StevenHemingway1 him being a virgin shouldn't affect his opinion~ I love hearing about these new releases on 4k because i like old movies~ and he says things i never wouldve thought of!
i sure as hell wouldnt sleep w/ him in a million yrs, but again that doesnt change his stance and opinion!
Would love to see Charlotte go toe-to-toe over this and refute the charges being made here. As for me, I saw this movie screened in a theater in 1983 and have never had much call to watch it again, even though I have the DVD on hand. LIke most people, I won't be examining it with a microscope for static grain but I do prefer restoration to be as close to the original source as possible.
@StrangerThingsFangirl2009: Awww come on, we all know you couldn't resist a real filmgrain nerd. (Just kidding.)
I listened to it. I would be curious to the Crusader's response to what she says in the podcast. Are they full of shyte or what is going on here.
C'mon Spencer calling it a masterpiece are you smoking crack? Hitchcock the master of suspense makes a movie with no suspense in it at all. North by Northwest works so much better imho
@@bonzodog6872 I do consider all Hitchcock films masterpieces. TCAT is a rich yet lighter film by design almost a soufflé of a film.
North By. Northwest in contrast was designed as inherently self referential and each film has the individual stamp of their writers. TCAT with John Michael Hayes and Northwest with Ernest Lehman.
The constant editing of this video makes it unnerving and disturbingly unwatchable. It shows a lack of preparation in recording this.