@TheRedman790 yes it is. But in this case the original film grain has been removed picture made sharper and then they put a A.i generated grain over the top. Still watch it being a classic
you haven't even seen the 4k disc of aliens in person. You cannot go by anything on RUclips. It doesn't render accordingly at 4k60 with HDR. When will be understand this about youtube videos.@@DCMedien
It doesn't look so bad in the close ups. It's in the wide shots, where there's less detail for the AI to work with, that the character's skin starts to take on that artificial, waxy look. The new grading looks a bit more natural.
I do appreciate that it's been mentioned (elsewhere) that this is what Cameron provided Disney for the release, Disney didn't alter or touch it up. (Same goes for True Lies and The Abyss, though True Lies is the worst 4K of the three)
@@sg137iu 100% I've heard Disney did really good with the discs themselves. I heard The Abyss looks really good, actually. I might grab that and True Lies since these are the only reasonable ways to watch them, haha
Thankfully there are tools that will allow you to rip the Atmos audio from the 4K version and merge it with the 1080p version for the best of both worlds.
@@mwrightinsurance It's really not the same. Upmixing almost never sounds as good as native Atmos, DTS:X or Auro-3D. It might have a similar "surround" feel, but you won't get the same kind of precision. But I mean, if you're satisfied with it, that's all that really matters.
@@TheUnknownVideographer Yeah, it's very unfortunate. At least Aliens, Terminator, and T2 all have good Blu-rays. Hell, even Piranha 2 has a good Blu-ray Lol.
@@TheUnknownVideographer There is nothing wrong with using AI if you know what you are doing. But this is Predator all over again, too much contrast and AI upscale without using Grain. There is a reason why Topaz Video AI has Grain enabled by default so that upscaling does not look artificial. Grain will also give an effect of details that are not there. When I watch original Grainy AI upscaled movies where all Grain has been removed, I can often see a lot of detail up close, but from a little further away there are no details at all, just a smooth surface. The high contrast also makes some of the close-ups of skin appear artificial, as if the skin were made of plastic.
@@abstuli No, this transfer is much, much better than Predator. There is still some grain in this transfer that makes the presentation incredibly solid.
@@FervAnimalLover I agree that it is better than Predator: Ultimate Hunter Edition. They have used AI to remove all grain from Aliens and then added some fake grain. My opinion is that they have added too little grain. I see a lot of artifacts I recognize from Topaz Video AI, more grain could help hide them. I can often see parts of faces with a lot of detail where other parts of the face nearby are without detail. More fine-grained grain would help to hide this. Another problem is that they have used far too much contrast. On close-ups you can often see that the pores in the skin are far too clear and unnatural and remind of plastic skin we see in video games and not in reality.
I love my old DVD collection not only because they used Telecine analog machines to digitize the films, they left in the scratches, film grain, and even the cigarette burns to signal a reel change. That's cinema, not some sterile cleaned up smoothed over image.
telecine looks garbo tho. they just needed to per frame scan the original negs in 4k and then color match to whatever the original master interpos was or what it was supposed to be. but thats too complicated for these studios.
The Hadley's hope drop crew when they enter. The yellow machinery behind then in 4K looks like it is new. I like the grained look better. It looks better weathered battered and not a new coat of paint.
Nothing, but if you want to increase the resolution, you need to remove de grain previously to transform the image to 4k. And then, you can add a new 4k grain to the footage
Well this is depressing. Can't believe I'm going to pass up Aliens on 4k UHD, been waiting for it for YEARS, but here we are. James Cameron is out of his mind.
@@TheUnknownVideographer There is nothing wrong with using AI if you know what you are doing. But this is Predator all over again, too much contrast and AI upscale without using Grain. There is a reason why Topaz Video AI has Grain enabled by default so that upscaling does not look artificial. Grain will also give an effect of details that are not there. When I watch original Grainy AI upscaled movies where all Grain has been removed, I can often see a lot of detail up close, but from a little further away there are no details at all, just a smooth surface. The high contrast also makes some of the close-ups of skin appear artificial, as if the skin were made of plastic. I'm sure whoever upscaled this movie tore his hair out when he heard James Cameron wanted no grain and high contrast.
@@TheUnknownVideographer I'm sure whoever upscaled this movie tore his hair out when he heard James Cameron wanted no grain and high contrast. Aliens is a very grainy movie filmed on 16mm experimental film stock. All this Grain gives an effect of details that are not there. When you remove all this Grain during AI upscaling without adding new Grain, you get good details up close and a smooth surface with no details from a slightly longer distance. The high contrast makes the skin look artificial, as if it were made of plastic.
and approved by Cameron himself... but the Blu-ray was not the original negative of the movie. The blue tint was added and distracting. The 4k is still great
Yeah, very sad. For years I wanted an 4k version, but after this releases.. Nah i'm good. Fun fact, I was shocked how good the Terminator looks on blu ray, for years I just saw the stream version
You’re blind watch this comparison on a large 120” screen… the UHD is far superior and more detailed. There’s only a one or 2 shots I’ve seen where you can make a semi valid argument.
I was waiting for the 4K... this video convinced me to keep the blu-ray. The BD may look noisier, but is more natural. The 4K's heavy DNR and color grading is terrible and makes it look like a videogame.
Man, James Cameron of all people BUTCHERING his movies in 4K. HOW HARD is it to scan a negative, clean it up and release it in beautiful high dynamic range? No filtering, AI, upscaling or major tweaking necessary.
@@powerglover2021 Not only was all the film grain removed, but doing that made everyone look like wax models and insanely fake! Not to mention the obnoxious blue tint that was put all over the film!
They've removed the film grain which is just ridiculous - the movie was shot on film 40yrs ago and should not look like a movie shot on digital from the last 5. While some shots can look okay, clothes, walls and parts of people's faces often look unnatural. What a disappointment, why James, why??? Out of this, the Abyss and True Lies, The Abyss is the only one that looks okay. Thanks for the video, you've made up my mind, I won't be buying this and will stick with my blu-ray.
Why 50 year old movie can't look fresh and new? If I want it to look 40 year old with all the film grain I can always fire up the old VHS. When I buy a movie on 4k I want it to look and sould like it was shot yesterday, doesn't matter how old is the movie
because in the inherent nature of film, the grain is part of the resolution/clarity/texture. plenty of proper scanned 4k masters looks like movies that were shot today. when i buy a 4k movie, i want the utmost closest presentation available to the original source. i don't want something to look like all the typical modern bs.
@@elenathorne6149 Removing the film grain often makes faces look waxy since you're losing some detail to resharpen the image. Look at what happened to Star Trek VI when they went to blu-ray, they removed the film grain and it looked aweful, fortunately, for the 4K release, they didn't remove it and it looks so much better.
@@elenathorne6149 The grainy look is a part of the film. Taking it away diminishes the presentation. It’s not supposed to look like it was filmed in the last few years. On a different note…did you know that 35mm film has a resolution of 5.6K! So even 4k mastering is a downgrade from the source material. Now you did lose some of that resolution due to the graininess of 35mm film stock but it didn’t degrade it significantly.
The 4K looks inferior to the regular Bluray...AI processing should be nowhere near film. It's no longer ONLY dnr to worry about, it's god awful algorythmic sharpening added to it.
It should be noted that this is the streaming version of the 4k master, played back in SDR. "from the newly remastered Digital 4K UHD. Digital 4K SDR."
Cameron went from a great filmmaker, to a hack, with his damn Smurf movies. All the CGI must have made him blind to what film os supposed to look like. I'll bet he'll make a 8k AI "remaster", in 120fps, to make the movie look even more like a video game... Ironic, how he made a movie about the danger of AI, with the Terminator, and now he uses it, to destroy his movies...
If you’re watching this on your tiny iPhone you’re missing out. Just watched it on desk last night and it’s incredible. I’m grateful that a lot of the grain was removed because it was too grainy especially because of the dark scenes sometimes the Blu-ray you couldn’t even see the actors.restoration was incredible I loved every second of it
@@SuperSnakePlissken At what point did I mention me looking at this on a smartphone display? Doing something like that would be silly. This is literally the same master as the Blu Ray, just upscaled, edge "enhanced" and with the grain removed. It looks super artificial.
@@Gilarack Blah! I completely disagree. Just had six friends over for some brisket and sides and we watched Aliens 4K and everybody loved it and thought it looked incredible. You sir are an outlier.
I don’t understand this obsession with over cleaned images (4K), all the film grain is gone. For me grain is part of the movie «magic», like the 24 fps instead of video. Too clean of an image it reminds me something is fake...
Oh how long I have waited for this! This the first film I ever bought on laserdisk at $70 and it was a joy. Now in all its glory Im back to summer 1986.
This movie absolutely needs to have the option of watching it in a pure authentic 4K film scan (but also with HDR color grade). And from there fans can give it whatever grade of noise suppression we want, but just shipping it oversharpened by default is not a good look.
That would require a TV with GPU acceleration that can do real-time color grading and noise suppression. Also, it would need at least 4GB of dedicated memory. Thats not mentioning the fact that in order to do this you need the original file source in which is WAY larger than a compressed codec. Otherwise, you would be stretching data that isn't there, this introducing banding and artifacts. No streaming service is going to stream that much data uncompressed.
@@captureinsidethesound Personally I'm experimenting with running movies through Topaz tuned to my own preferences. Having a native 4K transfer would be highly valuable.
@@NCozy That's kind of backwards from what I'm trying to do. The thing is movies recorded on film actually contain all of the detail in the film grain, and because film grain is completely random that means even if a single frame is very noisy you're still going to see lot more image resolution watching the movie because in a movie scene you'll be viewing the average of the noise from 10-20 frames, not just one, reproducing film grain exactly as it was recorded is actually a big deal.
@@budthecyborg4575 I'm well aware of that, I do think that trying to put the grain in does mask some of the DNR and makes it less noticable and helps to restore a bit of the look but it is more of a bandaid solution that's fun to mess around with and not a serious suggestion on my end
The DNR is aggressive but it looks like skin detail was preserved and sharpened while the backgrounds are denoised. I'll have to see it in motion. Nevertheless, I'm glad for a 4K release at long last.
This is a no for me. Blu Ray has an incredible remastering and 4K seems to have an artificial scaling, and the application some type of DNR. For those who do not have the Blu Ray, it may be the best option since it comes with that disc included.
Noise/grain gone with some of the details, unsharp masked high contrast details sharpened as you'd expect......they appear to have removed ALL the grain though.
Looks waxy af. And the colors shifting into a greenish tint. The skintones looking so bad. Bishops skin has now a color like one of the simpsons, some weird yellow. Jeez, this 4K transfer is a mess. The scene in the rain looking awful, like someone smeared through the picture.
It's not the wax exhibit that people make it out to be but it's still pretty mediocre, especially compared to the blu ray release and moreover the Alien 4K release that's absolutely outstanding.
Yeah, I don’t hate what I see, but all the same it didn’t need to be changed at all. Cameron is a total joke now caring so much about technology than good filmmaking.
They should just make "an oldschool" edition for 4K later on with grain preserved instead of wax cabinet look. Judging by the screenshots, some screens look partially better in 4K, but even then it's just part of the full image area.. mostly something in the same scene is off at the same time, when some part of the scene looks better (or more detailed, at least). If it's a face close-up shot that was good detail to begin with, then the smallest details on lit area look better in 4K, but on the downside it seems that shadow-ed areas of the face are zero grain and actually seem to lose detail VS. blu-ray, because grain held some of that... some background items on bigger scenes just pop the wrong way without grain, some seem ok. It would look so much better with less grain removed imo.
@@TheUnknownVideographer Yeah, that's what's worrying me in 4K releases at the moment. To be honest, same thing was going on with Blu-Ray already ways back to some extent, whereas some releases looked really unnatural and wax-cabinet-like. If I remember right, my Predator Blu-Ray is one of those worst ones so far. I would love to have a decent Terminator 2 high-resolution one day.
This DNR processing, which is astonishingly atrocious, that Cameron's so inclined to apply to each film he's partaken in, has no idea how to facelift the dark edges. And these spots of bother are painful to look at. Aesthetically jarring too.
Yeah, me too. No one is talking about that. Even when they do, it's going to be some RUclipsrs with stupid sound bars, or upfiring speakers giving their opinion on Atmos. Which they have no business doing. It's hard to find anyone with a real Atmos setup reviewing 4k discs.
For sure. The picture differences look miniscule to me, I just want an upgraded soundtrack for modern equipment. I'll buy them anyway, they ain't going to be worse than T2 and that's what matters most.
Personally I don't care about atmos remixes on older movies that were never mixed for it originally. I just wished they gave us that original ac3 track from the laserdisc which stemed from the original 70mm 6 track. That was still the best sounding mix for aliens period.
@@marlonrobalinoyes, I've never seen a film where Atmos has been added in at a later stage that has made any significant improvement to the 5.1 mix. I think for Atmos to really shine the audio needs to be authored with it in mind from the start.
Yikes. I've been dreaming of the definitive presentation of Aliens forever, and based on these comps, I'll need to keep dreaming. UHD looks unnaturally whack.
At 1:54. Look at the cat´s eye, on th FOX blu-ray the eye has more detail but when going over to the UHD, the eye is blurry. Apperently Disney/Cameron (I head is more Cameron faulty not liking film and ordering Disney to remove it, what I heard anyway) has been using AI algorithm to lessen the natural filmgrain. So bad!
Well, at least there aren’t any more films left for James Cameron to fuck up. What’s so bad about film grain? I honestly enjoyed the films with all their imperfections-it gives them a certain character. There’s a better way of restoring film-based content without scrubbing away film grain to the point where everything looks enhanced and artificial, just ask Francis Ford Coppola.
You gotta be kidding me, they removed the bloody grain! I got to get a hold of the Blu Ray Alien 4-film collection, and get a Blu Ray player for my MacBook. I cannot watch films without grain, I NEED GRAIN.
Grain really isn't everything unless you absolutely want that nostalgia look. Scrubbing grain away can remove some details, but they do this anyway with most films when they do a scan and transfer. They won't scrub all of the grain away, but most of it, and then add in fake grain in post-processing. Modern films that are shot digitally look fantastic, and they don't have grain. Whether or not this really hurts the overall image quality though (like with Titanic 4K...and many people are ignorant about this) remains to be seen. Most of the comparisons in this video look good, except for some of the changes to the color grading, and I was specifically looking for scrubbed detail/AI upscale smear and wasn't seeing any. I was actually prepared for much worse than this. People need to stop confusing visual noise with details too. Sometimes grain is just noise, not actual details.
But still, grain is needed for Aliens. IT'S ALIENS! James Cameron ya son of a - (Xenomorph screams). Well, I gotta get a hold of a Blu Mac Burner and the Alien 4-film blu ray collection. Before DISNEY gets of hold of blu rays!!!@@Neonmirrorblack
Adding detail that is not there in the original which destroys lens blur and boka (especially on faces where there is supposed to be depth of field from noses to eyes). Smoothing elements and skin making them look like plastic (I guess it works on Bishop since he is synthetic, but still). Oversharpening to the point they look like they aged 10 years. These comparisons shine a light on how those who use AI have a long way to go in making sure it is applied with greater care. I will take the grain every time looking at these comparisons. I wish I had been involved with the cleanup as I could have pointed out the flaws in this remaster before going to print and helped make them less obvious.
When seeing details from the skin, sometimes it looks like parts of different photos made at different resolutions and stitched together. Thanks AI… Between this and the usual teal/greenish boost of this 4K generation, yep, I'll keep my blu-rays.
Hang on to those blu rays everyone, this is a mess. Disney and Jimmy Cammy ain't getting my money for this one. Look at the first Alien on 4k for a transfer done the right way.
@teabag7772 I prefer Physical Media too. Sometimes when you stream it can take a while for the image to buffer correctly and then if you have issues with the Internet etc it sucks. Digital is a pain too as I redeemed a lot of codes then they transitioned over to a different type of software and some didn't make it over. Owning physicial you have it there and can watch it whenever you want.
You guys are missing the color grading. I can't stand that teal color when I know what it is supposed to look like. Blade runner UHD is unwatchable for example.
Agree! Teal colour grading is terrible! Blade runner, Terminator, Terminator 2, Aliens everywhere the same colour grading. Great that Alien 4k has original colours
@@alvins.4775 wouldn't count on it 4K releases are expensive to produce and rare enough, it's not like the old blu ray days where the studio would just put out a slightly updated version
What happens when you tell AI to "make my movie look more gooder"...... The first live action film where I felt as though we were in the uncanny valley!
I would also like to add something: while the film grain has been removed and the image has a slight waxy look, this video is actually not representative of the 4k version. I saw it and the resolution and clarity is much higher than shown here. However, the denoiser used on the film and the youtube compression do not mix well together. For those that are undecided, keep this in mind. After seeing the 4k version I think I prefer it over the blu-ray original. I do recommend for people to see it live and decide for themselves.
I think it looks pretty good! I find it incredibly difficult to judge grain when it's not in motion and the color is much closer to what I remember the film print in a theater.
The film grain was a *character* in itself, imo. It gives just the right amount of other-Worldly distance from the image. With most of the grain removed for the 4K version, the faces look like rubber, and the alien lair effects look cheap. I even prefer the colour grading on the Blu Ray. It had more accurate pink-ish skin tones. The skin tones in the 4K version look too green and fake. The "AI" detail enhancement has that slight uncanny valley thing going on. I'll never understand how a Director as visionary as James Cameron would approve the new transfer. (similar to how George Lucas approved and indeed asked for most of the changes for the Special Edition of Star Wars.) I think the only real answer is: They think the majority of people expect a super-sharp grain-free presentation when released in 4K. In fairness, most people probably don't care as much as some of us do. lol I don't even think that on my projector, I would be too bothered about playing the 1080p Blu Ray version, vs the 4K UHD. The original 35mm film never looked that sharp and overly-clean anyway. The artificially sharpened 4K version isn't how most of us remember it. imo, The 1080p 2011 Blu Ray transfer is still the de-facto version of the movie. I won't be buying the UHD.
0:44 9:01 4:01 - Look at how more natural the skin tones look on the Blu Ray in those scenes. If anyone thinks the 4K UHD looks better there, they either have a badly-calibrated TV / monitor, or they are wearing sunglasses. lol Even the *contrast* looks better on the Blu Ray, although this YT video isn't in HDR, which often makes it harder to compare the UHD transfer. The colour of the metal lockers looks more neutral on the Blu Ray, the light above the lockers have a warmer colour. To me, almost everything on the Blu Ray looks more "real", or at least in the way we are used to with movies / celluloid film.
One other thing that's probably obvious in this video, is that the film grain is usually *moving*. ie. it's basically a random pattern all the way through the movie, so it's not half as noticeable as it is on still images. Obviously the RUclips compression doesn't do things justice either, but I think this vid still shows the differences very well. (the RUclips compression on the still images should be a lot clearer than for moving images. But, paradoxically, the film grain still won't look as noticeable when viewing the actual Blu Ray of the movie.)
9:51 - Just look at the peak of the cap that (the late) Al Matthews is wearing. There was *detail* within the film grain on the Blu Ray version. The 4K version has removed a lot of that detail, and has just smoothed / blurred things. You can see the shadow detail lost in his face, too. (and the film grain will again be moving / randomized on the movie when playing normally, so the details within the grain will be easier to see.) The "4K" version is like I used the Smudge tool in Paint Shop Pro, then added fake sharpness to the edges. lol Sorry, it's not for me. I just realized, the "Blu Ray" version shown in the video says "2010" in the description, but I'm assuming the 2010/2011 version is essentially the same disk. There is a newer Blu Ray (1080p) disk included with a physical release of the 4K version. It's apparently the same AI "enhanced" version as the 4K UHD, just shown at 1080p. I bet the new 1080p disk looks even worse when compared to directly to the 2010/2011 Blu Ray.
Waited so long for this and True Lies and I'm shocked that Cameron thought this would be ok. There's no grain and faces look waxy. It's jacked up. Such a shame. I'm not buying any of these now.
Some of it looks over processed, would be interesting to see what it looks like if they used about 50% the processing in some of the shots and scenes but for the most part it looks better. Some will say that you lose detail when you lose the grain but then more detail isn't always better, for the most part the image is cleaner and it still looks like it was shot on film which is the most important part
I'm amazed after what everyones been saying, this looks better in all these comparisons on 4k look how gloosy the eyes are more definition in backgrounds looks so good
13 лет назад купил коллекционную антологию "Чужие" (все 4 части) + "Прометей" на Blu-ray и периодически пересматриваю, особенно "Чужие", мой любимый фильм в серии. Все же я предпочту именно версию на BD, которая в более синий оттенок уходит (видимо, любимый цвет Кэмерона), чем это недоразумение 4K, которое зачем-то позеленили, как какую-то Матрицу.
The original does have an unfortunate amount of grain and the grain removal did a good job. What kills it for me is the teal overlay that kind of ruins the flesh tones.
The noise-free 4K backgrounds/sets are slightly too strong. They need a little bit of grain but for the most part are okay. But the characters need a 50/50 mix of the bluray and 4K.... to find a nice mid-ground.
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
In space no one can see your grain.
😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I thought the grain is a good thing?
@TheRedman790 yes it is. But in this case the original film grain has been removed picture made sharper and then they put a A.i generated grain over the top. Still watch it being a classic
This time, it's war... against grain
I'm forever grateful for the Quadrilogy set from years back
it's not worth breaking up that magnificent set to go 4k. The juice isn't worth the squeeze.
@@TheDbduecewrong - both alien and aliens 4k blow the Blu-rays out of the water. You have to see it in person.
That's true for alien. But for aliens.. Nah
@@ScruffyWarlord
you haven't even seen the 4k disc of aliens in person. You cannot go by anything on RUclips. It doesn't render accordingly at 4k60 with HDR. When will be understand this about youtube videos.@@DCMedien
@@TheDbduece Lol 4k versioni looks way superior
This is CLEARLY an Ai upscale of the blu-ray done through TOPAZ VIDEO Ai and color graded. This is not a remaster of the original film.
It doesn't look so bad in the close ups. It's in the wide shots, where there's less detail for the AI to work with, that the character's skin starts to take on that artificial, waxy look. The new grading looks a bit more natural.
Clearly James Cameron does NOT listen to feedback from his fans. Sticking with the blu ray.
I do appreciate that it's been mentioned (elsewhere) that this is what Cameron provided Disney for the release, Disney didn't alter or touch it up. (Same goes for True Lies and The Abyss, though True Lies is the worst 4K of the three)
@@sg137iu 100% I've heard Disney did really good with the discs themselves. I heard The Abyss looks really good, actually. I might grab that and True Lies since these are the only reasonable ways to watch them, haha
James Cameron; genius filmmaker. But a lousy editor; he needs to stay out of that booth.
lol it looks fantastic… you guys are nuts… watch the original blu ray then.
If I were him I wouldn't listen to us either.
Thankfully there are tools that will allow you to rip the Atmos audio from the 4K version and merge it with the 1080p version for the best of both worlds.
I just up-mix it with my receiver
@@mwrightinsurance It's really not the same. Upmixing almost never sounds as good as native Atmos, DTS:X or Auro-3D. It might have a similar "surround" feel, but you won't get the same kind of precision.
But I mean, if you're satisfied with it, that's all that really matters.
@@Neonmirrorblack Agreed. But it sounds pretty good.
James Cameron: "Now for my next magic trick, I will make this film grain disappear before your very eyes."
The grain always has been his biggest regret with Aliens.
And the natural detail of the film.
Whilst ruining the picture the colouring and making everyone's eyes look like bugs
"For my next trick i'll make my film look like waxy brz shit"
Another Wax Museum. Stick w the Blu-ray, I think Cameron forgot what Film looks like.
he just despises it
@@TheUnknownVideographer Yeah, it's very unfortunate. At least Aliens, Terminator, and T2 all have good Blu-rays. Hell, even Piranha 2 has a good Blu-ray Lol.
@@TheUnknownVideographer There is nothing wrong with using AI if you know what you are doing. But this is Predator all over again, too much contrast and AI upscale without using Grain. There is a reason why Topaz Video AI has Grain enabled by default so that upscaling does not look artificial. Grain will also give an effect of details that are not there. When I watch original Grainy AI upscaled movies where all Grain has been removed, I can often see a lot of detail up close, but from a little further away there are no details at all, just a smooth surface. The high contrast also makes some of the close-ups of skin appear artificial, as if the skin were made of plastic.
@@abstuli No, this transfer is much, much better than Predator. There is still some grain in this transfer that makes the presentation incredibly solid.
@@FervAnimalLover I agree that it is better than Predator: Ultimate Hunter Edition.
They have used AI to remove all grain from Aliens and then added some fake grain. My opinion is that they have added too little grain.
I see a lot of artifacts I recognize from Topaz Video AI, more grain could help hide them. I can often see parts of faces with a lot of detail where other parts of the face nearby are without detail. More fine-grained grain would help to hide this. Another problem is that they have used far too much contrast. On close-ups you can often see that the pores in the skin are far too clear and unnatural and remind of plastic skin we see in video games and not in reality.
A.I. for A.I. sake isn't using it as a tool, its abusing it as a gimmick.
I love my old DVD collection not only because they used Telecine analog machines to digitize the films, they left in the scratches, film grain, and even the cigarette burns to signal a reel change. That's cinema, not some sterile cleaned up smoothed over image.
i agree, there are subtleties that are ruined with AI up-scaling, the raw master reel is what makes it.
telecine looks garbo tho. they just needed to per frame scan the original negs in 4k and then color match to whatever the original master interpos was or what it was supposed to be. but thats too complicated for these studios.
The Hadley's hope drop crew when they enter. The yellow machinery behind then in 4K looks like it is new. I like the grained look better. It looks better weathered battered and not a new coat of paint.
What's wrong with grain? It's part of the image.
@@Claptrap0451
Maybe, but you gain nothing by smoothing it out!
Nothing, but if you want to increase the resolution, you need to remove de grain previously to transform the image to 4k. And then, you can add a new 4k grain to the footage
@@grg1979
?
James Cameron hates grain now, he prefers the digital and CGI look
@@grg1979 So you are saying it never was 4k in the first place?
Thanks for the comparison. I´ll stick to my Blu-Ray since it looks WAY more "analog" and natural.
Well this is depressing. Can't believe I'm going to pass up Aliens on 4k UHD, been waiting for it for YEARS, but here we are. James Cameron is out of his mind.
It was too much to hope that we would get an Aliens transfer that was as fantastic as Fox's Alien disc. Wasn't happening with Cameron's meddling.
@@TheUnknownVideographer There is nothing wrong with using AI if you know what you are doing. But this is Predator all over again, too much contrast and AI upscale without using Grain. There is a reason why Topaz Video AI has Grain enabled by default so that upscaling does not look artificial. Grain will also give an effect of details that are not there. When I watch original Grainy AI upscaled movies where all Grain has been removed, I can often see a lot of detail up close, but from a little further away there are no details at all, just a smooth surface. The high contrast also makes some of the close-ups of skin appear artificial, as if the skin were made of plastic.
I'm sure whoever upscaled this movie tore his hair out when he heard James Cameron wanted no grain and high contrast.
SADLY softwax-filtering with a lot of sharpening after that 😞
Wrong ot sharpening or wax
Wrong the previous transfer for blu ray were not that great especially with the coloring @@TheUnknownVideographer
@@TheUnknownVideographer I'm sure whoever upscaled this movie tore his hair out when he heard James Cameron wanted no grain and high contrast.
Aliens is a very grainy movie filmed on 16mm experimental film stock. All this Grain gives an effect of details that are not there.
When you remove all this Grain during AI upscaling without adding new Grain, you get good details up close and a smooth surface with no details from a slightly longer distance.
The high contrast makes the skin look artificial, as if it were made of plastic.
Blu-ray looks like a film. 4k looks like a video game.
Yup
Weird greenish hue in 4k version.. Sticking to blu ray!
$K Looks like a Marvel movie. #Sigh
Yep, its not enough that they produces new "movies" that are pure shit, they have to ruin the classics and their film look too.
and approved by Cameron himself... but the Blu-ray was not the original negative of the movie. The blue tint was added and distracting. The 4k is still great
Just canceled my pre-order. Thank you! I’ll stick with my Blu-ray, which looks accurate.
The color is acceptable in the bluray, but still different to previous versions.
The blu ray isn't accurate either.
It looks terrible. I´m done with all this sh*tty AI aesthetic. I prefer the grain of the blue ray all the way. It looks more like cinema.
There is no hope for a decent 4k of the terminator 1984 if this is the benchmark….hold on to those blu rays
Yeah, very sad. For years I wanted an 4k version, but after this releases.. Nah i'm good. Fun fact,
I was shocked how good the Terminator looks on blu ray, for years I just saw the stream version
@@DCMedien yeah, the blu ray is really nice. and it retains all its natural film grain. I’m satisfied with it
*2160p
One has been "available" online for years:
ruclips.net/video/G4X9zZJco3Q/видео.html
I'll stick with my terminator DVD. Has original mono tracks where the guns actually sound real and not stock
@@luvbug839 yep, I have that too, mono mix is so much better
Is it me or she’s the blu ray look way better? Did I miss something ?
Everyone looks like they have a mild case of jaundice now on the 4K version.
It’s not just you…the blu ray looks more like 35mm film….the 4k looks like it was shot digitally, which it was not
No AI upscaling technics just used.
@@Neonmirrorblack *2160p
You’re blind watch this comparison on a large 120” screen… the UHD is far superior and more detailed. There’s only a one or 2 shots I’ve seen where you can make a semi valid argument.
I was waiting for the 4K... this video convinced me to keep the blu-ray. The BD may look noisier, but is more natural. The 4K's heavy DNR and color grading is terrible and makes it look like a videogame.
Howw?? it looks superior to the BD lol
@@robomnemonic3751how does it look superior? It looks extremely artificial (which it is) and almost like a videogame.
@@nick1635 Look again and look how much sharper it is
@@robomnemonic3751 lol you are clearly braindead - it is awful
@@robomnemonic3751 it does not, it looks artificial, like it was generated by AI. Uncanny Valley fest.
Man, James Cameron of all people BUTCHERING his movies in 4K. HOW HARD is it to scan a negative, clean it up and release it in beautiful high dynamic range? No filtering, AI, upscaling or major tweaking necessary.
Only the most ridiculous of purists think it's butchering. To the rest of us it looks great.
Like with T2 I have a hard time understanding the outrage? Is it just because the grain is gone?
@@powerglover2021 Not only was all the film grain removed, but doing that made everyone look like wax models and insanely fake! Not to mention the obnoxious blue tint that was put all over the film!
If it's so easy, maybe you should show Cameron how it's done?
@SoapNugget that's only the digital version. The 4k Disk looks great.
They've removed the film grain which is just ridiculous - the movie was shot on film 40yrs ago and should not look like a movie shot on digital from the last 5. While some shots can look okay, clothes, walls and parts of people's faces often look unnatural. What a disappointment, why James, why??? Out of this, the Abyss and True Lies, The Abyss is the only one that looks okay.
Thanks for the video, you've made up my mind, I won't be buying this and will stick with my blu-ray.
Why 50 year old movie can't look fresh and new? If I want it to look 40 year old with all the film grain I can always fire up the old VHS. When I buy a movie on 4k I want it to look and sould like it was shot yesterday, doesn't matter how old is the movie
VHS don't have film grain. Like this 4K. Film grain is exactly what makes movie look good.@@elenathorne6149
because in the inherent nature of film, the grain is part of the resolution/clarity/texture. plenty of proper scanned 4k masters looks like movies that were shot today. when i buy a 4k movie, i want the utmost closest presentation available to the original source. i don't want something to look like all the typical modern bs.
@@elenathorne6149 Removing the film grain often makes faces look waxy since you're losing some detail to resharpen the image. Look at what happened to Star Trek VI when they went to blu-ray, they removed the film grain and it looked aweful, fortunately, for the 4K release, they didn't remove it and it looks so much better.
@@elenathorne6149 The grainy look is a part of the film. Taking it away diminishes the presentation. It’s not supposed to look like it was filmed in the last few years.
On a different note…did you know that 35mm film has a resolution of 5.6K! So even 4k mastering is a downgrade from the source material. Now you did lose some of that resolution due to the graininess of 35mm film stock but it didn’t degrade it significantly.
The 4K looks inferior to the regular Bluray...AI processing should be nowhere near film. It's no longer ONLY dnr to worry about, it's god awful algorythmic sharpening added to it.
Colours got worse, detail scrubbed… uff…
Yeah, the color grading is the worst offender to me. In some scenes it was actually fine, but in others it made people look sickly. Like WTF?
There's some weird DNR distribution going on here... such a shame. I was so looking forward to this UHD release! 🥺
No DNR used
Looks like a video game not a film from almost 40 years ago.
It should be noted that this is the streaming version of the 4k master, played back in SDR. "from the newly remastered Digital 4K UHD. Digital 4K SDR."
Cameron went from a great filmmaker, to a hack, with his damn Smurf movies. All the CGI must have made him blind to what film os supposed to look like. I'll bet he'll make a 8k AI "remaster", in 120fps, to make the movie look even more like a video game...
Ironic, how he made a movie about the danger of AI, with the Terminator, and now he uses it, to destroy his movies...
Exactly right
I always thought the point of 4K was an increase in resolution, not a removal of the aspect that MAKES the picture.
If you’re watching this on your tiny iPhone you’re missing out. Just watched it on desk last night and it’s incredible. I’m grateful that a lot of the grain was removed because it was too grainy especially because of the dark scenes sometimes the Blu-ray you couldn’t even see the actors.restoration was incredible I loved every second of it
@@SuperSnakePlissken At what point did I mention me looking at this on a smartphone display? Doing something like that would be silly.
This is literally the same master as the Blu Ray, just upscaled, edge "enhanced" and with the grain removed. It looks super artificial.
@@Gilarack Blah! I completely disagree. Just had six friends over for some brisket and sides and we watched Aliens 4K and everybody loved it and thought it looked incredible. You sir are an outlier.
ALIENS. This time, it's without grain.
And without the true sound mix.
In digital, no one can see your grain.
Now I'll turn your charming film stock into digital
I don’t understand this obsession with over cleaned images (4K), all the film grain is gone. For me grain is part of the movie «magic», like the 24 fps instead of video. Too clean of an image it reminds me something is fake...
Oh how long I have waited for this! This the first film I ever bought on laserdisk at $70 and it was a joy. Now in all its glory Im back to summer 1986.
This movie absolutely needs to have the option of watching it in a pure authentic 4K film scan (but also with HDR color grade).
And from there fans can give it whatever grade of noise suppression we want, but just shipping it oversharpened by default is not a good look.
That would require a TV with GPU acceleration that can do real-time color grading and noise suppression. Also, it would need at least 4GB of dedicated memory. Thats not mentioning the fact that in order to do this you need the original file source in which is WAY larger than a compressed codec. Otherwise, you would be stretching data that isn't there, this introducing banding and artifacts. No streaming service is going to stream that much data uncompressed.
@@captureinsidethesound Personally I'm experimenting with running movies through Topaz tuned to my own preferences.
Having a native 4K transfer would be highly valuable.
You can kinda do the reverse by ripping the UHD disc to a PC and you can use reshade to add grain in realtime.
@@NCozy That's kind of backwards from what I'm trying to do.
The thing is movies recorded on film actually contain all of the detail in the film grain, and because film grain is completely random that means even if a single frame is very noisy you're still going to see lot more image resolution watching the movie because in a movie scene you'll be viewing the average of the noise from 10-20 frames, not just one, reproducing film grain exactly as it was recorded is actually a big deal.
@@budthecyborg4575 I'm well aware of that, I do think that trying to put the grain in does mask some of the DNR and makes it less noticable and helps to restore a bit of the look but it is more of a bandaid solution that's fun to mess around with and not a serious suggestion on my end
The 4K sucks. I'm sticking with the Blu-Ray.
So, basically it adds clarity instead of sharpness and removes details.
Sad that Fox did a better bluray scan then Cameron with his dnr fetish
The DNR is aggressive but it looks like skin detail was preserved and sharpened while the backgrounds are denoised. I'll have to see it in motion. Nevertheless, I'm glad for a 4K release at long last.
This is a no for me.
Blu Ray has an incredible remastering and 4K seems to have an artificial scaling, and the application some type of DNR.
For those who do not have the Blu Ray, it may be the best option since it comes with that disc included.
Bluray wins here.
10:01 - how did the upper part move?
Also, is the cat orange or brown?
Terrible. It's like pulling the oxygen out of the image.
The bluray is very good quality. So not much in it
Must say goes to show how good Blu-ray was actually.
the skin is much better in blue ray
Noise/grain gone with some of the details, unsharp masked high contrast details sharpened as you'd expect......they appear to have removed ALL the grain though.
Thanks, is of great help love its film.but grains in gains of the film were eliminated in some scenes why ?????. chile ,santiago,2024.
Looks waxy af. And the colors shifting into a greenish tint. The skintones looking so bad. Bishops skin has now a color like one of the simpsons, some weird yellow. Jeez, this 4K transfer is a mess. The scene in the rain looking awful, like someone smeared through the picture.
maybe your monitor isn't calibrated
@jctai100 my TV is professionally calibrated.
The 4k is better....the coloring is a matter of taste!
Maybe you're 10 years old @@jctai100
I always wondered how great it would be to run these films through a 'CARTOONISER' filter.
Lol.
Waiting for a steelbook or limited edition so I don't have to endure that cover lol!
All classics it seems have very bad covers on 4K These days. Had to buy the limited 4K steelbook edition of Poltergeist to get the original cover.
Yeh, the cover is so underwhelming 🤦♂️
It's not the wax exhibit that people make it out to be but it's still pretty mediocre, especially compared to the blu ray release and moreover the Alien 4K release that's absolutely outstanding.
Yeah, I don’t hate what I see, but all the same it didn’t need to be changed at all. Cameron is a total joke now caring so much about technology than good filmmaking.
I pre ordered this and The Abyss. I need to watch this through.
🤮
4K is a mess like Terminator 2. I hate it's gonna be the same for True Lies and The Abyss. Disgusting.
The Abyss is fine, but True Lies is the same.
They should just make "an oldschool" edition for 4K later on with grain preserved instead of wax cabinet look. Judging by the screenshots, some screens look partially better in 4K, but even then it's just part of the full image area.. mostly something in the same scene is off at the same time, when some part of the scene looks better (or more detailed, at least). If it's a face close-up shot that was good detail to begin with, then the smallest details on lit area look better in 4K, but on the downside it seems that shadow-ed areas of the face are zero grain and actually seem to lose detail VS. blu-ray, because grain held some of that... some background items on bigger scenes just pop the wrong way without grain, some seem ok. It would look so much better with less grain removed imo.
@@TheUnknownVideographer Yeah, that's what's worrying me in 4K releases at the moment. To be honest, same thing was going on with Blu-Ray already ways back to some extent, whereas some releases looked really unnatural and wax-cabinet-like. If I remember right, my Predator Blu-Ray is one of those worst ones so far. I would love to have a decent Terminator 2 high-resolution one day.
I'm impressed how the Blu-ray holds up. But the 4K transfer also looks pretty good.
The image sharpening is a step forward. But the grain removal and green-colour filter are two steps back.
Excellent comparison I chose blu ray
This DNR processing, which is astonishingly atrocious, that Cameron's so inclined to apply to each film he's partaken in, has no idea how to facelift the dark edges. And these spots of bother are painful to look at. Aesthetically jarring too.
I just need to know one thing.
How's the Atmos?
Yeah, me too. No one is talking about that. Even when they do, it's going to be some RUclipsrs with stupid sound bars, or upfiring speakers giving their opinion on Atmos. Which they have no business doing. It's hard to find anyone with a real Atmos setup reviewing 4k discs.
For sure. The picture differences look miniscule to me, I just want an upgraded soundtrack for modern equipment. I'll buy them anyway, they ain't going to be worse than T2 and that's what matters most.
Personally I don't care about atmos remixes on older movies that were never mixed for it originally. I just wished they gave us that original ac3 track from the laserdisc which stemed from the original 70mm 6 track. That was still the best sounding mix for aliens period.
@@marlonrobalinoyes, I've never seen a film where Atmos has been added in at a later stage that has made any significant improvement to the 5.1 mix. I think for Atmos to really shine the audio needs to be authored with it in mind from the start.
@@bassage13We aren’t going to listen to these videos and are going to buy it for ourselves. On Disc, like it should be done.
Since I already have Bluray version, I will gladly take the 4K version for all the extra detail. Thank you.
Yikes. I've been dreaming of the definitive presentation of Aliens forever, and based on these comps, I'll need to keep dreaming. UHD looks unnaturally whack.
At 1:54. Look at the cat´s eye, on th FOX blu-ray the eye has more detail but when going over to the UHD, the eye is blurry. Apperently Disney/Cameron (I head is more Cameron faulty not liking film and ordering Disney to remove it, what I heard anyway) has been using AI algorithm to lessen the natural filmgrain. So bad!
My mother is dead and I have no basement. I'm still never buying this garbage, James.
I'll be avoiding all AI filtered films, thanks.
Well, at least there aren’t any more films left for James Cameron to fuck up. What’s so bad about film grain? I honestly enjoyed the films with all their imperfections-it gives them a certain character. There’s a better way of restoring film-based content without scrubbing away film grain to the point where everything looks enhanced and artificial, just ask Francis Ford Coppola.
Does James have a problem with his eyes? Skin looks very green in the 4k version.
8:49 Gorman looks waxy or like he rubbed a shit ton of lotion all over his face lol
Sucked the fucking life right out of it...are they out of their minds or something?
You gotta be kidding me, they removed the bloody grain! I got to get a hold of the Blu Ray Alien 4-film collection, and get a Blu Ray player for my MacBook. I cannot watch films without grain, I NEED GRAIN.
Grain really isn't everything unless you absolutely want that nostalgia look. Scrubbing grain away can remove some details, but they do this anyway with most films when they do a scan and transfer. They won't scrub all of the grain away, but most of it, and then add in fake grain in post-processing. Modern films that are shot digitally look fantastic, and they don't have grain.
Whether or not this really hurts the overall image quality though (like with Titanic 4K...and many people are ignorant about this) remains to be seen. Most of the comparisons in this video look good, except for some of the changes to the color grading, and I was specifically looking for scrubbed detail/AI upscale smear and wasn't seeing any. I was actually prepared for much worse than this. People need to stop confusing visual noise with details too. Sometimes grain is just noise, not actual details.
But still, grain is needed for Aliens. IT'S ALIENS! James Cameron ya son of a - (Xenomorph screams). Well, I gotta get a hold of a Blu Mac Burner and the Alien 4-film blu ray collection. Before DISNEY gets of hold of blu rays!!!@@Neonmirrorblack
Adding detail that is not there in the original which destroys lens blur and boka (especially on faces where there is supposed to be depth of field from noses to eyes). Smoothing elements and skin making them look like plastic (I guess it works on Bishop since he is synthetic, but still). Oversharpening to the point they look like they aged 10 years. These comparisons shine a light on how those who use AI have a long way to go in making sure it is applied with greater care. I will take the grain every time looking at these comparisons. I wish I had been involved with the cleanup as I could have pointed out the flaws in this remaster before going to print and helped make them less obvious.
My man just ruined his own movie.
Is it still greenish? Unlike the DVD
Aliens just doesn't seem right without the grain.
When seeing details from the skin, sometimes it looks like parts of different photos made at different resolutions and stitched together. Thanks AI…
Between this and the usual teal/greenish boost of this 4K generation, yep, I'll keep my blu-rays.
" god will take care of you now sister "
Hang on to those blu rays everyone, this is a mess. Disney and Jimmy Cammy ain't getting my money for this one. Look at the first Alien on 4k for a transfer done the right way.
@teabag7772 I prefer Physical Media too. Sometimes when you stream it can take a while for the image to buffer correctly and then if you have issues with the Internet etc it sucks. Digital is a pain too as I redeemed a lot of codes then they transitioned over to a different type of software and some didn't make it over. Owning physicial you have it there and can watch it whenever you want.
I mean, it’s just not the 4K disk, you also need a 4K TV
*2160p
You guys are missing the color grading. I can't stand that teal color when I know what it is supposed to look like. Blade runner UHD is unwatchable for example.
It's like every decade, these classic movies get the color grading of the moment, and the original colours are lost to time
Agree! Teal colour grading is terrible! Blade runner, Terminator, Terminator 2, Aliens everywhere the same colour grading. Great that Alien 4k has original colours
nice finally 4k Clear and sharp
I love film grain and how the old transfers look... why did they do this?
I saw a slight improvement in image sharpness in 4K, but a noticeable color difference that looks better on Blu-ray
The whole thing is inconsistent. Some shots look better on the 4k, most look MUCH worse on the 4k.
That's what happens when you slap on an algorithm and call it a day.
I bet we'll get a Remaster of the 4K Remaster in a few years, using a different algorithm.
The best algorithm would be no algorithm.
@@alvins.4775 wouldn't count on it
4K releases are expensive to produce and rare enough, it's not like the old blu ray days where the studio would just put out a slightly updated version
I love these comparisons!
What happens when you tell AI to "make my movie look more gooder"...... The first live action film where I felt as though we were in the uncanny valley!
Is it true that they used ai upscaling?
yes, ver bad one
Where's the film grain !?
Gone thankfully
@@GenXCellent1970It's called film grain for a reason. It's PART of the film and contains picture detail.
@@GenXCellent1970 🤦♂
4k is disgusting. Looks like it was generated by midjourney. Not buying it.
I would also like to add something: while the film grain has been removed and the image has a slight waxy look, this video is actually not representative of the 4k version. I saw it and the resolution and clarity is much higher than shown here. However, the denoiser used on the film and the youtube compression do not mix well together. For those that are undecided, keep this in mind. After seeing the 4k version I think I prefer it over the blu-ray original. I do recommend for people to see it live and decide for themselves.
Happy 75th birthday Sigourney.
I think it looks pretty good! I find it incredibly difficult to judge grain when it's not in motion and the color is much closer to what I remember the film print in a theater.
The film grain was a *character* in itself, imo.
It gives just the right amount of other-Worldly distance from the image.
With most of the grain removed for the 4K version, the faces look like rubber, and the alien lair effects look cheap.
I even prefer the colour grading on the Blu Ray. It had more accurate pink-ish skin tones.
The skin tones in the 4K version look too green and fake.
The "AI" detail enhancement has that slight uncanny valley thing going on.
I'll never understand how a Director as visionary as James Cameron would approve the new transfer.
(similar to how George Lucas approved and indeed asked for most of the changes for the Special Edition of Star Wars.)
I think the only real answer is: They think the majority of people expect a super-sharp grain-free presentation when released in 4K.
In fairness, most people probably don't care as much as some of us do. lol
I don't even think that on my projector, I would be too bothered about playing the 1080p Blu Ray version, vs the 4K UHD.
The original 35mm film never looked that sharp and overly-clean anyway.
The artificially sharpened 4K version isn't how most of us remember it.
imo, The 1080p 2011 Blu Ray transfer is still the de-facto version of the movie. I won't be buying the UHD.
0:44 9:01 4:01 - Look at how more natural the skin tones look on the Blu Ray in those scenes.
If anyone thinks the 4K UHD looks better there, they either have a badly-calibrated TV / monitor, or they are wearing sunglasses. lol
Even the *contrast* looks better on the Blu Ray, although this YT video isn't in HDR, which often makes it harder to compare the UHD transfer.
The colour of the metal lockers looks more neutral on the Blu Ray, the light above the lockers have a warmer colour.
To me, almost everything on the Blu Ray looks more "real", or at least in the way we are used to with movies / celluloid film.
One other thing that's probably obvious in this video, is that the film grain is usually *moving*.
ie. it's basically a random pattern all the way through the movie, so it's not half as noticeable as it is on still images.
Obviously the RUclips compression doesn't do things justice either, but I think this vid still shows the differences very well.
(the RUclips compression on the still images should be a lot clearer than for moving images. But, paradoxically, the film grain still won't look as noticeable when viewing the actual Blu Ray of the movie.)
9:51 - Just look at the peak of the cap that (the late) Al Matthews is wearing.
There was *detail* within the film grain on the Blu Ray version.
The 4K version has removed a lot of that detail, and has just smoothed / blurred things.
You can see the shadow detail lost in his face, too.
(and the film grain will again be moving / randomized on the movie when playing normally, so the details within the grain will be easier to see.)
The "4K" version is like I used the Smudge tool in Paint Shop Pro, then added fake sharpness to the edges. lol
Sorry, it's not for me.
I just realized, the "Blu Ray" version shown in the video says "2010" in the description, but I'm assuming the 2010/2011 version is essentially the same disk.
There is a newer Blu Ray (1080p) disk included with a physical release of the 4K version.
It's apparently the same AI "enhanced" version as the 4K UHD, just shown at 1080p.
I bet the new 1080p disk looks even worse when compared to directly to the 2010/2011 Blu Ray.
Waited so long for this and True Lies and I'm shocked that Cameron thought this would be ok. There's no grain and faces look waxy. It's jacked up. Such a shame. I'm not buying any of these now.
Some of it looks over processed, would be interesting to see what it looks like if they used about 50% the processing in some of the shots and scenes but for the most part it looks better. Some will say that you lose detail when you lose the grain but then more detail isn't always better, for the most part the image is cleaner and it still looks like it was shot on film which is the most important part
Asombrosa, mágica, única Sigourney Weaver!.
I'm amazed after what everyones been saying, this looks better in all these comparisons on 4k look how gloosy the eyes are more definition in backgrounds looks so good
13 лет назад купил коллекционную антологию "Чужие" (все 4 части) + "Прометей" на Blu-ray и периодически пересматриваю, особенно "Чужие", мой любимый фильм в серии. Все же я предпочту именно версию на BD, которая в более синий оттенок уходит (видимо, любимый цвет Кэмерона), чем это недоразумение 4K, которое зачем-то позеленили, как какую-то Матрицу.
The original does have an unfortunate amount of grain and the grain removal did a good job. What kills it for me is the teal overlay that kind of ruins the flesh tones.
Why is the 4k version so... Green?
Now the movie title makes too much sense. They were always little green people lol.
The noise-free 4K backgrounds/sets are slightly too strong. They need a little bit of grain but for the most part are okay. But the characters need a 50/50 mix of the bluray and 4K.... to find a nice mid-ground.
How old was Jonsey the cat in Aliens?