By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Why are certain old movies not being ported to Blu-ray?

I'm upgrading my Blueray collection to 4k Ultra Blueray I want to get 1998 movie Saving Private Ryan it's 91% in metacritic everybody agree that movie smokes most movies today my uncles had taste, I do like many moden movies Drive by Sony Pictures and love Spiderman movies.

Last edited by SegaHeart - on 13 April 2022

Cute and honest Sega Saturn fan, also noone should buy Sega grrrr, Sega for life.

Around the Network

Schindlers list 1993, got 94 on Metacritic amazing I have alot of styles in my movie taste 



Cute and honest Sega Saturn fan, also noone should buy Sega grrrr, Sega for life.

I recommend Life of PI 2012 it outscored Spiderman far from home , Spiderman no way home and Avengers endgame on Metacritic



Cute and honest Sega Saturn fan, also noone should buy Sega grrrr, Sega for life.

SegaHeart said:

I'm upgrading my Blueray collection to 4k Ultra Blueray I want to get 1998 movie Saving Private Ryan it's 91% in metacritic everybody agree that movie smokes most movies today my uncles had taste, I do like many moden movies Drive by Sony Pictures and love Spiderman movies.

Then you should also get the mini series Band of Brothers:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0185906/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1



I'm not all that into replacing blu-rays with 4K blu-ray. For movies prior to 2010 it makes little difference. Only if they were shot on 70mm it will have benefits on 4K blu-ray. Movies shot on 35mm and the early digital movies with 2K digital masters have no benefit of 4K upscaling an adding HDR after the fact either looks weir or unnoticeable. Even for new series. I got Westworld S3 on 4K HDR blu-ray and it looks exactly the same as the 1080p blu-ray version.

I would love a 4K HDR version of Lord of the Rings, yet the source material simply isn't there. The first movie already looks dated on blu-ray due to it being shot with early digital cameras and mastered in 2K. It would have looked better with 35mm material. The later movies look better but it's a shame they didn't pull out the 70mm cameras for this epic movie series. Yet that bit of low res fuzziness does help with the immersion. I found the Hobbit looking worse despite using much better cameras. Probably because using much better cameras and also due to different lighting techniques as it was shot in HFR. (48 fps)

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Blu-ray also already reveals the strings in the dark crystal, Willow and Big trouble in little China also don't benefit all that much from blu-ray. It looks better, but it also looks less coherent.

Shooting on 65 mm and 70 mm still looks the best to me. Digital camera look too 'clinical', looks more like a game than a movie. All that modern cgi doesn't help of course. I just ordered murder on the orient express and death on the nile on 4K blu-ray. Modern movies shot on 65/70 mm, hopefully they didn't mess with HDR too much.



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:

I'm not all that into replacing blu-rays with 4K blu-ray. For movies prior to 2010 it makes little difference. Only if they were shot on 70mm it will have benefits on 4K blu-ray. Movies shot on 35mm and the early digital movies with 2K digital masters have no benefit of 4K upscaling an adding HDR after the fact either looks weir or unnoticeable. Even for new series. I got Westworld S3 on 4K HDR blu-ray and it looks exactly the same as the 1080p blu-ray version.

I would love a 4K HDR version of Lord of the Rings, yet the source material simply isn't there. The first movie already looks dated on blu-ray due to it being shot with early digital cameras and mastered in 2K. It would have looked better with 35mm material. The later movies look better but it's a shame they didn't pull out the 70mm cameras for this epic movie series. Yet that bit of low res fuzziness does help with the immersion. I found the Hobbit looking worse despite using much better cameras. Probably because using much better cameras and also due to different lighting techniques as it was shot in HFR. (48 fps)

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Blu-ray also already reveals the strings in the dark crystal, Willow and Big trouble in little China also don't benefit all that much from blu-ray. It looks better, but it also looks less coherent.

Shooting on 65 mm and 70 mm still looks the best to me. Digital camera look too 'clinical', looks more like a game than a movie. All that modern cgi doesn't help of course. I just ordered murder on the orient express and death on the nile on 4K blu-ray. Modern movies shot on 65/70 mm, hopefully they didn't mess with HDR too much.

I've jumped to 4K ever since I got my OLED in preparation for the PS5 (which I now have), and I've double dipped on many movies I own on DVD. However, I won't 4K double dip if I already own them on blu-ray. It's not THAT big of a difference to justify rebuying them. DVD to 4K, though? It's a night and day difference.



SvennoJ said:

I'm not all that into replacing blu-rays with 4K blu-ray. For movies prior to 2010 it makes little difference. Only if they were shot on 70mm it will have benefits on 4K blu-ray. Movies shot on 35mm and the early digital movies with 2K digital masters have no benefit of 4K upscaling an adding HDR after the fact either looks weir or unnoticeable. Even for new series. I got Westworld S3 on 4K HDR blu-ray and it looks exactly the same as the 1080p blu-ray version.

I would love a 4K HDR version of Lord of the Rings, yet the source material simply isn't there. The first movie already looks dated on blu-ray due to it being shot with early digital cameras and mastered in 2K. It would have looked better with 35mm material. The later movies look better but it's a shame they didn't pull out the 70mm cameras for this epic movie series. Yet that bit of low res fuzziness does help with the immersion. I found the Hobbit looking worse despite using much better cameras. Probably because using much better cameras and also due to different lighting techniques as it was shot in HFR. (48 fps)

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Blu-ray also already reveals the strings in the dark crystal, Willow and Big trouble in little China also don't benefit all that much from blu-ray. It looks better, but it also looks less coherent.

Shooting on 65 mm and 70 mm still looks the best to me. Digital camera look too 'clinical', looks more like a game than a movie. All that modern cgi doesn't help of course. I just ordered murder on the orient express and death on the nile on 4K blu-ray. Modern movies shot on 65/70 mm, hopefully they didn't mess with HDR too much.

Good points all around. Fortunately for me I only ever got a couple of blu-rays so buying everything in 4k if possible makes sense in my case. I wonder if 4k Ultra-HD will be the last physical media before everything goes digital.



KManX89 said:

I've jumped to 4K ever since I got my OLED in preparation for the PS5 (which I now have), and I've double dipped on many movies I own on DVD. However, I won't 4K double dip if I already own them on blu-ray. It's not THAT big of a difference to justify rebuying them. DVD to 4K, though? It's a night and day difference.

Well yeah, would be about the same as DVD to Blu-ray. But if the price isn't all that much higher, might as well go for the one with less compression. That's one benefit 4K blu-ray still has with older movies, higher bandwidth, less compression artifacts, and full 1080p color. (Both 4k Blu-ray and 1080p Blu-ray use 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, meaning color values are only sampled on every other line and every other pixel. Blu-ray has 540p color resolution while 4K blu-ray 1080p color) Of course the main thing you see better is the film grain!

@Spike0503 I hope physical stays around since it's still the only place where you get extras like behind the scenes footage and director's commentaries. Yet I don't see any 8K physical format coming anymore. I doubt 8K will catch on anyway, my eye sight tops out at 1440p at a comfortable viewing distance. 4K still has benefits, yet I already need to walk up to the screen to see the difference clearly.

For digital, 8K is rather pointless as well. Let digital first match 4K blu-ray's 128 mbps bandwidth. Better motion resolution makes for a more consistent quality picture. Even at 128 mbps, pausing a 4K blu-ray in a busy scene still reveals plenty compression artifacts. Digital cinema goes up to 250 mbps. Might be higher now, that was the max for 2K movies still using mpeg2.



James Bond Gold finger amazing scene, hat vs statue

Diamonds are forever intro, amazing

Living Daylights intro sequence also amazing want it smoother

DIe another day - frozen lake chase amazing whole 5 minute video

Man with the golden gun, Intro fight 6:22 mark needs to look better

Goldeneye tank chase, must of been alot of money

Needs blueray treatment

Octopussy - yoyo 10/10 super amazing best thing 1:09 mark

Diamonds are forever las vegas chase

Last edited by SegaHeart - on 16 April 2022

Cute and honest Sega Saturn fan, also noone should buy Sega grrrr, Sega for life.

@SegaHeart Great stuff! I'm a huge Bond fan so I would love to get some of those. I saw in Amazon that they have this:



Which is pretty convenient for me since he's my favorite Bond. Aside from his collection, there are a couple of Blu-ray collections containing everything and some collections divided by actor. I think the only ones in 4k seem to be the Craig movies which is a shame. If I were to buy them maybe I'd buy Craig's 4k + Brosnan and Connery in standard blu-ray. It'd be great if they release another complete set but in 4k though.