COLLATERAL 4K UHD BLU-RAY REVIEW
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2024
- This is another 4K UHD release people had asked me to review. I purchased the disc a few years ago but it did not exactly give best impression of any 4K disc I've ever seen and so I decided to leave a review for another time. I finally watched is again and also had an extensive look at the DVD and Blu-ray to formulate a more definite opinion of each and whether or not the 4K is a worthwhile purchase, particularly given that the majority of Collateral was filmed only in HD video.
Aspect ratio is approximately 2.40:1, Sound is DTS HD 5.1 and it has a running time of 2 hours.
I maybe wrong but perhaps the downgrade in image quality during the 2000's may be to do with the prevalence of digital mastering.
This is admittedly before my time but I know plenty of films even to this day may be shot on film or high res digital only to be downscaled to 2k digital for compositing, colour grading etc, then upscaled back too 4k or printed onto film.
I got a copy of the Hobbit trilogy recently and was shocked by the softness as I remember it was filmed in 5k. So I looked online & sure enough it was mastered in only 2k, making me wonder why they filmed it with nice cameras in the first place.
Thankfully 4k DI's seem to be increasingly the norm nowadays.
You might be onto something there. For sure there was the rapid growth of CGI which almost forced the adoption of Super 35 for shooting the films rather than the superior full frame anamorphic 35mm. This is because however good the anamorphic lenses are there are always minor distortions and that makes adding computer cartooning to the resultant images far more cumbersome. I want to work out all the causes of the downturn in image quality because it ruined my cinema-going in the late 1990's onwards and it hasn't recovered to this day.
John.
Yes, the 2000s was when digital intermediate came in. The first film to use it was O Brother Where Art Thou (2000) and it very quickly became the norm. 35mm footage was scanned into 2K and that was what was edited and colour timed. And until around 2009-10 the 2K digital was then put back onto 35mm film. Nowadays I still prefer proper film projection (and I’m fuming that I couldn’t get off work today to see Amélie on 35mm at the Prince Charles) that hasn’t been through digital intermediate, but I saw the new Beetlejuice on Monday in 4K Dolby Vision and have to admit that it looked terrific, as did Alien: Romulus the week before.
@@kamandi1362 That explains a lot Kamandi. Image quality has never fully recovered... unless your name is Christopher Nolan. I'm sure most of us know that the Jaws 4K release confirmed that 35mm is far in excess of a lowly 2K. I've forgotten what Jaws was transferred at but it was around 5.5K and the result of that was apparent on screen. Reducing 35mm down to 2K (about one-sixth of the potential quality we enjoyed before) perhaps illustrates the lack of interest and maybe even contempt people in the industry have for the industry they are in.
Thank you for the definite information Kamandi. I very much appreciate it.
John.
I'd highly recommend getting the new blu ray of Miami Vice! It's certainly not a filmic image, but I think it pushed what you could do with digital cameras in interesting directions, and there's not another film that looks quite like it. Rough around the edges, but characterful. Plus the sound is to die for. I'm biased though, as it's my favourite Mann film and I find myself quite swept away by the indulgences of romance, speedboats and action.
Glad you enjoyed Collateral! All killer no filler.
Marcus
I enjoyed Collateral when I first saw that DVD very soon after it was issued. But the film seems to get better and better every time I watch it. I'll be able to watch Miami Vice again now that I understand why it looked so poor on the huge screen in The Empire and I'm hopeful I'll be able to accept it as it is on a far smaller screen in here. Might just get the DVD though and see how I get on with that because I'll probably find one for about 50p.
John.
As always, great review and I always enjoy your additional insights about film vs digital. I own a DVD copy and I’m encouraged to get the 4K. The nightclub scene is one of my favorites with the choreography and sound always exciting.
As for the low light and dull colors, I guess I always thought it was a good representation of the cityscape, sort of a gritty version due to the subject matter.
Thank you!
I remember reading an article when collateral came out about manns intended look he was going for,where he wanted certain aspects of LA at night to look peculiar and almost yellow and hazy,he felt that the inner city had a very peculiar almost monochrome look that was unique to that city.but in order to achieve this he experimented with alot of different cameras and processes, but could only achieve this with HD digital and as you pointed out some 35mm.its also worth noting that this created a digital noise almost mimicking heavy grain which he liked so much that he decided to use it for miami vice to give it a gritty realism. I have the blu ray of miami vice and I've learned to really appreciate the look because it's intentional and true to source. The main difference being the much more saturated colour pallette of miami vice which in alot of scenes actually looks really good. I've owner collateral on dvd blu ray and now 4k and I definitely think the 4k just does everything the blu ray does just a little bit better and when adding all the small improvements together is definitely the definitive way to watch the film and gives off a more cinematic experience, especially on bigger screens. I like that these movies look the way they are intentionally filmed to look.jamrs Cameron could learn something from Mann.
You'll have to watch the first extra again Daniel which is a 'making of' because Michael Mann tells us that he felt video would pick up detail in the city that film would not. I suspect he thought that the crushed out look of Heat would be repeated if he shot on film but there were other negative stocks that might have done a better job. It's a shame but it's possible using smaller video cameras resulted in a more relaxed shoot and got the amazing performances out of Messrs. Cruise and Foxx and the great film that ensued.
I can remember Miami Vice being largely shot in bright sunlight (no surprise really as it's Miami) and that always means richer colours and less film grain or as in this case, less video noise. Cameras love bright sunlight.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Hello John, hope you are well, I believe what our friend here is reffering to is the fact Michael Mann pushed the deeper focus night footage in Miami Vice 2006, I remember most of that film being at night, and actually taking advantage of Miami's heavy light pollution, as someone who grew up there, the night sky being captured looks incredible and accurate, since they shot the movie during hurricane season, they got more bipolar weather. There is a particular shot I remember of Colin Ferrell against a red thundering sky. The movie has ALOT of noise, but as Daniel mentioned it's an acquired taste.
-Ignacio
Great content as always, John. I always look forward to your reviews as they are very informative, and the technical details are always greatly appreciated. Thanks once again for all your efforts once again
I decided not to review this when I first got it a couple of years ago because at the time I couldn't work out how to do it because I didn't want to just slag it off as poor quality. Watching it again now it seemed obvious. Thankfully, it didn't seem to be such low quality this time around too.
John.
Been hoping for this review from you! Thank you for the detailed, informative review. I’ll be upgrading to the 4K as a result for sure. An absolutely brilliant film. Meanwhile, I was very excited to learn that Signs is getting a 4K release in America, which hopefully means we will get it here in the UK too…. 🤞
Just keep in mind that the 4K isn't going to be a massive leap over the DVD although it is clearly better in every respect. The Blu-ray is pretty close to the 4K but the colours aren't quite right on the BD. However, if you do purchase the 4K at least it's a good excuse to watch this great film again.
John.
You've hit the nail on the head there, John, with your comment about Heat. Michael Mann has said that he looked into cutting edge Digital Video Cameras in 1995 to see if he could shoot Heat on them, so as to capture more of the night-time. But the quality wasn't good enough for a cinema release. As such he resigned to shoot on 35mm, until the technology caught up. Interestingly for the upcoming Heat 2 (seemingly filming in 2025), Mann has said he may shoot it on 35mm to maintain continuity with the first film.
Amazing. Thank you for filling me in David. I hadn't given the darkness of Heat and if Mr. Mann had considered shooting it on video any thought until I put myself in front of the camera to record this review of Collateral. I hope he does shoot the Heat sequel with 35mm because he may see something superior to what he's been doing over all the intervening years and get back into shooting on the best format.
Thank you for filling me in on all the details.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 That is a funny coincidence. As soon as you asked about it, I remembered Michael Mann saying just that in the celebration panel on Heat where Christopher Nolan interviewed the main crew and cast on stage.
@@davidjames579 And to think that when it was released as a 4K disc so many people went nuts about it on TH-cam because they thought someone had somehow messed up a cine to video transfer. That in itself is pretty daft because that's all done by automated computer scanners now. I think people tend to get mixed up between the cine to video transfers and the mastering.
John.
Greetings from Santiago de Chile. I agree with your thoughts about "Collateral" and "Miami Vice", and I would add something else. If you consider "Public Enemies" it seems that he wanted to go digital video as a narrative tool to obtain a rough image and a more grounded look. I thought about it looking at the glorious 4K of "The Untouchables" which image is breathtaking but it's depiction of the gangster gender goes in a more "artistic" way than the crude vision that Mann has about the violence of the 20's and 30's. If you make a comparison between "Heat" and "Miami Vice", the first one look the police world from a different perspective than the second one giving it a more realistic approach and a darker tone that the TV series did not have. And the use of the sound in his films is just awesome, and this regard the 4K editions of his movies is complete delight. Fingers crossed that someday we could have "Ali" in 4K because that movie deserves to be watch and commented. Adiós, amigo.
When a movie is as good as Collateral I don't suppose it matters much that the image quality is sub-standard. A good film is a good film. As for 'Ali', I've never seen it. That will change one day though.
John.
Another great review John :) I really enjoyed this tense thriller with great performances by Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx. It’s interesting to see the relationship between Max and Vincent and how it changes during the film. I highly recommend Collateral.
I feel it's similar to 48 Hours but is much more serious. A great film even if the image quality isn't really up to it for the most part.
John.
Hi John, just to tell you I finally got my projector setup installed and am delighted with it. Transforms the whole experience, and really makes me appreciate the cinematography much more. Of course these films were designed to be seen on a large screen and they really shine in this way. Thanks for your advice on this.
Well done Stu. Projection is cinema so what you now have is a cinema in your home. Even when installed into a living room, once the lights are out the effect is the same.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Finally the worryingly large 4K Blu collection comes into its own.
Thanks for the comment below about whether or it's worth upgrading to the 4K if you already have the blu-ray. It's one of the most important things I want to know about a 4k Review.
If it had have all been shot Super 35 then it would probably have been worthwhile getting the 4K but as it is most of the movie is colourless and lacklustre. I expected to recommend the DVD which can be purchased for peanuts these days but after analyzing them, the BD and the 4K were noticeably better which surprised me.
John.
Great video as always John.
Only have this on DVD so I might keep a look out for this one in a sale.
Just watched Jaws 3 in 4k and 3D last night and had a blast.
All the best
Jer
Afternoon Jer. I hope you're on the up and getting better all the time. Trevor at Double Bill Movies liked the Jaws 3 4K too. I haven't seen Jaws 3 for years but I can remember the 3D glasses strained my eyes in the cinema so I think I'd prefer the 2D 4K.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Hi John ... I just finished watching Jaws 3 last night and have uploaded a video of my thoughts on it to my channel.
Yes, my health is good at the moment and just getting back into things again, hope all is well with you.
All the best
Jer
@@coolerhash I'll join you over on your channel Jer.
I remember renting Collateral from my local and long since closed Blockbuster. Recently, I found myself buying it on DVD very cheaply from a local charity shop.
Around here we can find Blu-rays and DVD's at 3 for £1. DVD's often surprise us with how good they look out of the 4K player. Collateral is a pretty good example of a DVD.
John.
Hi John! Thank u for reviewing Collateral. I have the blu ray but perhaps will add this 4k/blu ray combo at some point if a nice price appears and give the blu ray to my daughter when she moves out . Hard to go wrong with a MM film and I do love this one. Cruise and Foxx are great together and again I remember being immersed into the LA night while watching this . Time for a rewatch for sure. Hope all is well Cheers D in BC!!
Morning Dave. The 4K isn't much better than the Blu-ray but it is better and best of all, it will give you an excuse to watch this great film all over again. It's not the best image quality you'll ever see by a long way but who cares when a film is this good?
John.
The noisey image you talk about was actually by design (and one of my favourite parts of the look of the film). Here's a quote from Paul Cameron, one of the DOPs: “It became pretty apparent early on that the only way to get the look Michael wanted was to shoot HD and push the gain on the cameras,” says Cameron. “In film, photochemical magic takes place in the falloff and in the highlights, but HD reacts very differently - once you start pushing the gain, you have to carefully monitor your signal-to-noise ratio... In order to get the look Michael wanted, we had to push the camera beyond its normal mode.”
(edited for clarity, this is taken from the ASC article about the shooting of Collateral)
I do think more movies shot digitally and printed to film should use at least Internegatives as the basis for restoration or even release prints. Thinking about what Fincher's Zodiac must look like with that bit of positive film grain from the 35mm release prints keeps me up at night.
The negative was created from the 2K video master so I don't think there would be any need to go through the interpositive to internegative stages. If the negative were to get damaged then it would presumably be a case of creating a new negative from the 2K video master. As for the video noise, it looks okay on a telly but watch it at any size and it's a little off putting. I didn't see it in the cinema but I did see Miami Vice as I detailed. I think people in general had started to accept that cinema was in decline and were able to put up with the lower standards on screen which might explain that review you saw. It would be unusual for any true film enthusiast to be particularly positive about HD video on a big cinema screen but so many screens were quite diminutive by then that I suppose the reviewer could have seen it on a tiddler. Actually, now that you've made me think about it, he may have had a pre-release review DVD-R and only seen it on his own telly.
John.
Thank you John.
Thank you Cheekster!
A supreme review.
The story of cinema goers being gradually prepared (by the way of increasing degradation of image quality in cinemas) for the final switch-over to digital cinema projection is the most cynical thing I've ever heard. I commend you for talking about it in this way.
I remember that the most impressive thing about the experience of Collateral in the cinema was the 35mm SDDS sound, particularly in the night club scene that you talk about in this review.
Erik.
Evening Erik. I was pretty careful with what I said about the intentional downgrading of image quality and a conversation within the comments on here resulted in a reply by Kamandi who educated me that 'O Brother Where Art Thou?' in 2000 was edited in a computer and a 2K video master output from that (digital intermediate) from which a 35mm negative was produced to create the release prints. That process was used increasingly from then on and that will be a big factor in explaining what I experienced. However, even prior to this films were being shot Super 35 rather than full frame anamorphic 35mm and this was because CGI preferred the more exacting imagery of Super 35 (anamorphic lenses always introduce 'mumps' or distortions however good they may be). Therefore, the lower image quality of Super 35 disguised the predominantly 2K CGI and the end result was poorer image quality overall than what we'd been used to. Then Michael Mann and George Lucas started shooting in HD video. No wonder I gave up on cinema after Miami Vice in 2006.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Thank you, John.
The Coen brothers and Roger Deakins say they couldn't achieve the exact idiosyncratic look of O Brother, Where Art Thou? photochemically, so they did it digitally, and perhaps it's right to say they pioneered and/or experimented with the digital intermediate method for colour timing and mastering. If that's so, then it's probably right to say that Peter Jackson and Andrew Lesnie brought the DI method into mainstream filmmaking with The Lord of the Rings trilogy, starting in 2001. The Lord of the Rings films were most likely the first major Hollywood films to be colour corrected and mastered digitally (at 2K), and the first major Hollywood films to not have their original negatives cut together to have photochemical release prints struck.
Erik.
@@loekegaard9 Thank you Erik. That explains why The Lord of the Rings looked so poor at the Odeon Leicester Square. I never knew it was an early video to film transfer but now I know and it all makes sense. No premiere house master prints of The Lord of the Rings then. John.
@@moviecollector5920 I still would love to hear what you think about the 4K video discs of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I haven't seen them myself, but I've heard all sorts of different things, positive and negative.
If I remember correctly, at the end of the 4K disc review of The Hobbit trilogy, you said you might take a look at the 4K discs of The Lord of the Rings films as well. Erik.
@@moviecollector5920 I still would love to hear what you think about the 4K discs of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. They're upscaled from the original 2K masters, but the films have been colour timed anew for these 4K discs releases. I haven't seen them myself, but I've heard all sorts of things, positive and negative. I think if there's one person who can sort out these discs, it's you. Erik.
I have the bluray and never upgraded because most reviews said not really worth it,so i listen😮great video and movie
It's just that the colours are more accurate on the 4K but I don't think it makes any difference unless you don't have Collateral on a previous video disc, in which case the 4K is the one to go for.
John.
Nice job John..... can't remember this film....seen it in the cinema back in the Day.....must give it a rewatch.... Thanks 👍
It is a brilliant film Roy. Possibly Tom Cruise's best ever performance. That Jamie Foxx chap isn't bad either. John.
Nice review!
I would love for you to do a review of the 1986 movie 'The name of the Rose' with Sean Connery.
I believe the 4K disc has only been released in Germany currently.
But it has English DTS-HD & additional English subs.
I haven't seen that one for years. Probably not since the 1980's. If it does get a release over here I might take a look at it but the sad thing is that very few people would be interested in a review video. I have to be careful because I put a lot of time into trying to produce something interesting and then if hardly anyone watches it can be a little depressing. Collateral was a bit of a risk but I've been doing some quite big videos lately in terms of work so I felt like I needed something that wouldn't take up quite so much of my time.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 I understand your point. 'The Name of the Rose' was one Sean Connery's best performances in my opinion.
But the theme of the movie is not every ones cup of tea...
Great review John and I think this is a movie with some amazing sequences. It is a great Movie and I love it. Both leads are incredible. 👍😊
That's a pretty good summary and well said. You should have done this video!!! John.
It looks amazing, and the compression is why it needs a 4k.
It does in places Mike but those are the Super 35 sequences. Some of the video shots look good but most of it's not up to the cinema screens of old i.e. huge! On our tiny home screens it's okay. At ten feet wide in here it was pushing it a little but a telly should make it look good.
John.
Good flick!
Agreed!
I have the Blu Ray of Collateral John and havent got around to watching it on my newish......4k Blu ray whcih upscales blu rays and dvd's. I'll have to let you know if I can see a perceptible difference. Watch this space and keep up the great content. Love your work and reviews/opinions 👍😊
I suppose a lot will depend on the size of your telly but in here at ten feet wide the difference in quality was easy to see. The DVD is very good though but you have to consider the original shoot was largely of very low quality.
John.
Was just looking at this on my shelf earlier, thinking what a good film it was. I only like a few Michael Mann films, and this is one of them.
Thanks for the review John
I think Collateral is probably his best Andrew. I haven't seen all his films but most seem to regard Heat as his best but Collateral is better. John.
Masterpiece. Saw it on its opening day in September 2004 and it quickly became one of my favourite films of the Noughties. The Fever club scene is phenomenal and is certainly a walk down memory lane for me. Cruise delivers a career best, whilst Foxx has the role of his career, and Mark Ruffalo got noticed. Incidentally when DreamWorks were looking for directors for this film they approached the director of City of God and he wanted to turn into a comedy a la After Hours. Thank heavens that did not happen. Always considered upgrading this from my BD copy, I always am weary over upscaled 4K’s, might get it on sale.
You may not notice any difference over the BD but the colours are accurate on the 4K so if you can find a copy singing like a bird (cheap, cheap) then at the very least it will be an excuse to watch Collateral again.
John.
Thank you for sharing.
You're welcome Ryan. John.
Hanks I never knew about the "deliberate drop off in quality" during the great switchover, I thought it had more to do with CGI. Shrinkflation started earlier than I thought, less is more....
CGI was a part of the downgrade in image quality Colum because it rather enforced the use of Super 35 rather than full frame anamorphic 35mm for films that were going to have CGI added. This is because Super 35 has less distortions (if any) compared to anamorphic which always has CinemaScope mumps irrespective of how near to perfect the 'Scope lenses may be. Another big cause - and possibly the biggest - for the reduction in quality has been pointed out by two people who have left comments so far and that is the fact that in the early 2000's the use of a 2K Digital Intermediate was being used to create the 35mm release prints. This means that the master file was about six times lower image quality potential than the end product. The films were never assembled as a completed negative in these instances because each negative element was cine transferred and then the low quality video was edited and graded from which the film negative was created.
Add to this that a few directors were shooting HD video and you have a perfect recipe for putting people off going to the cinema and thereby speeding up the terminal decline.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 John, thanks for the explination, I knew CGI films were compromised but the use of a 2k digital intermediary to master really is a sin as they can never rescan the original 35mm, every day is a school. Day.
I love Cruise's character here, and have a BD steelbook, and am not upgrading.
I like Mann's 'natural' realistic hand-held-like camera look here, on Miami Vice, and partially on his awesome but canceled TV series of the 2002-03 season, Robbery Homicide Division starring Tom Sizemore. Wishing more movies were filmed like that.
I like it too Lenny but I don't think either of us would have liked it anywhere near as much in a cinema with a reasonable sized screen. Miami Vice on a huge screen was awful and that was filmed the same way. HD video wasn't up to it and it's not up to my ten foot home cinema screen.
John.
Enjoyed that movie John.
I can't imagine there are many people who haven't enjoyed it or won't enjoy it Craig. But we're not all the same of course. John.
John never thought of buying this because of the remarks about the minimal improvement over the blu ray but may get it anyway because it comes as 2 for £30 at HMV that way I get both 4k and blu Ray and can compare.
The 4K is better Mike but given the low quality to start with (except for the Super 35 sequences I suppose) it wouldn't have been worth paying full price for Collateral when first released on 4K. I think you'll find the only obvious difference is the colours on the Blu-ray are not accurate, the 4K is.
John.
Only bought this because it was in my local CeX, no slipcover but I think they could of come up with much better artwork anyway and it doesn't look like they've changed it for the steelbook (only the price has increased!😮). It's still in the watch pile but glad to hear your thoughts. I have seen the film previously by the way and like it very much.
It's not the most impressive 4K disc I've ever seen but when a film is as good as Collateral, who cares?!? I hope you enjoy it as much as I did irrespective of it looking a little lacklustre.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 I'm not the biggest Tom Cruise fan but it was nice to see him in a bad guy role. I look forward to a rewatch on a different format. Cheers Ed.
I'm not surprised the DVD didn't hold up as well. That old-school Mpeg-2 compression struggles to keep up, especially with early digital video where noise is a given.
I haven't bought a DVD since I saw Thor over a decade ago and the entire screen would turn into a pixelated mess whenever there where too many colourful effects going on.
The DVD is very good. I'm finding that I watch a lot of DVD's again now because most of them look so surprisingly good. It's just that the Blu-ray is better and I wasn't expecting that given the low quality of so much of the original shoot. John.
Thanks for review. I saw this once, and totally hated the obvious plot twist in the ending, which you saw mile away in the beginning, but thought it would be so stupid, that they must go other way. But no, there it is. Michael Mann has some good movies, but not masterpiece, and most them drag a way too much on the visual gimmicks than storytelling.
If we all felt the same about every movie then we'd have nothing to discuss. I thought the ending was set up well even though it was a little telegraphed. It was how we got there that was so good. Perhaps if you give Collateral another try you may see it differently. The DVD is good enough and you could probably find one for about 50p these days.
John.
This is a film I picked up on 4k a while back and have been meaning to watch. Heard great stuff about it.
I recently saw his masterpiece The Insider for the first time in a 1999 series at my local cinema. It was shown in 35mm. Still yet to see his more notable work Manhunter, Thief and Heat. Might have to do a Mann marathon one of these days. Cheers
I think this is probably his best film Jonathan. I haven't seen them all (yet) but this one is so good it's hard to think there could be a better one out there.
John.
A great film, with a great soundtrack, I have watched this 4k several times, I love Cruise as a bad guy .... I wish he would try something along those lines again some time , Mann knows how to do a shoot out, Heat and Miami Vice also has superb sounding gun fights
It's such a good film Aidey that I've watched it more often than most of my video discs over the years. This is the second time I've run the 4K and that's unusual within such a short space of time.
John.
Just picked this up myself recently
Be prepared for somewhat lacklustre imagery for much of it Tom (not the opening though which was a clever way to suck us in) and you'll have a great time with a great film.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Oh I know the film well, saw it at the cinema when it was released!
Wasn't the point of that scene in HEAT that the cops couldn't see De Niro until they turned on the nightvision? I thought the darkness was intentional.
It was but it seems that everyone who reviewed the 4K disc release got it wrong and slagged the disc off for being too dark. Fortunately I'd seen it in the cinema and have quite regularly thought about the density of the print I saw which meant that when I saw the 4K disc I knew that was how it looked originally.
John.
Exactly. That’s correct ☑️.
@@knownpleasures Thank you Vintage. John.
Personally disappointed with the transfer, too much grain which is a shame really because this is one of favourites and truly one of the best cinematography works ever
It's nothing to do with the cine transfer, this is how it looked. Mostly shot in just HD video so the only good looking shots are some of the video that was shot with good light and, of course, the Super 35 shots which are about 10% to 15% of the complete film. I did explain all this in the video but I do realize not everyone will want to watch more than a minute or two so hopefully I've filled you in on anything you may not have seen.
John.
Thank you again for an informative and well thought-out review! I happened to walk into a movie theater and see Collateral in the USA when I spent the autumn 2004 there as an exchange student. I liked it quite a lot. The acting, direction, suspense, even some humor.
How do you find the image quality of a movie shot digitally today, with today’s technology, in a cinema (outside of movies shot on film)? Does the reduction of image quality persist to this day, or has digital 4k (or even 8k) brought the image quality back for you?
There have been some very good looking movies shot on video but so many cinemas have poor video projectors or poorly maintained video projectors that I've given up. The BFI IMAX has the best video projection I've seen so far but it's such a way off their genuine IMAX 15/70 screenings that it's not something I'd ever travel to see. Here at home I'm able to achieve film like imagery from 4K home video discs but that's because I know how film should look. Cinemas rarely have people with the experience any longer so the decline has continued. Top Gun: Maverick is probably the best quality video movie I've seen and perhaps Le Mans '66 not too far behind. How both of those would look in a cinema would depend entirely on the cinema but I can almost guarantee that they would both look pretty poor in a lot of cinemas.This is because no one cares. It's all about money - get them in and get them out.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 thank you for your reply! I have a collection of 4k discs, a great player and a good, big OLED-TV. This combination brings me much cinematic joy in my small apartment. For bigger-screen experiences and big sound I must rely on local cinemas. Luckily I have both options!
Heat, miami vice and Collateral are excellent films but my favourite Mann and all time film is The Insider.
Hope you find the time to watch it!
If The Insider is anywhere near as good as Collateral then I'm in for a treat. I hope it wasn't shot on video at all though.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Yes please watch The Insider its an amazing piece of storytelling, acting and cinematography. Super 35 Kodak 250D + 500T. Deserving of a 4k remaster, meanwhile the Bluray is one of the better ones indeed. Worth the effort.
It's a great drama, not much action but great acting. Suspense and atmosphere. I'd watch it on VHS if that's all I had
@@moviecollector5920 Yes please watch The Insider its an amazing piece of storytelling, acting and cinematography. Super 35 Kodak 250D + 500T. Deserving of a 4k remaster, meanwhile the Bluray is one of the better ones indeed. Worth the effort.
Hi John,
Done some research and found that it was shot on 35mm.
Also was awarded 7 Oscar nominations but no wins. Would have won a few had it not been for American Beauty.
I struggled watching this in the cinema because of the shot on video apprerence. It spoiled my enjoyment completely.. so judging from your review maybe give it another try on blue ray! Now that it can be enjoyed in our home cine experience.
Back then when it came out it was as though we had been robbed of a true cinema event that would have blown us away if had been given a more filmic look. That's my take on it.
From Graham down Mexico way.
I didn't see it in the cinema Graham but that's why I mentioned Miami Vice because that was made the same way and gave me the same disappointment that you experienced with Collateral.
I hope the weather's better over there with you than it is here. Typical bloody British weather again now. Crap!!!
John.
Yeah it's very hot just now boiling at around 33 c.
Thankfully not higher.
I meant to write back after your Indiana Jones 4k review . Envious that you saw it at the BFI in all it's glory. But I did see " The last Crusade" in a 70 mm blow up when it came out.
If you'll remember there was a trailer saying and this time he's bringing his dad!
And that time I was bringing my mum.
She really enjoyed it to the point that she added a seventh sound track in her Lancashire accent, luckily due to the high sound level no one really heard her carry on as if she was in the picture
Bless her.
That's the way to see all the Indiana Jones films on the biggest screen possible.
Hope your weather bucks up a bit before the summer fades away.
@@hildamontes6146 Morning Graham. There's also a Last Crusade poster with the tag line, "The man with the hat is back and this time he's bringing his dad!" My parents purchased the VHS as soon as it was released.
John.
Thanks for the info, seeing that I've got this film on my to get list.
Don't expect TENET style image quality Timothy but it's a great film so who cares how it looks? Actually, the 35mm sequences do look good so that might make for an overall good impression.
John.
@moviecollector5920 I haven't seen the disc of Tenant yet. As for this film, I remember it being quite good. I'll be looking out for the review of Point Break now that it's being released in the Uk. I understand that The Terminator is coming up soon as well.
@@TimothyMathetes-e2o I have the US 4K of Point Break. It's very good. Came from the interpositive apparently so could have been even better if the negative was available. I may not do The Terminator for a while as I know the film off by heart. Had it on Super 8 for more than 30 years. John.
@moviecollector5920 I may have Point Break very soon. I have wanted it for a long while, so I'm chuffed to bits. It makes me wish I had a setup like yours. Quite a film that Point Break is. My only problem with it is the profanity.
@@TimothyMathetes-e2o I can't remember the effing profanity Timothy!
Thanks for the review. I've seen the film once long ago and was thinking of purchasing it but it looks like the bluray hd would perfectly fine for 1/3 of the price.
Or the DVD which isn't too far off really given the low quality origins of so much of it. But it is a great film and the Blu-ray would give a slightly better impression.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 Thanks John though I think my 4k player might blow a cap if I give it a DVD 🤣
@@taqyon I think you're player will be surprised how good DVD really is. Parttcularly DVD's taken from the same video master files as recent 4K releases.
@@moviecollector5920 I think I need to have a look at DVD again. I've watched a video yesterday about HD VHS tapes! Because of the master, it's better than the Bluray!
fantastic film looks great on my oled miami vice was very good. good video
That's the size differential Chris. The DVD looks fabulous on my 5 inch portable DVD player. It doesn't look so good ten feet wide. Miami Vice looked awful at 54 feet wide. It makes a big (!!!) difference.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 i take your point but my 65 inch oled really helps with this and if i am being honest i've always liked collateral look hard to put into worlds but it adds character to the film
One of my favorite movies and probably my favorite starring Tom Cruise. He plays a great villain
I think it's his best role so far. John.
That alleyway scene is superb.
@@palmlifeuk3553 one of the few movies where a gun sounds like an actual gun
The newest 4k upgrade of this one John takes it to Dolby Vision and that improves it even more, it’s only a US steelbook release but it’s region free on both bluray and 4k so worth an import.
It's not exactly the best looking movie ever issued. I'd have been happy to stick with the DVD but people asked me to take a look at the 4K when that first came out so after a while I purchased a copy. I wasn't impressed so didn't review it. But I long thought about re-visiting it to see if that initial disappointment wouldn't be so disappointing during a second watch. It wasn't and that's because I was prepared for it. It did also make me think about the poor image quality of Miami Vice so hopefully all this came together for a fairly interesting video. Does the image quality matter? Not anywhere near as much on our tiny home screens and particularly not when the film in question is as good as Collateral.
John.
Dolby Vision is also on the standard release.
salut voila une bonne vidèo sur le 4k uhd bien
Bonjour Alain et Merci. John.
I watched this on tv few years back, I remember noticing some opera-ish kind of effect, some motion blur on sequences I believe were obviously shot on HD. I wonder if this uhd video has some blurriness in scenes with clear movement.
Nothing evident in here but I expect there would be if any digital 'enhancements' had inadvertently been switched on. That's likely what you saw as tellies and video projectors are riddled with that rubbish.
John.
As far as visual degradation in the 2000’s I wonder if not only the transition to digital photography that affected this. But most of the films at this time were starting to have 2k digital intermediates. Not many received 4k d.i. Unless your the oceans or Toby Spiderman movies. Which now that I think about it Toby Maguire was in the first movie to have a 2k d.i. With Pleasantville back 1998.
Thank you Jesse. Kamandi told me much the same thing yesterday so you're the second person to come up with the most culprit for the continuing decline in image quality we saw in the 2000's. Kamandi thinks 'O Brother Where Art Thou?' was the first to get the dreaded 2K digital intermediate but that was in 2000. Whatever the case, this would explain the most marked decline in image quality that I continually noticed during that period. Another biggie would have been the switch to Super 35 so that CGI would be easier to apply. This is why the 1997 Alien Resurrection is nowhere near as good image quality as Alien of 18 years earlier. I'm able to state this with some certainty as I have 35mm prints of both.
John.
On a side note I have just seen (twice now) beetlejuice beetlejuice aka beetlejuice two and tonight finally saw the original. My thoughts while the original is iconic and efficient, I think the new one is funnier and more fun to watch. And the UK last I checked is getting a 4k double pack for that. I think I’ll be importing that one.
@@jessechristensen6028 I'm glad the sequel is better than the first Jesse because I've never liked it. Maybe I'll see the sequel sometime and it will help me to enjoy the first. John.
I believe Miami Vice to be far superior to Collateral. It's very much a digital movie but it has great imagery and soundtrack. Really good villains too. Underrated.
I only saw Miami Vice in that cinema visit and it was difficult to fully enjoy as a result of the poor image quality. Not all the way through but for so much of it. It wasn't the only movie to disappoint in a big way around that time though. I do feel that I'll be able to get the DVD or the Blu-ray and simply watch it for what it is now.
John.
I think the HD video look rather suited Collateral with its gritty almost fly on the wall documentary style urban noir. When Mann employed video for Public Enemies it entirely ruined the look of the film for me. It seemed out of place to have the clean and hollow looking digital video represent a 1930s gangster piece instead of a rich 35mm image. Thankfully digital filmmaking has come a long way from then.
I can't confirm how bad Collateral looked on those big screens that were still left in cinemas in 2004 but having seen Miami Vice and how poor that looked I think I've got a good idea. It's fine on tiny home screens but clearly wasn't up to a cinema screening in my own home cinema. Does it matter when a film is this good? Probably not.
John.
Its a good movie. I like the bluray.
I don't think there's any point in getting the 4K if you have the Blu-ray. John.
i've got. terrific movie!
Absolutely brilliant film Gary. John.
I have the Blu-ray and never thought the upgrade would be worth it. I do like the movie. Too bad Sean Connery wasn’t the hit man. Dynamic range is impressive,I remember when cds first came out, killed a speaker or two!
It probably isn't worth it Gary. The Blu-ray gave me a very good impression after watching the 4K, it's just that the colours are a little off on the Blu-ray but it's trivial and I'd stick with the Blu-ray.
John.
Thanks for that John. I found the comments about how film projection was deliberately reduced in quality so as to usher in digital projection hoping then that nobody would notice the drop in image quality. Outrageous!! In other words the industry knew that digital projection wouldn't be that good. Talk about conning the public! I did drop you a comment recently about trip I made to the cinema to watch the latest Alien film and how I walked out half way through because the image onscreen was so awful. I did send an email of complaint but got no reply. I feel I must name the cinema chain. 'Everyman' cinemas. I won't be going back!!
@@keithevans7996 To be fair to the film and cinema industry, audiences had been declining for years and so ways to save money were being looked into. To lose film projection meant no skilled workers required as well as big savings in print production and distribution costs. Today the audience is tiny compared to what it once was but we're still not back to where we were in terms of image quality. I expect what you experienced with the recent Alien film was a video projector in need of a service. They work hard and I think the lamps need regular re-alignment but without skilled staff who know the equipment any longer there's little chance of that until a technician comes in to perform a scheduled service.
John.
@@keithevans7996 A quick scan of the specs would tell anyone the Digital Projectors weren't up to 35mm quality. The industry was fully aware of this, but believed the quality level would be enough. As such if that passes then saving money is the key thing here. Especially in multiplex cinemas. On that note, deliberately lowering film quality (if that really happened) could be seen as an act of mercy, rather than making the audience go 'cold turkey' from 35mm to digital.
Is it possible for me to buy (in UK) an external blu-ray (4k) drive for my laptop?
A DuckDuckGo search would turn a few options up for you but here's an example on eBay: www.ebay.co.uk/itm/355668381956?_skw=4K+blu-ray+burner&epid=11031537773&itmmeta=01J7P1DSCW48FJMJ9J8ZQC5PBP&hash=item52cf7cd104:g:CVQAAOSwrN1mK7Qz&itmprp=enc%3AAQAJAAAA8HoV3kP08IDx%2BKZ9MfhVJKm4MkXVxxbIyebT5DjKFlSg%2BR6%2FSb4fdtWUPvIOutYifjS%2FU7XbvpVZ2CLneFaGDBtevK%2FJvUD9%2Ba20YsLDatdK9RXyIGtLz5PWwrc9U8UT6npLVg4i1Gjgo0bA%2BbiJugEJxkS%2BxCdzr3yrUMc%2F5BH2VO8OWNGQ99i4MPtvZMnYTC%2F0vj3Rq9Wzw2K9PbR1zkxWjxP7%2FNX2Z2x2TUjDFe8Q8D5TxjsuZ9wcU4X4L0Lo0vY2PpRDIjvZENFzjTULo24JA%2F3dfQncDOwI%2BC9viA7uMrZ2M10YMXZDv3Kv391n1Q%3D%3D%7Ctkp%3ABFBMxpa3wb1k
Collateral has always looked like that, they didn't try to fix what wasn't broken, that's fine by me.
It wasn't anywhere near good enough for the huge screen at The Empire. Huge screens were becoming a rare thing by then though so I suppose film makers could aim more for small studios and the rapidly growing DVD home video market. It's fine on our tiny home screens but wasn't really up to standard in our home cinema here... except for the 35mm sequences and some of the brighter HD video shots.
Whoops, just realized I'm talking about Miami Vice at The Empire and not Collateral but the point is still relevant.
John.
I love this film… Michael Mann was experimenting with the medium at this point. I just can’t see this looking good on 4K - especially technology filming this was for its time (if I remember quickly…). The bad thing about this film? Jamie Foxx’s hairline.
Best scene is where Jamie Foxx has to pretend to be the hit man - brilliant change of direction.
It's a wonderful film. Who cares that the image quality is comparatively poor for so much of it when the content is this good?
George Lucas shot Star Wars Attack of the Clones in HD if I remember correctly. That was the worst I've ever seen in a cinema. The full CGI shots looked to be SD, probably because they couldn't be output in time for the release date in HD.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 The question is then, John - why buy it! Haha - but yes - some directors experiment, some directors are good at predicting future tech and some just don’t understand what will look in 20 years (episode 2) and use a combination of technologies such as Peter Jackson (lord of the rings trilogy still looks insane)
Actually it does look good and the difference is visible in motion - the noise / grain is mucj better resolved, it's more handsome, tighter presentation.
@@ColonelSternlove The Lord of the Rings was another film of the period that looked awful compared to what had gone before but that was mainly due to the CGI which the rest of the film had to match. I think I was told that much was done to improve it for the 4K releases but I can't remember for sure now. Many films suffered similarly at that time. The general downgrade in image quality did mean that Michael Mann and George Lucas could experiment with far lower quality than was previously expected. Mr. Lucas even insisted the Odeon Leicester Square install a completely inadequate video projector for Attack of the Clones. The chief wasn't happy about it and new it would result in complaints but amazingly when I spoke to the manager (a week into the screenings) I was the first to let him know how awful I thought it was. Bad times to be a cinema-goer but there were a few exceptions every now and then.
John.
Hey careful with the spoilers
The HD video roots are not a good showcase for 4k. The Miami Vice Blu Ray also suffered from this. Grainy and noisey as hell. I found that the HDR in this one does give it a bit more colour and life in the image compared to the blu ray but it's not outstanding overall. Fantastic movie though and I guess that is Manns style.
One thing that occurred to me this morning is that by the time this film was made DVD was a major market while cinema was well into the terminal decline we know only too well today. Given that, perhaps Mr. Mann thought less emphasis was required for something that would hold up on huge screens because they were a rare thing by 2004 and therefore he could concentrate more on how Collateral would look on tellies by way of DVD. The DVD is actually rather good and stands up well to most other DVD releases of the day. Unfortunately the resolution and overall quality isn't there for Blu-ray and 4K but they're still pretty good on our tiny home screens.
John.
@moviecollector5920 the same with Stars Wars Attack Of the Clones , the colour and resolution was low but for DVD it would of been fine. On 4K there is not enough to bring out of the picture so it doesn't translate very well. I must bring out my Collateral DVD and compare because I've only compared the 4K and Blu Ray.
@@clarku4 I did type out my recollections of how awful Star Wars Attack of the Clones was at the Odeon in a reply to an early comment on here but I'll go on about it a little more here Clark. The full CGI shots were evidently output at SD for the dreadful, low quality video projection we endured. The manager gave us freebies to return to the Leicester Square Theatre (Odeon West End) two months later when they then had a 35mm print to screen. This was so that i could let him know what I thought of the 35mm by comparison. The CGI had evidently been finished at HD or 2K by the time the 35mm prints were struck and even though the overall image quality was still comparatively poor compared to most films, it was a whole lot better than the awful presentation we endured at the Odeon Leicester Square. The downturn in image quality I'd been perceiving was confirmed and it continued apace after this but Attack of the Clones video projected at the Odeon is still the worst I think I've ever seen.
John.
Be interesting if you ever review Mann's film Public Enemies, John. While Miami Vice suffered with video noise on a big screen, it somewhat got away with it if you pretended you were watching a fly on the wall documentary about undercover cops (a stretch I know). Public Enemies being set in the 1930's, compete with all the Gangster Movie trappings, of clothes, cars and Tommy Guns, looked ridiculous shot on video. Even though it was shot and presented at 24fps, it reminded of the later High Frame Rate releases of The Hobbit films, which just made it seem you were watching actors in costumes. It was a 2hr behind the scenes documentary screened in a cinema. The Digital Video had improved since Miami Vice so there was less noise, but the synthetic-ness of the images zapped any atmosphere. Thank god Digital Video improved by the time Mann made Ferrari, so at least immerses you into a 'movie'.
@@davidjames579 Digital video has improved quickly. It's just such a shame that here we are almost 25 years after the 2K DI nonsense probably caused cinema imagery the biggest downgrade ever and film is still capable of much higher resolution. But Ferrari was good enough for our tiny home screens and I suppose that's the best we can hope for for the most part.
John.
I love Collateral, always have and always will but my only issue with it is the presence of JPS, she's a truly problematic person and she bothers me greatly.
John Player Special?
@@moviecollector5920 Hahaha
Yeah love Michael Mann! Collateral and Miami Vice while not 'pretty' have an interesting look, a grungy reality to them that for me adds to the appeal of their respective stories. Its a pity that 88 Films recent release of Miami Vice weren't able to produce a 4K as originally intended but I think the blu-ray looks good. I'd be interested in what you think of that blu-ray. Keep up the great work John!
I can only gauge my thinking of how Collateral would have looked on huge cinema screen from my experience of Miami Vice. Poor doesn't really do it justice so 'awful' is probably a better description. They're fine on tiny home screens and tellies and it's occurred to me that Mr. Mann might have been prioritizing that market because DVD was massive by 2004 and even bigger by 2006. But now that I know more about the low quality filming format of Collateral I think I'll be able to finally give Miami Vice another try. I don't know when but I'll get to it eventually.
John.
@@moviecollector5920 I saw Collateral and Miami Vice in cinemas on 35mm, and Collateral was the much better visual experience. I can only think the night sequences helped there. They do have a nice gritty feel. But Miami Vice has a lot of bright sunny sequences and it really shows the lack of resolution of the video cameras.