#

blu-ray

(3 articles)

A/V Nerds: "Star Trek: Into Darkness" on 4k UHD Blu-Ray

_I recently completed my home 7.1.4 speaker setup and have been really enjoying digging into high-end Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision material. Playing around with nip23 long-form content to share this kind of niche nerd stuff that doesn't quite make sense as a regular nostr note._ ![](https://images.static-bluray.com/movies/covers/153633_large.jpg) tldr: A pretty good but not-really-Trek movie's presentation totally disappoints on this early-run 4k disc. See [Blu-ray.com's 4k review](https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Star-Trek-Into-Darkness-4K-Blu-ray/153633/#Review). ### The movie It's JJ Abrams doing Star Trek. Normie non-Trekkies should love the slick excitement. More hard-core Trekkies should resent the commoditization of Trek. Abrams is a great storyteller; his generation's sorta-Spielberg. Well, a Spielberg whose artistry is happy to live within the sanitized confines of corporate mega-media. But Abrams does have much of Spielberg's lively camerawork (without being Michael Bay's swoosh-all-the-shots), expert tight pacing, clarity, and humor. But my core conflict as a Next Generation-era Trekkie is that Trek was never about fast-paced, intense action. Abrams' Trek is good for what it's aiming for. It does have heart. But no matter how earnestly it tries to honor its Trek roots, it just isn't terribly Trek-like. Minor side gripe: I have no clue why Benedict Cumberbatch feels the need to overplay Khan so badly. Even the way he mouths words is just so weirdly overdone (it's like he needs to fit a whole apple in his mouth between each syllable). ### Video Interesting โ€” and disappointing โ€” nerd issues here. This was one of the first 4k discs that Paramount put out. New tech, new processes, lots to learn. The disc was cut from a 2k master. 2k is basically the same as a standard HD blu-ray. That's half the resolution dimension-wise vs true 4k. Note that when you halve both height and width, you end up with 1/4 the total number of pixels. And it shows. Surprisingly, it's less noticeable in close-ups. Those look detailed enough. But any shot where the camera is backed a little further away is just really soft. It's so bad that if a future "4k" disc I'm considering watching is actually a 2k transfer, I'm just going to take a pass. I'm also already so spoiled by Dolby Vision that mere HDR10 (the baseline HDR standard that the 4k UHD disc format guarantees) is a let down. This is an interesting case where the Blu-ray.com review linked above actually raves about the technicals here. I was super-confused at first given my deep disappointment. But their review was in the infancy of 4k discs, seven years ago. Since then there've been great leaps forward to get so much more out of this format. It was impressive for 2016. But unacceptably bad for 2024. Misc notes: The HDR color grading makes Christopher Pine's hair look like it's dyed a slight orange in the opening, perhaps a consequence of over-cranking the colors to make the unique red foliage pop (though it's entirely possible that my system is to blame; HDR10 requires your system to be properly calibrated). This is the IMAX version of the movie, meaning that the aspect ratio pops up to IMAX's taller format (fills the area above and below that would otherwise be letterboxed) and pops back down to the quite wide Cinemascope (2.40:1) aspect ratio. I've liked these combo presentations in the past (e.g. The Dark Knight HD blu-ray), but the aspect ratio changes here are just too jarring. I think there were even some scenes that were shot-for-shot alternating between the two formats. ### Audio Another consequence of being an early release, the Dolby Atmos mix just sounds amateurish to me. Yes, there are distinct audio effects as spears go whizzing by in the opening. But everything is just overdone. The mix is loud and harsh. Wait, if the mix is loud, just turn down the volume, right? Except the dialog is targeting a certain level. The loudest effects are just too aggressive relative to that dialog baseline level. A loud, deep rumble from the sub is one thing, but too often it's accompanied by a higher-end harshness that is just unpleasant. The previously reviewed [Midway](https://habla.news/u/KeithMukai@nostr.seedsigner.com/1708450249010) Atmos mix puts Star Trek: Into Darkness' overcranked mix to shame and shows that it is possible to deliver intense sonic warfare without just being loud and painful.

A/V Nerds: "Midway" on 4k UHD Blu-Ray

_I recently completed my home 7.1.4 speaker setup and have been really enjoying digging into high-end Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision material. Playing around with nip23 long-form content to share this kind of niche nerd stuff that doesn't quite make sense as a regular nostr note._ ![](https://images.static-bluray.com/movies/covers/256916_large.jpg) tldr: I came for the state-of-the-art A/V experience but was happily surprised at how good the movie is! See [Blu-ray.com's 4k review](https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Midway-4K-Blu-ray/256916/#Review). ### The movie I'll be honest, I picked up this disc mostly because the above rave review of its A/V technicals. Newly completed 7.1.4 speaker setup was begging for a top-notch Dolby Atmos mix. But the movie was more than just a rah rah boom boom spectacle. Not quite on par with the spectacle aspect of Michael Bay's "Pearl Harbor", but โ€” thankfully โ€” director Roland Emmerich is an actual grownup, which makes this movie easily better than anything Michael Bay can put out (Bay's movies are sumptuously slick and sexy but are mostly terrible if you set aside the visual candy). There are some cringe Bay-esque proudly dumb testosterone moments (every scene with Nick Jonas) and there are way too many characters for any of them to get sufficient development. Expected consequence of it being built around a selection of real people who played pivotal roles in the actual events; this is not a single hero narrative (though it sorta tries). It's not bad character development, just diluted. And, yeah, sorry, but at some point every white guy with a '40s-era haircut and mustache all start looking the same... Worse, Emmerich fails at the most important aspect of a movie about a crucial battle: you can never fully appreciate the strategy, the physical positioning of the warships, who's being lured where, how a trap is set up and sprung, how the enemy's reaction does or does not play into the plan. But mostly it was just surprisingly good. I vaguely knew that the Battle of Midway was a thing but not really anything beyond that. The aftermath of Pearl Harbor and the military's need to land a counterpunch make for a pretty fascinating slice of history. "Midway" is emotionally engaging and entertaining enough to be well worth the time. ### Video Ironically, I said that I came for the A/V technicals but I have the least to say about them. The Dolby Vision video presentation is simply perfect. Period. In previous tech eras, if you were really savvy, you might review a disc to be "as good as the DVD format can provide" or "as good as a 1080p blu-ray can provide"; i.e. laud the current achievement, but realize that it could get even better via some future format. But at this point with 4k HDR displays, any future 8k or 16k or 100k display won't have noticeably higher resolution unless you project it on a huge wall. And the dynamic range (min-to-max brightness, more intense colors) is already beyond fantastic. We are at peak 2D video technology. Barring a move into a whole other storytelling medium (e.g. fully immersive VR worlds), 4k UHD blu-rays of this quality are the apex. ### Audio This is the most active Dolby Atmos presentation I've heard yet that really engages the rears with distinct effects (in a 7.x setup you have center, front left/right, side left/right, and rear left/right): bullets whizzing by, chaff exploding behind you. Atmos (and/or my more careful approach to calibrating my speakers) yields incredible, sumptuous subwoofer integration. My ceiling speakers can't play deep at all but they sound like they do, the sub seamlessly supporting them to perfection. Absolutely amazing what good content + tight calibration can get out of relatively inexpensive speakers. The movie's audio is whizz-bang flashy, but there's just so much going on (it's supposed to be max chaos) it's not what I'd reach for if I wanted to demo distinct surround and/or height sound effects. Zero complaints about the technicals of it, though. It's incredibly immersive (orchestral score coming from everywhere, fully 3d ambient sound and effects, yet consistently clear dialog throughout) and yet it doesn't try to show off too much and call attention to itself. The mix also manages to be as big and boomy as you'd expect but never feels like it's overly loud or brash or harsh. Can't emphasize enough just how impressive that is. It's nice to find myself just being engrossed in the content rather than constantly analyzing the technicals or thinking about other minutiae of the presentation.

A/V Nerds: "The Matrix" on 4k UHD Blu-Ray

_I recently completed my home 7.1.4 speaker setup and have been really enjoying digging into high-end Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision material. Playing around with nip23 long-form content to share this kind of niche nerd stuff that doesn't quite make sense as a regular nostr note._ ![](https://images.static-bluray.com/movies/covers/198328_large.jpg) tldr: This is the best The Matrix has ever looked or sounded. Find someone with a Dolby Vision-capable 4k blu-ray player (not as easy as you might think) and go watch it. Now. And, no, streaming doesn't cut it. See [Blu-ray.com's Matrix 4k review](https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Matrix-4K-Blu-ray/198328/#Review). Their reviews get pretty deep into the videophile / audiophile nerdosity. ### The movie Holds up amazingly well for being almost 25 years old. Bitcoiners have obsessed about the red (er, orange) pill meme for good reason. The Matrix was astonishingly ahead of its time in 1999 and still feels futuristic. When old tech is onscreen (green CRTs were old even in 1999; old tube TV; rotary land line phones) it's now even clearer that it was a stylistic choice; The Matrix's simulation has frozen our progress in the past. I think phone booths still existed in 1999, but now they, along with the movie's still-pretty-cool flip phones, read as just part of that time capsule effect. ### Video _(aka why Dolby Vision is amazing)_ My older 4k blu-ray player started playing the disc in HDR10 (the baseline high dynamic range format). It looked good but there were all sorts of obvious flaws (primarily shadows being crushed to black). My screen wasn't calibrated (contrast/brightness/color/etc tweaks) in its HDR10 mode. Ug, calibration for videophiles is such an OCD rabbithole. But what happened to the disc's Dolby Vision output? (Omitting longer story here. Deeper nerding happened) Ah, now we've got Dolby Vision output! And holy shit. It's incredible. Shadows are now perfect. The pervasive computer green is SO richly green (thank you, high dynamic range color)! Yet human-toned reds (pink cheeks, red lips) still pop through. The Matrix was shot on film so it doesn't have the shot-on-digital, low-grain look of a modern movie, but the natural film grain looks great. The only glaringly bad effects shot was the physical prosthetic used when Neo's mouth is sealed (the skin tone coloring just does not match). For a sci-fi film shot in 1999, The Matrix's Dolby Vision presentation has NO flaws and far exceeds expectations. ### Audio The Dolby Atmos mix has some nice gee-whiz 3d audio effects (e.g. the bullet-time shots w/sounds tracking around the room as the camera orbits Neo) but I kind of discount big loud action movies; yeah, of course shit's blowing up all around you. The real win for Dolby Atmos is when it ISN'T explicitly grabbing your attention. The overall fullness and envelopment of the music and ambient sounds (the whole point of Atmos is that it adds ceiling speakers) is what people should really appreciate. One critique: the source material does show its age a bit. At max orchestral and sound effects intensity, the limits of the original recordings are somewhat revealed. Really great recordings have a certain liveliness to their dynamic range; your ear is constantly intrigued and excited by certain resonances or richness or suddenness (e.g. the attack of a bow on a violin). Lower dynamic range audio is like being stuck in a tunnel. The liveliness is muted and as a whole the crescendos become more like a wall of noise rather than a collection of widely varied sounds. Minor limitation and totally expected. The only real technical nitpick for this disc.