My response to 'Taking 4K Blu-rays Too Seriously'

Thanks for watching and let me know your thoughts on the topic!

For me, I think it’s important we’re picky with our 4k presentations, because chances are, these are the last versions of these films we’ll ever get on home media, and it’s a sadness that a format so capable of presenting the film with near-perfect accuracy is being marred by trends in digital alteration. We’re talking about art here, and access to art, and I think it’s vital that the art is presented to us as authentically and accurately as possible

This is just a personal opinion and how I perceived Jeff's video. First of all, it's quite clear to me that Jeff's video was triggered by the negative response for Cameron's movies in 4k. And this seems a bit odd to me. Why now? Is it just about the community's negative reaction or just an attempt to water down the criticism of those transfers, by somewhat pointing the finger towards the negative feedback? When Terminator 2 arrived on 4k, I remember it being universally destroyed by all the reviewers on Youtube. I didn't see one reviewer telling us that we shouldn't take the 4k format too seriously. Now, it's quite obvious to me that all three transfers in question are at least problematic, especially in the video department. So, they are nowhere near the decent restorations most of us were expecting. In fact, I really doubt Cameron himself cared too much; for instance, one youtuber measured both the 4k and the standard blu-ray of Aliens and came to the conclusion that the former is just an upscale of the latter. So, no restoration of the original negative, no new transfer whatsoever. Just a quick, AI sharpness enhancement and grain scrubbing. I'm convinced the same applies to the other two transfers, True Lies being the worst offender. So, it's not about over analyzing every pixel on the screen here; it's about the rule of diminishing returns. 4k discs are expensive and many of us expect more than a "decent" transfer for such beloved titles.

I’m just a guy on a budget. When 4Ks are 2x / 3x the price of the Blu-ray, I really just want to know if the 4K is - A) Basically the same as the Blu-ray B) Noticeably better C) Actually worse The discussion becomes more nuanced when you have multiple 4K releases of the same film by different companies. I’m trying to be a smart consumer. I rely on video reviews to help me make smart choices.

Here’s the thing. If I am looking for a 4k review I do expect someone who can give me a decent answer as to whether it’s worth the upgrade. I subscribe to several different people to hopefully find multiple viewpoints. I do enjoy Elliot’s film reviews and recommendations as we have similar eclectic tastes, but if some of these other “it’s just about the movies now” guys really cut disc quality reviews I don’t know what they offer me. Jeff is never going to review a movie I haven’t seen unless I already don’t care about it. I’ll stick with the Crusader and his ilk, as I do think it’s worth it to be passionate about our passions.

"Damn fool idealistic crusader" put everyone in the youtube reviewer community on notice, then jeff and all the other reviewers had to respond 😂😂😂 i wanna see what daisuke says lol

I certainly don’t take it as seriously as the Professional Home Theater Brigade does, but I also want a film to be a proper restoration and preservation. I patently disagree with Jeff’s statement that if it’s out on 4K then it already amazing because now it is the best it will ever be and it’s better than every old version and we should just be thankful. Well, no. No it’s not. Sometimes a transfer is just dog crap, slathered with DNR that is horrible. And then you have the Lucases and Camerons of the world who talk out both sides of their mouths — from one professing their love and passion for film preservation, and from the other bellowing that they can change whatever they want to their films whenever they want, preservation be damned.

I think with everything there is a balance to be had. I think most of us would agree that the preservation of films and the way they originally looked and sounded is important. I get the feeling some YouTubers don’t want to be negative about releases and would rather just be grateful that we are getting physical releases period. They don’t want to be “toxic” and don’t want to bite the hand that feeds. Just what I’m seeing. And again, I think there is a balance to be had. Some things are definitely subjective. However, I do feel strongly that if a film is changed in any way from the original presentation, it should be made known and the original presentation should be preserved, and included with the revised version if possible.

Unlike Jeff, thanks Elliot for not poo-pooing those of us who actually do care about the 4K quality and the tech specs like bit rates & nit values. When I see a 4K that’s not up to the quality of other 4Ks, the bit rates & nits are typically lower. With 4K prices quickly rising, when I’m considering a blind buy or catalog release, reviewer’s tech specs help me decide whether to take the plunge. Even a lower quality movie is still a great watch if the disc is of high quality (see Vinegar Syndrome). Jeff does not understand that and hates me for caring about how I spend my money and for wanting releases that aren’t half-assed or revisionist. Thank you for your channel and not bait-and-switching us. I appreciate your passion and recommendations and the time and effort you put into this channel for this great community.

Too seriously?? We're spending how much on equipment and James Cameron can't be messed with to make a decent 4k version of his films. Naw, that's disappointing for all of us collectors. I will fight to the bitter end for physical media because I've found some streaming options to be less superior - specifically with sound and things like Dolby vision.

I really just wish all reviewers would reveal what hardware they use to watch movies. TV model and type at the very least. If you are a "reviewer" I feel it's a must. I personally care about the movie more than the presentation but watching an amazing 4K disc on a $300 LED 4K TV or a $2000 OLED TV will yield tremendously different results.

The niche aspect of 4k vs Blu-ray is what drew people to his channel. For him to pretend otherwise now and do a 180 is odd and makes his channel irrelevant going forward.

A great 4k transfer is a beautiful thing but I have no desire to upgrade all my blus to 4k. I also dont really care about the technical numbers but at the same time a shitty transfer should not be given a pass. Its all common sense.

Any consumer scenario regarding premium goods has a much higher expectation whether it be food, services, or products. You buy a name brand rather than a store brand for instance and while a store brand offers the value incentive, the name brands offers an assumed superior quality. There exists different types of media releases with regards to home movies. DVD fills the low end of the spectrum, Blu-ray is the middle offering a better quality over DVD but still budget friendly in most cases, and 4K Blu-ray is supposed to be the premium enthusiast experience. Enthusiasts are the target for 4K releases and expect great results for the money and investment in equipment. If the studio is not producing a top quality product in this category, the buyers are in the right to be upset. Of course an enthusiast takes this format seriously, they spend the money and effort catering to the best experience the format offers.If that weren't the case then 4K need not exist as a format.

I'm in between. I have zero problem buying bootlegs if the studios won't do a good transfer or won't release movies. To me, it will forever be better owning a subpar transfer of something than not having it ever available. I just won't pay full price

I'm sorry to say this, but Jeff isn't really interesting enough, talking about the actual film; his language and his views are, at least for me, not worth my time.Sure, he has an opinion, but it's a very average opinion, and frankly, not special or enlightening in any way. The times I've watched him has been as a general curiosity-thing; talking about big films, often ones I have no interest in buying; like the much debated Cameron trio just released. I am one of those who unsubscribed from his channel after his big announcement about changing tack. I wish him all the best, but he was always a sideline for me. About taking 4k's too seriously; well, first: they ain't cheap, and I want my money's worth; as simple as that. And more importantly; B: We all know the potential of this medium; we live in an astonishing time for home viewing of films and tv. If directors who love to tinker or studio bosses who love $$$$ get in the way of our enjoyment; damned right I will say something! We all should! There were famously many negative comments about T2 (not enough of a fan to care or own) and that's a good thing: it looked like crap (supposedly) and the studio needs to know! Personally, I wish that the community would boycott such crap releases, and force a better rerelease; but that's not gonna happen. I've enjoyed DVD's, 1080p Blu-ray's and now also 4k's. If I love a film I will get it; but no, not necessarily 4k, just because it's available. You, as well as Mr Rauseo, have to decide what to do and say; I, on the other hand, choose what to watch and hear, and all it costs me is time. I will continue making negative comments about videos or film releases which I don't like or more importantly disagree with; I expect, that if the shoe was on the other foot, many would voice their disgust at my opinions. Many already do! Keep up the good work, Elliot! EDIT: also, who is Jeff to tell me, I shouldn't take this seriously? He makes money doing what he does! Talk about serious!

Appreciate this Elliott, It seems to me that the worst offenders of bad 4Ks are Paramount eg Godfather Trilogy, Planes Trains and Automobiles, WB Studio eg Max Fleischer Superman cartoons, Maltese Falcon (not Warner Archive which is one of the best), Universal eg American Grafitti and lastly the James Cameron titles but as you say, the majority, especially most boutique labels make exquisite releases, most notably Indicator and Arrow.

Why I don't like 4k blurays: 1. Most of them are modern hollywood movies (nil interest) 2. They are usually "remastered" which means the original artistic intent is compromised (different colour grading, scenes edited). DVDs have issues too with the rereleases often being inferior to their original releases. The rule of thumb is "the older the DVD the better" (higher bitrates, no colour regrading, subtitles always included).

You do a great job with your reviews, but I think Jeff is missing the point. 4ks are usually are around £24.99 to £29.99. That's a lot of money for one movie and you could stream the same movie for pennies. With that in mind, you can see why people take 4k seriously. People just want to know they are buying a quality product.

I've noticed recently that there is too much toxic positivity out there. It's as if reviewers are afraid to be critical. Example: One of the most famous movie critics on youtube, Chris Stuckmann, refuses to criticize bad movies, etc. It's just ridiculous. We need to be extremely critical to companies who sell bullcrap releases. If we don't say anything they will continue to release more crap. Don't accept bullshit.