THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY 4K ULTRAHD BLU-RAY REVIEW | KINO LORBER 

If they don’t a lot of people will be upset lol

It would disappointing to have just one of the 3( or five including Leone's other two westerns)

I think it'll largely depend on how well this new 4K sells

Yesssss!

Yes, please!

My all time favorite western

They will most likely go for that one next since Kino is releasing 4K versions of A Fistfull of Dollars & For A Few Dollars More the end of May.

@@dannygrant639 And then there’s only two more Leone movies to go!

...I mean...ALL of them?

I'd honestly rather them restore the original audio mixes cause the remixes are terrible

I only care for the first 2 dirty harry’s. The first one is still the best tho. 4k stereo would be better than atmos.

If they can somehow get cinema resolutions into a cheap to package format there will definitely be more. But of course at the tail end of physical media being available that most likely won’t happen.

Without HDR, there's gonna be another edition.

DUDE same.

did you get the slipcover?

@@joshualufkin7781 Yes - I posted an unboxing video on my channel fyi and talked a bit about the release - haven't watched it yet tho!

Well, the theatrical cut had been available on the very first DVD from 98/99. But never remastered at this level of course. The reason they didn't use HDR is because the negative as it is wasn't the best to use HDR on, it would overblow the contrast from what I read a technician explain in a review

@@andresvergara3095 Actually that version was not the true theatrical cut it had some missing shots and reordered shots during one sequence. So this is the first time since the early 90s laserdisc that we are getting the true theatrical cut. The source they were using was a SDR 4K master with baked in colour grading. They did not have access to the original negative for this. Granted, the SDR master was made from the negative so it has nice clarity and no generational degradation but because it was mastered in SDR doing an HDR grade while fixing the colours would not add anything. HDR doesn't "overblow" the contrast. A colorist still needs to sit behind a monitor and do a colour correction, it's not an automated process. HDR is just more colour bits and dynamic range to work with while grading and it can be used on any film negative no matter what the state of it is. A good example is how Django has just had an HDR 4K release and looks great. If Kino did a brand new scan from the negative with all new restoration work (which would cost a hell of a lot) then they for sure would have done an HDR mastering.

@@samreid9106 Thank you for expanding on this, I did mean the Scan (not the Negative) was not optimal for HDR...although I have also heard some negatives don't look as well with HDR, not sure where that comes from. It still doesn't make a lot of sense not doing a new scan when they are able to afford new scans for something like Django (Arrow) but not for TGTBU?? Arguably one of the "biggest" movies in history as with many other films...or would MGM not let them rather?

@@andresvergara3095 you’re welcome. Yeah who knows why it could be the case where it’s such a long movie it would require a lot of man hours plus the licensing fees from MGM are probably very high. Criterion actually lost the bid on this so you can imagine the price tag. Maybe one day we’ll get one but this is definitely a lot closer to perfection than ever before.

​@@samreid9106 Hey Sam, I just watched first time the 4K UHD today (was super lucky to find a copy earlier this week!). Overall I was really marveled at so many levels on how beautiful so many shots look and for the first time looking much more clean and stunning. That being said I do feel like this version evidence quite a bit of disparity in quality for different shots which I think this is where the rabbit whole probably gets quite deep. There's a lot of shots were you don't really know if the shot is slightly out of focus naturally (many at the torture scene with Angel Eyes for example and others) or is it ths a matter of the actual negative that needs better restoration or a better scan in some parts...then again you can see some shots looking picture perfect (many of the landscape shots), so It makes me wonder how much room for improvement can be done to ever make this picture closer to perfect. Maybe it just wasn't the best shot movie ever as I've heard some suggest? My theory is they didn't make a Director's Cut version so they might revisit it in the future with a new scan. So although I super enjoyed it, i wonder how much better can it really get.

I took that photo with my phone off the TV. It’s not the best quality but it’s all I can get at this point until they make 4K drives more available for PCs

Anyone who looks at the caps-a-holic link you left in your description will see you didn't use their 4K shots because they weren't uploaded yet, so you used the Mondo Blu-ray and called it the new transfer. Your spam filter ate it, but I posted a link to the same shot from the 1080p disc in this set.

@@KevinStriker I’ll have to look again then. Maybe I did pull the wrong image in when doing my layout of the three. If so, that’s unfortunate but I can cut it out of the video.

Kino is a really small label. HDR grading monitors are expressive as hell.

FUNimation messed up. Their release was supposed to be HDR, it's not that they decided not to do it.

Dude, they finally tracked down and put in the original, uncompressed Mono track for the first time in over 30 years and you want Dolby Atmos? Mixing a surround sound track from mono is extremely hard and costly and would not be representative of Leone’s vision.

From what I've read the theatrical cut is only available on the blu-ray, not the UHD disc

@@droopdiggity DVDbeaver say it’s the theatrical cut.

@@FastEddie86 I've read a lot of conflicting information about whether or not the UHD disc is the theatrical cut, so I'm going to wait until next week for feedback from folks who bought it. I was hoping Jeff would've clarified this since it's a big issue for die hard fans of the movie. Some strongly prefer the extended, and others like myself strongly prefer the theatrical release.

It was originally the extended cut, but Kino ended up doing a poll on FB asking fans which version they wanted. Fans picked theatrical. So 4K is theatrical and the included blu has the extended. The scenes from the extended version are also available on the 4K disc in 4K resolution, they've just been relegated to the deleted scenes special feature section.

@@droopdiggity Very simple, the UHD IS THE THEATRICAL CUT, the BD included is the extended version. You also get the standalone extended scenes on 4k UHD as a special feature but not within the cut.

Good for you, but when you choose VHS tape you spend only 25 cents. So next time safe your money 💰🤑.

@@alarykattila4096 or just download this version’s MP4 torrent for free. 🤷🏻‍♂️

@@alarykattila4096 Honestly this is the kind of rough-edged movie that is suited to a VHS viewing. Same with Clint's Unforgiven

@@IsekaiApostle streaming in movies and music is sudpar and thats really what DLing is.

@@DoctorXander you are high again .

It's not accurate.

@@TheStOne1 yeah but it gives the movie a dusty vibe which fits for a western.

I wish mine would ship. I preordered it a week ahead of release and Amazon STILL hasn't shipped it. Amazon is hit and miss with preorders. It seems they struggle to comprehend "release day delivery"---- I guess it's "release month delivery" (if I'm lucky).

@@ontologicallysteve7765 Yea that does happen at times especially depending on the title. I guess this was a pretty popular release even though it's an older film. I pre-ordered mine from Best Buy I about 2 weeks out.

I too have this but I made my own blondie grips from an 1851 grip blank and snakes from Amazon. It was like $45 total.

Wait for what??

The 2009/2010 blu-ray version included in the "Trilogy" set is incredible as well. I won't be upgrading to a 4K version.

It was for the benefit of the picture not using HDR, there's a couple of reviews talking about this decision was the best from Kino, the scan was not the best to use HDR on it. Contrast wouldn't have benefited as it would with other movies/scans

There are two types of people in this world

It was for the benefit of the picture not using HDR, there's a couple of reviews talking about this decision was the best from Kino, the negative/scan was not the best to use HDR on it. Contrast wouldn't have benefited as it would with other movies/scans

It won't drop much if ever as there is low quantities being produced from a small company.

The 5.1 are the old effects, as it is made from the LaserDisc sourced mono track that is also included.

There's one thing that would make it better...run it through a software program that makes it 60FPS!! Tell me when you do it.

Maybe 30 years later... because we have this... don`t expect new version soon.

@@haukionkannel 30 years? I doubt there will even be physical media in 30 years. Naw, probably more like 3 years to come out with a more optimized HDR version. I think they deliberately make sub-optimal versions of movies in the beginning so that people repurchase the same movie over and over. And after it is optimized, they change the format entirely. There is no excuse for having a noticeable color shift in a digital version of a movie. They are laughing all the way to the bank.

It is similar to the 2009 yea

No, the 2009 version had a very different color grade that was far more cool. However, it suffered from heavy DNR. This was the version that was included in the Man With No Name Trilogy in 2010.

@@michaelmcbrd8 Thanks!

@@michaelmcbrd8 I have that "Trilogy" set from 2010, with the extended version. I have no problems at all with the coloring, and the DNR didn't bother me at all. I won't be upgrading to the new 4k version.

I would like to tell you the 2009 is good enough because I also have it, but of course the UHD is superior in almost every way possible picture and audio wise. It's the best this movie has ever looked only beneath well preserved 35MM prints in a movie theatre

@@andresvergara3095 Thank you, this movie is up in my top three westerns. The other two are Clint Eastwood, "High Plains Drifter", and "The Outlaw Josey Wales." I hope they come out on 4k also, and I will get the Good, Bad, and Ugly on 4k. If I can find one, everyone right now is sold out.

Good. Hopefully that means this will sell enough to get the other 2 films on 4K.

sure does! just got my email saying its shipped and arriving tuesday

@@bsmolina92 same! I got it an hour ago.

The effects on this particular new release are original, the 2009 Blu-ray has the changed sound effects.

If this sell Well... maybe. If this sell badly... not likely! They will release them one by one. If previous sell Well enough. They make the next. If not. This will end here. If all three will be released, there is bigger chance of the box set release eventually. They just have to add one extra blue ray with some features that you can not get from the individualistit disks and you can sell the whole set again to some biggest collectors! Profit ;)

Yeah I have a VFX degree and was thinking the same thing lol 🤭

No. It's the U.S. theatrical cut recreation, or as close to it as can be done.

Killer western!

Theatrical only

It was for the benefit of the picture not using HDR, there's a couple of reviews talking about this decision was the best from Kino, the negative/scan was not the best to use HDR on it. Contrast wouldn't have benefited as it would with other movies/scans

This is a close-to recreation of the U.S. theatrical cut only. May be why Kino could not apply an HDR grade to this one title, but do so for all of their other 4k titles. The source master may have been a limiting factor.