• Type:
  • Genre:
  • Duration:
  • Average Rating:

Kaleidescape

Review: The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

Mobile Logo
The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022)

review | The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

recent reviews

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

Nicolas Cage’s love letter to himself proves to be predictably self-indulgent and only mildly amusing but entertaining nonetheless

by John Sciacca
June 14, 2022

Before Facebook co-opted the term, being “meta” denoted a creative work “referring to itself or to the conventions of its genre; self-referential.” By that definition, The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent might very well be one of the most meta films to ever come out of Hollywood. 

With the giant number of movies Nicolas Cage has appeared in—with 109 credits on his IMDB page as I write this—he’s developed a bit of an “I’ll do anything” reputation. But it’s important to remember that among that list of questionable choices are some truly brilliant films including Raising Arizona, Moonstruck, Honeymoon in Vegas, The Rock, and Lord of War. It’s also an acting career that has resulted in a Best Actor Academy Award nomination for Adaptation along with a win for Leaving Lost Vegas.

Massive Talent felt like it was inspired by the excellent “Get in the Cage” skit from Saturday Night Live, where Andy Samberg plays an exaggerated and over-the-top Nick Cage who eventually has the real Nick Cage on with him. “As everyone knows,” Samberg/Cage said, “my dream as an actor is to appear in every film ever released. However, until now I’ve only been able to muster a measly 90%, bringing shame on my dojo.”

What Cage demonstrated in this skit was a fantastic self-awareness and an ability to poke jabs at the roles he took on, describing the two key qualities of a Nick Cage action film: “All the dialogue is either whispered or screamed . . . and everything in the movie is on fire.”

In Massive Talent, Nicolas Cage plays himself going through a bit of an existential crisis. He’s just been passed over for a film role, is having trouble connecting with his 16-year-old daughter Addy (Lily Sheen), owes $600,000 to the hotel he’s been living in for a year, and has occasional arguments with “Nicky,” a younger, more over-the-top, emotionally volatile version of himself who wants Cage to make better choices. When his agent Fink (Neil Patrick Harris) floats him an offer to go to Spain to attend the birthday party of Javi Gutierrez (Pedro Pascal), a billionaire superfan who is willing to pay Cage $1 million to attend, he reluctantly accepts. 

When he arrives in Mallorca, CIA agents Martin (Ike Barinholtz) and Vivian (Tiffany Haddish) tell Cage that Javi is really a major arms dealer who he has kidnapped the daughter of a politician, and they need Cage to be their man on the inside. To do so, he must channel the skills and abilities of some of his past roles. 

The film is packed with references, name drops, and even scenes from films throughout Cage’s career, including a nod to his “Nouveau Shamanic” acting ability. Cage is excellent, leaning into the incredible situation in which he’s been thrust in classic “Come on!” fashion; but where the film really shines is in the chemistry and exchanges between Cage and Pascal, especially during one LSD-fueled joy ride. 

While a “comedy,” the humor is certainly subtle, and for me produced more smiles than laughs. One of my favorite examples was a scene where Cage sees a life-sized statue of himself from Face/Off that Javi has in his collection of Cage memorabilia.

“Is this supposed to be me . . ?” Cage asks. “It’s . . . grotesque. If you don’t mind me asking, how much did you pay for this . . . disturbing statue?”

“About $6,000.”

“I’ll give you $20,000 for it.” 

I also felt a real kinship to Cage when he described making his daughter watch some of his favorite older films and then discuss them. 

Shot on Arri at 4.5K resolution, this home transfer is taken from a 4K digital intermediate, and the images are clean and sharp throughout. What really stood out was the clarity and tight focus on the actors, who are often in the front of the frame with background objects blurred behind them. You can really see Cage’s unusually smooth forehead, countered against the lines and pores in Pascal’s. The resolution also lets you appreciate the fine detail and textures in stone walls and bridges, or the patterns and details in Cage’s shirts. 

The HDR grade gives a nice natural presentation to the images and benefits low-lit interior scenes, a night party scene bathed in golden colored tones, and scenes where bright sunlight is streaming in through windows in darkened rooms. Perhaps the most dynamic-looking scenes are some of the early ones driving at night in LA with bright city and street lights, and the sun-drenched exteriors in Mallorca.

While the Kaleidescape download features a lossless Dolby TrueHD Atmos soundtrack, it puts most of its emphasis on the front channels, with some of the action spreading a bit out left and right of center. The surround channels are reserved primarily for some simple fill and atmospherics like outdoor sounds off in the distance, with the music being mixed in a room-filling manner. There is a bit of gunfire in the third act with bullet strikes that hit far offscreen, but this isn’t a movie you’ll queue up to demo your theater sound system. For the most part, this mix concerns itself with delivering clear and intelligible dialogue locked to the center channel, and it does that admirably. 

While The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent has broader appeal than for just the Cage superfans, it is ultimately a love story about Nick Cage, starring Nick Cage as Nick Cage, focusing on the fantastical life of Nick Cage, for fans of Nick Cage. And for fans, that’s high praise.

Probably the most experienced writer on custom installation in the industry, John Sciacca is co-owner of Custom Theater & Audio in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, & is known for his writing for such publications as Residential Systems and Sound & Vision. Follow him on Twitter at @SciaccaTweets and at johnsciacca.com.

PICTURE | Images are clean and sharp; the HDR grade gives a nice natural presentation and benefits low-lit interior scenes

SOUND | The TrueHD Atmos mix puts most of its emphasis on delivering clear and intelligible dialogue via the front channels, with some of the action spreading a bit out left and right of center

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Black Widow

Black Widow (2021)

review | Black Widow

the MCU on Cineluxe

related articles

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

This empowered-female action film also takes on weighty issues of family and freedom

by Dennis Burger
July 9, 2021

If you’re clicking on a review of Black Widow right now, I can only assume you’re here in search of one more person’s opinion about whether it was worth the wait. The simple answer is is: Yes. If you don’t mind, though, I’m gonna ramble on for a bit about why.

I’m normally not one to invest much energy in the horse-race discussion about movies like this. But in the case of Black Widow, it’s hard to ignore. It was supposed to come out last year but ended up being one of many casualties of the global pandemic. Meant to kick off Phase 4 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it got beaten to that punch by WandaVision, Falcon & The Winter Soldier, and Loki. It’s probably the biggest Disney movie to date to be available via Premier Access, three months ahead of its free-to-view streaming release on October 6, 2021. 

But none of that really matters because none of it has any bearing on the quality of the movie. And yet, it’s a hard discussion to avoid.

Black Widow was always going to be a movie whose release was a little weird, temporally speaking. The bulk of the plot takes place between Captain America: Civil War (2016) and Avengers: Infinity War (2018) but it’s a story that couldn’t really be told until after Endgame (2019), not necessarily for narrative reasons but for emotional ones. To fully make sense of the character of Natalia Alianovna Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) in this story, you have to understand not only the redemption arc she’s been on since first introduced to the MCU in Iron Man 2 but you also have to know that she’s the type of person who would make the sacrifice she did in the last Avengers movie. 

All of that makes Black Widow a puzzle piece that you can only place in time, not merely space. But that’s sort of fitting for a character as complex as Natasha. I won’t bother to even begin to attempt to explain the plot. Doing so would make me sound ridiculous. It’s got a thousand tiny moving pieces and it plays a very dangerous game with them in that it all flirts with being just a little too much. I’m normally turned off by plots this complex. Give me a simple story any day of the week—but writing simple stories is difficult. 

Here’s the thing, though: The convolutions of the script don’t seem to be a product of laziness but of necessity. Story writers Jac Schaeffer (WandaVision) and Ned Benson (The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby), along with screenwriter Eric Pearson (Thor: Ragnarok), seem to understand that this one had to do a lot of heavy lifting and cover a lot of ground. It also manages to pull off a trick few stories do successfully—it manages to be a critique of a thing while also being that thing itself. Black Widow is a comic-book action movie, yes, but it’s also a subversion of the genre, a sendup of its tropes, and a cheeky rumination on the dangers of idolizing these impossibly perfect characters. 

It only works because the writers understood three key things: 

Firstly, pacing: For every big action set piece (and there are plenty of them, with car chases that rival Baby Driver and fight sequences that are every bit as stupid and amazing as anything in the John Wick series), there’s at least as much time devoted to quieter, tenderer character moments. 

Secondly, tone: The movie deals with a lot of heavy material, from psychological manipulation to the exploitation of vulnerable women to Cold War hangover, but it always strikes the right balance between sincerity and levity. It knows when to take itself seriously and when not to. It’s heartbreaking one moment and legitimately hilarious the next. 

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly: It just knows what it’s about, and although it would take two hours to recount the narrative beat by beat, it’s easy to explain what it all means. Ultimately, Black Widow is about family—specifically that weird and contradictory set of emotions that comes from interacting with your family now that you’re an adult, that troubling realization that your parents were just cosplaying as adults for your entire childhood, and the baffling combination of rage and familiarity that only your relatives can drag out of you simultaneously. 

It’s also about freedom—not only the necessity thereof but also the cost and why that cost is worth paying. While playing around with that theme, the story also touches on notions of free will and animal instinct. But all of that really points back to freedom.

And that’s it. As many twists and turns as there are in the plot, all of them ultimately support the themes of family or freedom, or both. That’s what keeps Black Widow grounded throughout, keeping it from devolving into utter chaos.

Can I just say, though, that this is yet another blockbuster movie I’m so glad I didn’t have to suffer through in a packed cinema? Disney+’s presentation far surpasses the quality of any commercial cinema I could reasonably reach in a half-day’s drive, and I also got to enjoy it without suffering the distractions of an auditorium full of chatty extroverts and their rowdy kids. At home, I could give it my full attention and even take a tinkle break halfway through without being forced to choose between skipping an action sequence or a bit of character development.

The Dolby Vision presentation is taken from a 2K digital intermediate, as most MCU movies are, which was itself sourced from original footage captured in a mix of 4K, 6K, and 8K. Fine detail abounds, not merely in closeups but also in long shots (which many of the action sequences are—a welcome break from the claustrophobic framing of most high-octane movies these days). Colors are gorgeous and the high dynamic range is employed spectacularly.

There are a few very minor and very fleeting blemishes, but I’m not sure whether they’re a consequence of post-production, Disney+’s encoding, or the fact that I streamed it on Day One, simultaneously with millions of other people.  Evidence for the latter comes from the fact that, on my Roku Ultra, with my 250mbps internet connection, the stream didn’t switch from 1080p to 4K until about two-thirds of the way through the Marvel Studios logo that precedes the movie. Disney+ normally launches at 4K for me.

The evidence that these blemishes are baked into the master is circumstantial. During a shot very early on that takes place in a shadowy bathroom, there’s about a quarter second of very, very minor banding as the flat tiles of the environment give way to the shadows. But the very next shot is in the same environment with the same tonal variation, and there’s no banding. There’s also a long shot of Natasha’s trailer that exhibits a touch of moiré for a few frames. But a few minutes later there’s another shot of the exterior photographed from the same distance in roughly the same light, and there’s no moiré. 

So I can’t be sure if these momentary imperfections can be blamed on streaming or taxed servers or what. But thankfully they add up to no more than a cumulative second over the course of a 135-minute film. Otherwise, Black Widow looks stunning. 

It also sounds way, way better in my home than it would in any movie theater I’ve ever sat in. Mind you, the Dolby Atmos track seems to have been mixed for large auditoria, not home cinemas, so it can be a little too dynamic in spots. I also had to turn the volume on my preamp up to +3dB (with 0dB being cinema reference level) in order to unlock the full fidelity of the track, especially the bass. If you have a well-designed sound system, though, you’re in for a sonic treat. If, on the other hand, you’re trying to watch Black Widow with a soundbar as your only audio system—even a really good soundbar—you’re quickly going to discover what it feels like to pack ten pounds of you-know-what into a five-pound bag.

It remains to be seen, of course, whether Disney continues to support these day & date releases via Premier Access as Hollywood attempts to force a return to normal over the next year. All I can say is this: If I have the option to watch future Star Wars and Marvel movies—the only movies I really feel compelled to see Day One—in the comfort of my home, in quality this superior to even a good cineplex, for just $29.99? Sign me the heck up. I’ll never need to sully the bottom of my flip-flops with sticky popcorn grease ever again.

Dennis Burger is an avid Star Wars scholar, Tolkien fanatic, and Corvette enthusiast who somehow also manages to find time for technological passions including high-end audio, home automation, and video gaming. He lives in the armpit of Alabama with his wife Bethany and their four-legged child Bruno, a 75-pound American Staffordshire Terrier who thinks he’s a Pomeranian.

PICTURE | Fine detail abounds in both closeups & long shots, colors are gorgeous, and the high dynamic range is employed spectacularly

SOUND | The Atmos track seems to have been mixed for movie theaters, not home theaters, so it can be a little too dynamic in spots, but if you have a well-designed sound system, you’re in for a sonic treat

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: The Northman

The Northman (2022)

review | The Northman

related articles

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

Not the gore fest its reputation would lead you to expect, this turns out to be a hypnotic exploration of the intersection of history, myth, and reality

by Dennis Burger
June 8, 2022

I knew pretty much two things about Robert Eggers’ The Northman before digging in. I’d heard that it is perceived as a gruesomely violent film. I also knew that it’s yet another retelling of one of the most oft-told tales in Western culture, the legend of Amleth, told perhaps most comprehensively by Saxo Grammaticus in Gesta Danorum but reborn again and again through the ages as characters ranging from Shakespeare’s Hamlet to Disney’s Simba, the eponymous Lion King. 

Amleth is not the hook that drew me into this story, though. The archetype I’m here for is his father, King Aurvandill, also known as Ørvendil or, in Anglo Saxon, as Ēarendel, a name that will immediately grab the attention of any Tolkien fan. 

Almost none of this has any bearing on The Northman as a film. I bring it up merely to point out that there’s something resonant and archetypal about this story. There’s a reason it keeps getting told and retold, that its central characters inspire entirely different legendaria, that we’re drawn to it like flame, despite knowing that flame burns. 

And perhaps the best thing I can say about this stupefying work of cinema is that Eggers seems to get that. In crafting his own version of this well-trod tale of revenge—while attempting to return to Saxo as much as possible without erasing the impact and importance of future adaptations such as Shakespeare’s—the director/co-writer seems to understand that to truly convey why the impulses and emotions central to this story are so destructive, we must explore why they’re so seductive. 

It’s a neat trick to be able to pull that off without venturing too close to glorifying bloodshed at one extreme or moralizing from a modern perspective on the other, but Eggers and co-writer Sigurjón Birgir Sigurðsson (aka Sjón, aka Johnny Triumph of The Sugarcubes) have found a nice middle ground here largely by taking a show-don’t-tell approach to the storytelling. 

What they’re showing, though, is so utterly and delightfully weird that I can’t begin to imagine what the pitch meetings with the studio heads at Regency Enterprises must have been like. In one sense, you can’t help but get the impression The Northman is Eggers’ way of countering a lot of the ahistorical nonsense of The History Channel’s popular TV series Vikings. You can see onscreen the obsession with historically accurate (or at least not laughably inaccurate) attire, architecture, even hairstyles. Few meaningful liberties are taken with the material world in which the film is set.

On the other hand, not all of the film takes place in the realm of the material, or at least it seems not to. There’s an acknowledgement that so much of this story is based on legend, not real historical figures, and there also seems to be a concerted effort to incorporate the spiritual beliefs of the peoples portrayed as accurately and evocatively as possible. Passages of the film straddle the line between acid trip and fever dream, and it’s not always clear whether the fantastical elements are intended to be viewed as the dreams and visions of the characters or the actual reality of the story being told. Sometimes the distinction is evident, but not always. 

Perhaps what makes it difficult to tell at times whether we’re seeing the world as it supposedly is or purely as the characters imagine it is because The Northman is simultaneously one of the most theatrical films I’ve seen in ages and also one of the most cinematic. Those competing aesthetics create a sense of tension that permeates the work throughout. 

Sometimes the Dolby Atmos soundtrack comes off like something I would have heard while working at my local Shakespeare Festival, and others times it almost seems to be trying to recreate reality. At other times still, it goes places only a modern movie sound mix can go. In many instances, the UHD HDR10 transfer—taken from a 4K intermediate, itself taken from a Super 35 negative framed at 2:1—looks like a work of cinema from the 1980s, with backdrops that appear to be matte paintings and nocturnal exteriors that appear to have been shot day-for-night despite the fact that they weren’t. At other times, the cinematography by Jarin Blaschke looks as naturalistic and un-stylized as possible for a film shot on Kodak stock.

What I’m trying to convey is that The Northman isn’t a sort of straightforward blockbuster-looking movie. It’s a bit weird and organic and grungy and filmic. Blacks aren’t always rock-solid black, and often (though far from always) the finest of details are obscured by filters and fog and smoke and fine film grain. But it’s all so beautiful to behold, even if it’s not quite what most videophiles would consider home-cinema demo material. There’s so much texture to the image that it brings the environments and the people that inhabit them to life wonderfully. HDR doesn’t do much here except enhance shadow detail, but that hardly matters since the UHD resolution unlocks nuances in the imagery I have to imagine would be lost in HD.

And you could say much the same about the Atmos mix. It’s not interested in keeping the knob dialed to 11 on every speaker in your room. It’s ostentatious when it needs to be, and quiet when it needs to be. It may not be the title you cue up to show off your sound system, but it’s one that requires a well-engineered system to appreciate, given how dynamic it is. Just for kicks, I decided to watch some of the film through my TV’s built-in speakers and found it to be incomprehensible. 

As for the much-ballyhooed bloodshed—it may just be that this aspect of the film was all anyone wanted to discuss when it first debuted in cinemas, but I found the violence to be far less gruesome than it could have been, much less so than expected, at any rate. Only two or three shots could be legitimately accused of being gratuitous, and I think I would be on the defensive side of that debate. 

More often than not, the worst violence or gore happens just offscreen, or just a few fractions of a second after the scene cuts away. The carnage is more implicit than explicit—which is not to say that it isn’t felt. It surely is. But it never ventures into the exploitative territory of something like, say, the original RoboCop or the more recent Bone Tomahawk. 

If my thoughts here seem a bit scattershot, that’s a fair criticism. I’m still trying to sort out exactly what I think and feel about The Northman, although I’m aching to watch it again—not necessarily for the story, since it’s one we all know by heart, but rather the cinematography, the symbolism, the performances, the set design, the costumes, the score, the sound mix . . .  the sheer experience of it all. 

It’s a bummer the Kaleidescape release lacks so many of the bonus goodies found on the UHD Blu-ray—including an audio commentary, roughly 40 minutes’ worth of featurettes exploring the historical context of the film and its shooting locations, and deleted scenes—but such is the case for Universal releases on Kaleidescape. In the online domain, these supplements seem to be Apple exclusives.

Even without the bonus goodies, though, The Northman is a must-own if you think you can endure the occasional abstractions, the sometime stream-of-consciousness storytelling, and the infrequent sword to the face. I went into it thinking I knew what kind of film it would be and uncertain of whether I would like it. I came out the other side ever-so-slightly obsessed with this deliciously strange slice of cinema. 

Dennis Burger is an avid Star Wars scholar, Tolkien fanatic, and Corvette enthusiast who somehow also manages to find time for technological passions including high-end audio, home automation, and video gaming. He lives in the armpit of Alabama with his wife Bethany and their four-legged child Bruno, a 75-pound American Staffordshire Terrier who thinks he’s a Pomeranian.

PICTURE |  HDR doesn’t do much here except enhance shadow detail but that hardly matters, since the UHD resolution unlocks nuances in the imagery that would be lost in HD

SOUND | This may not be the title you cue up to show off your sound system but the Atmos mix does require a well-engineered system to appreciate, given how dynamic it is

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Top Gun (1986)

Top Gun (1986)

review | Top Gun (1986)

A 4K/Atmos makeover helps breathe new life into this Tom Cruise career-maker

by John Sciacca
May 21, 2020

The United States Navy could scarcely have crafted a more effective recruiting film for promoting naval aviation than if they had actually written, produced, and directed Top Gun. (The Navy was involved in the production, providing access to jets and pilots, allowing filming on an active carrier, and suggesting some script rewrites.)

Tony Scott’s fast-paced film introduced viewers to a world most have never heard of—a school where the Top 1% of fighter pilots went to hone their craft—and does everything possible to glamorize the fast-paced, life-on-the-edge, alpha-male lifestyle that is being the best-of-the-best: A member of the Navy’s elite carrier-based fighter squadron. Beyond its huge success at the box office—and launching a bomber-jacket craze across the country—the movie actually led to a huge recruiting increase for the Navy, to the point where recruiters actually set up stations at some theaters showing the film!

Beyond establishing his bona fides as a big-budget action director, Top Gun was Scott’s first collaboration with the dynamic production duo of Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson. The film also features a host of young rising stars, including Tom Cruise in the lead role of something-to-prove renegade, Maverick; Val Kilmer as the mechanical, precise, and aloof Iceman; Anthony Edwards as Maverick’s RIO (Radio Intercept Officer, aka “back seater”), Goose; and the too-cute Meg Griffin as Goose’s wife, Carole. (Also, keep an eye out for an incredibly young-looking Tim Robbins as Merlin on the carrier at the end when he removes his flight helmet.) 

Released in 1986, Top Gun holds up incredibly well (except for the technology shown in the post-flight briefs, which looks like a worn-out VHS tape badly in need of some head tracking). Sure, some of the banter is cheesy, and there’s that random shirtless volleyball scene, but overall the film remains very entertaining, with enough of a plot and character development to keep you involved and caring about the characters until the next aerial dogfight. The numerous air-combat scenes feature actual planes opposed to the “let’s do it in CGI” world most effects films now live in. And the camera angles and dynamic pacing remain dynamic and exciting, and offer a sense of what it’s like to sit in the cockpit as you pull high-G maneuvers and go head-to-head against another jet with closing speeds exceeding 1,000 miles per hour. And the soundtrack is still every bit as catchy as you remember. 

Top Gun was filmed in Super 35 format (apparently because the anamorphic lenses were too large to fit inside the F-14 Tomcat’s cockpit) and comes to the home market with a new scan of the film taken from a 4K digital intermediate. This release was likely designed to coincide with—and build excitement for—the upcoming sequel, Top Gun: Maverick, originally scheduled for theatrical release on June 24, now pushed to December 23.

As good as the film looks—which, without question, is the best it has ever looked—it isn’t realistic to expect it to have the same razor-sharp edges and micro detail of modern films shot digitally. The opening shots of the jets sitting on the carrier deck with the early morning light and smoke billowing around reveal a fair bit of grain and noise—as do some of the flying scenes taken in low-lighting conditions—but this is rarely distracting, and stays true to the film’s look instead of taking too heavy a hand with the digital noise reduction. 

Edges are sharp and defined throughout, and closeups reveal tons of detail. Every star is clearly visible on the shoulder flag patches worn on uniforms, and you see the scratches, scuffs, and even seams in the detail tape used to decorate the pilots’ flight helmets. Tight shots on actors’ faces reveal every pore and whisker (including one distracting whisker Viper [Tom Skerrit] obviously missed while shaving), along with Cruise’s unibrow, which has various stages throughout. 

Something both my wife and I commented on was just how sweaty the actors are. Like, a lot. Faces are almost always covered, nay drenched, in sweat, even when there is apparently no reason for it. I’ve no doubt the US Navy Fighter Weapons School is an intense program, but actors frequently look like they have just finished a lengthy Bikram Yoga class. But these are the kinds of details the 4K transfer makes you aware of. 

Colors are natural and lifelike, with that orange-pink-purple color of West Coast evening sunsets looking very accurate and free of noise and banding—something difficult for a streaming service to do on a highly compressed delivery. The high dynamic range gives some nice punch to the gleaming white T-shits, adds some nice brightness boosts to the Tomcat engines on full afterburners, and provides images with more overall depth and dimension. 

The audio mix has been given a full Dolby TrueHD Atmos makeover, and while not as dynamic as a modern mix, it does a fantastic job of breathing new sonic life into this near-35-year-old film. Right from the start, Harold Faltermeyer’s “Top Gun Anthem” is given more space and room, then come the sounds of the mechanical noises aboard the carrier deck—the whipping winds, the ratcheting of gear and retracting chains, the roar as jet engines spool up for launch, and the steam from the catapult launch. 

Once in the air, you can appreciate the increased dynamics of the high-powered jet engines, with jets streaking and roaring past overhead or ripping back along the side walls. Beyond the throaty roar of the engines, missile impacts and explosions have a ton of bass output that will energize your room. The final scene, as Maverick and Ice hold off the Russian MiGs, sounds fantastic, and will likely become part of your home theater demo reel. 

The soundtrack also does a nice job of delivering subtle (and not so subtle) atmospheric effects. For example, there is a completely different sonic quality when the camera is inside the cockpit, with the sounds of wind outside and breathing through the oxygen mask, compared to outside the jet. And when in the classroom, you’ll hear a variety of appropriate background sounds in the distance, including various planes and helicopters, as well as a jet periodically ripping past overhead. 

Top Gun is a classic for a reason, and it remains as much fun to watch now as the first time I saw it at a matinee back in the summer of 1986. Paramount did a wonderful job restoring the film, and this new 4K HDR version with Dolby Atmos audio is guaranteed to make your home theater feel the need . . . the need for speed!

(I was fortunate enough to do an overnight stay aboard a US aircraft carrier on deployment, and got to stand on the “foul line” and watch them launch and recover F-18s—a sound that feels like it’s going to shred your ears and shake your body to bits! You can read more about my real-life adventure here.)

Probably the most experienced writer on custom installation in the industry, John Sciacca is co-owner of Custom Theater & Audio in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, & is known for his writing for such publications as Residential Systems and Sound & Vision. Follow him on Twitter at @SciaccaTweets and at johnsciacca.com.

PICTURE | As good as this film looks—and this is the best it has ever looked—it isn’t realistic to expect it to have the same razor-sharp edges and micro detail of modern films shot digitally 

SOUND | The mix has been given a full Dolby TrueHD Atmos makeover, and while not as dynamic as a modern mix, it does a fantastic job of breathing new sonic life into this near-35-year-old film

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Casino Royale (2006)

Casino Royale (2006)

review | Casino Royale (2006)

recent reviews

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

The initially derided Craig rebooted the franchise in a big way in this gritty interpretation of Fleming’s first Bond book

by John Sciacca
April 9, 2020

As I mentioned in my Goldfinger review, my dad was always a Connery man. It was the Bond he started out with and who he associated with the character. Roger Moore was the Bond I grew up with, and his looser style and cooler gadgets—thanks to improvements in Q Branch no doubt—resonated with me. For years, For Your Eyes Only was my favorite installment in the franchise. 

But as I got older, read the Ian Fleming (and John Gardner and Raymond Benson) novels for myself, and had more Bond options, I realized Moore really wasn’t the best representation of the character. Where Moore was quick with a quip or tongue-in-cheek comeback, Fleming’s Bond was often brutal and not into trading barbs of the verbal variety. He went about his business of killing with professional detachment, taking no joy in the act, but never shying away from it.

In Fleming’s own words, “I didn’t intend for Bond to be likable. He’s a blunt instrument in the hand of government. He’s got vices and few perceptible virtues.” 

In many ways, Timothy Dalton got closest to the brutal edge that was the literary Bond. Unfortunately, though, he hit the not-likable part a little too literally for much of the Bond viewership.

For me, the Bond films reached a franchise low-point with Pierce Brosnan. I initially had high hopes for him after Goldeneye but then the Brosnan films started relying too much on gadgetry and ridiculousness. (Denise Richards as nuclear physicist Dr. Christmas Jones in The World is Not Enough?! Ugh . . .). And when we finally got to Bond parasailing a giant wave into enemy territory, followed by racing around in an invisible car, and a cameo of a fencing Madonna in 2002’s Die Another Day, well, I didn’t think I had another day to give. That is, until we got Daniel Craig.

Remember, though, that when Craig was initially cast, the world was anything but supportive. The press dubbed him “the blonde Bond,” a clear departure from Fleming’s descriptions, and fans were also similarly dismissive. (Fleming, by the way, several times describes Bond as looking like singer, songwriter, actor Hoagy Carmichael. A description from Moonraker describes Bond as “certainly good-looking . . .  Rather like Hoagy Carmichael in a way. That black hair falling down over the right eyebrow. Much the same bones. But there was something a bit cruel in the mouth, and the eyes were cold.”)

With four years between Day and Casino Royale, it gave the franchise a chance to cool off. And by the time Royale came out, Bond was ready for a much-needed reboot, not only with a new leading man, but with an entirely new realism and edge, reborn in the 21st century.

Casino Royale is the first Fleming novel, a fitting point for the series to restart from, and the film opens in gritty, grainy, ultra-high-contrast black & white where we see a relatively inexperienced Bond new on the job. This is a Bond yet to earn his 00 license, which we quickly learn requires two kills to attain. The first kill is a brutal, personal, up-close-and-ugly affair that doesn’t go quick. The second is . . . easier. Gone are the quips and jokes. This is the brutal, blunt instrument Fleming imagined.

After Brosnan’s heavy reliance on gadgetry, here we have a Bond utterly stripped of gadgets and tricks. (Though you’ll notice several key instances of Sony product placement throughout.) Instead, we see Bond at his best, relying on his guts, brains, and self to outwit and scramble out of trouble. Craig is clearly—and visibly—in fantastic shape, and he isn’t the “pretty Bond” of his predecessors. His grappler’s body is scarred, and his face shows the wear of numerous fights and the hard life Bond leads, but when we see Craig thrust into Bond’s world, he is utterly believable. 

Fleming’s Bond also had a voracious appetite for liquor, and his consumption of bottles of wine, champagne, and hard liquor at meals would have made Don Draper look like a teetotaler. We get a sense of that here, with Bond drinking heavily. We are also introduced to the Vesper, a martini of Bond/Fleming’s creation. (Finding key ingredient Kina Lillet can often be a challenge if trying to recreate this for yourself.)

There are many things that separate this Bond—both film and character—from the others. For one, the overall tone of the film is just darker, moodier, and more intense. We also get the series’ most brutal onscreen torture scene—one pulled directly from the book. Where other villains monologue about what they are planning to do to Bond, here Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) just gets down to business. 

Also different is the character- and relationship-building we see developing between Bond and those around him, notably Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), M (Judi Densch), and Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright). The dialogue between Bond and these characters is sharp and fast, smart and poignant, looking well past the opportunity to simply work in some witty quip, and actually interested in developing the story and characters and challenging Bond. It also helps to make Bond seem more human, relatable, and vulnerable. Here we see a Bond who has fallen in love, who lets his armor down and decides to commit to another person and resign from MI6 before it consumes—or kills—him.

The movie is long. At 2:24, it is the second longest Bond film, giving it plenty of time to develop the story and the characters. The Texas Hold ‘Em card game at the titular casino in Montenegro between Bond and Le Chiffre lasts a long time, but manages to keep tension and remain engaging without feeling overly long. It succeeds here because of the dialogue between characters, the developments on and off the table, and the way the game is broken up, allowing the players to rest and go about other business. Further, changing the game from baccarat (Bond’s preferred game in the novels) to poker for the film was also a brilliant stroke. Baccarat’s rules are far more basic, and wouldn’t have given this lengthy battle of wits and wills the same tension or pacing.

Shot on 35mm film, this is taken from a 2K digital intermediate and images look mostly great but don’t always rise to reference quality. The opening black & white images remind me of some Kodak professional film stock I once used at a wedding, resulting in images that are either deep black or pure bright white, giving it a stark look that pops in HDR. The whites look a bit overexposed, revealing some speckles and giving it a (likely intended) gritty look to capture Bond’s admission into the 00 ranks. 

Closeups reveal tons of facial detail as well as the fabrics in clothing, such as the fine detail and texturing in Rene Mathis’ (Giancarlo Giannini) tie, the pebbled texture in Bond’s tuxedo shirt or the delicate white-on-white V pattern in Bond’s suspenders. It also resolves single strands that have fallen loose from Vesper’s hair. Exterior shots in Montenegro and Venice also look fantastic, with buildings having brilliant sharp edges and definition, and full of color. It’s the mid-length shots, such as when the camera pulls back at the gaming table, that don’t seem to have the same sharpness, almost as if a different lens or film stock was used, slightly pulling you out of the fantasy world.

There are a lot of night scenes, either driving around the streets of Miami or a chase outside an airport, or the bright lights illuminating the gaming table, and these benefit from HDR’s deep blacks and bright whites. We also get a lot of “natural” bright reflections as sun reflects brightly off rocks or gleams on sweating faces and bodies. Outdoor scenes just look more real and natural with the wider contrast range. I didn’t find that the film makes much use of HDR’s wider color gamut, but skin tones are natural, as are the green foliage in a jungle and a dust-filled embassy.  

I was initially bothered that there’s not a new audio mix here, just a “basic” 5.1-channel DTS HD-Master audio track; but fortunately, that disappointment didn’t last long as Royale’s soundtrack is dynamic and active. (It’s also worth mentioning that the disc release also contains the 5.1 mix.) 

Audio is used extensively to properly place you in the environment, and a quality home theater processor’s upmixer does an admirable job creating a truly immersive mix. During an early scene, rain is pouring overhead, and the mix does a great job of putting that water up above you. As Bond runs through a construction site, the room comes alive with sounds of the site, with drilling, cutting, welding, and distant shouts all surrounding you. While in the airport, the room fills with sounds of passengers chatting and PA announcements. And during the interrogation scene, the audio takes on the low-ceilinged flat echo quality of the small space, with water dripping and splashing periodically in the corners. 

There is plenty of gunfire, and the dynamics are loud and sharp, capturing the crack of the bullet and different sonic characteristics of different weapons. During the battle at the embassy compound, bullets hit and crash all around, with glass shattering, impacts striking into walls, and debris falling and splintering. Bass is authoritative, with impact, collisions, and explosions sending waves of low-freqeuncy energy through the room.

Dialogue is well presented and easy to understand, as is the equally important—and beautiful sounding—12-cylinder engine note of the Aston Martin DBS (a car I actually got to spend an entire weekend with driving around New York several years ago . . .).

I had forgotten just how much I enjoy this film. From start to finish, Casino Royale is engaging, engrossing, and entertaining, and is the truest version of Bond as Ian Fleming imagined and wrote. Fans of the series will want to own this movie looking and sounding its best, but even non-Bond fans will find plenty of action and intrigue here that will leave them shaken not stirred. 

Probably the most experienced writer on custom installation in the industry, John Sciacca is co-owner of Custom Theater & Audio in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, & is known for his writing for such publications as Residential Systems and Sound & Vision. Follow him on Twitter at @SciaccaTweets and at johnsciacca.com.

PICTURE | Images look mostly great, but don’t always rise to reference quality

SOUND | The disappointment over getting just a “basic” 5.1-channel DTS HD-Master audio track doesn’t last long since Royale’s soundtrack is dynamic and active

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Goldfinger

Goldfinger (1964)

review | Goldfinger

related reviews

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

The most iconic of the Bond films shows little of its age in this 4K transfer

by John Sciacca
April 7, 2020

“The name’s Bond. James Bond.” There is perhaps no more iconic introduction catchphrase in the history of cinema, a line cribbed and lampooned countless times in nearly as many different genres. 

Say “James Bond” and it immediately conjures a host of similar images in people’s minds. Bond, ever cool under pressure, gliding through a world inhabited by fast women and faster cars, pitted against ruthless super-villains bent on world domination. Bond, always perfectly attired, knowing the right thing to say or do in any situation, doing whatever necessary to complete the assignment at hand regardless the risk, saving the world and leaving with the girl. 

Bond is the original man men wish they could be, and women wish they could be with. While Ian Fleming’s Bond was a popular character in literary fiction—actually mentioned by President Kennedy as one of favorite books, leading to From Russia With Love to be the second film made—it wasn’t until Bond hit the big screen with Dr. No in 1962 that he truly caught on and hit worldwide acclaim.

I came to Bond through my father, and I can remember watching the latest Bond adventure when it would hit TV, gaping at the opening title sequences as each film revealed more and more inches of female skin, and wondering what incredible gadget the super spy would have up his sleeve (quite literally in the case of the Rolex Submariner he wore in many of the early films).  

My dad, who read all the Fleming (and subsequent John Gardner and Raymond Benson) books, was a Sean Connery man, faithful to the original. And while Bond is now entrenched in the world’s zeitgeist, it’s likely there would be no Bond today had the casting fallen short with that first film. 

Bond needed to be able to handle himself physically, but not be so big that he stood out. With a weightlifting and boxing background, and a 6-foot 2-inch height, Connery fit the bill. He also needed to have enough style and charm that he could fit in playing baccarat with billionaires in Monte Carlo or be believable driving around in an Aston Martin with a beauty at his side, but also be equally at home getting his hands dirty when the time called for it. Connery’s Bond oozed confidence and cool, and he wore the character like a second skin, setting the benchmark against which all future Bonds would be judged. And launching a franchise character who has now survived 26 films by a variety of actors and spanning seven decades. 

Goldfinger comes to us renewed in 4K resolution, looking impossibly clean and fresh for a film that is now 56 years old. A final credits screen displays “Pristine Digital Restoration by Lowery Digital Images, a DTS company.” Lowery Digital won the right to restore the Bond films for Blu-ray back in 2004, and the company did significant work on the films at that time, restoring damage, doing digital cleanup, and making a 4K scan of each frame. It’s likely that these are the scans taken at that time, and also why we don’t have versions of these early films featuring HDR.

Today, the Bond opening title sequences are mini features of their own, and Goldfinger is the first Bond film to really push the opening to be something more than just a song and credits. While the title sequence is incredibly tame by modern standards, with just clips from the film projected onto shimmering gold-colored models while Shirley Bassey belts out the title track letting you know beyond any question that Goldfinger loves only gold, it was the first step that got us to where we are today. 

The first thing you notice about Goldfinger is that it’s presented in a slightly odd (albeit the original theatrical) aspect ratio of 1.66:1. When accurately presented, this will not quite fill  a 16:9 display, with small black pillarbox bars to the left and right of the image.

The next thing you notice is how clean images look. It is as if they polished off years of grime and neglect from a window, giving you a startling glimpse into what the cinematographer saw through the lens over 50 years ago. Closeups are startlingly sharp and detailed, with edges in razor-sharp focus. Any scene where the camera pulls in tight reveals tons of micro detail and texture, whether in clothing, faces, playing cards, or building details. You can actually see the dirt under Q’s (Desmond Llewelyn) fingernails. There are also plenty of opportunities to appreciate the varieties of fabric in Bond’s suits or see the sharp and jaggie-free lines in the vertical stripes of Felix Leiter’s (Cec Linder) seersucker hat. 

Colors pop, especially in bright outdoor scenes. There is a shot of a helicopter panning over a hotel and pool in Miami that dazzles with bright gleaming whites and tons of appropriate bikini-clad skin tones, and gold shimmer with appropriate luster, whether in bars or in the paint covering Jill Masterson’s (Shirley Eaton) body.  

Blacks are nice and dark, and noise-free. A shot with Bond in a tuxedo clearly shows the different shade and sheen of his lapels compared to the jacket. 

Not everything is perfect here, though, as the razor-sharp focus reveals the limitations of some of the technology at the time. For example, many of the shots around the pool where Auric Goldfinger (Gert Frobe) is playing cards are so crisp, the blurred backgrounds look to be obvious backdrops. The same effect is visible again when Bond is driving Tilly Masterson (Tania Mallet) around Switzerland in the famous Aston Martin DB5. And while closeups look tack-sharp, longer shots often don’t fare nearly so well. The famous scene where Bond is strapped to the laser cutting table—“Do you expect me to talk?” “No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!”—jarringly cuts back and forth, with the far shots looking much softer, almost like a completely different film. 

Also, the opening sequence when Bond is coming out of the water in his scuba suit has an odd frame speed up where he appears to move in double speed for a second. On first viewing, I thought perhaps I’d imagined it, but it’s definitely there and clearly a speed shift. This isn’t unique to the Kaleidescape download so it’s something from the source material, perhaps due to damage or lost elements.

Sonically, Goldfinger comes with a 5.1 DTS-HD Master soundtrack but as the original film included a mono soundmix, you can’t expect too much from this. And, well, it doesn’t deliver much in the way of actual surround sound. The film is primarily spread across the front three channels, with little bass activity even during explosions. Gunshots have some nice dynamics but a modern soundmix this isn’t. Even still, dialogue is well presented and every word is easily understood, and we also get some nice atmosphere, such as the audio inside the cavernous Fort Knox at the end or Oddjob’s (Harold Sakata) hat sailing past.  

As mentioned, Goldfinger isn’t the first or even second Bond film but rather the third, and is actually the seventh novel in Fleming’s series. But by this point in both the film and literary world, Bond was truly hitting his stride. He was established as the world’s greatest secret agent, helped by a Q-Branch producing high-tech gadgets in the form of one of the most iconic vehicles ever committed to film, with Connery starting to lighten up with some quips—“Shocking. Positively shocking,” after electrocuting a baddie in a bathtub—with perhaps the most on-the-nose Bond Girl name ever in Pussy Galore (Honor Blackman), and producing one of the most memorable villains in the series. The film scored a franchise high critics rating of 98% on Rotten Tomatoes as well as tying the franchise-high audience rating of 89%, and it comes to the home looking as good as you’ve ever seen it.

Probably the most experienced writer on custom installation in the industry, John Sciacca is co-owner of Custom Theater & Audio in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, & is known for his writing for such publications as Residential Systems and Sound & Vision. Follow him on Twitter at @SciaccaTweets and at johnsciacca.com.

PICTURE | Goldfinger looks impossibly clean and fresh for a film that’s 56 years old

SOUND | The film comes with a 5.1 DTS-HD Master soundtrack but as the original film included a mono soundmix, you can’t expect too much from that

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Rear Window

Rear Window (1954)

review | Rear Window

related reviews

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

The 4K transfer exposes both the good and the bad of Hitchcock’s best-known film, but ultimately offers a satisfying way to re-engage with a classic 

by Michael Gaughn
September 19, 2020

As I mentioned in my Psycho review, more has been written about Hitchcock than any other filmmaker—and more has probably been written about Rear Window (1954) than any other film. It and Vertigo (1958) are often considered his most accomplished efforts—a conclusion I would vigorously dispute, but not here. Rear Window has gotten the most attention because, between the two, it’s the squeakier wheel.

It’s undeniable that this hubristic exercise in artifice, or stagecraft as cinema, would have completely unravelled in the hands of a lesser filmmaker. And it remains impressive how much Hitchcock is able to make the pure contrivance of his elaborate set a big part of what makes the film so engaging. You almost don’t care that it’s the epitome of mid-’50s Broadway set design. There’s something about its sheer physicality that makes everything that’s presented on it feel convincing.

Because Hitchcock was relentlessly ambitious, his reach constantly exceeded his grasp, so Rear Window has more than its share of shots that don’t quite work, storyboard concepts that had to be triaged in post, characters that could have used a little more development. Thelma Ritter’s part is ridiculously overwritten, and you can feel her pausing for laughs that faded it into the void more than five decades ago. Grace Kelly is just a little too Grace Kelly, with a patrician accent that can’t help but grate on modern ears.

The film works mainly because of the ingenious way Hitchcock makes the set, with its vignettes, convincing as projections of Jimmy Stewart’s various states of mind, making the film from early on feel dreamlike. And it works because of Stewart’s performance. He, pre-World War II, was a good, even great, actor—his work in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is jawdropping, even today. But he was also kind of lightweight, sometimes clownish. After the war, there’s an undeniable sense of experience behind his eyes that he was able to employ deftly in his best roles—like in the Anthony Mann westerns, in Vertigo, and here.

Not that his performance is flawless. As always with Hitchcock, there are weak moments in the script and in the direction that cause Stewart, adrift, to lapse into his patented Stewartisms. But in the hands of a more traditional Hollywood pretty boy type, L. B. Jeffries snooping out of the back of his apartment could have seemed just comic, or even diseased. Stewart creates a perfect tension between making it all seem justified and also the dangerous preoccupations of a troubled soul.

The 4K HDR presentation is a must-have for anybody who even thinks they care about movies—not because it smooths over the flaws but because it presents everything honestly, the good and the bad. Seeing Rear Window in any other format inevitably puts you at a distance from the film, which inevitably places you at too great of a distance from what’s going on in the apartments across the way. You need to see it at this resolution to get pulled back into the film, so it stops feeling quaint and again becomes relevant and compelling.

The flaws are pretty egregious. Hitchcock, of course, endlessly obsessed over how to present Kelly, but there’s a shot at 29:51, during a sequence meant to scream “beguiling beauty,” where she looks like a walking corpse. Even more jarring is a closeup at 1:50:29 of the hapless Wendell Corey that looks like it was originally part of a wider shot that was ruthlessly enlarged on an optical printer. 

For whatever reason, cinematographer Robert Burks didn’t do as good a job here as he would on Vertigo, but for everything that takes you out of the film, there’s plenty to keep you engaged. Probably no other movie has better conveyed the feel of New York at sunset, or especially at three in the morning. And, while the HDR makes its presence felt just here and there, it is an absolute revelation during the climax. Anyone who knows Rear Window will know exactly where I’m going with this, but Raymond Burr being blinded by Stewart’s flashbulbs fell solidly into the “suspension of disbelief” camp until now. Presented in HDR, those white flashes become searing, making you feel Burr’s disorientation and sense of absolute loss. Rear Window is worth seeing in this form just for that moment alone. 

The audio is “only” DTS-HD Master Audio stereo. I used quotes because the thought of somebody mucking around with Hitchcock’s innovative and masterful sound mix to take it into the land of Atmos is both terrifying and nauseating. In the right hands, it could definitely enhance the experience—but who’s got the right hands? And I think there’s a good chance an enhanced sense of spaciousness could actually end up emphasizing the one-dimensionality of a lot of the stagecraft.

The mix here does a great job of allowing you to savor what Hitchcock originally wrought, where he used mainly volume, timing, and reverb to convey the sense of voices and other sounds heard in various spaces and from various distances away. The soundtrack, as is, is so strong it could almost stand on its own as a radio play.

But allow me just a brief swipe at Franz Waxman’s score, which is the weakest link in the film. It’s not that I don’t like Waxman—his work on Sunset Boulevard represents the pinnacle of the film-scoring art—but he’s just not in sync with this film at all. The opening theme—if you can call it that—is a hackneyed pastiche of Gershwin clichés—42nd Street meets The Naked City. But what makes it really fall flat is the sense of complete disconnection from the evocative use of source cues that makes up the rest of the soundtrack. I know Hitchcock was aiming for a kind of overture as the curtains literally went up, but he missed the mark.

And then there’s that song. Another of Hitchcock’s offerings placed on the altar of Grace Kelly, it was a great idea in concept—show a composer struggling to write a song to parallel Jimmy Stewart’s conflicted feelings about Kelly and then have it all come together as an example of songwriting perfection. Problem is, the song sounds fully worked out—and not very good—from the start. Had it been great, it could have really enhanced the film—and not made the salvation of Miss Lonelyhearts look like the worst kind of Victorian contrivance. But “Lisa” is a real stinker.

I’m not a big fan of Top 10 or Top 100 or whatever lists—they’re almost all laughable when they’re not outright dangerous. So let’s just say that Rear Window, for too many reasons to ignore, is an essential. Not only does it stand on its own as entertainment for all but the most jaded contemporary audiences, but its reverberations can still be strongly felt in filmmaking in the present. In 4K HDR, it becomes not just another movie, but a glimpse of the very wellspring of cinema.

Michael Gaughn—The Absolute Sound, The Perfect Vision, Wideband, Stereo Review, Sound & Vision, The Rayva Roundtablemarketing, product design, some theater designs, a couple TV shows, some commercials, and now this.

PICTURE | This 4K HDR presentation is a must-have for anybody who even thinks they care about movies—not because it smooths over the flaws but because it presents everything honestly, the good and the bad

SOUND | The stereo mix does a great job of allowing you to savor what Hitchcock originally wrought, where he used mainly volume, timing, and reverb to convey the sense of voices and other sounds heard in various spaces and from various distances away 

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Shadow of a Doubt

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

review | Shadow of a Doubt

related reviews

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

One of Hitchcock’s very best films almost flawlessly presented in 4K HDR

by Michael Gaughn
May 9, 2022

I suspect it’s a rights thing, but the latest round of Hitchcock in 4K is a surprisingly weak lot. There can’t be more than a handful of people clamoring for The Trouble with Harry and Family Plot, and yet there they are. No Strangers on a Train anywhere to be seen. But there is one standout in the pack—Shadow of a Doubt, which, along with Strangers, may be Hitchcock’s best work.

I realize that last bit is an arguable, if not controversial, statement, but both of those films rank at the top for me exactly because they don’t exhibit the kind of bravura showmanship, bordering on P.T. Barnum, that’s generated such mass affection for his mid to late ‘50s concoctions from Rear Window through Vertigo to North by Northwest. Both Shadow and Strangers stay focused on the material, with the film technique always in proportion, never overwhelming it. As a result, you have a sense throughout both of completely developed characters in believable environments instead of specters drifting through stage-managed dreamworlds.

And let’s cut right to it: Shadow of a Doubt is the best 4K HDR Hitchcock release to date. It’s a still compelling, even riveting, work presented in a way that couldn’t be more true to how the film was made, without any jolts triggered by bad elements or overzealous hands at the knobs. If you want to see a Hitchcock film from the period when he was in full control of his artistry presented pretty much as he intended, this is it. 

And it isn’t a museum piece. Not only was Shadow about 30 years ahead of its time with the treatment of its protagonist, but in not only subject matter but technique feels surprisingly contemporary. Hitchcock sensed, in the midst of World War II, before the A bomb and before the horrors of the concentration camps became known, how that conflict would yield a more cynical world and used the Joseph Cotten character to develop a take on society that wouldn’t even begin to scratch at the door of pop culture until more than 10 years later in works like Aldrich’s Kiss Me Deadly and Thompson’s The Killer Inside Me. You can also sense the influence on the anti-hero films of the ‘70s, and on the far more adolescent and superficial take on dark that seems to have permeated the whole of current culture.

But there’s no raging madman here, no cocksure vigilante. Cotten’s Uncle Charlie is a sophisticated but damaged man in a smug and content society that can only survive sheltered from the realities of the larger world. It’s clear that Hitchcock’s sympathies lie with him, one of the many troubling aspects of a deeply troubling work. Hitchcock creates an idyllic microcosm and then gets you to pierce it by adopting the viewpoint of a misanthropic murderer. That’s old hat now, but he has such a firm command of his material that it still works, and, by contrast, shows just how shallow and silly the current efforts are.

This is probably Cotten’s best performance, here able to craft a role without being upstaged by Welles’ endless scenery chewing in Citizen Kane or baroque expressions of technique in Magnificent Ambersons. His Uncle Charlie is a compelling human being, the most rounded of the film’s characters, not some convenient bogeyman. That doesn’t mean, though, that Hitchcock denies he’s essentially evil. In fact, he underlines that brilliantly in the famous shot of the train bearing Uncle Charlie arriving in Santa Rosa vigorously belching a massive cloud of thick black smoke, like it’s in transit from the mouth of Hell, the noxious plume then settling over the town like a shroud. That shot is particularly striking in this transfer—especially the depth of the black cloud against the highlights of the sun-drenched All-American town. And it’s done while maintaining the balance of the overall visual fabric of the film. 

But here’s why Shadow of a Doubt is a great movie: While Uncle Charlie is fully developed, all of the other characters are fleshed out to nearly the same degree. And although Hitchcock’s disdain, if not contempt, for their small-town world is clear, he realizes he needs to honor that world in order to make Cotten’s troubling of it compelling. And he stays so true to its conventions that those other characters’ emotions are convincing throughout and are actually, at times, moving. You’d be hardpressed to find anything like that in any other Hitchcock film. You can sense he feels drawn to their sheltered society—or at least to the reasons why the characters find it so attractive—while knowing it’s a kind of Potemkin village that can never stand. (Lynch tried to adopt that same stance in Blue Velvet, deliberately exploiting parallels with Shadow along the way, but didn’t pull it off half as well.)

And then there are the seemingly endless grace notes, the kind of thing a master artist does when he has an overabundance of energy and ideas but is so in sync with his material that he knows how to make every touch apt. Those accents, ornaments, and inflections are so abundant, there’s little point in citing many, and it would take a lot of the fun out of watching the movie to anticipate them here, but to highlight a couple: Hitchcock, feeding from his roots in German Expressionism, uses some angles and lighting (like looking down on Teresa Wright through the staircase balusters) that would seem gratuitous in any other film or in lesser hands but, because they’re acute extensions of the character’s frame of mind, ring true. Or the various startling ways he reveals Cotten’s character by having him engage directly with the camera, striding toward it when he goes to grab the newspaper from Wright’s hands or the slow track in on his profile as he makes his “silly wives” speech only to have him turn and look straight into the lens after the camera has come uncomfortably close.

There’s not a lot to say about the transfer exactly because it so well serves the material. There doesn’t seem to have been any attempt to “improve” the look of the original film (a frequent sin in 4K HDR transfers) but instead a deliberate effort to honor its visual fabric and keep the look consistent throughout. For the first time in a while, there was nothing here that at any point pulled me out of the movie, and someone deserves kudos for that alone. I didn’t realize until this viewing how extraordinarily well photographed this film is, and the transfer can take a lot of the credit for that.

What can I really say about the sound? It’s a stereo mix of the original mono that never draws too much attention to its stereo-ness—which, until it occurs to someone to make the original mono part of 4K presentations, is probably the best we can hope for. My only complaint is that the Dimitri Tiomkin cues can come on a little strong, especially during the otherwise low-key “chase” scene near the beginning. This disparity was probably in the original mix, but the presentation here is so dynamic it only heightens it. 

To sum up: Shadow of a Doubt is one of Hitchcock’s very best films presented in the best 4K HDR transfer to date of any of his work. Yes, watch it to savor the transfer, but also watch it to savor the film, which is one of those classics that’s so strong at the core that it feels untouched by time.

Michael Gaughn—The Absolute Sound, The Perfect Vision, Wideband, Stereo Review, Sound & Vision, The Rayva Roundtablemarketing, product design, some theater designs, a couple TV shows, some commercials, and now this.

PICTURE | There doesn’t seem to have been any attempt to “improve” the look of the original film but instead a deliberate effort to honor its visual fabric and keep the look consistent throughout 

SOUND | The stereo mix of the original mono never draws too much attention to its stereo-ness, although the music cues can come on a little strong at times

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Ambulance

Ambulance (2022)

review | Ambulance

Nobody should be surprised this Michael Bay actioner is just one long chase scene, nor that it makes for great demo fodder

by John Sciacca
May 4, 2022

When a movie poster has “A MICHAEL BAY Film” emblazoned above the tile, you have a pretty good idea what to expect. The guy behind five Transformers films, Pearl Harbor, Armageddon, both Bad Boys, The Rock and so many more isn’t exactly known for subtlety. Michael Bay likes to watch things explode. And if you appreciate that, Ambulance delivers a pretty exciting, non-stop action ride.

There’s something about the cover art that reminds me of the TV series Miami Vice. Maybe it’s the cool chrome color palette, or the framing of the shot, or maybe there’s no connection at all. In fact, when I first saw the trailer, I actually thought this was from director Michael Mann, who directed the film version of Miami Vice as well as another of my favorite heist dramas, Heat.

They set off the LA in “Ambulance” to let you know that’s where the film is set. But this is actually a remake of the 2005 Danish film Ambulancen, written and directed by Laurits Munch-Petersen, which has a very similar plot, though tweaked for modern technology and the greatly increased budget a Bay film demands.

If you’ve seen Heat—and if you haven’t, please do so immediately!—then Ambulance is a bit like Breedan (Dennis Haysbert) being pulled in for that last job, but instead of getting killed almost immediately, he gets stuck with totally crazy Waingro (Kevin Gage) as they shoot from the hip (quite literally sometimes) and try to escape and get away with the big score. 

For a film with a 136-minute run time, Bay doesn’t spend much time on backstory, and once the story starts moving, it moves fast and doesn’t stop. Instead, he has characters share bits of information along the way, letting us stitch the important bits together before jumping straight into the action. We learn Will Sharp (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) is back from the war in the Middle East and his wife needs an experimental surgery that is going to cost a bundle. He asks his adoptive brother Danny (Jake Gyllenhaal) for a loan, but Danny is about to execute a major bank heist and could use Will on his crew. Danny’s father also has a history of violent heists mixed with crazy. 

When the heist goes wrong, a cop is shot. An ambulance is dispatched to work on the officer, and Will and Danny see this as their getaway. They steal the ambulance with EMT Cam (Eiza Gonzalez)—who has a reputation for being able to keep any patient alive long enough to make it to the hospital—and bleeding-out Officer Zach (Jackson White) on board. 

With $16 million in stolen loot in the ambulance, what seems like the entirety of the LAPD vehicle and air division converge on the vehicle in a chase through the streets of LA as Danny tries to think his way out of things.

Danny knows if the ambulance is stopped—or if the cop on board dies—they’re done, so the movie has a bit of a Speedlike quality, where things are constantly on the move and there is this back-and-forth move/countermove between the police trying to stop the moving vehicle and Danny and Will figuring their way out. 

If you start asking questions like, “Why didn’t they just shoot the engine block with that Barrett 50-cal?” or “Why didn’t they shoot out the tires or lay down a tack strip?” then you’re thinking too much. Instead, sit back and enjoy the carefully orchestrated vehicle mayhem and shootout main course that Bay has set for you. As one character astutely observes, “It’s a very expensive car chase right now.” 

As much action as Bay packs in, Ambulance starts to feel long and a bit repetitive. Even though they try to throw in some unique uses of tech, some cool helicopter flying, some fancy driving, and lots of crazy camera angles, zooms, pans, and drone camera shots, after a while you just become a bit shellshocked and numb to what is essentially just a long chase sequence. Also, that they shoehorned in a completely pointless scene to show that FBI Agent Clark (Keir O’Donnell) is gay just feels like an egregious case of “box checking.”

Shot on Red at 6K and 8K, the home transfer is taken from a 4K digital intermediate, and it clearly looks it. Images are super clean, tack-sharp, and highly detailed. Similar to the cover art, the opening scenes have a stylized chrome blue-grey look almost like some kind of Instagram filter has been applied. The clarity and resolution are readily visible in closeups that show the finest details and textures in clothing, stone walls, actors’ faces, or the tight mesh-knit on a ball cap. In one scene where Cam leans over and her long hair dangles in the sunlight, individual strands are sharp and visible. 

With a lot of the filming taking place in the back of the ambulance or inside darkened environments like warehouses or garages, the HDR grade gives the film nice deep blacks and lifelike shadow detail, with black levels that are truly black and noise-free. There are also some really vibrant and saturated reds, as well as the near-constant bright flashing police lights, or the perpetual golden-hour LA skies. 

The big star is Ambulance’s soundtrack, which is presented in a fantastically immersive Dolby TrueHD Atmos format via the Kaleidescape download. While there are tons of the gee-whiz overhead and surround effects, what I really noticed was the terrific audio tracking as sounds moved around, off screen, or overhead. If the camera moves and an object—say, a cutting tool in a garage—travels up into the corner of the screen, the audio clearly follows it there. Traffic that drives by travels well left or right of the screen and passes away, or clearly travels from the front of the room into the back; a baby crying sounds like it’s off in another room; a garage door slides up to the top of the room and then rolls back overhead. 

Then there are all the little ambient sounds and atmospherics like rattles of equipment and jingling sounds inside the ambulance that fill practically every scene, or helicopters passing by and zooming overhead. The Ambulance mix is definitely one that will be enhanced by listening on larger Atmos audio systems, as sounds will more smoothly pan and move around the room.

There are a couple of big shootouts, and gunfire is loud and dynamic, with weapons having clearly different and varied sound based on type, whether pistol, rifle, or shotgun. The gun battles have people shooting and bullets striking all around the room, and the soundtrack delivers deep and fundamental low-bass energy. The soundtrack also boasts what must be the loudest and most immersive presentation of Christopher Cross’s “Sailing” ever featured anywhere. 

If there’s any downfall to the audio, it’s that some dialogue can be a bit difficult to understand or hear, either drowned out by some of the bombast or just recorded too low on set. 

Ultimately, Ambulance is a forgettable movie, and certainly not even ranking amongst Bay’s “best” work. However, it’s action-packed, fast-paced, and just interesting enough to hold your attention. The big treat here is the Atmos soundtrack, which delivers the goods on all counts, and makes for a lot of fun in a well-appointed home theater. 

Probably the most experienced writer on custom installation in the industry, John Sciacca is co-owner of Custom Theater & Audio in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, & is known for his writing for such publications as Residential Systems and Sound & Vision. Follow him on Twitter at @SciaccaTweets and at johnsciacca.com.

PICTURE | Images are super clean, tack-sharp, and highly detailed, and the HDR grade provides nice deep blacks and lifelike shadow detail, with black levels that are truly black and noise-free

SOUND | The big star here is the fantastically immersive Dolby TrueHD Atmos soundtrack, which features terrific audio tracking as sounds move around, off screen, or overhead

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Review: Singin’ in the Rain

Singin' in the Rain (1952)

review | Singin’ in the Rain

also on Cineluxe

Sign up for our monthly newsletter
to stay up to date on Cineluxe

This most classic of classic musicals bucks the recent trend and actually proves to be well served by its 4K incarnation 

by Michael Gaughn
May 3, 2022

I’m a sucker for films about process. It’s one of the reasons why most fantasy films do nothing for me—when you’re in a universe where anything can happen and where credible cause and effect no longer pertains, yes, everything is possible but nothing is interesting. Showing process makes characters meaningful within a fictional world—it gives them a reason to be. The more convincing the process is, the more convincing the world portrayed becomes, and the more compelling the characters.

And process isn’t genre specific. It can range from heist films like The Asphalt Jungle to a financial-meltdown flick like The Big Short to engineering the end of the world in Dr. Strangelove. And then there’s the whole subgenre of show-biz process. A sitcom like The Dick Van Dyke Show still holds up because its backstage world is self-consistent; the characters’ wisecracks ring true because they’re comedy writers. 

Most musicals bore me because they tend to veer too much toward fantasy, leaving credibility behind. But there’s a sub-subgenre of show-biz-process musicals that tend to be more substantial than the rest, that give you something to chew on besides production numbers. And I don’t think it’s pure coincidence that the two best musicals ever—The Band Wagon and Singin’ in the Rain—both spring from the process mold.

I have to give the edge to The Band Wagon because basing it in Broadway culture, as opposed to Singin’ in the Rain’s more superficial world of Hollywood, lends it a more satisfying depth. Also, the dilemma of Fred Astaire’s character—cast back into a theatrical milieu that’s completely changed around him, trying to not just hold his own but transcend it—is more compelling than Gene Kelly’s need for a little bit of emotional propping up.

All of that said, Singin’ in the Rain still plays as well now as it did when it was released in 1952. And, yes, much of that has to do with the production numbers, which were the primary draw then and remain so now. But its longevity, and its energy, and its continued relevance owe just as much to its faithful, if arch, portrayal of Hollywood during its disorienting 1920s transition to sound. And for that we can thank the brilliant, slyly witty writing team responsible for so much other meaningful fluff, Betty Comden and Adolph Green (who also penned The Band Wagon, by the way).

One more thing before I get to the transfer: Process films lend themselves particularly well to satire (again, Strangelove), and Comden and Green, with their spot-on portrayals of show-biz worlds, were always able to lace their confections with a little dollop of well-placed acid—which also has a lot to do with their efforts’ relevance and longevity.

As for this presentation: Singin’ in the Rain is a legitimate classic (it’s kind of surprising how many illegitimate classics there are out there—products more of the zeitgeist and misplaced affection than of talent and craft), and truly classic films haven’t been faring too well lately in 4K HDR (witness Citizen Kane and The Godfather). So I was a little trepidatious about approaching this release, especially since the original negative isn’t around anymore to work from, which can be a warning of a bumpy ride ahead.

But, while it might not reach reference-level quality, Singin’ in the Rain is a pleasure to watch in 4K HDR. The experience is, for the most part, visually consistent, and the inconsistencies that do exist aren’t likely—with one particularly egregious exception—to pull you out of the film. The colors are sumptuous and vivid without lapsing into garish (which has been a problem with earlier home video releases of this film). In fact, the HDR grading lends them just enough subtlety to make the more visually heightened moments (like the deliberately gaudy montage of first stabs at musicals that leads up to “Beautiful Girl”) look appropriately exaggerated but never cartoony. 

The truly problematic spots seemed to be confined mainly to moments on either side of optical dissolves. For instance, the color palette collapses completely at the end of “Moses Supposes,” making Gene Kelly and Donald O’Connor look like they’re suffering from some kind of vitamin deficiency. The particularly egregious moment mentioned above falls in the middle of the big “Broadway Melody” number as Kelly fantasizes about Cyd Charisse after she walks into a casino. There’s a long (almost one-minute) take after the dissolve as Kelly begins to dance with her, and the resolution is so jarringly low that it induced a DVD flashback. This is likely a product of the elements they had to work with, but the shot goes on for so long that you just can’t brush it off.

One last thing to gnaw on about the image transfer: I know this has become a critical saw, but HDR makes some of the shots stunning—for instance, all of the lighted signage in “Broadway Melody” and the medium shots of Jean Hagen and Debbie Reynolds as they stand on either side of the curtain at the film’s finale. This comes mainly from having plenty of highlights to accentuate within the shots. Here’s my query: Doesn’t the ability to do this throw off the visual balance of the film? What about all the other footage (the bulk of the movie) that doesn’t lend itself to creating a 3D-ish effect? I loved seeing the shots mentioned above looking so vivid, but it seems to me more to the point to stay true to the look the filmmakers intended. Something tells me we’ll look back at this first round of releases of old films in 4K HDR and find a lot of it gimmicky.

As for the audio: It’s surprisingly dynamic and palatable. But, as much as I know it pains some people to hear this, I have to say it again: This film was originally mixed in mono so it should be listened to in mono, no matter how deep your addiction to all those other speakers in your room. We can’t claim to care about the filmmakers’ intent, and support a booming market of director’s cuts, etc., and then just pick and choose which aspects of that we’re actually going to honor, based on our proclivities. (Sadly, as with The Godfather, the original mono isn’t an option with the 4K HDR version. You have to descend all the way to the lowly DVD-quality download to have that experience.)

But to boil all of this down to its essence: Singin’ in the Rain is well worth seeking out in 4K HDR because it still holds its own as both a musical and a classic film and provides a visual and aural treat despite a few unavoidable hiccups along the way.

Michael Gaughn—The Absolute Sound, The Perfect Vision, Wideband, Stereo Review, Sound & Vision, The Rayva Roundtablemarketing, product design, some theater designs, a couple TV shows, some commercials, and now this.

PICTURE | It might not reach reference-level quality, but Singin’ in the Rain is a pleasure to watch in 4K HDR. The inconsistencies that do exist are, with one exception, unlikely to pull you out of the film. 

SOUND | The audio is surprisingly dynamic and palatable but, unfortunately—and inexcusably—there’s no option here for listening to the original mono mix

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

© 2023 Cineluxe LLC

Scroll to top

sign up for our newsletter

receive a monthly recap of everything that’s new on Cineluxe