The Thing (new restoration from a 4K scan) blu-ray £13.30 (Prime) / £15.29 (non Prime) at Amazon
262°Expired

The Thing (new restoration from a 4K scan) blu-ray £13.30 (Prime) / £15.29 (non Prime) at Amazon

30
Found 22nd JanEdited by:"groakybaby"
This has been out of stock for a while but seems to be available again and at a decent price!

  • Brand new restoration from a 4K scan of the original negative, supervised and approved by director John Carpenter and director of photography Dean Cundey
  • High Definition Blu-ray (1080p) presentation
  • Original Mono and DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
  • Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
  • Audio commentary by John Carpenter and actor Kurt Russell
  • Who Goes There? In Search of The Thing an all-new feature length documentary produced by Ballyhoo Motion Pictures exploring the history of The Thing, from the original novella to John Carpenter's terrifying science fiction classic. Featuring new interviews with the cast and crew, as well as authors, historians, and critics
  • 1982: One Amazing Summer an all-new retrospective documentary produced by Ballyhoo Motion Pictures about the unforgettable films released in the summer of 1982
  • John Carpenter's The Thing: Terror Takes Shape archive documentary on the background and production of the film
  • Vintage Featurettes
  • Outtakes
  • Behind-the-scenes
  • Trailers, Teasers, TV and Radio Spots
  • Still Galleries
  • Reversible sleeve featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by Gary Pullin
Community Updates

Groups

30 Comments
Too expensive for a blu ray. Getting close to the cost of a uhd 4k disc price.
I got this in Sainsbury's 2 for £25 blu Ray in store promotion couple of weeks back, so might be another option for a little further discount. I is a very nice disc....and very good extras.
Chrisace12 m ago

Too expensive for a blu ray. Getting close to the cost of a uhd 4k disc …Too expensive for a blu ray. Getting close to the cost of a uhd 4k disc price.


its worth it just for the extras, picture quality is much better than the other blu release. great film will get it again if we see a UHD release.
It appears to be in the 2 for 25 at Amazon too so get it for 12:50
Robert.Taylor941 m ago

its worth it just for the extras, picture quality is much better than the …its worth it just for the extras, picture quality is much better than the other blu release. great film will get it again if we see a UHD release.


The picture is deffo better that the shout edition, but the extras aren't as good
Just got mine delivered from Amazon and yes, it did have the slip case!
billwilliams2 m ago

The picture is deffo better that the shout edition, but the extras aren't …The picture is deffo better that the shout edition, but the extras aren't as good


i meant the crappy normal edition we got here.
brought the double version for less than a fiver last week from zoom and watched it last nite and the picture is excellent.This is a ripoff price.
so, the 4k hdr should be out soon
nexus7619 m ago

brought the double version for less than a fiver last week from zoom and …brought the double version for less than a fiver last week from zoom and watched it last nite and the picture is excellent.This is a ripoff price.


you must mean this version as zoom have not had this instock for months

zoom.co.uk/pro…ray

if you did the difference is like night and day in picture quality, that version has been criticised for the poor picture quality(not much better than DVD) and you don't get all the extras
Edited by: "Robert.Taylor94" 22nd Jan
bobo531 h, 4 m ago

so, the 4k hdr should be out soon



Not according to my conversation with Arrow customer services, not enough call for it
This blu ray has a 4k restoration transfer so no way they’ll release it in UHD anytime soon as they had the chance to do it
I'll wait until the 4k uhd version is released (and I have a UHD player). They have the scan so no doubt it will happen sooner or later. Too busy buying up cheap 3d blurays at the moment anyway!
hotyoda33 m ago

Too busy buying up cheap 3d blurays at the moment anyway!

Where from?
Is this really worth it? Has anyone compared old and new Blu-ray editions? From what I remember, I was very impressed with the picture quality on the old Blu-ray version. Can it really be that much better?
Got the limited steel book version of this. Well worth it.
A 4K scan of a (at best) 2K film negative - is still going to (at best) still a 1080P picture.
You can't add extra definition bumping it up to a 1440p or 4K picture when the extra pixels aren't there in the first place - even with interpolation.
In my opinion the normal Blu-Ray release a couple of years back is still as good, it's a beautifully sharp picture the quality of which makes it look as though it was shot with today's film technology. All this "Now in 4k!" hullabaloo is a marketing tactic to get you to buy it all over again.
Edited by: "SimyJo" 22nd Jan
nexus767 h, 33 m ago

brought the double version for less than a fiver last week from zoom and …brought the double version for less than a fiver last week from zoom and watched it last nite and the picture is excellent.This is a ripoff price.



SimyJo2 h, 30 m ago

All this "Now in 4k!" hullabaloo is a marketing tactic to get you to buy …All this "Now in 4k!" hullabaloo is a marketing tactic to get you to buy it all over again.


Scanning at 4K gets far more out of 35mm film than 2K, The Thing's Blu-ray was sourced from a dated master and slathered with filtering and sharpening (the HD DVD release is far superior to the Universal's Blu-ray). They actually managed to remove falling snow from the Blu-ray with over-zealous use of dirt and dust removal tools.

If you want to see The Thing better than it's ever been, this is the copy to get. The rest are imposters ...
This review tells you all you need to know about the Arrow 4K release and how it compares to other available Blu-ray editions:

thedigitalfix.com/fil…on/
groakybaby8 h, 40 m ago

Where from?


Mainly Amazon. I waited a long time to start building my 3D collection and so prices are now pretty good for the older movies. Picked up things like the Extended Hobbit trilogy for £30 and Dawn of the Planet of The Apes for £6. There are loads under £10 now and sometimes a fiver.

Just wish they would bundle 3D with UHD but they don't so I'll wait 2 or so years until I can pick those up cheaper. Still lovin 3D at the moment anyway.
I have to say, I don't normally go for 'Special Edition' or 'Remastered' Blurays but after hearing about this release and researching it, I bought it over Xmas from HMV in a two for £25 deal (along with Ronin) and can genuinely say that the picture quality really is superb.

Whether you feel its worth paying £15 is obviously subjective but as this film is one of my all time favourites, it was a no-brainer for me.

(BTW, watched the Ronin bluray at the weekend and that is also an excellent transfer).

EDIT: If you don't have Prime, like me, then it can be had for £14.99 delivered from HMV: store.hmv.com/fil…(4)
Edited by: "HappyShopper" 22nd Jan
SimyJo8 h, 36 m ago

A 4K scan of a (at best) 2K film negative - is still going to (at best) …A 4K scan of a (at best) 2K film negative - is still going to (at best) still a 1080P picture.You can't add extra definition bumping it up to a 1440p or 4K picture when the extra pixels aren't there in the first place - even with interpolation.In my opinion the normal Blu-Ray release a couple of years back is still as good, it's a beautifully sharp picture the quality of which makes it look as though it was shot with today's film technology. All this "Now in 4k!" hullabaloo is a marketing tactic to get you to buy it all over again.


There's no such thing as a 2K film negative. Film negatives don't have measurable resolutions.

A 4K scan does not give you an "at best" 1080p picture. It presents a 2160p image. A 4K scan of film negative gives you exactly that: A 4K scan. It doesn't add "extra pixels" that "aren't there in the first place". A film negative doesn't have pixels, and the 4K scan is a digital representation of that film negative which contains more detail than if you were to scan it at a 2K or 1080 resolution. There are more pixels in a 4K scan than a 2K or 1080 line scan. There's no adding of "extra pixels". The higher resolution of the scan enabled a better restoration and for Arrow to achieve a much more accurate grade (which was approved by Cundy and Carpenter). The higher resolution and dynamic range allows greater shadow detail, which is extremely important on a movie with so many dark scenes.

The quality of the image contained on the "normal Blu-Ray release" (what's a normal Blu-ray?) from Universal doesn't come close to Arrow's recent offering. Arrow have produced a disc that shits all over Universal's Blu.
Yas17 h, 27 m ago

Is this really worth it? Has anyone compared old and new Blu-ray editions? …Is this really worth it? Has anyone compared old and new Blu-ray editions? From what I remember, I was very impressed with the picture quality on the old Blu-ray version. Can it really be that much better?


Im not falling for it, My old blu ray of the film is fine, and the new extras dont look all that good, at least the US one contains the TV version which this doesn't.
good if you dont already own the film but otherwise dont waste your money.
themachman8 h, 45 m ago

Im not falling for it, My old blu ray of the film is fine, and the new …Im not falling for it, My old blu ray of the film is fine, and the new extras dont look all that good, at least the US one contains the TV version which this doesn't. good if you dont already own the film but otherwise dont waste your money.


The new Blu-ray is the best the film has ever looked on home video, and unless you've seen the new remaster in theatres, it's probably the best it's ever looked.
cheapskate2516 m ago

The new Blu-ray is the best the film has ever looked on home video, and …The new Blu-ray is the best the film has ever looked on home video, and unless you've seen the new remaster in theatres, it's probably the best it's ever looked.


Understand but i aint that bothered about seing a pimple in more detail on Kurt Russell's face Now if they had the TV version included on it i'd snap it up
themachman1 h, 37 m ago

Understand but i aint that bothered about seing a pimple in more detail on …Understand but i aint that bothered about seing a pimple in more detail on Kurt Russell's face Now if they had the TV version included on it i'd snap it up


To me a good remaster or restoration is like getting to watch a film or TV show for the first time again, so the good ones are well worth picking up. It's a sahme that Arrow couldn't get the TV cut as it's an interestng curio.
Thanks for the headsup. Haven't got Prime at the minute so went for the Limited Edition Steelbook version for £20.30!
CARPENTERSSON22nd Jan

There's no such thing as a 2K film negative. Film negatives don't have …There's no such thing as a 2K film negative. Film negatives don't have measurable resolutions. A 4K scan does not give you an "at best" 1080p picture. It presents a 2160p image. A 4K scan of film negative gives you exactly that: A 4K scan. It doesn't add "extra pixels" that "aren't there in the first place". A film negative doesn't have pixels, and the 4K scan is a digital representation of that film negative which contains more detail than if you were to scan it at a 2K or 1080 resolution. There are more pixels in a 4K scan than a 2K or 1080 line scan. There's no adding of "extra pixels". The higher resolution of the scan enabled a better restoration and for Arrow to achieve a much more accurate grade (which was approved by Cundy and Carpenter). The higher resolution and dynamic range allows greater shadow detail, which is extremely important on a movie with so many dark scenes.The quality of the image contained on the "normal Blu-Ray release" (what's a normal Blu-ray?) from Universal doesn't come close to Arrow's recent offering. Arrow have produced a disc that shits all over Universal's Blu.


If it's not filmed in 4K with 4K cameras - It won't BE a proper 4K picture - that's just both fact and logic.
SimyJo4 h, 4 m ago

If it's not filmed in 4K with 4K cameras - It won't BE a proper 4K picture …If it's not filmed in 4K with 4K cameras - It won't BE a proper 4K picture - that's just both fact and logic.



Is it me or is SimyJo missing the point? He is correct in that you can't turn a movie filmed with 1080p digital equipment into 2160p, but this is much older and was filmed in 35mm analogue, so resolution is only constrained by the quality of the lenses and film negative (and digital resolution of scanning equipment).
SimyJo7 h, 8 m ago

If it's not filmed in 4K with 4K cameras - It won't BE a proper 4K picture …If it's not filmed in 4K with 4K cameras - It won't BE a proper 4K picture - that's just both fact and logic.


You're one of two things:

1) A troll
2) Clueless

If you're number 2, please do a little research before commenting. Not one word you have submitted is accurate in any way.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text