The Matrix and How Bad Remasters Happen

Exploring the hazards of accurately remastering films for home video through the The Matrix and its 19 year history of bad remasters.
patreon: / watchingtheaerial
twitter: / watchingaerial
letterboxd: letterboxd.com...
The Greatest Long Take You've Never Seen: • Filming Half a Movie i...
The Matrix Resurrections vs 2018 Remaster: • The Matrix Resurrectio...
Seven article: notonbluray.com...
David Lynch on Color Timing: • David Lynch on Color T...

[@wolfmaria6640]

My memory about this is a little bit different. The original Matrix never was that green in the theater or early DVD releases and became it's look overhaul just for the Trilogy Box Set. In fact the original movie had more a tendency to blue than any other color, even the poster was mainly in blue. Which was also a big trend in the years of it's release.

[@gooddouble2]

The scenes in the matrix have more of a green tinted and the ones in the real world have a blue tint.

[@justinseau]

I’m glad someone in the comments pointed this out. All the marketing material leaned towards blue - just check out the original VHS, DVD and soundtrack material plus alternative poster. The colour timing in the first movie were subtle compared to the sequels. It was the introduction of the deluxe DVD trilogy collection (with Animatrix) that there was a deliberate decision to go back and retime the colours of the first film so they were consistent with the sequels. The 4K release essentially is an attempt to ignore the changes.

[@bestieboys887]

The DVD trilogy set stuff is correct - when Warner released a big 10-disc complete collection set in 2004, the Wachowskis returned to the original film and re-timed it to match the hues of the sequels. This was discussed at the time in articles on sites like Digital Bits and IGN - for memory this was info direct from Warner, or DP Bill Pope. The 2008 Blu-ray set simply used the HD masters prepared for that 2004 DVD set, which is why it has the same color timing for the first film.

[@magnuskallas]

I had the original VHS (official, not bootleg) and both you guys and the author of the video are correct - first home releases were actually quite warm looking and marketing was mostly blue (Soundtrack included). When first HD uploads started appearing, I literally remember thinking "wow, the green tint was bigger giveaway in the original than I thought". One thing I would like to point out is that some remasters might have been influenced by the sequels, since massive fanbase was now fully aware of the green Matrix code aesthetics.

[@thegrimyeaper]

I remember the DVD. Very green.

[@brianhernandez8625]

Algorithm sent me here. Kinda insane that this was 2 years ago. Would love to see more content like this.

[@MarcosZanet]

Same here.

[@oldnewpixel]

@@MarcosZanet that makes three of us

[@teamhyper2698]

Same

[@andrewmuller3514]

same

[@ThePwig]

Yeah especially about the original LOTR trilogy changing color so much

[@Halbmond]

At the beginning of this video I was constantly nodding: “yeah, bullet time, trench coats, green color palette, yeah I remember, yeah - wait green? Wasn’t it more like a bluish color palette?!” I only saw early DVDs in the very early 2000s and have never seen the remaster from 2008, so it looks like my memory of The Matrix has been completely different from many others. That’s fascinating! Also the reasons behind it. Thanks for the video!

[@angrymikko]

Proper use of “Clubbed to Death” 🎵

[@teldeebmel]

proper version too!!! ironically, this song has sooo many versions, remasters and remixes

[@JasonRasmussen]

I saw The Matrix multiple times in the theater in its original run. There was a green tinge when in the Matrix, but it was subtle so you did not notice it at first, but with subsequent viewings you knew which scenes were in the Matrix and which ones were not.

[@drlca6601]

@Peacefield I wish you could talk to just about anybody about such things without being considered eccentric.

[@christophergiblin3376]

@Peacefield In the original the green hues were a lot more yellow-green. They changed the colour of the tint to match the sequels when it was released on blu ray.

[@OutFreak28]

I also watched it back in the day and for me it was more like the 4k bluray, at least for the first movie. I didn't watched reloaded at the theaters but I did watched Revolutions, and revolutions had a yellowish look. I never liked the green tint in the 2008 release for the first movie, but I know it makes sense within the trilogy. The weirdest part for me is Revolutions, it doesn't look like I remember, but I don't mind since it looks more like the first Matrix, the saturation is different the colors are way more vibrant.

[@blumenkopf]

I caught two screenings of the original 35mm release print of the Matrix (and in good condition) about a year ago in Los Angeles (one at the New Beverly Cinema, and the other at the Legion Theater). I can confirm the green tint was certainly present, albeit much subtler than the 2008 Blu Ray (therefore discounting any claims that Matrix did not have a green tint at all in its theatrical run), and articles from the 1999 American Cinematographer issue on the Matrix clearly mention that the green was bumped up in the film's color timing as an artistic choice. What was surprised me though was how much the amount of tint varied from scene to scene in the 35mm print I saw; it was very pronounced in the opening scene with Trinity, for instance (I'd say even approaching the level of the 2008 Blu Ray), while Neo's interrogation scene with Agent Smith was much more yellowish-green (like the original 1999 DVD). Meanwhile, the rooftop shootout scene midway in the film was more like the recent 4K remaster (with more cyan hues present), and in a few scenes (notably the lobby shootout scene, and the helicopter scenes), the green tint was barely even there at all. It's also worth mentioning that the 35mm print I saw was also quite contrasty (so NOT like the 1999 DVD release), and also seemed quite a bit desaturated (more so than what the recent 4K remaster would lead you to believe). So to sum it up - from what I could tell, none of the home video releases seem to be a true representation of the original 35mm print, although certain *specific* scenes from each home media release do come pretty close.

[@gc3k]

Ironic that there's so much debate over what a popular movie like The Matrix originally looked like. Almost like you can't trust what is and isn't reality

[@froddobaggins]

God why is the Matrix so fucking good. I can just rewatch it over and over and never get sick of it.

[@PrinceWesterburg]

That Lord of the Rings wasn't bad either - I hear they're bringing out a book of it. Madness.

[@OxKing]

But only the first one I guess. 😅

[@axolet]

The Wachowski brothers were effing geniuses. The later two films may not be as good, but they still have a special place in my heart.

[@OxKing]

@@axolet They are the Wachowski sisters now.

[@TheUnknownHarbingers]

I didn't know yall have Tv's

[@Indigo_Gaming]

This is fascinating! My next project covers a lot about the Matrix and even mentions its color grading as a storytelling technique. I'll now have to look back at all the versions to make sure what I said is correct per the theatrical color grading. Excellent work, keep it up!

[@TheArtOfTechSupport]

Is that cyber punk part 3

[@managers6667]

glad you doing something else than streaming

[@darknessviking]

because green tint sucks just look at resident evil 5

[@guaposneeze]

Probably the single most important thing about the grade of The Matrix is the fact that it came out a year before O Brother Where Art Thou in 2000 -- That is to say, it was before grading for a whole film was done digitally, and it was happening at the very tail end of the era of all photochemical coloring. That means that in the original theatrical release, the initial telecine wasn't actually that important because any coloring done with printer lights in the telecine on The Matrix wasn't something that directly transferred to the prints shown in theaters. That said, The Matrix obviously did have a ton of digital VFX (by the standards of the time,) so a bunch of the film got scanned. But only the specific scenes with digital VFX were scanned and put on a computer to be manipulated. Scanner time and storage was simply too expensive to scan the whole film at that point, which is why the first "Full Digital Intermediate" film didn't come out until the following year. So the stuff that got scanned, manipulated, and printed could have some degree of digital color tinkering, but that all had to live alongside the stuff that was done 100% with colored lights and literal adjustments to timing in chemicals while developing the film. One of the crucial difficulties of doing coloring with the classic process was that it was basically impossible to add contrast from one step to the next. So if you did something like have a strong green wash, your R and B channels might lose contrast and you'd be stuck with it. When you are doing the home video release for the DVD, it's a completely different toolset, so you have the option of making very different color choices -- including choices which were still physically impossible on the film release in 1999.

[@cranshawmccaw]

I regards to your video, I think the green tint was a happy accident. I say this because I remember the "real world" shots had regular color grading, while the matrix shots had a green tint. I liked the contrast, and always thought it was intentional to have that association with green tint because of how the matrix computer language looked on screen. Anyways, that's my take. The 4K version takes that away and it's not enticing for me to buy because of it.

[@titovalasques]

This is exactly why Criterion became a company as they color corrected every frame from a fresh positive made from the original negative wherever possible.

[@joshua43214]

I've never seen a movie that Criterion dig not butcher in both video and audio. I wish those people would just go away.

[@Clay3613]

My one pet peeve with many 4K/UHD remasters is that the skin-tones in SDR end up looking like something from the 1930s and 40s. Like it's been colorized.

[@aolson1111]

They must have remastered the remaster for HBO Max. The skin tones look fine, and there's no overwhelming green tint. Haven't watched the whole thing, but what I've seen looks great.

[@peterthx]

Because your device doesn't downconvert/remap the HDR to SDR properly.

[@robertcop3736]

It’s almost like that’s how the medium of film looks you numbskull

[@leepopey]

In the most recent release of Terminator 2 there is a scene where John has florescent lips and it looks HORRIBLE (the terminator explaining to john about the t1000 while they ride the bike at night)

[@Skrenja]

Yep, way too much magenta.

[@paulmuaddib451]

So cool to hear someone talk, even briefly about the LaserDisc version of the film, which, to many LD collectors, looks the closest to what the original looked like. Appreciated and subbed.

[@chrisfratz]

You mean it's not the same master and grade as the DVD?

[@Random_Tangent]

I thought that whenever they're "In the Matrix" the green filter is applied, while in "the real world" colour grading is neutral or warm.

[@SCP1471]

Yeah that was my impression too, most of the shots when Neo is unplugged from the Matrix are far more blue tones compared to when he's plugged in.

[@vikassm]

Yep. That was pretty obvious in the theaters when I first watched this movie. Looks like the re-masters screwed it up big time!

[@christopherbowers7236]

the sequels were definitely greener, i prefer the original the old way, it works better thematically, the matrix seems real at the start of the first movie, until we see the colour difference in the much Bluer real world. in the sequels we dont need a big reveal, so it helps the narrative to easilly pick out whether they're in the matrix based on the colour

[@theblackestvoid]

you're right. I seen 35mm prints from the original run and that's how it is, even with some degradation.

[@athurV1]

@@theblackestvoid 35mm all the way sir , the host should do a comparison coz that's its natural base form colouration.

[@SuperMyacc]

Still prefer the green tint. Makes the movie look better.

[@MentasmUK]

The reason for the changes to the original film can be summed up in two words: the sequels. The Wachowskis and Bill Pope changed the look of the film for the Ultimate Collection DVD release to bring it in line with the sequel aesthetic. The same HD masters were used for the BD releases, although because Warner was dual format at the time they were encoded in VC-1 with low bitrates to support HD DVD, rather than taking advantage of BD's superior specs. The original DVD releases did in fact look way different, almost muddy at times. Years ago I wrote an article on the differences for the now-defunct DVDActive, including comparison screen shots, but that's been lost to time (along with my Star Wars changes comparison articles, which I really wish I'd kept).

[@bumwhistler6304]

'the matix is 20 years old now'...like a knife to my heart. fk im old.

[@sodalitia]

There is nothing glorious about life. It's a "thing" that unfolds over the period of years and before your skeleton turns too dust leaving only teeth behind, the memory of yours is wiped out. Just look at younger people, like a permutation of your past, they think they got things to accomplish, places to get to. You are getting nowhere eventually. We all just dream in the locked room about being a person we want to be, when all you do is just maintenance of your body and executing instructions from the dumb DNA molecule that tells you to do stuff increasing chances of its replication. You are just a container for the stupid molecule of acid. It creates needs to drive your behaviors, just for you to take it as a free will and agency. It's not. It's just your programming. You know that when you die in Matrix, you die for real? Here is the thing: knowing doesn't make a difference whatsoever. Still going to die. Every year like nail to your coffin.

[@bumwhistler6304]

@@sodalitia ppl think im depressed when i share views like this.

[@sodalitia]

@@bumwhistler6304 People tell each other stories about how great their lives are, when in reality they need constant distractions to not to think about how pointless their accomplishments are. You don't have to be depressed to recognize that life is a harm to sentient beings.

[@bumwhistler6304]

@@sodalitia oh i know that honestly i just think people are strange for not being able to understand it and instead push a mental disorder to explain my thinking.

[@sodalitia]

@Vasy What is nihilism?

[@marinesgtblake]

Everybody is getting this recommended. I think this is a sign you should come back.

[@systemmonitor5295]

Keanu style... "yeah, I think I'm back!"

[@AngryWildMango]

def

[@BR-ty3hx]

Still come back to this video often. Insanely good analysis.

[@WatchingtheAerial]

glad to hear i'm not the only one who's into these crazy specific topics, thanks!

[@BR-ty3hx]

@@WatchingtheAerial honestly can't get enough of it! Do you plan on covering topics like this at any point in the future?

[@WatchingtheAerial]

@@BR-ty3hx got a couple things potentially in the works, keep an eye out

[@joeyjelsch]

@@WatchingtheAerial is there a 1999 4k version ?

[@seriousgranpa]

@@WatchingtheAerial i think the reason is quite simple original was green because of using green screens, so to make editing process easier they added that filter(blue screen will reflect blue light) maybe nowadays it isnt a big of a deal to remove green light from green screen, so they did it, removed green color as much as possible

[@905Speed]

I watched this movie repeatedly when it came out in 99... on VHS. I remember the "matrix" scenes looking very green. Ive never owned or seen it on dvd , just vhs and I completely recall the green saturation.

[@GlennDavey]

I had the VHS and later DVD with the balanced colours version. For years I was thinking "Why is this just daytime shots of Sydney that looks like an Australian TV show, why did I think this looked more impressive in the cinema?" In recent years everyone's talking about the "green tint" of the original Matrix and it was like a Mandela Effect for me. This video... explains... so much. I can finally sleep tonight.

[@drlca6601]

That green saturation is the most pure, true and senior version IMO.

[@MrBenMcLean]

It is very clear to me how to correctly color The Matrix: 1. Every scene in the virtual world should be lit green, like the "incorrect" home releases. 2. Every scene in the real world should be lit warm, like the theatrical release. Colors tell the story.

[@coramunro95]

The greenish tint of the Blu Ray version was unwatchable. Sorry if you grew up with it, but this version is just wrong. They just wanted to adapt the film to the colors of the two bad sequels. I'm glad to finally see the film as I remember it.

[@MarioAtheonio]

@@coramunro95 Godard's The Image Book was unwatchable, a slight green tint on The Matrix is okay.

[@chadchampion6773]

@@coramunro95 I'm fairly sure the green tint is intentional from the Wachowskis. Everything in the Matrix is supposed to be green tinted and everything outside is supposed to look true to life.

[@coramunro95]

@@chadchampion6773 That was the case in the two bad sequels. Yeah, sure it is intentional, but is only retcon. The original wasn´t so ugly green when he came out.

[@chadchampion6773]

@@coramunro95 Well it's good to know I wasn't getting Mandela'd at least.

[@PurushaDesa]

I had the 2 disc DVD of _Se7en_ and one of the featurettes went through the colour correction process justifying their changes. I feel like this is an area of film preservation which doesn’t inflame enthusiasts quite as much as removed footage or aspect ratio because the very nature of colour is a much more subjective experience.

[@StratoSambo]

The bonus on Seven was really good and showed how much it changed the tone of a scene. I remember the works on Pitt's face in the finale so that it would not be so red. Anyway, few people do notice it.

[@PurushaDesa]

@Aggressive Filmmaker I think that would still count as subjective but just what’s popular versus what’s not.

[@jacklongston8055]

It definitely always had the green color pallet to some degree. My friends and I were obsessed with it when it came out in 1999 and watched it repeatedly in the theater, the green tint was a notable stylistic choice.

[@carcrashjayson]

no one said it didn't

[@carcrashjayson]

@Aggressive Filmmaker Watch the video.

[@carcrashjayson]

@Aggressive Filmmaker There always was a green tint, no one is saying there wasn't. The 4K version also has a green tint. It's just that the green filter was severely cranked up on the Blu-Ray.

[@carcrashjayson]

@Aggressive Filmmaker But the video doesn't say that, and neither am I.

[@aolson1111]

You're wrong. There are 35mm release print scans on youtube proving you wron. kzbin.info/www/bejne/haiUfHePmJ6Lqac

[@4.0.4]

Imagine a point in time where, when watching any old movie, you could easily select which version of it you wanted, and most importantly the defaults were good. I didn't knew so many of them were in this bad condition.

[@tophat2776]

Ask George Lucas to release the original cut of Star Wars.

[@chickenburgahh]

It's funny how when I was a 90s kid, I watched so many films from the 60/70/80s that already looked outdated. But The Matrix just has that timeless edge, even 23 years later. This scene in particular is absolute class.

[@lanolinlight]

Mastering technology has a lot more to do with that than the merits of the original material. So many pre-90's films on video were simply misrepresented by crude telecine and mastering ending up on a low-res home video format. Nowadays with digital scans at the highest resolution, we can see how fantastic and timeless the work of, say, cinematographer William H. Daniels or director Josef von Sternberg was in the 1930's.

[@tjeerdtrekkie1030]

I still prefer the green toned bluray version..... those natural skin colours just don't feel... natural

[@sockatume]

Thanks for digging through this. I missed The Matrix in theatres and caught it on VHS and later DVD. The remastered DVD was deliberately intended to bring the original movie closer to the extreme blue/green digital colour grade of the sequels but was controversial even at the time as you might imagine. When I finally saw the punchy, very 1990s colour grade of the 4K remaster (in the theatre at last!) I was agog.

[@PanelstoPixels]

This is a really great video. I recently saw the film for the first time in many years and was shocked to see that it wasn't nearly as green as I remembered. Now I know why.

[@Ballowax]

You can find 35mm cell scans at www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwju1ZDluY3mAhVBC6wKHa0GAL4Qjhx6BAgBEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Foriginaltrilogy.com%2Ftopic%2FThe-Matrix-35mm%2Fid%2F16098%2Fpage%2F6&psig=AOvVaw3dh_6RGXwrqPB4OfA5bokn&ust=1575049128952316

[@prezidenttrump5171]

Your content is awesome man, take your time on the next one and release it whenever. Your channel is never dead as long as you're still alive. Much love to your work on this, fascinating topic.

[@FromTheAtticTV]

The green version looks so much better and more iconic it's insane.

[@alexandremullen4293]

Great job on breaking down the color grading process, and exploring how a film's look can change over many different versions. Very well done! However, as pertains to The Matrix, I believe you're missing some of the original context. (And since your analysis is three years old, maybe this is information you have learned since then, but I'll write it in case it can be useful.) Digital color grading became mainstream in the early 2000s, "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" being a famous early case. Back in 1999, The Matrix was most likely graded photochemically, a costly endeavor that didn't afford much flexibility, explaining the original "neutral" look. After the two sequels came out in 2003 (digitally graded and sporting the green look we're all familiar with), Warner produced a trilogy boxset, which (to my knowledge) is the first time the original film was seen with that green tint. Did the Wachowski siblings always intend for the film to look like that, or was it a bit of revisionism to ensure uniformity across the trilogy? Hard to tell, but probably a little bit of both. Now I don't know the specifics of what went on during the film's latest remastering, but there's an industry-wide tendency to give 80s and 90s movies revisionist teal and orange color gradings, most likely in an effort to make them more appealing to younger viewers, who are used to modern movies. Off the top of my head, I've seen it in Con Air, Top Gun, Blade, Aliens, The Terminator, T2, and most importantly, in fellow Warner releases Batman and Batman Returns. Now, I don't mean to imply that original DP Bill Pope didn't approve this version; it's quite possible he did. But my point is that the newer teal/green/orange look is probably not an attempt to correct past mistakes, but most likely another revisionist take on the film's look to make it "more appealing". So which is the true version? If you're looking for historical accuracy, it's probably the neutral one. If artistic intent matters more, then the question becomes "Who made the call for each version? The filmmakers? The DP? The studio?" You mention Se7en, which is an interesting topic, since in the DVD extras, Fincher specifically mentions changing the color grade between the theatrical presentation and the DVD remaster, reminding us that a director's vision is constantly evolving, making this a very murky topic...

[@GlennDavey]

"How can we add teal and orange into this classic movie's look? That's what all the kids like these days..." "Uh but boss, we really should try to preserve the original green...-" "Teal and orange!!!!!!!"

[@chrisfratz]

I thought the orange grade for Top Gun was only on the 3D version. And I heard it was done to make the 3D pop more because the 3D wouldn't work with how the movie was lit originally. I've been meaning to watch Top Gun and because I love 3D movies so I'm thinking of watching that version for my first viewing. I plan on getting the 3D Blu-ray which also comes with a 2D disc.

[@alexandremullen4293]

@@chrisfratzRegardless of why it was done, the 2020 2D Blu-Ray has the revisionist color grade, so it has sadly become the de facto official version of the film. Still, color is only one aspect of the film, so I hope you enjoy the movie!

[@chrisfratz]

@@alexandremullen4293 that is unfortunate for sure. Like I said I only ever known that the 3D Blu-ray had a different color grade in order to make the 3D pop. The copy I did order does come with a 2D Blu-ray so I'm curious to see if the grade on the 1080p 2D disc I'll get is different. And yeah, I'm excited to sit down and watch Top Gun for the first time. And if I like it it maybe I'll check out Maverick afterwards.

[@DavidChristopher727]

I saw The Matrix about ten times in the theatre and I never realized until now that it didn’t always have that green tint. Crazy!

[@chadchampion6773]

I thought the scenes in the matrix were intentionally green. I was reading this somewhere long ago, was I lied to?

[@blumenkopf]

The original print of the Matrix did have the green tint (I saw a 35mm print in theaters last year); it just wasn't crazy over the top like the 2008 Blu-ray's was.

[@volrath__]

I love that out of nowhere the algorithm can take a video like this and shoot to the moon, literally years after it was made! So weird, but I would love to see more videos in this style! Hopefully the creator of this channel comes back and realises that there is an audience out there! :)

[@ScribblebytesWorldwide]

KZbin is the new stock market.

[@volrath__]

@Adrian Vegas when I made this comment the hype train about the new Matrix films hadn't started up. Like yeah people knew it was coming but promotion hadn't started. KZbin had a habit of rocketing videos years after they have been made.

[@volrath__]

​@Adrian Vegas That is true, but, I came here in the same way as many others apparently did, through the recommendations page. (judging by the overwhelming comments at the time I came across this video) Statistically the vast majority of "viral" views (meaning views not generated by the persons natural following) on KZbin isn't from people searching content, it is by the algorithm serving videos to people through recommendations and the side bar. That is why I specifically mention the algorithm, I didn't search for this, I didn't view any Matrix related content before this, this was a random video with an interesting title served to me by the algorithm. It appeared on my feed mixed in with the normal movie/gaming/science content I view. The hype over the new film probably triggered something in the algorithm to start serving more Matrix related content around 4 months ago, then the increase of click through rate and watch time on this video served it to more people which gave it a massive boom. It is relatively rare for a video to get the majority of views years after publication, when it does happen it is normally specifically algorithm related There are some very interesting breakdowns of how these things work by channels like Veritasium. Algorithm is King on YT

[@volrath__]

@Adrian Vegas Apologies for the long reply, but the mechanics of how this website works is something I have an unnatural interest in 😂

[@volrath__]

​@Adrian Vegas yeah, you just summed up exactly what I said about the algorithm. an increase in search ranking of The Matrix caused the algorithm to serve more content related to The Matrix who have a shared interest based on common viewing habits, out of that this video found popularity way beyond what it would have done! I never said it was "mystical" or even expressed any kind of wonder in this. My love came purely from that this dude, years ago made a couple video essays. Got a few thousand subs, then, two years later, this video gets served to literally millions of people (based of the click through rate to imaged served ratio) and the video earned a massive jump in views. This can, and is directly attributed to the algorithm, as seen by the comments of this video.

[@CaffeineAndMylanta]

I was under the impression (can’t remember where I picked it up) that theatrical cut scenes within The Matrix were intentionally hued with that famous green, and scenes taking place in The Real were more natural tones or slightly blue. Great analysis by the way. Subbed.

[@danieldorn2927]

So to leave the green unreal world, you take the red pill to finally see the blue true world And add all this together, it is a journey to the white enlightenment

[@KillahMate]

The theatrical cut _did_ have the scenes in the Matrix hued green - it was just far more subtle than the uniform green tinge like the Bluray did it. For example the sky inside the Matrix is never blue.

[@psychomoth06]

What an insightful video! It also makes me appreciate even more when a release or remaster can say it's "Director-approved" like Criterion often does.

[@lucasborja6981]

But it's not "Directed-approved" but cinematographer-approuved". The 4K version is maybe more true to the original version but the blu-ray version is more true to the vision of the Washowski. It's obvious that they wanted the Matrix world to look like very green in Reloaded and Revolutions and in Matrix 4 (no spoiler) we see some flash-back of the first film and they are green like the blu-ray version so it's obviously the blu-ray version that is the "Director's coloring". It's like the special editions for Star Wars, they are true to the vision of Georges Lucas but not true to the original version. Now witch is the "good" version is more dificulte to say (for The Matrix I personnaly prefere the blu-ray version)

[@plainlake]

The green tinge is not noticeable to most when you first watch the movie, until they take it away, when the first scenes outside of the matrix takes place. After that you start to notice it more and more and the alien, post apocalyptic world begin to seem more real and the 2000s "normal" world seems unreal.

[@doltBmB]

I think the matrix world is actually in the late 80's judging by the computer tech level. Remember smiths words about how as soon as computers started thinking "for us" it became their world.

[@dir390]

@@doltBmB It's definitely the late 90's judging by the flip phones used throughout the film. In the 80's, cell phones looked like giant bricks.

[@slippinjimmy5683]

@@doltBmB In the movies it's explained that the Matrix is a recreation of the world as it was in 1999 because that's when humanity was at its peak.

[@Hail-Marīyami]

@@doltBmB You clearly NEVER lived in the 90s. Nothing in matrix is even 80s, The matrix is literally reflective of 98. Trust me, I lived it..

[@Hail-Marīyami]

@@slippinjimmy5683 Thanks, it was supposed to tackle on the y2k scare we had, people thought world going to come at halt in 2000 due to computers being computed for 20th century

[@JayColor]

How the hell did I stumble across this incredible channel that only has three uploads from a few years ago??

[@clairemadeinheaven]

DUN DUN DUUUUUUUN...................................

[@shadowtsg]

I know right the videos are so good please come back

[@Noubers]

It's crazy seeing the 4K vs. BluRay color shift, the 4K was like unlocking all the memories of having seen it in the theater (which I did at least 11 times). I remember watching the BluRay for the first time after not having seen the movies in a while and going "its so cheesy how green they made everything, I don't remember this... must have just been my mind as a kid making it look nicer". Nope.

[@hokusman100]

I’ve seen the Matrix trilogy countless times and I always liked how the Matrix is green, the real world is blue, and the machine city (through Neo’s eyes) is yellow. The fact that they messed this up makes me want to avoid the 4K version

[@prufan]

Except it’s hardly them messing up, it’s simply them putting the film back in it’s originally intended format.

[@B.D.F.]

Try the original DVD. It’s still my preferred version.

[@juanme555]

You gotta empathize with the people that saw the film at the theatre and then were never allowed to see it again in the same way they saw it at the teather, now they can finally re-watch it just like the first time, whether the Green Tint fits the Matrix or not, you like it because that's what it looked like the first time you saw it, same goes for them.

[@JayAlexander1]

@@juanme555 Like garbage?

[@funkybuddhaInit]

The cast looking like Yoda is stupid. The 4K is clearly an improvement that the vast majority of people prefer.

[@MoreRolls]

Thank you for putting effort in making this video. Very insightful!

[@t.a.d.m.a55]

That ending to this video is so meta when you consider the message of the 4th film.

[@supermutant963]

I watched the 2nd Renaissance and my whole feed is full of Matrix content, I like this

[@GlennDavey]

I watched that early color-corrected print for so many years... mind boggled.

[@goodstufffromchina6236]

The original version has no green tint.

[@DecodingDoom]

In the BTS the producers talk about how they lowered the blue channel in scenes taking place in the matrix. There is an intentional green tinting in any "in-the-Matrix" scene.

[@goodstufffromchina6236]

@@DecodingDoom I was talking about 35mm version , you can find it online and watch it. Original theatralic version has no green tint.

[@DecodingDoom]

@@goodstufffromchina6236 There was some green boosting even in the original in Matrix scenes. It was far less, though.

[@goodstufffromchina6236]

@@DecodingDoom search on youtube The Matrix 35mm Film Scan and you will see that green tint is missing .

[@JacobDreamWorks921]

When Cinderella (2015) came to Blu Ray and DVD, i saw that the entire film looked like it had been passed through a yellow filter destroying the look of how it was intended and it was very oversaturated during post production.

[@definitelynosebreather]

It's been two years since you posted a video, but I'm gonna subscribe anyway in case you make another great video like this

[@richardlittle9975]

Hahah class 👍

[@benj7483]

This was something I've been wondering about ever since i saw clips of the new remaster. Thanks so much for talking about it!

[@jonathaningram8157]

to bad the channel is dead and only have so few subscribers. Very professional work.

[@jasonm1641]

Such a great video! Bonus points for putting Clubbed to Death at the end. Excellent work!

[@Downhuman74]

Yeah, it was pretty widely known at the time of the original DVD re-release (a couple of years before the Blu-ray release) that the Wachowskis had the original movie re-timed to match the sequels and that the original DVD from 1999 was closer to the original color timing. And as someone who saw The Matrix about 5 times in a theater, that original DVD matches what I saw. Everything after - - including the new 4K - - is a revision.

[@taylorbernier7966]

So the original theatre version was more green? Therefore better? I don't know the whole history here, the version now doesn't have the same green tint?

[@Downhuman74]

@@taylorbernier7966 Not more green (and definitely not better) but definitely a more flat color palette. Check Caps-o-holic for the story here. The original 1999 DVD had a muted color palette with earth tones and browns more prevalent (which is how I remember it in the theater). It wasn't pretty and skin tones were a mess but you have to remember that this was in 1999 when digital color-grading wasn't really a thing. Still, the 1999 DVD matched the theatrical presentation for better or worse. The Matrix was re-released on DVD in 2004 after the 2nd and 3rd movies were released as part of the The Matrix Ultimate Collection. For this, the first movie was re-timed extensively to match the sequels -- and they went a little overboard, honestly. The green tint saturated everything to the point of absurdity. This is also the same mastering that showed up a few years later for the Blu-ray release. The 4K dials it back considerably while still maintaining visual continuity with the sequels but it is still NOT how it looked in theaters originally. But, I'm actually OK with this latest revision and it's my preferred way to watch.

[@acf2802]

I never saw The Matrix in theaters, and I also never saw the bluray version, so when I saw the 4K bluray I was completely blown away by how good this movie looked.

[@AustinNGrayson]

I definitely prefer the 2008 blu-ray over the 4K remaster. The all-encompassing green filter is one of my favorite things about The Matrix universe. It being gone does make sense though in Resurrections after the ending of Revolutions.

[@MarkusLeist]

I think the more greenish tint of the BluRay version supports the story quite well. Also the look ties the trilogy together visually. This may not have been the intention of the cinematographer, but it makes sense on a certain level and is therefore my favourite version.

[@coramunro95]

The greenish tint of the Blu Ray version was unwatchable. Sorry if you grew up with it, but this version is just wrong. They just wanted to adapt the film to the colors of the two bad sequels. I'm glad to finally see the film as I remember it.

[@MarkusLeist]

@@coramunro95 Nothing to be sorry about. I never saw the movie in cinema. The sequels may not be as good as the original movie, although I like reloaded for its world building, but from a color language point of view the green tint makes perfect sense and tells the viewer there is something off in the reality of the Matrix on a subconscious level. Since the sequels were released just a few years later and extended the visual language I'm perfectly fine with the choice to retroactively adapt the color scheme for the original. I'm just a bit irritated when I see the original posters and boxart without any green tint 😅

[@RonsaRRR]

@@coramunro95 Sequels weren't bad. Not as awesome as the original but not bad.

[@thischannelisdeleted]

The trilogy sucks. The Matrix stands on its own. I hate it when they try to make films in the same series look the same without them originally having been like that. It’s a sin.

[@thischannelisdeleted]

@@coramunro95 is the new 4K like the original?

[@beefknuckles]

The original never had the green tint, as you said, & The Wachowki's went back after doing 2 and 3 and changed 1st movie to match the green tinting. So your guess was correct. It was all over the internet when it first came out. The newest 4k release is the closes I've seen to the original colors, with a few caveats of course.

[@Shadoefax760]

He doesn't take into account the equipment needed to correctly portray 4K, you need a certified ultra high speed HDMI 2.1 cable & the right settings so this guy more than likely streamed the blu-ray next to the 4K with equipment not prepared to handle the information. I paid 100 for 3feet of ultra high speed 2.1 HDMI cable & 4K on my television with proper input & proper settings looks fucking amazing.

[@bvaldez21]

@@Shadoefax760 You don't need an HDMI 2.1 to correctly portray 4k, unless you are going for 4k 60fps or more. The 2.1 standard has more bandwidth that allows for higher refresh rates at higher resolutions. Most film is natively 24fps, which can be handled by pre 2.1 spec cables @ the 4k resolution.

[@efraim.]

source?

[@beefknuckles]

@@efraim. why don't you go look it up? This is readily available information online

[@jonnyfive5000]

I enjoyed both. I wasn’t completely aware of what was different but after watching this I understand why the “mood” changed when watching the 4K version recently. The 4K version didn’t feel as fantasy as the previous versions. I didn’t feel as immersed but it was still great. I mean I also have the Blu-ray if I really wanted to experience it that way again.

[@GrizDrummer25]

Such a cool discovery! Thank you for your research and insight on this. It's crazy how different the Matrices are. It's hard to tell which one is "better".

[@findmestudios]

I just got the Blu ray for this and I thought it looked bluer than normal. I too was used to a greener filter.

[@GlennDavey]

THey're trying to make it look like a modern movie. Everything's blue and orange these days, movies don't really have a color "cast" like they used to. and they tried to add those colors to a movie with a green cast, shot on particular film to give it that look on purpose. Doesn't quite work to change it years later in a computer.

[@yes1234]

Please make more videos. No one talks about this and it's something that film makers/enthusiasts need to know about

[@Galgomite]

Thanks for this excellent video! Just enjoying it now. The Matrix is such a good example because the color grade is there for everyone to notice, and different points of entry (like the DVD for me) end up being “definitive” for different people. Personally I assumed that, rather than treating their movies like art, they treated the original matrix like a product, matching it up with the more aggressive and artificial green in the sequels. Unfortunately for me, the DVD is still the only one that looks right. The city Neo was living in only became known as an illusion a ways in so I’ve always felt that making it more neutral, or at least a little more blue, was the only “right” choice, and they gave the action in those scenes more realism and impact.

[@qpSubZeroqp]

This was an amazing breakdown of the process! Thank you for the effort you put into this

[@Onrain20]

All these years... I had questioned the green... all these years.....

[@donlee_ohhh]

1:20 the 4k rescan's colors look like colorized black & white film, at least at in the hair & skin tones of Agent Smith.

[@bened22]

That's most likely just bad HDR to SDR conversion. The movie looks fine on a HDR display.

[@Lollerkid]

@@bened22 Hold on a second. HDR if i am correct is not shoot with 2-3 different cameras to get a better contrast. It's a digital reproduction of the withest part of the film and the darkest and some in between. This pretty much creates the illusion of a more detailed version of the actual scene with wide range of contrast. Correct me if i am wrong, but my point is that an analog film tape has all the information for HDR content as well as SDR.

[@Eralen00]

@@Lollerkid You're right that analog film is basically capable of HDR on its own, but it doesn't translate that way to digital unless you composite 2 or 3 different film scans for digital viewing. Since you have to scan the film with a digital sensor, the digital sensor can't always pick up all the visual information in the darkest and lightest areas, so you have to make different scans with different amounts of backlight (If you've studied photography, you'll know about "bracketing"). If you just make one scan, some of the information may be lost either in the darkest or lightest areas, depending on what you meter for. (I'm an amateur still photographer, not a movie professional in any way, but I have done research on the topic. This info may be a few years out of date, I'm not sure if they have some fancy new digital technology that surpasses these limitations of digital)

[@chrisfreilich]

@@Lollerkid You're wrong. HDR video is not the same as HDR photography. High dynamic range source material such as film or RAW digital cinema footage has all the information required to create HDR video. What has been lacking up until recently were display devices capable of displaying high dynamic range.

[@chrisfreilich]

@@Eralen00 No, multiple scans of film negative are not required to create HDR content. HDR video is all about how the material is prepared for display. Film and modern RAW digital cinema capture are capable of capturing all the information necessary for HDR (assuming it's properly exposed). One pass is all that's necessary.

[@MizoxNG]

my personal 2 cents: the 2004 DVD (not the 1999 one, the 2004 one) is the one the Wachowskis were directly involved with and signed off on the 2007 HD-DVD and 2008 bluray uses the same color grade as the 2004 DVD ergo, this release is the one closest to the intention of the directors the 2018 release is likely able to maintain this with more subtlety when displayed in HDR, but the 2018 SDR release actually suffers, and features a lot of blown-out colors, clipped whites where detail is totally lost, and seemingly random shifts in color from scene to scene.

[@Conundrum191]

This came up in my KZbin recommended. I had to actually check my copy to see for myself, and you are right -- Everything is super green, given it is the older Bluray. Might need to pick up the remastered so I have the real version.

[@jaystarr6571]

"What is 'Real?' How do you define Real?"

[@fredlabosch5164]

The skin tones in the 4K version don't look 'real' to me...^^

[@lucasborja6981]

It's dificulte to say Witch is the real version. The cinematographer approuved the 4K release and said that it's more true to the original look but the 2008 blu-ray version seems to be more true to the vision of the Washowski (you just have to look like the sequels or the flash back scenes of the first movie in Resurrections to be convinced). Personnaly I prefere the 2008 blu-ray version

[@booradley5127]

even with the cinematographer they still managed to screw up the color. As has unfortunately been the case with so many "remasters" lately the skin tones are far too magenta. It's extremely easy to tell since there are unaltered HD trailer files from 1999 to reference. We're well past the point of having to guess now since anything from 1998 on has digital content from the period of their release to check. Also The Matrix was a pioneer in the digital coloring techniques that are in every film now, all those blue and orange washes across movies in the early 2000s are because of of it, so there really isnt any excuse for anyone to say that using archival negatives or new coloring techniques are to blame.

[@DIOBrando-ij2bp]

If it’s meant to be in line with the original theatrical release then The Matrix shouldn’t be as green as the version this video is showing. That overbearing green tent wasn’t in the original movie, it was only added later to make it look like the two new at the time sequels, so the whole series could have one unified look on DVD. This video is kind of funny because of that, since they’re arguing that the later fucked up version is the right version, and the remaster that goes back more towards how it originally looked is somehow a bad mistake since the version they grew up with is the wrong one. This would almost be like getting a 4K remaster of the original Star Wars movies and someone wondering what happened to all that Special Edition stuff they grew up with.

[@blumenkopf]

I saw an original 35mm print of the Matrix twice last year in L.A. (it cycles around from time to time), and the green tint was definitely there originally, it was just overall much subtler than the 2008 Blu Ray (although in some scenes, like the opening scene with Trinity and the subway fight scene, the green tint was very prominent and surprisingly similar to the 2008 Blu Ray). Some scenes, though, had more of the yellow-green hue of the 1999 DVD (Neo's interrogation scene with Agent Smith), others had more of a cyan tint like the recent 4K remaster (the rooftop shootout scene), and yet others barely even had a green tint (the lobby shootout and the helicopter scene). The print was also less saturated than the recent 4K remaster, and more contrasty (so not like the washed-out 1999 DVD). It's also worth clarifying that ONLY the car chase scene in Matrix Reloaded used digital color grading; the rest of all the scenes in both the 1999 Matrix and its 2003 sequels used traditional color timing (in addition to colored lighting gels, camera filters, etc.) to produce the familiar green tint.

[@schaffy_]

Thanks for the link to the Seven article. I checked it with Netflix, they use the Warner Bros Bluray from 2010.

[@potatochalbro]

Thanks for the video, very helpful! I'll still buy the trilogy in this new weird natural color version because I only have it on DVD and want to see it in HD but I'll keep those DVD's forever!

[@recht_voor_zijn_raap5506]

A great recommandation by KZbin. Didn't know they'd exist anymore. Awesome video.

[@ChubbyChecker182]

I like the 2008 version better, the Greener effect really suits the movie

[@Z0MBUSTER]

Isn't it greenish only when they're in the Matrix as the green letters on the computer screen? I thought so...

[@GlennDavey]

For years I was watching that original skin-tone-balanced version thinking "I swore this looked better watching in the theatre, now it looks like a TV show, wtf?". Sure enough, we didn't get that theatre version on home video until 2008. Really messed with my head.

[@aolson1111]

@@GlennDavey The theater version did not have green tint.

[@GlennDavey]

@@aolson1111Bro I was there, yes it did

[@kentallard8852]

countless films have in their bluray release had their color pallet fucked with, usually doing the orange/teal shit

[@luismartinez6408]

The matrix was green because it represented the attributes of colour green and gnosticism

[@links5957]

My older brother had a negative film when he used to work in the movie theater. I remember found it the bathroom looking at the part the agent dodging the pallets. Probably in a landfill

[@neomp5]

my understanding is that the way the earliest DVDs looked is how the film was released theatrically. then after the sequels came out, it was the directors themselves who recoloured it to match them more closely. this was part of their artistic intention for the film. green represents the matrix and blue represents the real world. you basically never see blue within the matrix, and the only green in the real world is the matrix code itself. so that is the definitive colouration this new version you're showing here looks very patchy and inconsistent, with blue showing up all over the scenes within the matrix. that goes against the directors' intentions

[@jaystarr6571]

"What is 'Real?' How do you define Real?"

[@aolson1111]

Obviously it wasn't their artistic intention if they had to change it a decade later.

[@neomp5]

@@aolson1111 they changed it when the movie rereleased alongside the second and third films. this latest release seems to have changed it back.

[@notrdy4thisjelly546]

The “where is this going” was hilarious there.

[@iforgotthenamemate]

so the first and most important rule for remastering an old movie is just consulting it with director of photography and director or just DP and the job will be done correctly.

[@judasbooth5455]

What if both are death?

[@thewildcardperson]

@@judasbooth5455 ask the editor or a colorist you got army's working on films now can't all be dead

[@iforgotthenamemate]

@@judasbooth5455 dead at most. Bill Pope and Wachowski's are still alive so...

[@TheRealDuckofDeath]

In the industry's defence. It is infinitely better than the early days of DVD. Back then, the transfers to digital was often shockingly bad, and often out of focus.

[@rohithkumarsp]

Now is the time you need to upload something before you lose traffic.

[@Free_Samples]

Interesting, this video is 2 years old but YT algo sent me here. Great video!

[@freddykruger1118]

I believe they also did try to match the sequels colors more when remastering the matrix to Blu-ray.

[@ninjabiatch101]

Watching those security guards go down in real time felt bizarre. And this is wild. I'm almost 30 but I always remember it being green, and its been my favorite movie since I was about 8 years old. Clearly the later versions just overwrote my recollection of the earlier ones. Wild...

[@JohannesLilover]

the 4k looks pretty bad ...

[@HunchbackJack]

I remember noticing in the theater that the green washes in Matrix 2 and 3 were more intense than in 1, where it was quite subtle. The versions of The Matrix I've seen on home media since then have either had it too strong (like the later films) or barely present.

[@blumenkopf]

Yup, the green tint was definitely present in the first Matrix, just much subtler than the 2004 DVD/2008 Blu Ray.

[@therexbellator]

This apologia for coloration contradicts itself. If coloration and color grading can be easily mucked up by a colorist then this Remaster is no more "definitive" than any other version of the Matrix. Indeed, the fact that you reference Lynch throughout showing how he's there for the entire process shows that directors, including the Wachowskis, wouldn't have left a transfer up to some random backroom colorist. The Remaster re-colorization is simply the Wachowski's Lucas-ification of the movie that put them on the map. Don't let them gaslight you. The green tint was absolutely deliberate and was there in the 1999 theatrical release as well as the subsequent home video releases.

[@jasonball3496]

Agreed. And who's to say the super-green version from 2008 is any "worse" than the others?

[@blumenkopf]

I caught two screenings of the original 35mm release print of the Matrix (and in good condition) about a year ago in Los Angeles (one at the New Beverly Cinema, and the other at the Legion Theater). I can confirm the green tint was certainly present, albeit much subtler than the 2008 Blu Ray (therefore discounting any claims that Matrix did not have a green tint at all in its theatrical run), and articles from the 1999 American Cinematographer issue on the Matrix clearly mention that the green was bumped up in the film's color timing as an artistic choice. What surprised me though was how much the amount of tint varied from scene to scene in the 35mm print I saw; it was very pronounced in the opening scene with Trinity, for instance (I'd say even approaching the level of the 2008 Blu Ray), while Neo's interrogation scene with Agent Smith was much more yellowish-green (like the original 1999 DVD). Meanwhile, the rooftop shootout scene midway in the film was more like the recent 4K remaster (with more cyan hues present), and in a few scenes (notably the lobby shootout scene, and the helicopter scenes), the green tint was barely even there at all. It's also worth mentioning that the 35mm print I saw was also quite contrasty (so NOT like the 1999 DVD release), and also seemed quite a bit desaturated (more so than what the recent 4K remaster would lead you to believe). So to sum it up - from what I could tell, none of the home video releases seem to be a true representation of the original 35mm print, although certain specific scenes from each home media release do come pretty close.

[@SteelyDanzig]

I feel like removing the green tinting for the remaster is a disservice to the visual narrative and tone of the movie. It gave the in-Matrix scenes a surreal feeling that contrasted well with the regularly color balanced real-world scenes, lending itself to the idea that you're actually watching the inside of a computer program. It works remarkably well after the first 30 minutes or so, once Neo is finally brought into the real world and we go from this dull green filter for an entire half an hour to the striking blues and reds of him waking up in his pod and looking out onto the machine world.

[@aolson1111]

How do you not understand that the movie did not have the green tint originally? It doesn't make it look "surreal," it makes it look like shit, like every other movie with an overdone tint. Removing it doesn't do a "disservice" to anything. It restores the film to its original greatness.

[@SteelyDanzig]

@@aolson1111 I'm not reading all that shit lol

[@SteelyDanzig]

@@aolson1111 kiss my ass

[@SteelyDanzig]

@@aolson1111 like damn bro do you even want to have a discussion or just want to insult people's intelligence on KZbin comments. Also, liking your own comment? Really? That's pathetic. Touch grass, get laid

[@jainee4507]

Still to this day we don't have a watchable version of the original theatrical version to look at. There are some stratched up 35mm prints online but they don't do the job for me. Its a shame because the original color grade is the best by far.

[@TVComercialProducer]

damn, didnt know Seven has so many versions, have to research now

[@peteranderson266]

Pure coincidence! I just started rewatching this film in 4K yesterday and the color confused me. Since I have old copies on my hard drive and I have watched it thousands of times, I can tell how different the 4K version is. What amazed me now is how KZbin knows I watched it on my TV yesterday and sent me here!😓

[@ashishxthakur]

They tried to remove the green tint and it doesn't feel like I'm in the Matrix anymore. Luckily, I found a sharp Open Matte source for all three movies which doesn't only show more of the video on top and bottom, the original look and feel of the movies haven't been tampered with, which is exactly what I wanted.

[@KRAFTWERK2K6]

I always found the "scope" crop for the Matrix movies completely pointless and the films would have breathed and looked a LOT better would they have been opened to at least 1,78:1. But i'd have prefered 1,66:1. So many shots look even better in fullframe 4:3, like Trinity's "Dodge this!" Scene. Always loved such wide shots. So far i only have the films on DVD (the acrylic box with the Neo bust and the original Warner-Snapper DVD) but really didn't like the framing and the color-timing revisionism for the first film.

[@ashishxthakur]

@@KRAFTWERK2K6 The Matrix movies that I found are in 1.78:1. It works for me because it fills the screen of the TV and there are no black bars.

[@Skrenja]

I like the black bars. 🤷‍♂️

[@aolson1111]

@@KRAFTWERK2K6 Good god, you're a moron. There is no "revisionism," the movie originally released 2.35:1 with NO green tint.

[@purplezebrahoover]

Thank you KZbin algorithm, this was fascinating. Subbed to the channel!

[@VanScott100]

Now I’d like to know what happened with the blu ray extended cut of The Fellowship of the Ring

[@philippebiendon5809]

Its on HBO. Thats funny you mentioned it. I just watched it yesterday. Amazing a lot of shot give way more depth to some characters... And its almost 4 hours long wow wow !!!!

[@drlca6601]

@@philippebiendon5809 Not in Canada! I fucking hate HBO for that because I long to see the remasters!

[@BenjaminWhitley]

Two really important points you missed: 1. The original snap-case DVD (that was how most people first saw the film) was an infamously botched, distorted transfer, in addition to the incorrect colors that weren't in the theatrical version. And 2. The original film was INTENTIONALLY re-color timed for the box set to the more saturated color-correction of the sequels in order to create a consistent look across the entire trilogy. I remember the filmmakers stating such around the time the trilogy box sets were released. Personally, I strongly prefer the box set versions to the 4K version's attempt to re-create the theatrical look. Not only do I think it looks better and more consistent, as far as I know it is the Wachowski's intention, and they were not involved with the 4K version, which seems to have been supervised by cinematographer Bill Pope and not the directors.

[@WhiteRabbitDave]

I actually have been saying this about the true colours of remaster immediately after seeing it in the cinema at the 20th anniversary. It even is in my channel in a clip where I briefly share my experience of seeing The Matrix in a cinema theatre 20 years into my fandom. You have no idea how much it means to me to see a proof that I was right in my impressions!!!

[@Terjay]

One thing to add: Back in the day there weren't that many advanced color grading tools available and movies had their masters color timed in the film lab. This was restricted to adding or removing red, green or blue tints or changing the exposure. The telecine systems had some more tools, like blurs and simple mask shapes to make secondary corrections but it was still mostly primary corrections only. The first digitally graded film was O brother where art thou in 2000 and the software/hardware used in post production have come a long way from 1999.

[@Terjay]

Also a big restoration problem is that one might get the rights to do a restoration on a series or a movie but no one wants to pay a DOP or the director to come oversee it. Then it's done quickly and cheaply by some telecine operator that hasn't seen it before and the internet loses their mind.

[@blumenkopf]

Yup, the 1999 Matrix came before digital intermediate color grading was the norm, and even its 2003 sequels went through a traditional photochemical color timing finish (aside from the car chase in Reloaded, which was the only scene to be digitally graded).

[@SPVFilmsLtd]

While everyone is correct that THE MATRIX was regraded towards a green tint to match the two sequels for its re-releases, I think A LOT of people here have really faulty memory. I saw THE MATRIX 7 times in cinemas and I can confirm that the movie had a YELLOWISH-GREEN tint, not too dissimilar to the theatrical version of DARK CITY, THE CROW: CITY OF ANGELS and a few other films experimenting with extreme color-timing around the era. The DVD version from the 1999/2000 and its VHS counterpart actually produce very realistic approximations of the 35mm color-timing. The 4K remaster is NOT what the film looked like in the cinemas I saw the movie in, the original film never had flesh tones that accurate in the distribution prints. The 4K remaster is likely what the original cinematographer WANTED the film to look like in his head but probably never achieved it outside of the color-suite. Granted we're all going off our memories, but as someone who works in the industry, has worked as a colorist and was notoriously angry about many home releases that had image issues and color-timing discrepancies of films I had loved in the theater and how bad they looked in VHS/DVD, I can attest that THE MATRIX DVD released in 2000 was more or less accurate to the 35mm distribution prints. I think it's a disservice to the original release to claim that the 4K version restores the 'theatrical look' as the theatrical look is not like the 4K remaster AT ALL. It is also worth bearing in mind that the advertising for THE ULTIMATE MATRIX BOX SET does boast that the first film was regraded to match The Wachowski's desire for how the film should look. If that bit of advertising fluff is true, then as much as the DOP was wanting to achieve one kind of look, I always default to the directors' as the keepers of what a movie SHOULD look like at the end of they day. And personally I actually liked the regrade, I felt the urine-soaked-yellow look of the theatrical prints I saw was not attractive at all.

[@SPVFilmsLtd]

@@ryokodeivisu Yup - that definitely backs up my theory: this is what the DOP WANTED the film to look like rather than what the film actually DID look like in 1999. He's doing a cinematographer's version of a STAR WARS: SPECIAL EDITION. Which is fine, I just don't like that the marketing tries to hint that this version is somehow more 'authentic'. Film is a collaborative process, it's not something purely lorded over by a department head in charge of their one thing. Loads of classic films are released with the cinematographer's vision never being fully realized.

[@SPVFilmsLtd]

@@ryokodeivisu You're missing MY point. The marketing for THE ULTIMATE MATRIX BOX SET made it clear that the first film was re-graded at the request of and with the supervision of The Wachowskis. Of course they allowed Bill Pope to do "his" version. There's no harm in letting a DOP have their version of the film they want as well, seeing as a studio is willing to pay for it and the director's have their own favourite version as well already out there. Not to mention that people's opinions on their own works change over time. I still look at episodes of television I've directed or commercials I've made and still cringe at the things that didn't go right, even though nobody else sees them except me. "The newest version is how they intended the film to look, never mind in 1999 or 2018." There's zero guarantee of this being any more or less true than The Wachowskis regrading the first film for THE ULTIMATE MATRIX BOX SET. It's one piece of marketing vs another. "You should know that because filmmaking is a collaborative process, so I presume the DoP has better understanding what was done and what can done to improve the picture." The DOP does have a good understanding of what was done and can be done to 'improve' the picture, but 'improvements' are subjective -- this is the second time the film has been regraded to achieve the filmmaking team's "vision". And this is after a distance of 20 years, experience on working on other movies and change in art and film aesthetics all coloring the filmmakers perspectives. I've worked with a dozen DOPs and I don't trust them to have the same opinion of something they shot 20 years from now. I don't trust MYSELF to have the same opinion either. I'm fine with people improving stuff if they want to as long as previous iterations of a film are still available. Sure, they've regraded the INDY films, the ALIEN movies, the Burton BATMAN films, but the originals are still available in earlier releases. Hell I even PREFER the regraded 1989 Batman (complete with new foley FX) to be honest, even if it took me a couple of watches to get used to. But I don't buy that any of these are somehow "closer to the intended original version". Advertising that THE MATRIX now looks "closer to the intended vision" of the filmmakers is a spurious claim; not just because we have to believe that Bill Pope spent the last 20 years looking at his movie and being sore about how it looks (I mean the regraded MATRIX doesn't even look like the sequels and he had those two films to refine his process), but also the fact that the new look WAS achievable back then. The fact that it was not what they chose to go with tells you everything about the filmmaking process as a whole. I'm happy they're giving Bill Pope the chance to make the film look "his" way, but really that's all it means. I mean look, the scanned 4K 35mm theatrical release prints of the first STAR WARS look absolutely nothing like the Blu Rays, but which one is the "true vision"? The Blu Rays which are graded to look more in line with the rest of the films in the series, or the film print with that distinct Technicolor look that is only achievable because the DOP deliberately chose to shoot it in that process?

[@SPVFilmsLtd]

@@ryokodeivisu It's not about the 2008 versions. They could've made THE MATRIX look like this in 1999 if they wanted to. They didn't. They could've made RELOADED and REVOLUTIONS look like this during their theatrical run, if they wanted to. They didn't. The look of the films back in the day was a deliberate choice. And likely a compromise between DOP, directors, producers and time/budget/technology. We know that because the Wachowskis - according to marketing - regraded THE MATRIX in 2008 to make it look like its sequels but did nothing to look of the sequels themselves. It's abundantly clear that this is retroactive tinkering because times have changed and tastes have changed and Warners is perfectly happy to let the filmmakers made adjustments to things that they could've done in 2008, but chose not to. It's that simple. "True visions" of filmmakers are not necessarily a good thing. George Lucas's "true vision" of STAR WARS was an edit so terrible that John Milius and Brian De Palma thought that Lucas had sunk his whole career. It took 3 editors working WITHOUT Lucas's supervision, including Lucas's own wife Marcia, to save his film and make it into something extraordinary. The editing of STAR WARS is not Lucas's vision, its the vision of three other people who changed the structure, tone and pace into the masterpiece it is today. Filmmaking is compromise. The best filmmaking almost always is even if its compromise between genius artists. Again, got no beef with these new 4K versions. But the whole "original vision" is marketing fluff and possibly a chance for the DOP to have a version that appealed to his personal (and CURRENT) tastes more than the prior versions had.

[@SPVFilmsLtd]

No dude. They could've made this look this way in 1999. They did not. They could've made the sequels look this way. They did not. They could've regraded the 2008 blu rays to look more like this. They did not. Clearly "originally intended" is a subjective thing. George Lucas originally intended Jabba to be a "furry creature" not a slug. "Originally intended", especially for a successful film that clearly had nothing wrong with the original color-timing, is a purely subjective value and one that cannot be trusted to be anything resembling their intentions for THE MATRIX back in 1997 when they were planning the film out. "I still don't know how HDR technology, 4K resolution, increased color space could have been implied in 2008 masters." 4K and HDR technology has nothing to do with the color grade or the look of the film. It's exhibition tech, not an aesthetic choice for the movie itself. How are you confusing the two things up? "I still don't know why you presume Bill Pope has a total creative control over it. Elaborate on that, share some sources." Well clearly he didn't have creative control over the 2008 versions which the Wachowski's did. And look how different the two versions are? So either one of two things happened - the Wachowskis changed their mind on what the film is supposed to look like (so 'original intent' goes out the window) or they didn't and thus this is Bill Pope's chance to get his version out. "Thank you for confirming the editing teams is doing their job :)" If you really think that that's how editorial works with auteur filmmakers you don't understand the thing you're trying to have an argument about. If you really think cinematography and color-grading is somehow NOT like what you've described the editorial process, then you clearly don't understand the thing you're trying to have an argument about. I can chip away, department by department, decision by decision - from actual work experience - to show you how subjective and compromised "directorial vision" is and you'll just keep retreating and still insisting auteurship is somehow a thing that still exists regardless of how many steps in the process that's vastly out of the filmmakers control. I'm not going to convince you, so I don't see any point in trying since you're insisting on applying some "true vision of how the films were intended to look" narrative to a process you don't have any working experience with. My original comment is about how people ON THIS VIDEO are claiming that "at last the movie looks the way it did in the cinemas, the 2008 versions ruined it all" and how they are sorely mistaken. And that's all I was trying to say. It's weird that you've somehow taken my comments about how there's really no 'true' version of a film (even its color grade) because of the numerous steps and people involved in the photographic process and decided its some kind of attack on the auteurship of the movies.

[@ThoseStairsTheFirst]

I also checked all versions and the 1999 DVD has the most accurate colors and is the closest to the original theatrical experience. The 4k release has that modern generic teal color grading and too much unnatural contrast boost that eliminates details and dynamic range. The matrix is supposed to have a green tint and the real world a blue tint. The colors are bleeding and all over the place in the 4k version. The 1999 DVD (original look) in 4k resolution would be the optimal.

[@Hudson316]

I missed The Matrix in cinemas and never got the Bluray, but this explains why I thought that the second and third movies were comically overly green compared to the first one that I had on VHS and later DVD

[@shadowtsg]

my problem with the new remastered versions é that the green tones look bluyish which distorts a little the concept that green is the matrix and blue is the real world especially in the part that Trinity is talking to Neo which has a really big philosophical debate

[@Victor1139]

I have to dissagree with what you said about the new color correction being more representative of the original. To me, it seems like they are using modern color correction techniques like isolating the skin tones and keeping them pink and "natural-looking" while mantaining the cyan tint on everything else, it feels very revisionist in my opinion, sort of like "What if the matrix had been color corrected with modern color correction techniques?". It mostly bothers me because I feel that that kind of look feels jarring, and it makes the actors look disconnected from the background, as if everything was filmed on a green screen.

[@thomastommy9864]

I like the green tint to the original film. It was there for a purpose. To show when they were in the matrix. Outside of the computer generated world the colour was normal. I think it was a total sin to remove the green from the "inside" scenes. While we're at it, let's change The Wizard of Oz's yellow brick road to red and modify the movie audio and song to say the red instead of yellow. Come on now... Leave it alone. Just make it more resolution and look better and keep the damn colours alone!

[@Clay3613]

The green is still there, especially in the earlier scenes before Neo escapes The Matrix.

[@beefknuckles]

But the original release never had the heavy green tint until years later. The re-release of the first movie changed the color grading to match Matrix 2 & 3.

[@jaimem1788]

Yeah I feel like it gives away more of the original Matrix movie away I mean pretty sure it took me several viewings to even notice the subtle color difference to signify when a person was in the Matrix vs outside it.

[@briannewman532]

I don't think you watched the video. The excessive green tint was NOT in the original film. Subsequent remasters emphasized it for some reason, and when the original editor redid it for the new 4K version, he did it how it was SUPPOSED to be. Yes the green is there for a reason, and it still is, but it's toned way down to the way it was supposed to be.

[@JAFOpty]

I was comparing this remastered version to the 35mm scan, and it still looks very different.

[@TheSharkIsWorking_23]

The 2020 “Skywalker Saga” release of the Star Wars films, featured new Blu-ray transfers. The new transfers for A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back are AWFUL! Loved the previous transfer and will stick with them.

[@billyj.causeyvideoguy7361]

“How did the… exact same source materials end up so different?” Its because film is a fickle source material. Its not like digital, it changes with age as the dyes slowly dry (even when maintained) and the source of your scan (meaning what type of scanner you use) has a lot to do with the look too (as well as the choices you make in post). See: a negative when inverted will be very blue and very flat. You have to correct for the mask and for its density to linearize for display. This can be done in a million different ways to a million different results. If scanned from a print, the density of the print and its generation (how may steps from master it is) will affect the quality too and need to be corrected for. Most films prefer to use negatives for scans when possible and re cut the edit digitally to match what was done in the master, or will use the old EDL (edit decision list) when possible. A lot of old dvd and vhs releases used low contrast prints as a source to keep things simple and to avoid needing a lot of look development since the look was already set in the photochemical timing process. Nowadays the negatives are flat scanned in something resembling cineon and manually corrected with look development being digital. Due to how manual this is, its always going to lead to a different visual than the old low con tk. On the note of the 4k remaster specifically: they likely redid the grade from scratch to try and make something that worked in both hdr and sdr. The slow rollout of hdr and the need to make one deliverable for two formats had put things in a weird state. Also: celluloid hasnt been used since the 1960s. Safety film is cellulose. Lol.. commented before finishing the video. You go over all this. Ha!

[@vinicius100470]

9:09 at this point I'm so used with the greeninsh tint that the new 4K remaster does look wrong. Honestly, before this video I didn't even know the green tint wasn't there in the original release, specially with how unique the movie was for the time.

[@marquizzo]

I'm with you. I grew up watching the DVD versions over and over again, so getting a re-coloration in newer formats would look weird.

[@raksh9]

This is fascinating, because i saw The Matrix in the cinema, own an early 2000s DVD with cardboard case, and also own a later DVD. I have to look at the early DVD now.