Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

DVD-Software.info
Your one stop source for DVD Software

FAQ

Memberlist

Profile

Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

DVD-Software.info Forum Index -> General DVD Discussion

Author

Message

Cody k
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:25 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

"Russell Watson" <russell-watson@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3befl1t059l9com7tea6qmbqduuh385msg@4ax.com...

Quote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:49:31 -0600, Black Locust <bl2112@hotmail.com
wrote:

While I still think the "I need a widescreen TV in order to watch
widescreen DVDs." argument is utter bullshit largely perpetrated by Joe
Sixpacks who hate the "black bars," this news is still a good sign of
things to come..

snip article

Despite only having a 15-y/o 27" regular TV, I personally refuse to
buy "full screen" DVDs. I've seen some pretty decent movies in the
Wal-mart $5.50 bin but wouldn't buy them when I discovered that they
weren't widescreen. The "black bars" don't bother me a bit. What's
funny is that my wife professes to hate them. Every time I put in a
DVD she would bitch about it. The last time it came up I told her to
hold on a minute. I turned on the VCR and popped in a tape of recently
taped TV shows that she likes, such as "Smallville" on WB and the
"Stargate" series on Sci-fi. I asked her "What do you see?" and she
didn't get what I was trying to show her. "Look at the top and bottom
of the screen. These shows are widescreen and they're like this every
week, you just don't notice because it's 'TV' and you just watch
what's on there without even thinking about it, but you have it stuck
in your head when it's a DVD that there's something about the ones I
buy that you don't like so you're anticipating it and tend to notice
it more."
Needless to say, she hasn't mentioned it again. Maybe the trend
towards widescreen TV shows is helping to make people more accepting
of it in DVDs.

I don't go into a movie theatre and stare at the ceiling. I never even
noticed the black bars, when I had a 4:3 TV. As it happens, the majority of
the movies I like are filmed in 2.35:1, which still means black bars, even
on my 16:9 set.

What really ticks me off is that a lot of movies released as "widescreen" on
DVD are actually cropped to 16:9 from the original 2.35:1 theatrical
release. The Gung Ho DVD is a perfect example of this shameful practice. I
want my OAR!

Cody k

moviePig
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:58 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

Nick Macpherson wrote:

Quote:

Derek Janssen wrote:

moviePig wrote:

Jay G. wrote:

Black Locust <bl2112@hotmail.com> wrote:

Widescreen DVDs spread - Along with wider TV sets
By Susanne Ault

A representative of specialty retailer Tower reports noting an uptick
of about 5% in widescreen purchases over the past year, though the
broadest releases such as Buena Vista Home Entertainment's Oct. 4
Cinderella still sell 75% in fullscreen versions.

Actually, in the speicifc case of Cinderella, 100% of the purchases are
"fullscreen", as the 4:3 ratio is the original movie ratio of the
film, and
thus the only option available on DVD.

Not at all. For us "connoiseurs", there's a version with *four* black
bars...

Yes, but the article citing was to be meant in the traditional a.v.d
spirit of "Why won't Warner release the widescreen 'Gone With the
Wind'?--Sign my petition!" ;)

Stanley Kubrick preferred 4:3 to widescreen but if he was alive today
he'd realize he was wrong so we need the Kubrick DVDs re-released in
widescreen no matter what his family says.

Whoa... didn't he make the studio sign an oath in bile that EYES WIDE
SHUT would *never* hit video in other than 4:3? (If not, what am I
thinking of...) Odd, of course, since his magnum opus (imo) 2001:ASO
was one of the first movies in Super-Panavision's 2.85:1 ... vs. today's
norm of 2.35:1 ... (all facts unchecked, btw...)

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

moviePig
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:02 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

Jay G. wrote:

Quote:

moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

Jay G. wrote:

Actually, in the speicifc case of Cinderella, 100% of the purchases are
"fullscreen", as the 4:3 ratio is the original movie ratio of the film, and
thus the only option available on DVD.

Not at all. For us "connoiseurs", there's a version with *four* black
bars...

But it's not in a different aspect ratio.

Well, it is *somewhat* different. While original is 4:3, this new one
is 3:4 ... (as I said, only for connoisseurs...)

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

moviePig
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:05 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

David Z wrote:

Quote:

Acceptance of DVD = acceptance of widescreen.

Lincoln Spector
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:32 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

Quote:

Whoa... didn't he make the studio sign an oath in bile that EYES WIDE SHUT
would *never* hit video in other than 4:3? (If not, what am I thinking
of...) Odd, of course, since his magnum opus (imo) 2001:ASO was one of
the first movies in Super-Panavision's 2.85:1 ... vs. today's norm of
2.35:1 ... (all facts unchecked, btw...)
And wrong. I think you're confusing SuperPanavision with UltraPanavision,

which had a negative ratio of 2.76:1--and it's possible that no films were
actually commercially projected that wide. Like all SuperPanavision films,
2001 was shot (and originally shown) in 2:21, with an awareness that the
35mm reduction prints for the later wide release would be vertically cropped
to 2.35.

But it is ironic that Kubrick disliked the wide screen, but his most
widely-regarded film was one of only two truly wide films he made (and with
the other, Spartacus, he had no say in the format it was shot in).

Lincoln

Sean O'Hara
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:42 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful Jay G. declared:

Quote:

Charles Eggen <cne@efn.org> wrote:

But what about folks who want to fill their widescreens with an
academy image? Maybe we will start seeing "Stretch and Zoom" versions
of Cinderella and Gone with the Wind.

Considering that most Widescreen TVs already have those options for
viewing a 4:3 image, there's no need to offer DVDs of them.

Of course, most DVD players have an option to squeeze or zoom
anamorphic widescreen images, so there's no need for full screen DVDs.

--
Sean O'Hara | http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com
Jeff: When God made the parse, he didn't say, 'Hey, it's just your
basic hinge, let's knock off early.' He said, 'Behold ye angels, I
have created the arse. Throughout the ages to come, men and women
shall grab hold of these, and shout my name!
-Coupling

moviePig
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 2:01 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

Lincoln Spector wrote:

Quote:

Whoa... didn't he make the studio sign an oath in bile that EYES WIDE SHUT
would *never* hit video in other than 4:3? (If not, what am I thinking
of...) Odd, of course, since his magnum opus (imo) 2001:ASO was one of
the first movies in Super-Panavision's 2.85:1 ... vs. today's norm of
2.35:1 ... (all facts unchecked, btw...)

And wrong.

(Yes, I wasn't bragging. E.g., 'Super'Panavision didn't sound right...)

Quote:

I think you're confusing SuperPanavision with UltraPanavision,
which had a negative ratio of 2.76:1--and it's possible that no films were
actually commercially projected that wide. Like all SuperPanavision films,
2001 was shot (and originally shown) in 2:21, with an awareness that the
35mm reduction prints for the later wide release would be vertically cropped
to 2.35.

All right, this *is* at odds with my recall... which is that 2001 was
shown in Cinerama theaters (where I saw it) with Ultra's aspect ratio,
i.e., only slightly less elongated than Cinerama's original 3-strip
amalgam. In fact, I thought was 2001 the *first* such
production/presentation...

Quote:

But it is ironic that Kubrick disliked the wide screen, but his most
widely-regarded film was one of only two truly wide films he made (and with
the other, Spartacus, he had no say in the format it was shot in).

And in 2001, the cigar-screen certainly didn't deter his trademarked use
of horizontal symmetry in frame-composition...

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

Howard Brazee
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:01 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

I think it is The Incredibles that has comes with a standard letterboxed version and another version that has additional drawing on the top and bottom of the theater version to fit the taller TV set.

Rich
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:03 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:49:31 -0600, Black Locust <bl2112@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Quote:

While I still think the "I need a widescreen TV in order to watch
widescreen DVDs." argument is utter bullshit largely perpetrated by Joe
Sixpacks who hate the "black bars," this news is still a good sign of
things to come..

Finally, the dumbass bastards are realizing their new TV sets are WS.
Thats the only reason for a shift on DVDs.
Stupid luddite sheep.
-Rich

Lincoln Spector
Guest

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:19 am Post subject: Re: Acceptance of Widescreen DVDs is Growing

"moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote in message
news:%AT5f.1652$fm7.1538@fe06.lga...

Quote:

Lincoln Spector wrote:

Whoa... didn't he make the studio sign an oath in bile that EYES WIDE
SHUT would *never* hit video in other than 4:3? (If not, what am I
thinking of...) Odd, of course, since his magnum opus (imo) 2001:ASO was
one of the first movies in Super-Panavision's 2.85:1 ... vs. today's norm
of 2.35:1 ... (all facts unchecked, btw...)

And wrong.

(Yes, I wasn't bragging. E.g., 'Super'Panavision didn't sound right...)

I think you're confusing SuperPanavision with UltraPanavision,
which had a negative ratio of 2.76:1--and it's possible that no films
were actually commercially projected that wide. Like all SuperPanavision
films, 2001 was shot (and originally shown) in 2:21, with an awareness
that the 35mm reduction prints for the later wide release would be
vertically cropped to 2.35.

All right, this *is* at odds with my recall... which is that 2001 was
shown in Cinerama theaters (where I saw it) with Ultra's aspect ratio,
i.e., only slightly less elongated than Cinerama's original 3-strip
amalgam. In fact, I thought was 2001 the *first* such
production/presentation...
It was a Cinerama presentation, but by 1968 that pretty much just meant a

70mm film projected onto a Cinerama screen. And when you're projecting onto
that steep a curve, aspect ratio gets all confused. The sides of the image
get horizontally elongated, and the shape resembles more of a bowtie than a
rectangle. The UltraPanavision "Cinerama" films, like Mad, Mad World, were
released in recitified prints that got around that horizontal elongation,
but that wasn't the case with 2001. For a better discussion than I can give
you, go to http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcr6.htm.

Lincoln

John Harkness
Guest