Any HD DVDs actually fill the screen?

[thundernz1]

Just wondering if any HD DVD's actually fill a 16:9 widescreen tv. I've watched about 10 different films now and not a single one fills the screen entirely.

[Halveb]

Most films are filmed in 2.35:1 aspect ratio. I did watch two HD-DVD's yesterday that were 16:9 aspect ratio however and they were Willy Wonka and Polar Express.

[Art Sonneborn]

I think Grand Prix, Sky captain and the World of Tomorrow and the Hulk are either 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 so they will.

Art

[SirDrexl]

Originally Posted by Halveb

Most films are filmed in 2.35:1 aspect ratio. I did watch two HD-DVD's yesterday that were 16:9 aspect ratio however and they were Willy Wonka and Polar Express.

Are you sure? The Polar Express is 2.40:1.

[Rakesh.S]

repeat after me ..

there is nothing wrong with black bars

that's how the movie was shot and shown in movie theaters.

[UxiSXRD]

IIRC Scary Movie 4 (much funnier than I thought it would be, btw) was 16:9.

[Amiable-Akuma]

Actually I've heard that there are a significant (much-higher-than-would-be-expected) amount of films available on HD DVD that fill the screen. There was a thread on the HD DVD software forum dedicated to this surprising truth not long ago. I personally don't care either way because I enjoy the films in any ratio - but I think if you'll investigate, OP, - that you should be satisfied.

[TimV]

Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn

I think Grand Prix, Sky captain and the World of Tomorrow and the Hulk are either 1.85:1 or 1.78:1 so they will.

Art

Grand Prix is 2.20:1

All of the Discovery Atlas HDs are 16x9.

Again, though, black bars are your friends. You're actually seeing more, not less.

[wasting]

Originally Posted by Amiable-Akuma

Actually I've heard that there are a significant (much-higher-than-would-be-expected) amount of films available on HD DVD that fill the screen. There was a thread on the HD DVD software forum dedicated to this surprising truth not long ago. I personally don't care either way because I enjoy the films in any ratio - but I think if you'll investigate, OP, - that you should be satisfied.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ghlight=1+85+1

[apodaca]

Originally Posted by Rakesh.S

repeat after me ..

there is nothing wrong with black bars

that's how the movie was shot and shown in movie theaters.

Then why did many buy a 'wide screen' TV? They should call them semi wide screen. Or better yet they should have offered a zoom that zooms the wider aspec ratio movies to fit the vertical axis or made the new HD player incorporate this feature.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by apodaca

Then why did many buy a 'wide screen' TV? They should call them semi wide screen. Or better yet they should have offered a zoom that zooms the wider aspec ratio movies to fit the vertical axis or made the new HD player incorporate this feature.

They bought a widescreen TV to better accomodate Widescreen movies. Many people are just ignorant that there are several widescreen aspect ratios. the 16x9 aspect ratio is a good middle ground for all the myriad of aspect rations. the 1.78:1 ratio covers a lot and gives a much smaller "black bar affect" on 2.35:1 ratio movies and gives much more space than a 2.35:1 ratio tv would have given to 4:3 sources. It's a compromise. NO ONE will ever have 0 black bars on their tv unless they are given a tv that can Morph or certain projector setups. People just need to stop whining about the damn black bars and how directors need to cater to their whims.

[JDLIVE]

Originally Posted by apodaca

Or better yet they should have offered a zoom that zooms the wider aspec ratio movies to fit the vertical axis or made the new HD player incorporate this feature.

Most do, don't they?

[eXgo]

This question is asked to no end.

someone really needs to educate people on OAR's.


Stickytime.

[homerx]

Originally Posted by JDLIVE

Most do, don't they?

Most DVD players have a zoom or s.fit button. However HDDVD players do not. A few of the warner titles allow zooming using the A-D buttons..

But like said you shoulf leave the bars their as zooming will either crop or stretch the image often times giving you a worse overall picture.

I don't even notice them anymore. My 16:9 set always has bars to the left and right during cable veiwing I'd rather not strech the 4:3 image out.

[DPowers]

Nacho Libre was 16x9. And how would it be physically possible to build a display that can handle every aspect ratio without bars? Unless people want everything cropped? I wouldn't want that, but a good zoom would be nice for those who don't want bars.

[thundernz1]

I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.

[SirDrexl]

Originally Posted by thundernz1

I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.

That's kind of like asking why every CD can't have a female singing the vocals. If some can have them, they certainly all can, regardless of whether they were recorded years ago?

The issue is that some movies were made for 2.40:1, and that's why they're presented that way on the discs. If the movie was 1.85:1, that's how they're presented.

Now, if they wanted, they could shoot all of them for 1.85:1 from here on out (not that they will, I'm just saying hypothetically), BUT, what about all the movies that were made for 2.40:1 in the past? They can't go back and time and tell the directors they must make them 1.85:1.

[boden11]

Time to lock the thread?

Originally Posted by thundernz1

I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.

[Baronken]

Originally Posted by boden11

Time to lock the thread?

Why lock it? The OP had a valid question wanting to know if there are fullscreen HD-DVDs (16x9 format).

EDIT: I have only seen Polar Express on HD-DVD so far and I don't remember if it was fullscreen 16x9. Will check tonight (on 360 addon).

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by Baronken

EDIT: I have only seen Polar Express on HD-DVD so far and I don't remember if it was fullscreen 16x9. Will check tonight (on 360 addon).

The Polar Express is 2.40:1.

[boden11]

The OP also asked this in regards to why there are so few 16x9 (1.78:1) titles:

Quote:
Originally Posted by thundernz1
I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.
-
Which leads me to believe that the OP is lacking much more than aspect ratios for current titles...WHICH CAN BE FOUND at most high def review sites.

Originally Posted by Baronken

Why lock it? The OP had a valid question wanting to know if there are fullscreen HD-DVDs (16x9 format).

EDIT: I have only seen Polar Express on HD-DVD so far and I don't remember if it was fullscreen 16x9. Will check tonight (on 360 addon).

[aronparsons]

Goodfellas and Caddyshack are the only ones I recall off the top of my head that were 1.78:1 or 1.85:1.

[Chewbaccacabra]

Honestly, seeing this question pop up again and again on AVS forum after almost 10 years of DVD surprises the hell out of me.

[gooki]

I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.

Money has nothing to do with it.

Film makers are artists, they will use whatever aspect ratio fits the overal mood they are trying to set. One wouldn't ask for the Mona Lisa to be reframed as a landscape painting and so one shouldn't ask a film maker to do that to their movies.

[Art Sonneborn]

Originally Posted by TimV

Grand Prix is 2.20:1

I stand corrected.

Here are a few more:
Corpse Bride
The Thing
The Searchers
Good Night and Good Luck

Art

[Chris_TC]

Originally Posted by thundernz1

I don't have a problem with the bars. I was just curious as to why some DVDs are made to the 16:9 ratio and others are not. If some movies can be made to this aspect ratio, then certainly all can. Like most things, I'm assuming it's a money issue.

It's not a money issue. Wide movies (the ones with the black bars) are visually more impressive in theaters than movies that are less wide (the ones that fill the screen at home).

I hate it when the side curtains don't move to make way for Cinemascope, and I'll never understand why even Mr. Spielberg sometimes goes for 1.85:1. That's an okay format for comedies and some dramas, but that's it.

[HTCrazy]

Originally Posted by Chris_TC

I hate it when the side curtains don't move to make way for Cinemascope, and I'll never understand why even Mr. Spielberg sometimes goes for 1.85:1. That's an okay format for comedies and some dramas, but that's it.

Agreed. The bigger the bars the cooler the picture for me. I also loooove the wide movie effect in theaters and this translates well to DVD.Maybe I'd think somewhat differently if I were using a 32" TV - but with my 108" FP setup, bring on the BIG bars.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by Chris_TC

It's not a money issue. Wide movies (the ones with the black bars) are visually more impressive in theaters than movies that are less wide (the ones that fill the screen at home).

I hate it when the side curtains don't move to make way for Cinemascope, and I'll never understand why even Mr. Spielberg sometimes goes for 1.85:1. That's an okay format for comedies and some dramas, but that's it.

Every movie has its own artistic needs. Neither ratio is inherently "better" or "worse" than the other. Saying that is like claiming that one color is better than another.

For example, Spielberg chose to compose Jurassic Park for 1.85:1 because he wanted to emphasize the height of the dinosaurs. A 2.35:1 framing wouldn't be as effective for that need. Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan were composed for 1.85:1 to more closely emulate the look of vintage WWII newsreel footage.

[Baronken]

I think all movies should be shot in Open Matte and then the director/producer can use the portion of the whole image to make their "as intended by the director" version for the theater. And make the "as intended by the director plus some" to make the movie fill a 16x9 widescreen HDTV.
Or better yet, just make all films in Open Matte as 16x9 (1.78:1) and show them that way at the theater. You lose nothing this way as the "intended by the director" portion is still contained within the image, and wide-sweeping shots would be there (would just be more foreground and sky).

[William]

Originally Posted by Baronken

I think all movies should be shot in Open Matte and then the director/producer can use the portion of the whole image to make their "as intended by the director" version for the theater. And make the "as intended by the director plus some" to make the movie fill a 16x9 widescreen HDTV.
Or better yet, just make all films in Open Matte as 16x9 (1.78:1) and show them that way at the theater. You lose nothing this way as the "intended by the director" portion is still contained within the image, and wide-sweeping shots would be there (would just be more foreground and sky).

You obviously have barely just enough knowledge to be dangerous.

Just one simple question: Under your [sarcasm] great [/sarcasm] plan how are Panavision films handled?