I've heard a disturbing rumor that the upcoming Blu-Ray of Max Fliesher's animated classic, Gulliver's Travels will for the first time be presented in "widescreen" by Kotch Media.
This of course would be an extremely misguided move as it's original 1.33:1 ratio would require the top and bottom of the frame be whacked off.
Any way to complain about this where it would do some good?
If any animation fan wants to drop Kotch Visions a quick line urging them to release Max Fleishers GULLIVER'S TRAVELS 1.33:1 rather than the stupid 1.77.1 they have planned, here is the email address.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Ramzyk /forum/post/15232631
I've heard a disturbing rumor that the upcoming Blu-Ray of Max Fliesher's animated classic, Gulliver's Travels will for the first time be presented in "widescreen" by Kotch Media.
This of course would be an extremely misguided move as it's original 1.33:1 ratio would require the top and bottom of the frame be whacked off.
Any way to complain about this where it would do some good?
This doesn't surprise me. It's the new pan and scan. The Roy Orbison concert, the Dragon's Lair game, and the Thunderbirds TV show have gotten the same treatment, and Seinfeld is being shown in HD this way on TBS. Granted, those may not be sacred works of art, but I figured it was only a matter of time before something people cared about was released this way.
There hasn't been much opposition to this for some reason. I think I may have been the only one here to complain about the Orbison concert. Others seemed to think that was just fine, but you know that if a 2.40:1 movie was cropped, people would be up in arms.
Sorry, but that's not how it was shot and I'm going to do all I can to inform people of your mistake so that they don't throw their $ away on a severely modified/cropped image (and sound). This isn't a 16 x 9 film and we both know it, so do quite a few other people.
Sounds like some silly ploy to get rights back in the release of a public domain film to me.
Disney thinks it's OK to put out PINOCCHIO as shot (1.33:1) by the way.
My original email,
Quote:
I was very excited to see that you will be offering a blu-ray of the classic Max Fleischer animated feature GULLIVER"S TRAVELS, but then I heard throughout the internet the bad news, that you're planning on a widescreen presentation.
This would be the wrong ratio for this pre-widescreen film to be shown in, and would require that the top and bottom of the image be cropped off in order change a square frame to a rectangular one. I think animation fans and reviewers alike will reject an attempt to "modernize" a 30's film by removing part of the image. If Disney can release PINOCCHIO in the correct ratio, I'd think you could release this important film as it was shot too.
I know this will be blasphemous....but 4:3 completely sucks. Id rather watch a 4:3 title with a decent stretching algorithm than anything else. I agree that zooming isnt a good choice either. But... pillar boxing is a deal-killer, IMO. YUK!
Also: Doesnt content have to be 16x9 or wider to even actually be an HD resolution? How can 4:3 be HD to begin with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey /forum/post/15356636
I know this will be blasphemous....but 4:3 completely sucks. Id rather watch a 4:3 title with a decent stretching algorithm than anything else. I agree that zooming isnt a good choice either. But... pillar boxing is a deal-killer, IMO. YUK!
Also: Doesnt content have to be 16x9 or wider to even actually be an HD resolution? How can 4:3 be HD to begin with?
It doesn't sound like a lot of films of this era would interest you anyway, so my question is why cater to those who aren't gonna buy the thing anyway? Truthfully, would you really be in the market for slightly creaky, non-Disney, public domain animated feature from the 30's?
I'm not trying to be rude, but it's kinda like coming up with one frame size for all the paintings in a gallery just because that's what is fashionable. A pillar-boxed image can be HD, I have a few and they look great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Ramzyk /forum/post/15356964
It doesn't sound like a lot of films of this era would interest you anyway, so my question is why cater to those who aren't gonna buy the thing anyway? Truthfully, would you really be in the market for slightly creaky, non-Disney, public domain animated feature from the 30's?
I'm not trying to be rude, but it's kinda like coming up with one frame size for all the paintings in a gallery just because that's what is fashionable. A pillar-boxed image can be HD, I have a few and they look great.
Actually, there are some older titles I'd be into. The Wizard of Oz is a MUST own for me, as an example. Im just saying that I'd prefer the screen to be filled if at all possible with these older titles. And no, I have no problem with 2.4:1 aspect ratio films. I just dont care for pillarboxing.
Distorted and decent can't be used together in a meaningful way. I'd rather zoom it than geometrically distort any picture -- at least with zoom I'm not physically ill after 10 minutes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey /forum/post/15357065
Actually, there are some older titles I'd be into. The Wizard of Oz is a MUST own for me, as an example. Im just saying that I'd prefer the screen to be filled if at all possible with these older titles. And no, I have no problem with 2.4:1 aspect ratio films. I just dont care for pillarboxing.
Wizard will be 1.33:1, it always has been last 3 times out. You'll have to be content to zoom or stretch, or just enjoy it as it was photographed (you've done so, so far).
HD can be any ratio, it's true.
P.S. I didn't start this folder specifically to argue ratios all over again, just plug people in that a important film is about to be ill-used, and possibly nip it in the bud.
HD does not automatically equal widescreen. There are already several Blu-ray and/or HD DVD discs out in 4X3, such as CASABLANCA, THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, or the upcoming QUO VADIS. All of these are 1080p discs.
Putting out the 1939 version of GULLIVERS TRAVELS in a widescreen format would be a big mistake, just as bad a panning and scanning a Panavision film.
If you think this is a good idea then obviously you don't care about the integrity of the original film at all, and would probably be better off watching something more recent.
Cropping, streching, panning and scanning or tilt and scanning are all just plain wrong. If you can't handle watching movies as intended, why even bother watching them at all? It's like reading a book in which half the pages have been torn out; it isn't the original work at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Ramzyk /forum/post/15357126
Wizard will be 1.33:1, it always has been last 3 times out. You'll have to be content to zoom or stretch, or just enjoy it as it was photographed (you've done so, so far).
Agreed. The Wizard has always been 4:3. I didnt know if it had been shot in widescreen or whatever but reformatted to fit TV screens. Excuse my lack of knowlege on some of this stuff, especially older movies. I do know that some might have been shot with wider aspect ratios so thats what prompted the questions.
When did movies start actually using widescreen aspect ratios? Im curious to know....
OK, HD can be any ratio.... I really didnt know that. Now, I do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve P. /forum/post/15357178
HD does not automatically equal widescreen. There are already several Blu-ray and/or HD DVD discs out in 4X3, such as CASABLANCA, THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, or the upcoming QUO VADIS. All of these are 1080p discs.
Putting out the 1939 version of GULLIVERS TRAVELS in a widescreen format would be a big mistake, just as bad a panning and scanning a Panavision film.
If you think this is a good idea then obviously you don't care about the integrity of the original film at all, and would probably be better off watching something more recent.
Cropping, streching, panning and scanning or tilt and scanning are all just plain wrong. If you can't handle watching movies as intended, why even bother watching them at all? It's like reading a book in which half the pages have been torn out; it isn't the original work at all.
Understood. Dont kill me or anything here. I didnt know if some of these older films might have been shot in widescreen mode and then reformatted for TV screens or whatever. Its an honest question/concern. I always watch stuff in its proper aspect ratio. I also know that some older films were shot in a widescreen format and might be available in such a ratio.
I am not a fan of pillarboxing though... but if thats all Wizard of Oz or whatever come out in then I'll have to live with it.
Composition is a very important artistic decision the directors/cinematographers have to make and completely destroying the intended composition of each shot by cropping old films is an insult to the filmmakers and the viewer's intelligence. I was hoping pan and scan would die along with VHS...
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey /forum/post/15357180
Agreed. The Wizard has always been 4:3. I didnt know if it had been shot in widescreen or whatever but reformatted to fit TV screens. Excuse my lack of knowlege on some of this stuff, especially older movies. I do know that some might have been shot with wider aspect ratios so thats what prompted the questions.
When did movies start actually using widescreen aspect ratios? Im curious to know....
OK, HD can be any ratio.... I really didnt know that. Now, I do.
With minor exceptions, think filmmakers started trying to outdo TV screens in the early 50s. Before that, there was the standardized academy ratio (1.37:1) that pretty much everyone filmed in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey /forum/post/15357180
Agreed. The Wizard has always been 4:3. I didnt know if it had been shot in widescreen or whatever but reformatted to fit TV screens. Excuse my lack of knowlege on some of this stuff, especially older movies. I do know that some might have been shot with wider aspect ratios so thats what prompted the questions.
When did movies start actually using widescreen aspect ratios? Im curious to know....
OK, HD can be any ratio.... I really didnt know that. Now, I do.
Widescreen did really take hold until the mid-50's with the rise of television. So PINOCCHIO, GONE WITH THE WIND, CITIZEN KANE, SNOW WHITE, KING KONG, CASABLANCA, FRANKENSTEIN, WIZARD OF OZ... should all be 1.33:1
IMAX is (correctly) presented in several ratios (depending on the individual screen installation), because, according to their production/presentation spec, the aim of IMAX material is not to meet a particular frame-shape, but to extend the image beyond the limits of the audience's peripheral vision (and thus exhibit no frame-shape at all). In light of this intention, the 1.78:1 presentation on the TDK Blu-ray is very arguably the best approach to this material possible. To say it has been "r@ped", IMO, only displays an ignorance to the very concept of an IMAX film.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator /forum/post/15364502
IMAX is (correctly) presented in several ratios (depending on the individual screen installation), because, according to their production/presentation spec, the aim of IMAX material is not to meet a particular frame-shape, but to extend the image beyond the limits of the audience's peripheral vision (and thus exhibit no frame-shape at all). In light of this intention, the 1.78:1 presentation on the TDK Blu-ray is very arguably the best approach to this material possible. To say it has been "r@ped", IMO, only displays an ignorance to the very concept of an IMAX film.
Well said. Although its a tough crowd here so good luck convincing anyone! The IMAX scenes in TDK on blu-ray were the coolest thing EVER on home video. Period.
Let's get back to discussing the aspect ratio of Gullivers Travels as there is a whole thread dedicated to The Dark Knight.
I have written them an email in the nicest possible terms explaining the widescreen concept and that Gullivers Travels should be issued in a 1.37:1 aspect ratio and if they intend to go ahead with the widescreen cropped release then give us both cuts of the movie which means the original aspect ratio and the fake widescreen cropped edition.
Anyone who cares about future editions of classic movies should write to these people before this becomes the norm and people start accepting it because as someone has already said this is the pan and scan thing all over again. ( with people wanting to fill the screen up on their 1.78:1 televisions )
Here's a page with a history of the widescreen format at the cinema...
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
AVS Forum
34M posts
1.5M members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!