AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
I noticed when Enemy Of The State first started, when they showed the congressman & John Voight's character talking by the lake, it was a beautiful panoramic wide screen view (I was really getting jazzed), then it went into the opening credits, still OK, and after that, boom, aspect ratio changed from the wide screen panoramic view to a....well there was less of a black bar above & below. What exactly was I witnessing there?


Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,831 Posts
In Dallas, it also started 2.35:1 but right after the credits it changed to 1.85:1.


Enemy is framed at 2.35:1. I guess ABC did not want people complaining about the bars so they made it feel the entire 16:9 TV (1.85:1 is almost the same as 16:9).


DAMN THEM! I am all about OAR, as most people are here. It still looked good but I liked it a lot better when it was 2.35.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,771 Posts
yeah, I too noticed their zoom/crop of Enemy of the State. It still looked really good despite this but before the zoom/crop it was stellar. It truly looked better than any ABC movie I had seen before that butchering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
#1. This is an R rated film and would need to be cut to shreds fo Network TV.


#2. I am getting sick and tired of ABC cropping 2.35:1 films.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Stevens

[B

I am getting sick and tired of ABC cropping 2.35:1 films. [/b]
I am getting tired of Hollywood cutting out a 2.35 from a full frame Super 35 film frame just to get it wide in the theaters.


I like it sized to 16:9 , the lines of resolution are all used, instead of broadcasting black bars on 1/3 of the lines, and the picture quality is improved because of it.


I am not alone here. Several directors themselves prefer their full format versions over the widescreen cut out that is sent to theaters and DVDs.

(James Cameron is one of them, Titanic, The Abyss, Terminator 2 etc.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
gmichael, you are just plain WRONG. James Cameron does *not* prefer full-frame. What he has said is that he thinks full frame is a good compromise for small TV sets.


Andy K.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
James Cameron has gone on record as saying that he actually prefers the full frame versions of several of his moves much to the consternation of widescreen fans. I believe Wolfgang Peterson has as well as some others but can't confirm those at the moment. (Remember the widescreen is cut out from the full frame.)

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...rforceone4.jpg (The full frame)

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...rforceone3.jpg (The wide screen)


Never the less, I dislike the widescreen cut out from a super 35 film frame just to get a widescreen print for a DVD and I prefer to use all the resolution lines to reproduce video data on a TV when possible and practical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,054 Posts
The "open matte" framing always sucks.


The movie does not seem nearly as intimate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
When a Super35mm film is shot, the DP only sees the 2.35:1 aspect ratio. End of story.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top