[DisneySwan1990]

My Picks:

Any film featuring Liam Neeson

Any Film Directed by either Steven Soderbergh or Michael Mann

LOTR Trilogy

Potter film series

Matrix Trilogy

Any CinemaScope film (i.e. Ben-Hur, Raintree County, etc.)


All of these films above absolutely have no place in pan-and-scan land, it needs to be OAR, all the time!!! Showing a scope film, such as the ones above, are against the law!!!! Yet these useless American networks (save for SHO, HDNet, IFC, and Sundance, which are all OAR almost all the time) crop these films to awful fully fullscreen, and it is really awful to watch a 2.35/2.40 film in 1.33:1!


People, Which other Scope flims should NEVER be shown in Pan-and-Scan again?


Can be recent films, too!!!

 

[lobosrul]

Err, all of them. I think the last time I watched a movie in 4:3 (that should have been wider than 1.37:1) was right after Serenity came out on DVD. I'll never ever watch a movie in 4:3, or even 16:9 "pan & scan". Open matte of super 35mm, maybe in some circumstances. I used to occasionally catch a movie on HDNet , Universal HD and a few others. But I think its now been some years since I've watched a movie except on Blu-ray, at the theater, and perhaps a handful on Netflix streaming.

 

[NetworkTV]

I'll agree that no widescreen film should ever be cropped, even if there's panning and scanning.


I'll also say that I'm opposed to opening mattes, too. "The Usual Suspects" is a perfect example of how opening the mattes can totally ruin great composition (the lineup scene is the biggest example). The same goes for "Dark City". "A Christmas Story" reveals production equipment and edges of sets when it's shown open matter.


Having said that, there are definitely some movies that are worse off than others when cropped and/or panned and scanned, compared to other movies seem to have a good deal of dead space on the sides. In those films, every inch of screen space has something going on it it and the composition is crucial.


Some that are terrible to watch in pan and scan, mainly due to entire actors being lost from certain shots:


It's a Mad, Mad , Mad, Mad World

The Sound of Music

A League of their Own

Ocean's 11 (either version)

Fly Away Home

The Ten Commandments

Cleopatra

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (not to be confused with the remake)


Other films were shot specifically to make use of negative space to show how remote the location is:


Lawrence of Arabia

The Black Stallion

Duma


Of course, the reverse is true, as well: movies or TV shows shot in academy aspect ratio or 4:3 aspect that are cropped to wide screen, which almost always results in cramped vertical framing.


Now that TV's have all kinds of options for the individual viewer to butcher stuff, there's no need to force everyone to watch it that way. Just leave the content alone.

 

[DisneySwan1990]



Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul  /t/1521386/which-films-should-never-ever-be-aired-in-pan-and-scan/0_100#post_24451736


Err, all of them. I think the last time I watched a movie in 4:3 (that should have been wider than 1.37:1) was right after Serenity came out on DVD. I'll never ever watch a movie in 4:3, or even 16:9 "pan & scan". Open matte of super 35mm, maybe in some circumstances. I used to occasionally catch a movie on HDNet , Universal HD and a few others. But I think its now been some years since I've watched a movie except on Blu-ray, at the theater, and perhaps a handful on Netflix streaming.

Which TV channel do you watch OAR Scope films on, if you had the only option to, if discs aren't available nowadays?

 

[Mark12547]



Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul  /t/1521386/which-films-should-never-ever-be-aired-in-pan-and-scan#post_24451736


I'll never ever watch a movie in 4:3

 

October 1, 2009 I purchased a HDTV and a coworker and I got it home.

 

October 2, 2009 I purchased a HDMI cable to replace the composite connection from the Roku to the TV.

 

October 3, 2009 Netflix had a special streaming of The Wizard of Oz (1939), that one day only, to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the classic movie and to get a bunch of publicity. My first thoughts were, "Why is this in pan-and-scan?" because I had the thick pillar bars on the HDTV. It turns out that this classic movie had an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 (equivalent to 4.11:3), which I found out on IMDB ( link ). Then I recalled that when the local theater had played the movie 15 years earlier the side curtains were brought way in and the image was squarish. Also, after landing in Munchskin Land, the blue water was over-saturated, but it was that way in the theater, too. Only then could I stop worrying about the stream and the Roku settings and just settle back and enjoy the journey along the yellow brick road.

 

I have tracked all the titles I have rented from Netflix, and all the 1939 titles had an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 (4.11:3). I'm more than willing to suffer the pillar bars to watch those movies in their original aspect ratios as the directors had framed those shots, rather than watch them butchered by cropping off the top and bottom of the frame to force them into a 1.78:1 aspect ratio or, worse, stretch them out so everything on screen is far fatter than it out to be.

 

[cinema13]



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisneySwan1990  /t/1521386/which-films-should-never-ever-be-aired-in-pan-and-scan#post_24458555


Which TV channel do you watch OAR Scope films on, if you had the only option to, if discs aren't available nowadays?

If they haven't been mentioned yet...SHOWTIME, THE MOVIE CHANNEL, HDNET MOVIES, and MGM-HD.(occasionally, OAR gets onto EPIX, but most are cropped.) Plus, on the streaming side: Netflix, CinemaNow, and VuDu. (I'd mention TCM-HD but they don't show anything in HD!)


Musts to Avoid: HBO, CINEMAX, STARZ, and FIOS OnDemand

 

[lobosrul]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark12547  /t/1521386/which-films-should-never-ever-be-aired-in-pan-and-scan#post_24458879


October 1, 2009 I purchased a HDTV and a coworker and I got it home.


October 2, 2009 I purchased a HDMI cable to replace the composite connection from the Roku to the TV.


October 3, 2009 Netflix had a special streaming of The Wizard of Oz (1939), that one day only, to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the classic movie and to get a bunch of publicity. My first thoughts were, "Why is this in pan-and-scan?" because I had the thick pillar bars on the HDTV. It turns out that this classic movie had an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 (equivalent to 4.11:3), which I found out on IMDB ( link ). Then I recalled that when the local theater had played the movie 15 years earlier the side curtains were brought way in and the image was squarish. Also, after landing in Munchskin Land, the blue water was over-saturated, but it was that way in the theater, too. Only then could I stop worrying about the stream and the Roku settings and just settle back and enjoy the journey along the yellow brick road.


I have tracked all the titles I have rented from Netflix, and all the 1939 titles had an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 (4.11:3). I'm more than willing to suffer the pillar bars to watch those movies in their original aspect ratios as the directors had framed those shots, rather than watch them butchered by cropping off the top and bottom of the frame to force them into a 1.78:1 aspect ratio or, worse, stretch them out so everything on screen is far fatter than it out to be.

Umm, I did say in the sentence before the one you quoted: "I think the last time I watched a movie in 4:3 (that should have been wider than 1.37:1)"


I always want to watch a film in its intended aspect ratio. With very, very few exception all movies made before 1953 were in "academy ratio" 1.37:1. Sometimes what you get (whether digital, HDTV, or optical) isn't exact though. 4:3 instead of 1.37:1 or more commonly 16:9 instead of 1.85:1. Neither of which is cause for great concern IMO.


ETA: hah, and this illustrates how the English language can be inexact at times:


When I said: "I'll never ever watch a movie in 4:3, or even 16:9 "pan & scan"." I meant I'll never watch a movie in pan & scan, regardless if its 4:3 or 16:9. I understand your confusion now.

 

[asterion]

I refuse to watch anything shot in Academy ratio in pan and scan. I want my additional 0.045 of screen, dang it!

 

[Mark12547]



Quote:
Originally Posted by asterion  /t/1521386/which-films-should-never-ever-be-aired-in-pan-and-scan#post_24464919


I refuse to watch anything shot in Academy ratio in pan and scan. I want my additional 0.045 of screen, dang it!

 

Would "center cut" be better?

 

I remember when TVs looked like circles that were flattened on the top and bottom. In those days, not only did you lose about 10% from overscan, but you also lost anything that may have been in the corners. And in those days there were no colors: just black and white and shades of gray in between. And even then, about every other month it wouldn't work, so you would let the TV warm up for a little while, unplug, and feel for the cold vacuum tube to pull out and take down to the store to replace or, worse, having to pull out a big section of tubes to test at the store, and often the tube number the TV had was substituted with another tube at the store, so you had to take notes on what got substituted so you could get the new tube in the right socket.

 

Compared to then, that 0.045 of screen is very little wastage. Nonetheless, it seems that the number one change to make once the TV is home is to turn off overscan (well, maybe number 2 after turning off store demo mode).