| jopezu |
|
bread-train
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5500
|
|
Loc: georgia
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
|
i recently saw the movie "charley varrick" on netflix. it was preceded by the old "this movie has been modified from its original form to fit this television screen" notices. great movie, and yes it's pillarboxed on netflix. so, i naturally (and rationally) assume there's a 16:9 film version out there that's the "original" format that the netflix modification notice is referring to. this is how shit always worked; 16:9 films had the sides cut off to fit onto 4:3 CRT tv's.
so then, i order the kino lorber blu-ray version that says it's the original 1.85:1 aspect ratio. i start watching it and immediately it feels off - i flip the receiver over to the appletv and load the netflix version. the netflix version contains all of the horizontal data from the blu-ray, but additional data at the top and bottom of the frame.
all of the movie and dvd sites say the kino lorbner blu-ray release (which is what i have) at 1.85:1 is the original and the 4:3 version is a crop or pan-n-scan. but, this literally cannot be the case. the widescreen version is the crop. these two images are snapped at the same frame. the netflix version contains more information and is what i have to assume is the cinematographer's intended framing. i have never seen this happen before. it's angering me, and all the review sites being completely oblivious to it (or worse, continuingly saying that the situation is the exact opposite of what it appears to be) is further confusing me. wtf is happening here? do i need to continue purchasing other releases??
i mean... if the netflix version is a crop, then the blu-ray has to be a crop of a crop.
(image attached)
[ATTACHED IMAGE - CLICK FOR FULL SIZE]
|
i learned everything i know from KC
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: jopezu]
#397951 - 02/14/24 07:47 AM
|
|
|
|
|
| jopezu |
|
bread-train
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5500
|
|
Loc: georgia
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: Reznor007]
#397952 - 02/14/24 03:13 PM
|
|
|
as i was discussing with the wife, i brought this up. it was the only answer that made sense. i remember large medium format projections in theaters where you could see the frame extending above and below the viewable screen . but, on the blu-ray, there are scenes where people look down at dead bodies on the ground that you cannot see, whereas you can see it on the 4:3 (but, in the same scene, the guy goes back to the body and the camera pans down to reveal it - just makes me question the intended framing). so, "intended pov" was still in question.
also, would the netflix version carry the "this film has been modified" message in instances where a full frame is being shown for a matte'd movie?
|
i learned everything i know from KC
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: jopezu]
#397954 - 02/15/24 04:10 AM
|
|
|
Netflix has the message because the director/cinematographer intended it one way, and the open matte version is different from that.
In some movies this can lead to errors like this scene from Peewee https://youtu.be/3iD-UoBg-YU?si=VHgqpsa6i_uY3Oa6&t=15
The open matte shows the trick of how the endless chain worked, but the OAR hides the bottom of the frame.
|
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: jopezu]
#397955 - 02/15/24 01:29 PM
|
|
|
Did you go through your TV's and your player's settings? I mean, a lot of tv channels aren't (or weren't... may be showing my age here) formatted to look right on a wide screen TV, so there are picture options to invoke different methods of zoom, so your picture doesn't look all weird and stretched. Goes for playing 4:3 content on a wide screen as well. It does look like your tv is in one of those zoom modes.
|
Just broke my personal record for number of consecutive days without dying!
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: Reznor007]
#397956 - 02/15/24 02:30 PM
|
|
|
> Netflix has the message because the director/cinematographer intended it one way, and
> the open matte version is different from that.
>
> In some movies this can lead to errors like this scene from Peewee
> https://youtu.be/3iD-UoBg-YU?si=VHgqpsa6i_uY3Oa6&t=15
>
> The open matte shows the trick of how the endless chain worked, but the OAR hides the
> bottom of the frame.
Such an accurate and highly amusing example 
|
|
|
| jopezu |
|
bread-train
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5500
|
|
Loc: georgia
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: URherenow]
#397957 - 02/15/24 03:48 PM
|
|
|
yeh, i thought that as well. scoured both the tv and the blu-ray player menus and made sure that wasn't the case.
i'm convinced now that the 4:3 version we see floating around today is the full, spherical shot 35mm film dump, and not the matte'd pov the director intended. very interesting.
i was perplexed. the blu-ray looks fantastic - it would have been weird for them to clean the film up to that degree, do great re-scans, and have the result look as good as it does, but then BUTCHER the framing. seems they didn't butcher anything. i'd just seen the unmatte'd version a few times, so the newly constricted shots on the disc at 1.85:1 seemed off to me.
|
i learned everything i know from KC
|
|
| jopezu |
|
bread-train
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5500
|
|
Loc: georgia
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
[Re: Reznor007]
#397958 - 02/15/24 03:50 PM
|
|
|
> Netflix has the message because the director/cinematographer intended it one way, and
> the open matte version is different from that.
seems to be the case. growing up in the 80's/90's, i'm just so entirely used to the message meaning "we took a widescreen print, and chopped the sides off. deal with it".
> In some movies this can lead to errors like this scene from Peewee
> https://youtu.be/3iD-UoBg-YU?si=VHgqpsa6i_uY3Oa6&t=15
>
> The open matte shows the trick of how the endless chain worked, but the OAR hides the
> bottom of the frame.
that's hilarious. one of the comments on that video is "yes, as a kid, i saw that and thought it was just another one of the film's jokes". LOL
|
i learned everything i know from KC
|
|
|
Wouldn’t be the first time
[Re: jopezu]
#397971 - 02/16/24 04:02 PM
|
|
|
> i'm convinced now that the 4:3 version we see floating around today is the full, spherical shot 35mm film dump, and not the matte'd pov the director intended. very interesting.
There’s a film I can’t recall the name of now that was shot on 35mm and matted to 1.85:1 for cinematic release.
There’s a scene in it where a male character is naked, but only visible from the waist up.
The television and home video release is matted to 4:3 using more vertical area from the original 35mm frames. This allows you to see that the character isn’t actually nude, they’re wearing underwear. It kind of ruins the scene.
I’m getting old – I can’t even remember what film it is, only the issue caused by different matting for cinematic and television aspect ratios.
|
|
|
| jopezu |
|
bread-train
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5500
|
|
Loc: georgia
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
LMFAO
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#397978 - 02/16/24 11:31 PM
|
|
|
can we call this "pee-wee bike chain syndrome" from here on out?
it's insane that a full 4:3 35mm dump is even available to publishers and agents. i assumed this entire time that "formatted for this screen" was *exclusively* a widescreen version that got both sides cut off in order to fit CRT's, not the full-frame raw material that the widescreen was derived from.
you'd think full dumps wouldn't be accessible to folks. take the official release and modify from there - you don't get the source code dawg.
|
i learned everything i know from KC
|
|
|
Re: LMFAO
[Re: jopezu]
#397981 - 02/17/24 07:04 AM
|
|
|
There are cases of the reverse, where 4:3 TV series were recorded in widescreen, and later released that way, revealing the film crew or actors not acting. Buffy was one that did this several times.
|
|
|
|
Re: LMFAO
[Re: jopezu]
#397983 - 02/17/24 09:57 AM
|
|
|
> you'd think full dumps wouldn't be accessible to folks. take the official release and
> modify from there - you don't get the source code dawg.
Depends on the film, though. Some films (e.g. The Abyss and Terminator 2: Judgement Day IIRC) were shot in 3:2 Super 35mm and framed to allow open matting to 1.85:1 cinematic aspect ratio and 4:3 television aspect ratio. The cinematic releases have a bit cut off at the top and bottom, but show the full frame width; the television releases cut off a little at the sides, but show the full frame height. Nothing important is hidden either way. Some directors pay attention to detail like that.
|
|
|
Previous 
Index 
Next 
Threaded 
i'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight - i need answers
Reply
[Re: 
