Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Archives > Archives > DVD Talk Archive
Reload this Page >

What exactly was misframed in BTTF 2 ?

Community
Search

What exactly was misframed in BTTF 2 ?

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-10-03, 10:58 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What exactly was misframed in BTTF 2 ?

Hi All,

I searched but couldnt find a list of what scenes were misframed in BTTF 2 (of course i suck at searches so maybe just missed it).

I borrowed it from a friend and never noticed anything out of the ordinary so i was just curious what all the commotion was about.


Thanks
Dazed is offline  
Old 08-10-03, 11:28 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Lighten up, Francis! (Funland)
Posts: 26,889
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Re: What exactly was misframed in BTTF 2 ?

Originally posted by Dazed
I searched but couldnt find a list of what scenes were misframed in BTTF 2 (of course i suck at searches so maybe just missed it).
you're not so good with the correct forum either.



nice bargain
Buford T Pusser is offline  
Old 08-10-03, 11:33 PM
  #3  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Although I'm sure it's in this forum somewhere, here it is over at www.bttf.com
bigosammy is offline  
Old 08-11-03, 12:32 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
lol, ooops, i was half asleep when i wrote it. can a moderator please move it to correct forum.

Thanks
Dazed is offline  
Old 08-11-03, 05:28 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The search function isn't hard to use and will give you all the info you need. Try it!
Steve Phillips is offline  
Old 08-12-03, 10:37 AM
  #6  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
(I can't beleive I'm asking this)

OK..so now the question arises, which is the better version to have?

If the full screen shows the full picture, wouldn't that be better?

And what about the first movie? Apparently everything's ok framing wise, but was it also filmed like the Super 35mm?

I've heard about the techinque, using the full frame that was shot for the full frame version, but how many movies do they do that on?

We saw the example with Air Force One, anyone else know of any others or where we could find a list or something?

...and is that what they meant at the beginning of Kubric's movie with the "full frame as the director intended"?....
mvolwitzer is offline  
Old 08-12-03, 11:00 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll be the first to jump in here, saying what many have said many times before -- and probably better:

Just because you're getting more picture doesn't mean it's better. In modern movies, the director and cinematographer compose shots for the wide screen and anything outside the widescreen area (above and below it, that is) is extraneous visual information that was never intended to be seen. In worst-case scenarios, this means you'll see things like boom mikes, or John Cleese's underwear when he's supposed to be naked. Even in the best cases, you're going to see things like lots of empty sky above people's heads. Simply put, the composition looks wrong. Furthermore, many full-frame DVDs still use pan-and-scan in some shots (special-effects shots, for example), so you're still losing visual information in those scenes.

As for the other issue, Stanley Kubrick decided that we should see full frame only at home and, in theory, composed his shots to look good in either full frame or widescreen. This is a can of worms, however, that I don't feel like opening. Someone else can take a shot at that...
Walter Neff is offline  
Old 08-12-03, 11:24 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,943
Received 271 Likes on 170 Posts
Originally posted by Walter Neff
In worst-case scenarios, this means you'll see things like boom mikes, or John Cleese's underwear when he's supposed to be naked.
Another example: seeing the chain being fed into the bike from underneath in the fullframe (TV) version of Pee Wee's Big Adventure
GuessWho is offline  
Old 08-12-03, 11:55 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Posts: 18,295
Received 372 Likes on 266 Posts
That chain in the bike thing always bugged me when I was a kid.
majorjoe23 is offline  
Old 08-12-03, 03:16 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In terms of the Back to the Future Trilogy, these were filmed and shown theatrically in the 1.85 widescreen format.

If I am not mistaken, while the movie could be shown Full Screen the special effects shots were filmed using a hard matte ( I think in a process using VistaVision Film) and thus when the special effects shots are shown in the "Full Screen" version these are actually panned and scanned. I know that these are true for #2 & #3, not sure about #1. Just check any special effect shot in the films and compare them against the full screen version.

So while you may gain a little bit of picture not seen in the theaters, you're losing picture information in any special effects shots.
DouglasRobert is offline  
Old 08-13-03, 12:32 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,851
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This BTTF.com thread HERE has a few pages worth of comparisons between the old and new versions. After seeing these images, I realized this is more than just a minor issue.
greatjedi is offline  
Old 08-13-03, 04:25 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm still put off on buying this set until the fixed version is in stores. I'm not one for buying something that has a known defect and having to send it in for the correct version. I want to be able to bring it home, open it, and enjoy all 3 films together.
Tazwolff is offline  
Old 08-13-03, 01:54 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Tazwolff
I'm still put off on buying this set until the fixed version is in stores. I'm not one for buying something that has a known defect and having to send it in for the correct version. I want to be able to bring it home, open it, and enjoy all 3 films together.
I brought home the bad set (got it for Christmas actually), opened it and enjoyed all three movies (they're not really that bad). Then I called a toll free number and got a free mailer sent. I returned the bad ones (postage paid by Universal) and got the 'fixed' versions. Then I enjoyed them all over again. This was many months ago and I can enjoy all three tonight or any other time I wish.

Wait if you want, but you could have had a corrected set 3-4 months ago. There's nothing to be gained from waiting unless you don't like making phone calls or putting an envelope in the mail.
MEJHarrison is offline  
Old 08-14-03, 05:18 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I never noticed the misframing, and never would have guessed there was a problem if I hadnt read about it online.

The set is awesome and for me it ranks up there with LOTR EE and Blackhawk Down Deluxe.
Dazed is offline  
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.