To be anal, this film is not "full-frame" (I hate this name), it's in its original 1.33:1 aspect ratio. The new video transfer is amazing. Just like Disney's previous transfers of Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. Just amazing. This is a great time to be a fan of Disney animated features.

Cyber:

I think you need a remedial course in film based on your question. WOW!!!!!!

Skip

Just how amazing is it comparing to the previous Gold Edition?

Sleeping Beauty was the first Disney movie filmed in widescreen

THANK YOU!





Roger Ebert

Actually, Lady and the Tramp (1955) was the first Disney animated feature released in widescreen. Sleeping Beauty (1959) was the second.

I always thought Sleeping Beauty was the first. You learn something new every day.

I don't have the Gold Edition (I was holding out for this), but I would assume there's no comparison. You can see brushtrokes in the painted backgrounds... This is another frame-by-frame complete restoration of the film and it's awesome to look at.

Sleeping beauty was the first WS Disney animated movie

errrrr maybe not

Whoa.. that's a mind screw.. I could've sworn that everything I had heard was the Sleeping Beauty was the first WS Disney flick.. maybe it was the first one made that way, but due to it's troubled production it was released later than Lady and the Tramp? Something doesn't seem right..

And, as widescreen TVs become more common, this is how the Joe Six Packs of the 21st century will think. It's thinking like that which gives us such crap as "widescreen" episodes of Kung Fu coming to DVD.

"Matted" widescreen presentations of 4:3 productions are just as bad as "pan-and-scan" versions of widescreen movies. I don't see how someone can hate pan-n-scan and not hate "fake" widescreen.

That's why I refuse to buy the R1 releases of er (which has fake widescreen) and the animated Mr. Bean (which is supposed to be widescreen but was released in a cropped 4:3).

This is something I've been expecting to see. People around here chant "OAR! OAR! OAR!" And I think alot of them mean "Wide! Wide! Wide!" I think as more people go to widescreen tvs, we're going to see more complaints about OAR that is not widescreen.

Please keep in mind, I'm not saying that everyone that wants OAR really wants widescreen, I just think that J6P is going to equate the two. And then we get comments like "Why does Little Mermaid say it's letter boxed, but doesn't fill my screen? Where's the rest of the picture?!" And "Hey, there's an R2 Buffy that is widescreen, that's the one I should watch since it's widescreen. Damn that Joss Whedon."

Joe-16:9-Pack!

It's amazing how I get shot down for not being a film geek. Excuse me for wanting to enjoy my t.v. and dvds! Unfortunately, I don't know the history of film like when the first widescreen film was made. I did find it interesting to learn that, now in the future I will know better. I actually wasn't looking for Disney to make a film that wasn't shot in present day widesreen format to be widescreen, just like I wouldn't want a widescreen film in pan and scan. I want the film in it's original aspect, I just hate the idea of missing something or having it look distorted. If that makes me your so called "joe 6 pack," whatever that is suppose to mean, than fine. It's amazing how you guys have to turn a question that I think the average person who enjoys movies wouldn't know into a put down. Thanks to those who were helpful with answering the question and no thanks to the rest who feel the need to put me down for wanting to aquire some knowledge.

Cyber:

My comment was made because I was stunned to see you have been a member for several years and made a lot of posts, you asked a question which I would have thought you knew the answer to. Look at the bright side, at least you didn't ask why the Wizard of Oz isn't widescreen of Gone with the Wind.

As to the history of Disney animation and Widescreen, Lady and the Tramp was indeed the first widescreen effort by the Studio. It is also one of the very few films in history to have not only a Widescreen theatrical release but also an Academy ratio (1.33:1) release due to the relative, at the time, scarcity of Widescreen movie houses. Kind of like what happened when lucas released Star Wars I and a very few theatres sowed it in purely digital form because there were not many that were able to do it.

Skip

You're both right. "Lady in the Tramp" was the first wide-ratio Disney animation feature (CinemaScope, a wide picture squeezed on regular 35 mm, but unsqueezed to widescreen format during projection) whereas "Sleeping Beauty'" was the first wide-gauge animation film (filmed on 70 mm stock and projected as is for twice the fidelity).

As skipnet said, Disney did an alternate fullframe version of "The Lady", which was much more popular than the scope version in original release. When came time to put it on DVD, Disney used the widescreen version but did an half-ass job by not making it anamorphic, which means that owners of widescreen TVs have to zoom in on the picture (letterbox it) with the resulting loss of definition.

Quite simple, really.

To complicate matters further, Disney is one of the only outfits in America that prefers to show its films in a 1.66 to 1 format, 1.66 being the European standard and a working compromise between fullframe (sorry, 1.37 to 1) and the contemporary American standard format of 1.85 to 1. Whenever Disney has to decide how to frame one of these 1.66 to 1 films for 1.77 to 1 (i.e. 16 x 9) TVs, they must be sorely tempted to go the 1.77 to 1 way in the widescreen version by slightly cropping it top and bottom and show it in the fullframe version by resorting to the original 1.37 to 1 footage, when available, or else slightly cropping the right and left edges of the original 1.66 to 1 animation frame to fit the fullframe version.

Not so simple now...

The best book ever written on this complex subject is "Wide Screen Movies" by Carr and Hayes. See details at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...roduct-details

Yeah, I agree... I mean, with the full-screen transfer, we see more of Alice's knee-socks.

So uhh...

I guess this all comes down to a bunch of people being mad that Alice in Wonderland is being released full frame because it was filmed in full frame and everyone is mad they didnt make a fake widescreen?

I don't treally think thats a good argument. Everyone always cries "RELEASE IT IN THE FORMAT IT WAS MADE IT!" So the are.. and now everyone is mad they aren't changing it to a format that isn't what it was filmed in..

Uh, no. There is no argument at all, and i don't see anyone mad. The original poster didn't realize that the full frame Alice in Wonderland is OAR. End of story.

To LordJezo:

Certainly not I, because I know "Alice" was conceived, planned and executed for the 1.37:1 ratio and therefore it should be put out in fullframe, which it was. Having said that, all widescreen TV owners will undoubtedly crop it or compress it vertically one way or another to make it fit their screens, like any other fullframe film, so what's the use of even discussing this?

I have a Toshiba rear-projection TV that has a wonderful "Cinema 1" option that crops just a little off the top and just a little off the bottom, adds two extra horizontal inches of the overscanned picture you never normally see on the sides and spreads the rest artistically, more towards the edges than the centre. When it's all done, it looks absolutely gorgeous and you don't feel like you're missing anything and you actually see more of the sides of the picture than you would in fullframe. But, of course, it's not OAR..

Well, it was a trade off really for that couple of minutes of uncut SOTS goodness thats on this DVD

IT'S NOT ABOUT A WIDER PICTURE, ITS ABOUT THE RIGHT PICTURE!!

everyone here will tell you. its Orginal Aspect Ratio that matters ... which in the case a alice in wonderland is 1.33:1 (fullscreen)

so dont be sad

T

HEY, THORN!! YA DIDN'T BOTHER TO READ ANY OF THE THREAD BEFORE POSTING, DID YA?!?

AGGGHHH! That is almost as bad as 4:3ing a widescreen movie!!

I hardly think ALL widescreen owners distort the image to fit their TVs. I watch 4:3 content at 4:3 ratio without distorting the picture. My DVD player generates black bars on the sides for 4:3 content.