roger_d

The only full screen movies i have are old movies and tv shows, other than that i don't by full screen of new movies at all. Its not worth it. The strange thing about it is that i saw a full screen movie showing at walmart and it was strange seeing the movie everyone seemed so tall and big.

Jah-Wren Ryel

"Tall and big" sounds like it wasn't full screen, but rather anamorphic but the tv and/or dvd player was displaying it like it was full screen.

Tarantino

Yeah...ah...4:3 is it's OAR.

talemyn

Hi . . . welcome to the forum.

Full Metal Jacket is an interesting situation (along with other Kubrick films). Kubrick actually stated that many of them should be released in FS only. Also, unless I am remembering incorrectly, the Kubrick DVD's that are in the 4:3 ratio (most of them) are presented in an "open matte" format, which, if you are not familiar with it, means that more of the film is actually shown (the 4:3 film was "matted down" to a WS ration for release in theaters and then the matte was removed for the DVD). So you are not actually losing any of the picture on the DVD, you are actually just gaining some screen area that wasn't shown in the theaters.

Do some searches around the forum on Full Metal Jacket and/or Kubrick for more information. This is an often discussed topic around here.

RockStrongo

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

I do not want to supplement the studio income for a movie that is FS. If we do support them, then they will continue to release this crap.

They should do it right the first time and support anamorphic widescreen releases.

In this day and time, there is NO excuse for releasing a movie in FS when the OAR of that movie is widescreen.

SpringsGal

I wish they would relase The Sting (Newman, Redford) in OAR. I would love to add this movie to my collection....but not if it is fullscreen.

mxv

I won't buy The Shadow on DVD because it only comes in fullscreen. I have to settle for keeping my LD of it which is widescreen.

Spiky

My copy is OAR. Unfortunately not anamorphic, though.

I have NEVER purchased a DVD that was not OAR. Odds are looking pretty good that I never will, either. But never say never. I do have some LDs that aren't OAR, purchased from a bargain bin.

Spiky

Unfortunately, as far as can be understood, Kubrick released (and filmed with 2 aspects in mind) most of his films for home distribution in 4:3 because of the shape of TVs, not because of any decent reason. So it's like the ultimate cop-out to J6P.

Squirrel God

When a FS, non-OAR, version is the only one available, I really try to be disciplined and not buy it. As already said on this thread, it is absolutely wrong to encourage the studios by buying these titles. If sales are high, they will know that they can get away with it again and again, and I want everything I watch to be in its OAR.

However, on three occasions, I have caved in because I saw the title really, really cheap, and they are ones that I wanted to watch and own soooo badly These were: With Honors (Warner Bros), Miracle Mile (MGM), and Deathtrap (Warner Bros).

Dan

no no no. I think that would be even worse for "the cause". It would only encourage the unknowledgable to keep buying Modified films.

Plus, think of it this way: They have to get someone to perform the Pan&Scan process on a film (there's gotta be a high suicide rate for a job like that...), so that would mean that the production of a non-OAR fullscreen DVD would cost MORE to manufacture than the OAR widescreen DVD of the same film (assuming the releases are identical except for the aspect ratio).

So, I think the studios should actually be charging MORE for Modified Aspect Ratio DVDs. If you want to stare at a modified image that some technician who probably had nothing to do with the original film created, you should be paying more. When explaining widescreen to people, I usually try to liken it to listening to a song with one speaker. Or with both speakers, but every other line that is sung is silenced out, or you only hear half of the instrumentation.

Back to the topic of the occupation of the Pan&Scanner... how does a person who has to do that LIVE with themselves?? Why would you apply for a job where your sole purpose was to mangle the art of many many people on a daily basis? I bet most of them are fresh-out-of-college students who want a job in the industry and take the job expecting to "move up" really quick. I wonder what they get paid...

talemyn

I'm curious to know what you would consider a "good reason".

And also, none of the reasons that I ever heard (and, unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be one clear one) had anything to do with J6P's, but rather his own opinion of widescreen presentation on TV.

Rypro 525

from what i heard regarding kubrick is that he was outraged on how bad his epic "2001" looked on tv in pan and scan aka fullscreen, so he shot all of his other movies in 1:85 so they would look better on tv, and sadly he passed away before dvd and widescreen in general became popular.

jarofclay73

I'm SO glad I held out on "Hoosiers." Was going to buy it in FS. I'm GLAD I waited for the SE.

jarofclay73

You don't think widescreen had a general popularity before 1999? You could be right. But, I've been a widescreen/OAR guy since the mid-80s when Siskel and Ebert took an entire show to explain it.

Spiky

Good reason:
Because it fit that film better.
Because he likes that aspect better.
Because he got a deal on some 4:3 lenses.
Because he likes to sit close and doesn't like turning his head so much for Scope.
Because it's going straight to TV.
.....Anything but, "that doesn't look good on TV, let's never do it again", insinuating that TV shape is more important than simply making his films how he wants. I thought that was his big deal, anyway. So apparently, order of importance: (1) eventual release to TBS and VHS, (2) make my movies the way I see fit.

Note that I said "LIKE...cop-out to J6P", didn't say that was his motivation.


I finally remembered the movie I keep refusing to buy: My Blue Heaven. Only 4:3 on DVD, won't buy it, even though I like it and will watch it whenever it's on.

mythmaker18

Kung Fu Season 1 (OAR fullscreen, cropped/matted to fit widescreen) is a prime example.
Mr. Bean animated (OAR widescreen, released that way overseas, but released fullscreen in R1)
V and V: The Final Battle (OAR fullscreen, cropped/matted to widescreen, though the first one was done with the director's approval)

I'm sure there are others, and this is just in R1. This doesn't include the fullscreen stuff that was released in widescreen just to satisfy the European market (such as Buffy).

tommyp007

Hear hear!!!!

If its not in OAR....I just don't need it yet.

Hendrik

...Hear, hear!!!...

. . . . . .

Bill Needle

Refusing to buy a movie, because it's only FS?

This one's easy: The Jerk

Spiky

Isn't much of European TV 1.66:1? And always released 4:3 here.

wolverine1028

If the movie is older or a classic (ie, Disney's Bambi) then I'd go with FS version.

If it is a recent movie or TV series and it only comes in FS, then I might pass unless it is a "must have" title. I haven't passed on any FS-only "must have" titles.

Cygnet74

I will refuse to buy an Pan & Scan DVD, but if it's Full Frame, I have my home theater set-up in such a way that I can effectivly do the matte myself.