Uh...

Great miniseries...hopefully this will lower the price of the original release so I can finally get rid of my VHS set.

From thedigitalbits.com

Count me out. No OAR = no sale. Besides, the first edition is nice enough for me.

There's absolutely zero reason not to take the guy at his word. There are no trappings of "12 year old making absurd claims" in the post. He's got his resume online, listing and showing his various film work. His claim jibe with the news that the new release will be widescreen.

Is it really that hard to believe that a show in 1998 was shot one way, then shown full screen? It happens *all the time*.

Now, if HBO was showing a boatload of widescreen mini-series in 1998, but not FTETTM, then I might believe widescreen wasn't the intended OAR.

Who is "the guy?" Please post a link to his resume.

There are three possibilities regarding From the Earth to the Moon:

1. The film was composed for some widescreen format and we will be seeing it for the first time as intended by the filmmakers.

2. The film was composed for some widescreen format and done poorly.

3. The film was composed for 4:3 format and is being "modified."

Two out of the three options will concern many DVD consumers.

Again, let's wait and see the results before pre-judging.

Didn't it already somewhere along the line begin being rebroadcast in widescreen after the initial broadcast runs? I believe that is correct.

Agree wholeheartedly. I just don't understand those who knee-jerk cry in dismay over this from the first announcement. I don't think anyone here has heard the definitive answer.

Per your request, from following the profile of the poster of message #21 in this thread:

http://www.justfx.net/resume.html

He does have contact info there. I suppose someone could ask him.

Clap. Clap. Clap. Thank you. There is way to much of that shit around here.

Seriously folks, is it that hard to believe that it could have been shot in widescreen but shown in full screen? ER was shot in widescreen in 1994, long before this series.

I don't know if it is possible to tell for sure that something is "obviously composed for 4:3". Try watching the FS side of some Columbia / TS flippers such as The Fifth Element or Air Force One - there are many scenes that look more complete open-matted in 4:3 than the cropped OAR version where the tops of heads are cut off, or some action gets lost on the bottom.

An example off the top of my head was the scene where Gary Oldman pins Harrison Ford against the wall and holds a gun to his neck. Though some action was lost in the cropping, the intensity level was higher in the close-up action - but if you only saw the open-matte version, it would have seemed perfectly natural.

still no answers?

NCYankee, the films you cite as Super 35 (well, maybe not The Fifth Element but definitely Air Force One), and are compex when it comes to aspect ratio differences in open-matte and indended widescreen ratios. Nothing like this with the miniseries in question.

If the new set will include all of the old bonus material, maybe now is the time to ebay my unopened original. But with my luck, the new set will have a few new features, but not all of the old set's.

I think I'll stick with what I've already got.

i still can't believe they didn't just put both versions on the disc

After seeing the pictures it is obvious to me that this show was intended to be seen in 4:3. It obvious that HBO is cropping it for the HD broadcast and that is ok for an HD broadcast of the show.

What really gets me is all you DVD elitists, always going into fits if a DVD is not presented in the original aspect ratio. Always freaking out about Pan and Scan (yes I do it to). Why because it cuts out part of the picture. Why because it alters the filmmakers vision. But, since a lot of you have Widescreen and or HD TVs it is ok to stretch, crop, or alter a 4:3 OAS. This is just as bad a Pan and Scan and you should all know that. It is so hypocritical, and it is disgusting. Because you have your elite HD new toys you want to play with you have forgotten the most important thing. View it like the artist intended it to be seen.

That is my rant for today.

link?

Anyone who has seen HBO-HD knows HBO's tendency to "fill the screen" instead of give us the OAR as witnessed the numerous 2.35:1 films cropped to 1.78:1. Why is it then so hard for people to think HBO would not open matte a film to again "fill the screen" for their J6P's viewers and the 4x3 TV's?

Anyone claiming they looked at the original 1.33:1 and is sure it was shot for 1.33:1 is suspect since they don't have a clue what the director's intent was. How do you know the director didn't want certain shots with what you may think are important details partcially out of the frame. Just because you see other film shot a certain way means absolutely nothing for all films since the director has their own way of shooting tying to convey a feeling. Some directors like very close up shots with everyone crammed into (and even partcially out of) a shot to convey a clostraphobic feeling. You may think the shot is wrong or poorly framed but that was what a director wanted.

Everyone just needs to chill out and wait for REAL information instead of jumping to conclsions because a closet director wannabe feels it was shot for 1.33:1.

I agree that we really don't know what the original intent for this show was unless we get some more information. I retract my first statement.

However my rant in the second part of my post still stands. In fact it drives me nuts the hypocriacy of some people who can spend so much time hating and speaking out against Pan and Scan, yet have no problem altering a 4:3 picture to fit their widescreen TV. They will cry out that people are ignorant because they don't like the "black bars" on the top or bottom of their TV, yet they wont watch something with black (or gray) bars on the sides of their TV.

Not really. Because pretty much everyone here is arguing for OAR. Some just think it's 4:3, some of us think it's widescreen.

Welcome to the near future. It's gonna get ugly.

This was actually the point I was trying to make with my "very hip to be OAR even if it's 4:3" comments earlier. Thanks, HBKDinobot for making it clearer.

My issue with 4:3 is that I have a (probably unnatural) paranoia about projection TV screen burn, so, for me anything that's 1.78:1 or 1.85:1 is just great. I'll still buy "TV on DVD" and I don't zoom it all the time, but, yes, sometimes, I realize I've been watching a lot of 4:3 and I'll zoom it to fill the screen, but it's not an attitude of "I have to fill the screen" or "I don't like the black bars" (vertical OR horizontal), I've just got the screen burn fixation.

Walmart.com has this new set for $55. I think that is a pretty good deal since I didn't purchase the first set.

Thanks for pointing that out. $7 shipping sucks, but it is still cheaper than any other etailer that dvdpricesearch pulled up.