These are theatrical movies, not TV shows. I don't give a rat's ass whether they fill your TV set. I want them to look good in movie theaters, and I want them framed the way the director wanted them framed. Homogenization, particularly to appease someone's TV viewing habits, is not a good thing.

I could set the building on fire.

-notrolls-

Isn't it obvious that this is a troll?

Well, this "Cool New Member" has been around on these forums for years longer than the people bringing up that fact.

So how about this, why is there no standard when it comes to filming? Does one thing have an advantage over another? Do the directors all use different equipment when they are filming? Why is the tv standard 16:9 if most of the movies out there are not in 16:9?

And yet you found one.

Not everybody is a widescreen scholar, you know.

why should there be? is there only one type of music? filmmaking is an art and shouldn't have any restrictions placed on it.

IIRC, 16x9 was established as a kind of "compromise" between the 4:3 TV shape (based originally on the Academy Aspect Ratio, 1.33:1), and 1.85-2.35:1, the aspect ratios of most modern films.

For more on this, consult your local library. Or wait for the inevitable deluge of information from those more scholarly than I am at 5:58am.

Lest there be flaming, I recall the lyrics from "Billy, Don't Be a Hero:"

"Billy, keep your head low..."

BOMM,

CS

Exactly. Why is it that when these guys show up here that most of our senior members continue to feed them? Just ignore these posts and let them fade away.

Now that I think of it, I have seen a few 16X9 movies on my widescreen TV and noticed there was still stuff being cut off from the sides. Don't ask me which ones because I don't remember.

Most consumer televisions have 5% or more "overscan", which trims picture off all 4 sides of the frame. A calibration disc such as Avia or Digital Video Essentials has test patterns that will show you how much overscan your TV has.

Search the forum for "wisescreen" or "foolscreen" for more info.

This is like asking why my car is silver when my sneakers are blue.

DJ

Oh, so you have some black bars. BIG EFFING DEAL.

I also just bought a widescreen tv and I have a question. My question is why is there about an inch or so of information on each side that isnt displayed on the screen? I am asking this because after reading the review of the new Office Space Special Edition I noticed something. When I looked at the screen cap of the special features menu (the picture with the cake, napkins, etc.) I noticed that the whole handle of the coffee cup could be seen as well as the whole napkin on the left side. On my tv (30 inch Sony Widescreen) the coffee cups handle gets chopped in half and only about half of the napkin can be seen. Does anyone know why this is? why cant you get "all" of the information to be displayed? My bother asked me why I wanted to make a big deal about it but if the information is there to be seen then why isn't it? Please inform me.

Well i guess the answer was posted while I was writing this.

overscan. most tv's have around 4-5% of info cut off at the sides.

I agree that these people need to be educated. Many just don't know better and once educated will only buy widescreen. Look how the sales numbers have changed so things are improving. This is also the reason studios should only release in widesreen and then provide both an explanation on why its in widescreen and how to make it your fit your TV if you still want it that way.
If "joe six pack" is willing to watch fullscreen, then I bet a stretched picture won't bother them either.

I think some of the REALLY high ones still haven't saddled up......

Doesn't Disney actually market 16x9 offerings as family friendly?

HUHHHHH??????

Some Disney titles that are 1.66:1 and anamorphic are labeled as "family friendly widescreen," even though the image is about the same height as the supposedly family-unfriendly 1.85:1 (exactly the same compared to 1.78:1), and uses less of the available television width. With enough overscan, the image seen on the set can be the same size as with 1.78:1.

Ah. So the word "has" was supposed to be "as." That was the issue with the above statement. Wasn't english.

Oops! Didn't realize that I hit "submit reply". I was going to look Disney's actual wording and post later. Now I realize that I had already posted it.

Atleast, Drexl understood my now fixed post.