And another Kubrick AR question.
 

Sorry if this has been asked before. I own 4 Kubrick DVDs. Eyes Wide Shut, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, and A Clockwork Orange. All of them are in the OAR of 4:3, except Clockwork, which is matted. Anyone know why they chose to release this in a matted 4:3 image and not the rest?

Kubrick decided he hated the black bars that were necessary to retain his widescreen films on a traditonal television. The problem originated when he found that when 2001 was broadcast on TV extra stars were added into the widescreen elements. He thought it was terrible and never wanted to have a problem like that again. He filmed his films so they could be opened up on home video releases. This started with The Shining, so any film after that is full screen on DVD.

This will probably change because it's been discoveresd exactly why, and now that he is dead, his films will retain their theatrical aspect ratio on future releases.

There is still a lot of controversy around this topic.

Drop is essentially right. The source of the controversy is none of Kubrick's original development material show that the film would be eventually shown on full frame when its going to be released on home video, and the only source who specifies that these film should be transferred on full frame is Kubrick's personal assistant Leon Vitali.

i think eyes wide shut was cropped to 1.85:1 when i saw it at the cinema. though i swear it was wider. though as it was filmed full frame i doubt it was wider.

I believe it's because Kubrick intended for A Clockwork Orange (as well as Lolita & Barry Lyndon) to be seen at 1.66:1. I don't think Kubrick's preference for 1.33:1 on home video came to play until his 1.85:1 films (The Shining through Eyes Wide Shut). At the time, Warners didn't do anamorphic 1.66:1 so that's why it's presented in 4x3 letterboxed.

Kubrick filmed for 1.85:1, but safe for 1.33:1 (meaning the frame can be opened up for TV). The preferences for no matting are based on the 1991 approvals he made for laserdisc transfers of his films. He always intended the films to be shown at their theatrical ARs in theaters... now that we have 16x9 DVDs and HD formats, it's a moot point.

Eyes Wide Shut looks great at 1.85:1 (in 35mm). The 4x3 framing isn't bad, but there's a lot of shots that work so much better with the matting

Because when Kubrick saw these on his TV he wanted it to use the whole screen.

:hairpull:

I think it had more to do with resolution.

The active picture content in the theatrical portion of the frame has less resolution in a 4:3 open-matte transfer than an anamorphic 16:9 transfer.

I've spelled out the Kubrick aspect ratio controversy in my review of Full Metal Jacket:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=24110

Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, and portions of Dr. Strangelove and Lolita were shot with hard mattes in-camera. The DVD exposes the entire 35mm film frame. On the latter two films, this means that some shots (without hard matting) fill a 4:3 frame and other shots have small mattes.

How is this even possible? Wasn't 2001 filmed with an anamorphic lens? There should be no mattes to remove. Or am I mistaken?

--THX

Nothing was removed, but I guess the TV company added in fake stars on the black bars where they could.

I would think Kubrick had more of an issue with the Pan-and-Scan version of 2001: A Space Odyssey than anything else. The P&S version of that movie is particularly atrocious (I still have it on VHS and have used it to demonstrate to friends on why "Widescreen" is better than "Full-Screen"). So by switching to filming everything after that in Full-Frame, P&S butchering of his movies on TV would be avoided. This was before "Widescreen" presentations became the norm instead of the extremely rare exception (and long before 16:9 TV were around).

You all know me as a hardcore OAR activist, but I'll admit when it comes to Kubrick's stuff, there's a teeny-tiny bit of wiggle room allowed. 2001, however, should never ever be seen in anything but it's proper widescreen format.



That said, I've heard of that "stars in the black bars" presentation for years and have always thought that would be neat to see at least once in my life. There are very few movies that would work for, and I think 2001:ASO is one of them.

It was a UK TV broadcast by the BBC which showed 2001 with the stars over the black bars. This was many years ago before widescreen TV. Obviously it was only done on exterior space scenes but personally I thought it was quite effective.

That's interesting. What happen to the stars when the camera pans?