DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Movie Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk-17/)
-   -   War Of The Worlds aspect ratio question (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/428962-war-worlds-aspect-ratio-question.html)

JM1 07-01-05 09:44 AM

War Of The Worlds aspect ratio question
 
I initially posted this on the main WOTW thread but as that is mainly about opinions of the film and this is kind of technical, thought it warranted a seperate post.

One question for you guys - I saw the movie here in the UK last night, and one thing that surprised me from the off was that it was not a widescreen scope print.

At first I thought that a little odd for this sort of movie, and for Spielberg. I wanted to know are all of the prints the same, ie was it shot in scope widescreen and some ordinary widescreen prints struck for certain territories - or did Spielberg just not shoot it in scope?

I must admit I tend to favor the latter, because I am sure Speilberg would excercise control over how the movie is presented, and it's possible he did not go for scope widescreen to try and preserve/emphasise the intimate, character based nature of the movie.

Grubert 07-01-05 10:01 AM

It's 1.85:1 (Academy Flat). Confirmed by IMDB, for what it's worth.

Most of Spielberg's recent films have been shot in that ratio, except Minority Report (which he shot Super35). Yes, even Jurassic Park wasn't Scope-ratioed.

Both Spielberg and especially DP Janusz Kaminski prefer 1.85:1.

Giles 07-01-05 10:29 AM


Originally Posted by Grubert

Most of Spielberg's recent films have been shot in that ratio, except Minority Report (which he shot Super35). Yes, even Jurassic Park wasn't Scope-ratioed.

In regards to Jurassic Park - as I recall one of the reasons for the 1.85 aspect ratio, was that Spielberg thought that 2.35 might deminish the size and scope of the dinosaurs effect shots.

marty888 07-01-05 11:20 AM

Actually, the 1.85:1 is probably the better choice for this one, considering what needs to be shown. The total height of the tripods wouldn't be possible in 2.35:1 unless you really distanced the camera from them - and that would <i>diminish</i> their visual impact.

wm lopez 07-02-05 09:57 PM

Yeah, it's a good choice that they went with the 1:85.

Jadow 07-03-05 03:36 PM

and there'll be no black bars on a widescreen tv!

Matthew Chmiel 07-03-05 03:57 PM

In the decade, the only film Spielberg has shot in 2.35:1 was Minority Report. And that was shot in Super 35.

With the exception of his '70s films (Jaws, Close Encounters, and 1941), the Indiana Jones trilogy, and Hook; everything he has done has been 1.85:1.

Grubert 07-04-05 04:01 AM


Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
With the exception of his '70s films (Jaws, Close Encounters, and 1941), the Indiana Jones trilogy, and Hook; everything he has done has been 1.85:1.

...and Sugarland Express (I must admit I didn't know that, as I only have watched it full-frame on a TV airing).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:17 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.