Cyrano de Bergerac MGM : non-Anamorphic! Why?

I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO DE BERGERAC
and, to my chagrin, found out that it was non-anamorphic widescreen.
agh! is there any reason these days for a studio to produce
non-anamorphic dvds? Is MGM the only studio that does this? I may
have to be more careful before buying...

Goro

"Goro" <> wrote in message
news: om...
: I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO DE BERGERAC
: and, to my chagrin, found out that it was non-anamorphic widescreen.
: agh! is there any reason these days for a studio to produce
: non-anamorphic dvds? Is MGM the only studio that does this? I may
: have to be more careful before buying...

=======================
MGM, for some bizarre reason, releases ALL of their 1.66:1 widescreen movies in
non-anamorphic.
It makes no sense and I refuse to buy any of them.
They are ignorant!

MGM is about the only studio left that does this.

Even the new Lion King 1 1/2 is 1.66 and anamorphic.
=========================

Richard C.

(Goro) wrote:

> I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO
> DE BERGERAC and, to my chagrin, found out that it was
> non-anamorphic widescreen. agh! is there any reason these
> days for a studio to produce non-anamorphic dvds?

I'm gonna guess that the aspect ratio on this is 1.66:1. Am
I right? MGM seems to have a policy of not doing anamorphic
transfers for 1.66:1 films.

> Is MGM the only studio that does this?

In general, and of the major labels, yes. There are the
occasional 1.66:1 titles from other labels that are not
anamorphic (like Warner's GIANT), and some labels like
Artisan seem to a lot of non-anamorphic tranfers regardless
of ratio.

-- jayembee

jayembee

(Goro) wrote in message news:<. com>...
> I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO DE BERGERAC
> and, to my chagrin, found out that it was non-anamorphic widescreen.
> agh! is there any reason these days for a studio to produce
> non-anamorphic dvds? Is MGM the only studio that does this? I may
> have to be more careful before buying...

I'm waiting for the Jose Ferrer version myself. Anyone know?

- Jordan

Jordan Lund

VCI has released the Jose Ferrer version and so has Alpha Video
Get the VCI Version

On 12 Feb 2004 13:50:42 -0800, (Jordan Lund) wrote:

> (Goro) wrote in message news:<. com>...
>> I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO DE BERGERAC
>> and, to my chagrin, found out that it was non-anamorphic widescreen.
>> agh! is there any reason these days for a studio to produce
>> non-anamorphic dvds? Is MGM the only studio that does this? I may
>> have to be more careful before buying...
>
>I'm waiting for the Jose Ferrer version myself. Anyone know?
>
>- Jordan

Film Buff

(jayembee) wrote in message news:<. com>...
> (Goro) wrote:
>
> > I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO
> > DE BERGERAC and, to my chagrin, found out that it was
> > non-anamorphic widescreen. agh! is there any reason these
> > days for a studio to produce non-anamorphic dvds?
>
> I'm gonna guess that the aspect ratio on this is 1.66:1. Am
> I right? MGM seems to have a policy of not doing anamorphic
> transfers for 1.66:1 films.
>
> > Is MGM the only studio that does this?
>
> In general, and of the major labels, yes. There are the
> occasional 1.66:1 titles from other labels that are not
> anamorphic (like Warner's GIANT), and some labels like
> Artisan seem to a lot of non-anamorphic tranfers regardless
> of ratio.
>
> -- jayembee

thankx for the info. CdB _is_ 1.66:1. I dislike buying
non-anamorphic to the point of not doing so for dvds i know of
(Criterion's earlier dvds) but I'd like to support the MGM World Films
dvds as they put out some really good stuff that I'd like to see
continue. Currently i have a Sony 32" Wega with anamorphic squeeze,
so it's not too much of a ****er for me, but still annoying (scan
lines!).

a side note/question: since 1.66 < 1.78 (16/9), how do they manage to
make it anamorphic? Do they trim the edges down and windowbox the
whole thing?

thx again
-goro-

Goro

"Goro" <> wrote in message
news: om...
: (jayembee) wrote in message
news:<. com>...
: > (Goro) wrote:
: >
: > > I just picked up the Gerard Depardieu version of CYRANO
: > > DE BERGERAC and, to my chagrin, found out that it was
: > > non-anamorphic widescreen. agh! is there any reason these
: > > days for a studio to produce non-anamorphic dvds?
: >
: > I'm gonna guess that the aspect ratio on this is 1.66:1. Am
: > I right? MGM seems to have a policy of not doing anamorphic
: > transfers for 1.66:1 films.
: >
: > > Is MGM the only studio that does this?
: >
: > In general, and of the major labels, yes. There are the
: > occasional 1.66:1 titles from other labels that are not
: > anamorphic (like Warner's GIANT), and some labels like
: > Artisan seem to a lot of non-anamorphic tranfers regardless
: > of ratio.
: >
: > -- jayembee
:
: thankx for the info. CdB _is_ 1.66:1. I dislike buying
: non-anamorphic to the point of not doing so for dvds i know of
: (Criterion's earlier dvds) but I'd like to support the MGM World Films
: dvds as they put out some really good stuff that I'd like to see
: continue. Currently i have a Sony 32" Wega with anamorphic squeeze,
: so it's not too much of a ****er for me, but still annoying (scan
: lines!).
:
: a side note/question: since 1.66 < 1.78 (16/9), how do they manage to
: make it anamorphic? Do they trim the edges down and windowbox the
: whole thing?
:
==============================
If you had no overscan on your set, you would see very slight bars on the sides with
an anamorphic 1.66:1 DVD.
With most sets, you cannot see them. 1.66:1 is almost as close to 1.78:1 as the
1.85:1 movies are.
===============================

Richard C.

Richard 'black bars' C. advocates more screen filling with:

> If you had no overscan on your set, you would see very slight bars on the
> sides with an anamorphic 1.66:1 DVD. > With most sets, you cannot see them.
> 1.66:1 is almost as close to 1.78:1 as > the> 1.85:1 movies are.


Yet more discussion on black bars from a noted screen-filler.

Watch the film - not the black bars.


Max Christoffersen

Max Christoffersen

"Max Christoffersen" <> wrote in message
news:BC550BFB.6A5E%...
: Richard 'black bars' C. advocates more screen filling with:
:
: > If you had no overscan on your set, you would see very slight bars on the
: > sides with an anamorphic 1.66:1 DVD. > With most sets, you cannot see them.
: > 1.66:1 is almost as close to 1.78:1 as > the> 1.85:1 movies are.
:
:
: Yet more discussion on black bars from a noted screen-filler.
:
: Watch the film - not the black bars.
:
:
=========================
Your comprehension skills are appalling!

When was the last time you actually did anything in this group besides troll?

Putz!
=========================

Richard C.

Richard C. tries to change the topic with:

> : Yet more discussion on black bars from a noted screen-filler.
> :
> : Watch the film - not the black bars.
> :
> :
> =========================
> Your comprehension skills are appalling!
>
> When was the last time you actually did anything in this group besides troll?
>
> Putz!

When was the last time you watched a film instead of the black bars?

Have you noticed how many posters are seeing through your little OAR
masquerade?..


Max Christoffersen

Max Christoffersen