full screen vs letterbox...can't we agree on both

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Scott Mitchell, Sep 24, 2003.

  1. Scott Mitchell

    DarkMatter Guest


    If that is how it was originally intended to be, then it IS OAR.
    DOH!
     
    DarkMatter, Sep 25, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Scott Mitchell

    DarkMatter Guest

    Not true either. It should only be offered in the form factor the
    director intended, regardless of the gear that was used to get it.
    I agree that it was a mistake to chop the wider version down. Same,
    stupid, console the idiots mentality.
    No way. The wide form yes, but the open matte ended up getting
    leased rarely, and the predominate showing was the VistaVision
    version. That is the aspect ratio that it was actually framed for,
    and that is really the only way it should end up on store shelves.

    There should NEVER be ANY film that ends up on a DVD in two forms.
    It cuts into what the consumer gets by attempting to cater to two
    groups. Intelligent movie buffs, and Ex-VHS rental FOOLSCREEN
    retards.
     
    DarkMatter, Sep 25, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Scott Mitchell

    DarkMatter Guest


    Your El Punko gang boy lingo is just as lame as you are.
     
    DarkMatter, Sep 25, 2003
    #23
  4. Scott Mitchell

    Mark B. Guest


    But I don't want both formats...just OAR. I refuse to buy any movie not
    released in the OAR.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Sep 25, 2003
    #24
  5. Scott Mitchell

    Richard C. Guest

    : On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 02:12:48 GMT, Black Locust wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    :
    : > I'm taking Dark Matter's stance on this. Scott, you need to educate
    : > yourself on aspect ratios and most importantly what happens to a movie
    : > when it's "modified to fit your screen." Then you can come back here
    : > and start making demands. I don't believe FOOL screen should be
    : > available seperately or on the same disc, period.
    :
    : What about Full Frame?
    :
    =====================
    Full frame for what? Older films?
    This is mere obfuscation.....

    Original Theatrical Aspect Ratio is all that matters.
    That can mean only one thing.
     
    Richard C., Sep 25, 2003
    #25
  6. Scott Mitchell

    Richard C. Guest

    : In article <3f71a13a$0$51869$>,
    :
    : > ================================
    : > Sorry...........I usually REFUSE to buy DVDs that have both.
    : >
    : > OAR is all that is necessary. You can watch widescreen on ANY TV.
    : > ==============================
    :
    : Well said Richard. Simple and to the point.
    : --
    ===========
    Thank you.
     
    Richard C., Sep 25, 2003
    #26
  7. Scott Mitchell

    Richard C. Guest

    :
    : : > I feel I was one of millions who helped kill DIVX...why can't
    : > we all agree to stop buying DVD's untill they put both formats on the
    : > same DVD. It works very well and the studios know it. They just want
    : > to sell the same DVD twice, when those of us that can't afford
    : > widescreen buy one and then have to buy another DVD. The technology
    : > is there as there are many 2-sided DVD's with both formats. Can't we
    : > have both and please everyone? Just like the high price of CD's, the
    : > coming of gold CD's, buying CD's when we had cassettes, buying
    : > cassettes when we had LP's. They continue to rape us and we have the
    : > club. STOP BUYING DVD'S UNTIL THEY PUT BOTH FORMATS ON ONE. I don't
    : > care if it costs a few dollars more...money in the bank at a later
    : > date. scott mitchell
    :
    :
    : But I don't want both formats...just OAR. I refuse to buy any movie not
    : released in the OAR.
    :
    : Mark
    :
    =======================
    Why do these fools keep coming in here and insisting that putting both versions on a
    disc would make "everyone" happy?
    The only people it would make happy are the compromising fill-the-screen mouth
    breathers.
     
    Richard C., Sep 25, 2003
    #27
  8. Scott Mitchell

    Eric R. Guest

    (Smaug69) wrote in message
    Not all of us have big widescreen or anamorphic TV's, Daddy Warbucks.
    Personally, I prefer fullscreen versions and don't care about
    so-called "anamorphic enhancement."
    Thank God.
    Yeah well, if you'll send me a couple of thousand bucks to buy a
    widescreen TV, I'd probably be more inclined to worry about "artistic
    integritry." Until then, the only integrity I'm worried about is the
    integrity of the wood grain cabinet of my 25" Curtis Mathis console
    TV.

    -Eric
     
    Eric R., Sep 25, 2003
    #28
  9. In
    Your nuts. Do you even care about seeing the whole picture instead?
    If you do then you should educate yourself a little.

    http://www.widescreen.org <--- I suggest your start there.
    Yeah, because I wouldn't want things your way.
    So? I have a 27 inch Sony and guess what... I still watch Widescreen
    films on it. TV size DOES NOT matter, its the intent of the film makers
    is what should be important. I'm not even entertained at the thought of
    watching any film that is missing up to 50%. Hell, how about a really
    grand film like "Ben Hur." Have you ever seen how much of that film
    gets cut off on the P&S version? Its beyond unwatchable at that point.
     
    Brian \Demolition Man\ Little, Sep 25, 2003
    #29
  10. In
    These are the same people who:

    A) Insist there is no difference between WS and P&S.
    B) Say that HDTV will be dead very soon.
    C) Want WS programming subjected to late at night.
    D) Want DVD to be VHS Redux.
    E) Live in a trailer.
     
    Brian \Demolition Man\ Little, Sep 25, 2003
    #30
  11. Scott Mitchell

    DarkMatter Guest


    Exactly.

    I'd bet that over 95% of them do not know anything about video
    either. They had to have their systems wired up by their kids or a
    "pro", and they only "know" how to plug in a tape, or disc.

    "Waahhh! I want my screeen filled! Waaahhh...."
     
    DarkMatter, Sep 25, 2003
    #31
  12. Said the Usenet genius whom could be baited endlessly forever and ever...
     
    Ura Dippschitt, Sep 25, 2003
    #32
  13. Scott Mitchell

    unclejr Guest

    If they still pressed "flipper" discs (with P&S on one side and WS on
    the other), then I think that this will make most (but certainly not
    all!) people happy.

    I, personally, like separate P&S and WS releases, so I can have the
    artwork on my WS disc that you wouldn't get with a "flipper." The
    only issue I have with separate P&S issues is that K-Mart and Wal-Mart
    (the local stores in my area) oftentimes only stock the P&S version,
    so I have to travel an hour to a Best Buy or Circuit City to get the
    WS version.

    Cheers,

    -Junior
     
    unclejr, Sep 25, 2003
    #33
  14. Scott Mitchell

    jayembee Guest

    I think he means "can't afford [a] widescreen [television]".

    -- jayembee

    (And I'll apologize in advance if you knew that, and are
    just playing with him.)
     
    jayembee, Sep 25, 2003
    #34
  15. Scott Mitchell

    jayembee Guest

    Irrelevant. I don't have a widescreen TV, either. Just a
    27" 4:3 TV. But I still insist on watching widescreen films
    in widescreen. And I did even for a brief period between
    reasonably-sized TVs when all I had was a 13" portable.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Sep 25, 2003
    #35
  16. Scott Mitchell

    jayembee Guest

    What do you mean "why can't we all agree"? We can't all
    agree, because some of us think that having both versions
    on the same DVD is a stupid idea.

    The way I see it, marketing a DVD with both versions on
    the same disc would be like the shoe manufacturers marketing
    their product with a pair of black shoes and a pair of brown
    shoes in the same box, letting the consumer decide which
    pair he'd rather wear.
    Sorry, no can do. Why should I forego the pleasures of owning
    and watching widescreen DVDs just so some aesthetically
    challenged tools can have their fullscreen?

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Sep 25, 2003
    #36
  17. Scott Mitchell

    Smaug69 Guest

    You're bored, too, eh?

    Smaug69
     
    Smaug69, Sep 25, 2003
    #37
  18. Scott Mitchell

    Eric R. Guest

    Yeah, I do. That's why I want to see fullscreen. Get it? Why do you
    think they call it FULLscreen?
    Yeah, well I have an *American* TV, not some Toyota-vision with fancy
    anamorphic enhancement and s-video inputs.
    Size DOES matter. And any woman who tells you otherwise is a damn
    liar.
    What about a really crappy one like Phantom Menace?

    -Eric
     
    Eric R., Sep 25, 2003
    #38
  19. Scott Mitchell

    buck Guest

    These fools just want every movie turned into a "television show". Im
    sure they would be even happier if the studios inserted commercial
    breaks every 9 minutes or so.

    If a person is so lame they cant figure out that a "Movie" is not a
    "Television Show", they certainly wont hve the brain power to see the
    advantage OAR brings to the viewing experience.

    The Pan&Scan version of Ben Hur is a really crummy movie, you can almost
    NEVER tell who is talking to who. The OAR version is truly spectacular
    even on a 15" monitor.


    It wastes calories to discuss "full frame" versions of Movies that
    weren't made that way to begin with.

    Changing the aspect ratio of a movie is as crass and revolting as re-
    painting the "Mona Lisa" to match the new draperies in the museum.


    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    buck, Sep 25, 2003
    #39
  20. Scott Mitchell

    buck Guest

    You have already proved yourself a fool by choosing to campaign for
    "fullscreen". It wasn't required to prove you also had the bad taste to
    buy a REALLY bad television.

    Not all of us (as a matter of fact I'll bet MOST of us) that want OAR
    have a widescreen TV. I don't, and I probably wont have one for quite a
    while, but I still want my movies in Original Aspect Ratio.


    Why???? Because it is the ORIGINAL, its not changed, altered, or screwed
    with.. Its as close as can be to the way it was in the movie theater.

    If I want furniture, I'll buy a table, or a chair, or maybe a hutch, but
    when I shop for a Television, I simply buy the best picture quality I
    can afford, and then I watch my movies. the way they are supposed to
    look.

    When I do get a widescreen set, I'll have the advantage of having an
    even BETTER picture because of the Anamorhic transfer on my DvDs.


    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    buck, Sep 25, 2003
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.