Justice League Is In Letterbox!

[James Harvey]

That's right! The JL pilot was presented in letterbox format! How awesome is that? The entire show was done in the 1.85:1 ratio. I think this is great! I can't wait to see this pilot on DVD...

[Tim Drake]

That is unbelievebly awesome. When did you find this out and how??? You didn't come upon a copy of the pilot did you DG???

[Maxie Zeus]

Will it be broadcast in letterbox? That would be great.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson
That's right! The JL pilot was presented in letterbox format! How awesome is that? The entire show was done in the 1.85:1 ratio. I think this is great! I can't wait to see this pilot on DVD...

1.85:1? Grrr....I've always disliked that format. 2.35:1 should be the preferred ratio for everyone....

[Stupendous Man]

I love this new trend of shows to broadcast in letterbox.

Enterprise is doing it now too.


I think it gives the show a more cinematic feel ...
Its promising cause it implies the producers are thinking
of transfering it to DVD .

If you have a 16:9 television this news kicks ass.

Whens the official premiere date ?

[Failure]

Cool! 1.85:1 seems a little weird though, but I'll take widescreen over normal format any day. Forgive my ignorance, but when is the JL series supposed to premiere?

[Bird Boy]

ahhh sweet!!! I love widescreen!

It airs Nov. 17th Failure! :)

-BB

[Joker85]

YAY!! I love letterbox! I am so glad that Enterprise is being shown in letterbox! A lot of shows are doing it now, though I think ER was the first.

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by Tim Drake
That is unbelievebly awesome. When did you find this out and how??? You didn't come upon a copy of the pilot did you DG???

No I didn't come upon a copy but the screengrabs I'm posting up from Jerry Beck are widescreen. Infact, in the review he does for the pilot (poste din the newspage) he mentions the show is in widescreen. Here's an example (sorry - these pics are at their biggest size)

http://news.toonzone.net/images/jle1.jpg

[The Flash]

COOL!! (he better not be getting ready to punch me in that pic! :D)

[James Harvey]

I think the letterbox format is a great choice. It will definatly enhance the grandeur of the movie pilot. I am drooling in anticipation in this. I can't wait to see my copy of JL! The images just look so great!

[Lucho]

Did he say Snapper Carr was in the show?....Yikes!

"The Right Stuff-esque" opening titles sound thrilling, no mention of the music(we herd a bit in the teaser, but not much), everythin sounds and looks great so far.
Thanks for the news.
Lucho

[James Harvey]

I really hope we get more Shirley Walker magic. She was confirmed to be one of the music superviors for the showe. I hope Kristopher Carter and Micheal (can't remember last name) also pitch in for the show. I'm sure they will. I bet they'll go with a heroic theme possibly similair to the Batman/Superman opening. I can't see them going techno for this show.

[The Flash]

I agree, Shirley better be on it or I'll be disapointed. She was the best, IMHO.

[The Mad Hatter]

Very cool. Still, it'll probably become more natural for shows to be letterboxed now that HDTVs are gradually gaining popularity, so they're just being prepared. And knowing how enduring the show will likely be, it's a good thing too!

[Calhoun07]

I just wish now I had a widescreen TV to watch it with! It is good also to see that they are obviously thinking about DVD releases with these great shows right off the bat.

As for the aspect ratio, I think somebody mentioned that it should be, and everything should be, in 2:35:1 ratio. Kinda hard since not everything is shot in that ratio!

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by calhoun07
I just wish now I had a widescreen TV to watch it with! It is good also to see that they are obviously thinking about DVD releases with these great shows right off the bat.

As for the aspect ratio, I think somebody mentioned that it should be, and everything should be, in 2:35:1 ratio. Kinda hard since not everything is shot in that ratio!

Plus it wouldn't be instantly anamorphic. I'm ,sure new TVs will have the "anamorphic" option on them eventually. I think having it in the 1.85:1 is good for now. Having it in 2.53:1 would be too much empty space for the common viewer. I think it's just great. Look at the grabs - we get so much more.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson
I think the letterbox format is a great choice. It will definatly enhance the grandeur of the movie pilot. I am drooling in anticipation in this. I can't wait to see my copy of JL! The images just look so great!

Heh. 1.85:1 isn't grand, my friend. "Flat", as the 1.85 ratio is termed in the industry, is just that -- flat. 2.35:1, termed "scope" in the industry...well...you get the idea.

And 2.35 doesn't give too much empty space for the average viewer -- not if it's composed like a movie and not like a TV show. Recent animated films shot in the scope ratio have proven just how cool animation can be in this aspect ratio -- Titan A.E., Osmosis Jones, Atlantis, etc. But, I guess we must realize that JL is a TV show and not a movie. But when you're dealing with TV shows shown in the 1.85 ratio, I can't help but wonder "what's the point?" 1.33 (TV ratio) and 1.85 aren't THAT much different. People should be educated about how much they miss when a movie is full frame when edited from 2.35, not 1.85.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by calhoun07
I just wish now I had a widescreen TV to watch it with! It is good also to see that they are obviously thinking about DVD releases with these great shows right off the bat.

As for the aspect ratio, I think somebody mentioned that it should be, and everything should be, in 2:35:1 ratio. Kinda hard since not everything is shot in that ratio!

I know not everything is shot in that ratio. I'm just saying that all MOVIES should be shot in that ratio. Helps separate movies from TV. That's the main reason the 2.35:1 ratio was invented WAAAY back in the 1950's -- to lure people away from the new invention called "television" and back to the movies.

Plus, I just really like the ratio. 1.85 is boring.

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by Cosmocat

But when you're dealing with TV shows shown in the 1.85 ratio, I can't help but wonder "what's the point?" 1.33 (TV ratio) and 1.85 aren't THAT much different.

If I see more animation and more of the screen, then it's fine by me. I love the widescreen look and I'm quickly tiring of full frame. If the JL is in 1.85:1 then it's fine by me. The more I see the better.

[Calhoun07]

I just want to see movies and programs in their original ratio. I never thought of one as boring over the other. And I am with DG, I just want to see what will show me the most for my money, and if they take those 1:85:1 ratios of JL and make them 2:35:1 then they would have to cut off the tops and bottoms and that wouldn't be something I'd want.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson


If I see more animation and more of the screen, then it's fine by me. I love the widescreen look and I'm quickly tiring of full frame. If the JL is in 1.85:1 then it's fine by me. The more I see the better.

That's just it. In 2.35 you're seeing even MORE. Wider frame, wider area, more animation. This is why 2.35 is rarely used for animation (until recently) -- even MORE area to animate.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by calhoun07
I just want to see movies and programs in their original ratio. I never thought of one as boring over the other. And I am with DG, I just want to see what will show me the most for my money, and if they take those 1:85:1 ratios of JL and make them 2:35:1 then they would have to cut off the tops and bottoms and that wouldn't be something I'd want.

I didn't mean that they should CROP it to 2.35 -- I just meant that it would have been even cooler if it was made for the 2.35 ratio to begin with.

I always want to see movies in their original ratios as well, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I liked the 2.35 ratio more. Bigger, grander, more powerful. It's also more naturalistic in a way.

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by Cosmocat


That's just it. In 2.35 you're seeing even MORE. Wider frame, wider area, more animation. This is why 2.35 is rarely used for animation (until recently) -- even MORE area to animate.

The 2.35 wouldn't work for TV becuase alot of folks would be turned off by the "huge black bars". I think they scope they have it in is just fine with me. True havin git at 2.35 would be fine, but this is telelvision and they wouldn't be able to pull it off. 2.35 is use din movies becuase it's supposed to be, and it works. It just wouldn't work on a regular tv, which 90% of the nation still has.

[Calhoun07]

I can already see people calling up TV stations when shows like Enterprise and Justice League come on demanding to know what is wrong with their sets! I think this is fair justice for those of us who know widescreen is the best format! The Joe Six Pack crowd is bound to complain, but oh well! For every person out there that says they don't like the "black bars" there are ten or more who don't care or prefer it that way!

[Vigo Sprax]

Ah, since we're not looking at something being cropped I could really care less how they do it. I prefer widescreen over full frame but it isn't that big a deal as long as its shown in correct aspect ratio. Samurai Jack is a good example of a show that mixes full frame and widescreen very effectively, to use the extra screen space when needed (talking standard TV) and have the cinematic element when they want to.

Dick: What exactly do you mean new TVs will have anamorphic features eventually?

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by calhoun07
I can already see people calling up TV stations when shows like Enterprise and Justice League come on demanding to know what is wrong with their sets! I think this is fair justice for those of us who know widescreen is the best format! The Joe Six Pack crowd is bound to complain, but oh well! For every person out there that says they don't like the "black bars" there are ten or more who don't care or prefer it that way!

That's the cool thing -- since it's on TV, they can't do anything to change it, and one of two things will happen: 1. They'll eventually get used to the bars and widescreen will bother them no longer, or 2. They'll be compelled to finally find out the truth about widescreen and why people insist on shoving it down their throats.

[Calhoun07]

Or just break down and buy a widescreen TV!

[Karkull]

Originally posted by calhoun07
I can already see people calling up TV stations when shows like Enterprise and Justice League come on demanding to know what is wrong with their sets...the Joe Six Pack crowd is bound to complain...

But will the Joe Six Pack crowd even bother to tune in to complain? Last I heard they think that cartoons are for kids.

Letterbox format??? The more that I hear about this show the more I can't wait to see it...and the 9:30 pm timeslot means that I won't have to cut class!

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by Vigo Sprax
Dick: What exactly do you mean new TVs will have anamorphic features eventually?

You know how on DVDs theire are anamorphic widescreen transfers on discs? This means that by using different options on the DVD player you can stretch the image to fill more of the screen without distorting or cutting the picture. Word has is that next generation widescreen television will have this option where the television will do this itself as a 'menu' option, like a DVD player.

Does that make any sense?

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by Karkull


But will the Joe Six Pack crowd even bother to tune in to complain? Last I heard they think that cartoons are for kids.


But Joe Six Pack will tune in and watch Enterprise, and I am sure other shows in the near future will also be broadcast in a similar format. And they will either complain about it or just have to learn to live with it.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Cosmocat
I know not everything is shot in that ratio. I'm just saying that all MOVIES should be shot in that ratio. Helps separate movies from TV. That's the main reason the 2.35:1 ratio was invented WAAAY back in the 1950's -- to lure people away from the new invention called "television" and back to the movies.

But don't forget the complaint of one golden-age director about CinemaScope: It's good only for photographing congalines and boa constrictors.

Saying that every movie should be shot widescreen is like saying that every painting should be the size of the Sistine Chapel, or every opera should be 12 hours long. Yeah, you get "more" of it, but that's not necessarily a good thing; the form should be fitted to the film, not the film stretched out to take up some arbitrary amount of screen space. "Star Wars" would suffer on a screen of standard ratio, but more personal and intimate films do better when the smaller screen forces the characters closer together.

JL promises scope and action, and I can see it being better in a widescreen aspect (and maybe 2.35:1 would be the best), but again that would be a function of the series' intrinsic concentration on spectacle, and not because ALL cartoons should be in widescreen. (BTAS, for instance, works wonderfully in a smaller aspect because it is a very character-driven series.)

[doctorcrime]

excellant point, max.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


But don't forget the complaint of one golden-age director about CinemaScope: It's good only for photographing congalines and boa constrictors.

Saying that every movie should be shot widescreen is like saying that every painting should be the size of the Sistine Chapel, or every opera should be 12 hours long. Yeah, you get "more" of it, but that's not necessarily a good thing; the form should be fitted to the film, not the film stretched out to take up some arbitrary amount of screen space. "Star Wars" would suffer on a screen of standard ratio, but more personal and intimate films do better when the smaller screen forces the characters closer together.

JL promises scope and action, and I can see it being better in a widescreen aspect (and maybe 2.35:1 would be the best), but again that would be a function of the series' intrinsic concentration on spectacle, and not because ALL cartoons should be in widescreen. (BTAS, for instance, works wonderfully in a smaller aspect because it is a very character-driven series.)

Fritz Lang's widescreen comment is based on his personal experience with the format and with his style. He wasn't speaking for the complete art of film itself. I'm so sick and tired of these coffee-shop film "elitists" and film school dorks putting rules on the medium based on the quotes, sayings and practices of the "masters". That and their pervasive "regalizing" of the medium of film itself. Face it -- it's just a camera, people, sets, and acting.

That being said, if every single person felt that 2.35 works best with spectacle and 1.85 works best with intimacy, films would be pretty visually boring, wouldn't they? 2.35 can work wonderfully for intimate movies. Ever see P.T. Anderson's Hard Eight? Ever see John Sturges' Bad Day at Black Rock?

There are NO rules in film. NONE. So many people put rules on the medium because they feel they can "master" it that way. They fail to see that the people who are considered "masters" didn't start their work in the medium with a set of rules. Everything I've said goes for animation as well. I always felt that Batman: Mask of the Phantasm would have been even more wonderful in 2.35. In one aspect, it differentiates it from the TV series, and two, for a movie dealing with lonliness and pain and hurt, what's better than to have one character somewhere in a wide open 2.35 frame?

[Cosmocat]

I forgot to add that when it all boils down to it, 2.35 is just a more "cinematic" ratio. Like I said before, 1.85 flat is flat. 2.35 just envelops you more. 1.85 always seems to keep me at an arm's length visually.