New Willy Wonka 30th Anniversary Special DVD will be in FULL FRAME!!!

[The Clown Prince]

The Digital Bits reported yesterday that Warner had officially confirmed that their new Willy Wonka 30th Anniversary Special Edition DVD will be in Full Frame and not anamorphic widescreen! Why this has happened has not been revealed yet. I'm a Willy Wonka fan, but as someone that is wanting to a get a widscreen TV within the next few years, I don't think I'm gonna get this DVD if it's in full frame only. It was originally said that the DVD would offer both Full Frame and anamorphic widescreen viewing options, but that is not the case. Is it just me, or does WB really know how to screw around with the DVD format. To read what they have to say go here...
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#wonkawierd

The Clown Prince

[The Clown Prince]

Depending on how your computer is, you'll have to scroll up or down to find the Wonka news when you click the link.

The Clown Prince

[Calhoun07]

Oh, well. I won't be buying it now. I hope they realize they lose customers when they pull this crap.

[Brian Cruz]

I sold my widescreen DVD when I heard a special edition was coming out! D'oh!

[Calhoun07]

Oh, man, I am so sorry. I never got the previous edition. Now I wish I had.

[Eraserhead]

WILLY WONKA is another one of those classics that was shot in 1.35:1 "widescreen". Now I'm a strong believer that we, the audience, should always view the picture the way the director intended, but to be honest, at a ratio of 1.35:1, We're not missing out on too much.

Unlike other films like BEN HUR, THE ROBE, HOW THE WEST WAS WON,etc. Now those suckers are WIDE! Their ratios are over 2.70! (The most common is 2.35:1) And to have films like that to be butchered all the way down to pan/scan...Thats where I draw the line.


But for real though, if the film was shot at 1.35 (or less) We don't miss as much picture and they might as well be considered "fullscreen".

[Jack]

I find it easier to deal with pan and scan when it is shot in a not-so-wide widescreen, but on the DVD? Having the option of widescreen is why I got into DVDs in the first place! The first DVD I ever watched was "The Mummy" in glorious widescreen, and it was great! Even films that aren't very wide should at least have the option there, especially when it's the anniversary edition.

Just yesterday I watched an old movie, I forgot the title, but I thought it was good, it had Cary Grant, Audrey Hepburn, and Walter Mathou (sp?). Anyway, it was pan and scan, but it played like it was shot for TV. Later that night, the movie was on again, only it was letterboxed. I enjoyed it more...


Jack:D
Widescreen forever!

[PlopKat]

I'll be passing on the new Willy Wonka Special Edition, too. If the disc couldn't hold both a widescreen and pan & scan versions, why didn't Warners make it an "Ultimate" edition like Universal did recently with "American Pie" for instance?

-PlopKat
The movie Jack watched was "Charade."

[Jack]

Thanks PlopKat, I knew it started with a C, but just couldn't remember it.

I'd understand pan and scan on a cheapo version, but a special aniversary edition?



Jack:D

[Patrick McCart]

Some movies are shot in 1.33:1, fullframe because it's cheaper and easier to film with. ANY movie made before 1953 besides Cinerama and CinemaScope movies (and a few special widescreen films before that) were filmed and viewed in full frame. These exceptions are a handful of 70mm sound films made in 1929 and the widescreen finale of Abel Gance's Napoleon.

A movie filmed in true widescreen (besides 70mm processes without image squeezing) has to use really heavy lenses...which are a real pain to move around. A few movies like Ben-Hen used really wide film combined with these image squeezer lenses to yield a really wide image. Theaters HAD to have special lenses to view these films...or the image would look really anorexic. :)

www.widescreenmuseum.com has a great website on widescreen films that is visually interesting and informative.

Just to clear some things up, here's the aspect ratios for some of those films:

The Robe: 2.55:1 (CinemaScope)
How The West Was Won: 2.60:1 w. 150 degree curve
Ben-Hur: 2.76 (Ultra Panavision) Filmed on 65mm film.
Charade: Filmed in 1.33:1 (TV ratio) and meant to be matted to 1.85:1 (A little wider than HDTV ratio)

Some of these DVD websites are making up stuff...

First, there's some talk going around that the Wonka: SE was not even announced with aspect ratio facts. Only the producer of the disc said anything about the formats

Second, the lies the DVD websites are feeding out that the disc is pan & scan is not true. If you compare the matted and unmatted versions of Wonka on the older DVD, you'll see that the matted version blocks out information.

Wonka was indeed made to be viewed at the "Academy Flat" ratio of 1.85:1, but was filmed fullframe. Theaters would matte it with the projector.

www.hometheaterforum.com has a petition link in the SOFTWARE section under one of the Wonka topics. Don't be fooled by their claim that the DVD is pan & scan...it's just propaganda.

Also, WB recently announced they would release a matted version shortly after releasing the fullframe version is released.

[Calhoun07]

I just want the movie the way it was shot. I don't think it's asking for much. I am not so hung up on widescreen that I can't see movies in full frame. Take True Stories, for example, David Byrne's movie from the mid 80s or so. That movie was filmed in the 1:33 ratio, full frame, so therefore some cropping must have been done to show it in theaters, but on DVD the film is presented in it's original 1:33 ratio. And that's the way it should be! Then you have a movie like Pee Wee's Big Adventure, which was also shot in 1:33 ratio, but the DVD shows it in widescreen format. I am just as upset over the Pee Wee's Big Adventure DVD as I am over DVDs that show the movie in the full frame version when it was shot in widescreen format.

[Jack]

Thank you Patrick for such an informative response. I read some of those "Home Theater Forum" threads, and I have some questions:

Okay, what is "anamorphic enhancement?" People mentioned it many many times. I'd check the Widescreen Museum site, but it's not loading now, and I don't recall if they had a section for matted movies.

Sigh, I do feel sort of fooled, while watching "Charade" in widescreen, I felt like I was seeing more. That made it more enjoyable for me. It just seemed more attractive, I guess. It seemed to look brighter too... Now I don't know what to think about the Wanka DVD. It should still have the matting feature, but what version is the "best" version? I'd assume the matted version is what was intended, since it was just a poor man's version of widescreen... Then again, it's been mentioned the later Looney Tunes were made with matting in mind, so would matted Looney Tunes be a good thing? I doubt it, but my DVD player has a "forced matte" option, so if those LTs ever do come out in DVD, I'll at least try it once, just to see what it looks.

Perhaps there is a site with comparisons (what the two Wonka versions are like side by side), what version makes it look better?

Anyway, I read your thread about Disnip movies and why not so much of an outcry, and you did have a point...


Signed,
Dazed and Confused (like that's unusual) Jack:confused:

[Patrick McCart]

Anamorphic enhancement is basically mastering the video at HDTV size. (Note: Films of wider ratios than 1.78:1, widescreen TV ratio, are still letterboxed, but with the optimal resolution that a 16x9 TV can take.)

The neat thing is that your DVD player can be set for a normal TV or a widescreen TV. If it's set for normal 4:3, it adds the void so that the image is centered. If you were to watch a movie such as North By Northwest on DVD on a normal TV, the "black bars" are added by the DVD. If you watched an anamorphically enhanced movie on DVD...in 4:3 mode, everything would be stretched!

Anamorphically enhanced DVD's are very good because you get 4 times the amount of resolution that you would get from a 4:3 set.

This would be PERFECT for ultra-wide movies such as Ben-Hur and How The West Was Won (even though HTWWW is NOT the correct ratio on DVD. It's mastered from a 2.20:1 70mm print that cuts off picture information on all 4 sides.)

One note however, ratios lower than 1.78:1 don't really benifit from anamorphic enhanced presentations. A movie such as Rear Window, which is 1.66:1 on DVD, is enhanced, so you get void space on the SIDES instead on the top and bottom (and you get more resolution.)

1.33:1 films don't really need the enhancement because they fit the tallness of the wide TV screen. Some DVD's with widescreen movies will have anamorphic supplements (even if they're 1.33:1!) and it helps if one doesn't have to switch from 16x9 stretched to centered.

A widescreen TV basically will fit the wideness of the image to the screen with almost no void.

[Brian Cruz]

As I go through the Disney DVDs and make pages for them, I wonder about some titles like "101 Dalmatians" (1961), "Sword in the Stone" (1963), "Jungle Book" (1967), "The Aristocats" (1970), "Robin Hood" (1973), "Fox & The Hound" (1981), and "A Goofy Movie" (1995), all of which are full screen, but were made after widescreen became the standard. Most of them say "Original 1.33:1 aspect ratio" on the back, and Disney (for all their faults) is usually very good about preserving the original ratio on their DVDs. But then again, I have the LD of "The Rescuers" (1977), and that's in 1.66:1. Could it be that all the films I mentioned before were animated 1.66:1 and cropped on the DVDs? Or could they all really be 1.33:1 and just matted in theaters? Does anyone really know for sure?

About the Willy Wonka thing, I also posted my thoughts over at the Home Theater Forum (Wonka thread Part 2, Page 2), but didn't get much of a response. I was saying that if everyone had complained when Space Jam and Pokemon came out in Pan-and-Scan only, maybe WB would have learned back then and never released a P&S Wonka. But everyone waited until it happened to a movie they liked, instead of trying to stop the trend when it first started.

[Jack]

I think there is a way to make sure, but in involves having every version of the movie. Take your version of "The Rescuers" and find a scene with lots of background details. Make a screen capture of that scene from every version you have and compare the backgrounds

I just got around to reading some of the other threads too, so I read Brian's post. You also have a point that people should even demand that "kids movies" get widescreen tratment on DVD. Then the companies wouldn't give a second thought to releasing all movies that way.

Thanks for clearing up what "anamorphic enhancement" was, Patrick. (can't believe I missed your reply the first time around). So I'm going to guess that "The Out Of Towners" (original version) was shot in TV format too, since the picture fits in the screen so perfectly. How does one find out what format the movies were shot in?



Jack:confused:

[Patrick McCart]

The credits can really help you out...

If the credits of a movie give NO credit like "CinemaScope," "Panavision," or and "____Scope" name, it's probably open matte.

Movies with a "filmed in Panavision" credit at the end credits indicate the movie was filmed at 2.35:1 screen format. If it says "Filmed with Panavision camera and lenses" it's eaither open matte or super-35.

Check out these sites:

www.widescreen.org
www.widescreenmuseum.com

No widescreen process credit = open matte or academy ratio.

Pee-Wee's Big Adventure's DVD is supposed to be 1.85:1 matted. Tim Burton asked for the transfer to be matted because a couple of scenes are ruined because of the open matte way. Wonka has a scene that is "Given away." You can see a hose up Violet's rear when she turns blue. :eek:

There's no doubt that Willy Wonka is supposed to be seen at 1.85:1, but you're not missing anything by seeing the fullframe version. (No matter what the so-called video experts say.)

[Calhoun07]

So does this mean the question boils down to whether you want to see the movie the way it was shot or in the way the director intended it to be seen on the wide screen? I am still saying we should be given both formats, even if I am not missing anything in the full screen version. I should be able to watch both and make my mind up from there, but I would likely want to watch it in full frame if that is the way it was shot, but I sure would like a chance to compare the two.

There is another problem here with kids titles on DVDs, and that's that they don't sell as well as VHS counterparts. When the studios see this, they realize the DVDs have widescreen and the VHS has pan and scan, so what would you logically conclude? That families are foregoing quality because they love pan and scan soooooo much that they will buy crappy VHS just to have it. Yeah, that's it, not that parents don't want their kids handling fragile DVDs at such a young age. Studios should be aware of this, and they also should be aware that there are collectors out there who want the widecreen editions as well, even if parents will still buy the cheaper pan and scan version on VHS for the kids.

[Jack]

I keep hearing that computer effects shots are always shot in the widescreen format, even if the rest of the film is matted. So while regular scenes have added information, special effects scenes are formatted for TV...

Anyway, for the heck of it, I decided to try a matted post 1954 Looney Tune experiment. Since there are no post 54 LTs on DVD, I couldn't use the forced widescreen feature, so i had to resort to a more primative means. I waited until a widescreen movie came on on one of the old movie chanels (can't recall if it was AMC or TCM) and taped paper over the black bars. I then moved the paper down a little because of TV cutoff and popped in a tape with "China Jones" on it. I then watched the whole cartoon in fake widescreen. It was interesting, nearly everything fit into the forced format rather well, even the end scene with the subtitles.


Jack:D