Widescreen DVD or Full Screen??

Patrick

New member
Hahahaha! I didn't think that it mattered that much to be seeing all the "Director intended us to see". However, cannot be described as a "scam". Calling that a scam is like saying that clothing in smaller sizes should be less costly since it doesn't offer as much fabric. I don't know why I continue to post. I guess I'll shut up now.
 

spohlso

New member
However, cannot be described as a "scam".

Actually it can. The next Generation of TVs will have an aspect ratio that matches movie screens. When you play your 'full' screen DVDs on them, the black bars you wanted to avoid will be on the sides instead of the top and bottom. Only this time, the black bars will actually represent missing image. If you want to fill the whole screen, you will have to buy your entire collection over.

That's the 'scam' part.

You may think, "Well, I'm never going to buy a widescreen TV." In a few years, they won't make the square ones. Eventually you'll need to buy a new TV. You just won't have a choice one day.
 

Randy_Flagg

Well-known member
spohlso said:


That's the 'scam' part.

You may think, "Well, I'm never going to buy a widescreen TV." In a few years, they won't make the square ones. Eventually you'll need to buy a new TV. You just won't have a choice one day.

I still don't think it's a scam. Don't get me wrong, I prefer widescreen, but the full screen is not a scam. Some people simply prefer to have the picture fill their entire screen. They find the lines at the top and the bottom to be distracting. Yes, I know, in a few years all TVs may have a different aspect ratio. But when you buy a movie, are you thinking, "Gee, I want to be able to enjoy this in three or four years," or are you thinking, "I want to enjoy this tonight"? For me, I'll worry more about what I can watch and enjoy at the moment.

Besides at the rate technology changes, who's to say DVDs will be the preferred medium by the time wide-screen televisions are predominant? We may all be on this forum saying, "Wow! The Indy movies are going to be available in Soopa-Doopa Disc format soon! Can't wait! I can't stand the horrible picture quality on my DVDs anymore!"
(actually, following that logic, why aren't people on this board complaining that VHS is a rip-off? Or DVDs... since we know DVDs will eventually be obsolete?)
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Regardless of the size of your TV screen or the format which you are viewing the movie on, widescreen was the intended ratio of the films. It has nothing to do with tastes, it has to with whether or not you want to see the movies the right way or the wrong way.
 

Patrick

New member
Finally, someone understands what I meant. I'm not going to bawl when the My Full Screen Videos do not fill my entire screen, in fact I tried to say numerous times ( All of the failed due to my poor vocabulary) That I was not saying which I prefered.
 

Indy Smith

New member
It's amazing how in America you have the choice between Pan and Scan DVDs and Widescreens. In the UK our DVDs are usually automatically in widescreen.

I wonder, does anyone know if these films will have their widescreen version in 16:9 made for TV widescreen or, will it be in the super wide screen which we saw in the Indy videos that were released a few years back? I know of late Speilberg has been a fan of shooting his movies in 16:9 rather than the super widescreen of cinemascope. I've saw a few screen captures that made me worry:
indianajonesz1coll16.jpg


indianajonesz1coll42.jpg


These screen captures are in 16:9 TV Scopre, when the actual film was done in Cinemascope. I know this because the opening titles of the Pan and Scan videos I have are in Cinema scope, but once the titles are done we go to Pan and Scan. I would really love to have seen them in Cinemascope Widescreen rather than 16:9 widescreen.
 

Randy_Flagg

Well-known member
Udvarnoky said:
It has nothing to do with tastes, it has to with whether or not you want to see the movies the right way or the wrong way.

But it DOES have to do with taste. (I know, I should just drop it, and yes, I do feel like a broken record, but let me try one last time to clarify what I mean.)

Some people PREFER to have the picture fill their entire television rather than having black lines at the top and bottom of the screen. The fact that they prefer it means it is a question of "taste." You said yourself, "It has nothing to do with taste," and then you said, "it's a question of whether you want...." Doesn't "wanting" something kind of imply taste?

Look, I prefer widescreen too. But I've spoken to many people who find those black lines at the top and bottom of screen to be distracting. They don't care if they lose a bit of the scene, they'd just rather have the picture fill their entire set. They like having a bigger picture, even if it's incomplete. So it is most definitely a question of taste.

Yes, I know you could argue all the reasons why fullscreen is inferior (it's not the director's image, etc, etc), but that's not the point. The point is, people want to enjoy the movie when they're watching it, and if they find those black lines (or the smaller picture) irritating, then why go with the widescreen format when Lucas was kind enough to offer it in a fullscreen format as well. It is NOT a scam to offer an alternative that some people prefer. It's a matter of providing choices because different people like different things. Now, IF Lucas was planning to release a fullscreen format first, and then a year later suddenly announce a widescreen version, I would say the "scam" theory may have some credibility. But they're releasing them at the same time.

Here's one last analogy:
A car manufacturer releases a fantastic new sports car in two color schemes: One is red, and the other is yellow and blue polkadots. Chances are you'll prefer the red one. But the yellow & blue polkadots are not a rip-off or a scam, they're an alternative for somebody who (for whatever bizarre reason) happens to think sports cars look great in yellow & blue polkadots. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If nobody likes it, nobody will buy it, and eventually the manufacturer will wisen up and stop releasing polkadot sportscars. But if enough people do happen to think polkadots look cool, they'll continue producing them. I think that's what's happening with fullscreen DVDs. Enough people like them, and so it's worth offering them.

(Arghh... now even I'M sick of hearing myself, so I'll end this here and start following the advice in my signature.)
 

Indy Smith

New member
Well if the widescreen version are going to be just 16:9 TV Widescreen as above rather than cinamescope widescreen then there's nothing to whine about because the 16:9 doesnt show off that many black bars on a 4:3 TV. Even my dad who hates watching cinemascope on a TV doesn't mind the 16:9 because it isn't as bad as superwidescreen. He always says with that you have half a picture. But with 16:9 he says isn't as bad.
 

Randy_Flagg

Well-known member
Renderking Fisk said:
It's a joke that people don't know enough to know they're getting ripped off. You're paying the same price for seeing only 2/3rds the picture.



(Randy Flagg bangs own head against wall repeatedly, indulges in a little primal scream therapy, and begins to walk out with the sad realization that he's been talking to a brick wall. Just before he leaves, he utters one final time, "But it's not a rip-off if people prefer it that way..." and then he stops, realizing the wall can't comprehend this simple logic, and he turns away, knowing he'll probably be back again some other day to try and once again explain simple logic to a wall, but needing to take a break for now.)
 

Indy Smith

New member
Some people prefer to have the image fill their entire 4:3 TV. it has nothing to do with ignorance. me, personally I don't mind either one. once your involved in the movie it doesn't really matter what screen mode it is in. If you're really anal about these things then I feel sorry for you. Ok, so your missing a bit of the screen. Like it really detracts from the story? My Indiana Jones films are in 4:3 mode and I don't mind. Granted I would prefer them in widescreen, it's nothing to get my knickers in a knot about.

I doubt we'll get through to him Randy. He seems intent on thinking what he likes best is correct, and that it's not just down to personal interest.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Ren...it's useless. If they want to ignore everything the directors, actors, etc. worked for, then let them. We aren't missing out, if that's what they want. Even if it is wrong...
 

Indy Smith

New member
Yeah, but you get a bigger picture on scan and pan. ;)

Well taking the director into consideration. I am a director and if it makes a majority of the people out there happier that they see my film in Pan and scan then so be it. I would personally oversee the Pan and Scan process and make sure what is seen, is what I want the viewer to see. Therefore I can make both of my audiences happy. those who like widescreen and those who like to see their TV's filled with an entire image.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Indy Smith said:
Yeah, but you get a bigger picture on scan and pan. ;)

Well taking the director into consideration. I am a director and if it makes a majority of the people out there happier that they see my film in Pan and scan then so be it. I would personally oversee the Pan and Scan process and make sure what is seen, is what I want the viewer to see. Therefore I can make both of my audiences happy. those who like widescreen and those who like to see their TV's filled with an entire image.

But that's making two different films, y'know...and how many directors are willing to do that? Not Welles...not Kubrick...and definately not Jack Ford...

If you would be, that's great. But is it really worth the trouble? It's hard to make art and also make all of your audience happy...Difficulty aside, is it even worth it? Is it even art?
 

Indy Smith

New member
You Americans...always overdressing for the wrong occassions...ok, maybe not, but if you are American, it's weird how its run in America. Over here, I have never in my puff encountered a DVD which is not in Widescreen. They are all in widescreen, so I am baffled as to why America seem to have different options. I used to believe that in ALL DVDs, you saw the film in Widescreen and that was that. So for me, there is no problem with this as everything is in widescreen here. The only full screen dvd I have (ok, there's one) is the shawshank redemption, but it's a double sided DVD, on one side it is in widescreen and the other is full screen 4:3.

I feel sympathetic towards your cause dude. i understand that some like wide and some like full. Now in a world of DVD if you're going to have different versions you should always split it 50/50. Your rental store should supply both widescreen and full vesions. or they should just supply widescreen. Those who don't like widescreen can always press the zoom button on the DVD. If i watch a DVD with my dad though (he's old) I just tell him the widescreen is a feature you cannot get rid of and he just accepts it and watches, but always complains of how narrow the image looks on his TV.
 

intergamer

New member
How is separate but equal pertinent? That idea, of course, comes from Plessy v. Ferguson, which is irrelevant. Even if one is better than the other, how does that relate to a Free-Choice argument? I'm sorry, but you seem to be throwing out buzzwords, while missing out on the greater meaning. Also, you engage in a amateurish attempt to cover possible comebacks (the preface about your arrogance, short dismissals of other arguments).

Oh, Mr. Fisk, whatever will we do with you. Alliteration not intended.

No offense intended, just a general commentary, my friend.
 
As I read this thread I wonder: is there a difference between full-screa--er, full-screen and pan-and-scan, or are they just different terms for the same thing?

All right, here's my one cent and a half a button: I feel that it's pretty ignorant of some people to watch fullscreen simply because "the bars are distracting." So it's not distracting for the camera to slowly pan to the side as the picture blurs up when you can tell pan-and-scan is taking place? But on the other hand, yes, it is their choice. If they want to miss out on up to half the picture and get gipped by paying for the same cost of the full picture, that is their problem.

I agree with what Ren has been saying. The original aspect ratio (whichever widescreen has been chosen) is the director's vision. When they transfer it to full screen, it's like up a painting or leaving out choice sentences in a book. You're seriously missing out on it by getting fullscreen. It is a crime that video stores are selling/renting fullscreen DVDs only. That would be like selling the younger readers version of, say, Robin Hood, or The Jungle Book, and not selling the originals. It's just wrong.

I could ramble on and on, but whatever else I could say at this point has already been said. That's all I've got to say right now.
 

Indy Smith

New member
If your DVD player is Multi-region fisk, and if not you might consider getting one at Multi-region. You could order a lot of DVDs from Region2. Of late region 2 DVDs are getting better than the Region1 counterparts.

http://www.blackstar.co.uk
 

spohlso

New member
OK, I just watched Raiders in widescreen for the first time since I saw it in the theaters back in 81. All these years I have only been able to watch my foolscreen VHS tape.

I have to say, it's an entirely different movie. The sense of scale is 100% different in widescreen. The look of the sets is completely different. The feel of the lighting is completly different. It's like a whole new experience.

I will admit, there are some scenes where it simply doesn't matter. Scenes where characters are just talking, close ups on peoples faces, etc. but the scenes where it does make a difference are amazing!

Shots of the Tanis dig. Indy running from the Hovitos. The fight in the market place. The fight in the Raven Bar. Even Marion and Belloq in the tent in the desert. The play of search lights against the pattern of the tent material is something that simply isn't there in pan and scan.

[Edited by spohlso on 10-22-2003 at 08:33 am]
 
Top