The reason Kubrick's later films look so good on the tv screen is that he shot most of them in the same aspect ratio as television screens, they weren't wide-screen at all!  If I remember correctly one or two of them (like Full Metal Jacket) were released in MONO too!!!  Funny that the guy who shot 2001 would revert to 1.33:1 Mono!
 
Night,

Bob
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Letterbox Loons

Dear JR et. al.
 
No indeed!!!   AMC (when they were American Movie Classics!) were not making it up about the rampant letterbox-itis in America. It's just unbelievable!!!  Obviously citizens of the US (I don't know about Canada. Folks up there?? Weigh in.) cannot understand the concept of a rectangle versus a square (or alMost a square.)
My friend who has worked in a reasonably mentally upscale (if such exists in the Big Easy)  Blockbuster in New Orleans testifies that Letterboxing is one of the biggest bugaboos there. People just scream about it!  They really did it more so before the DVD made widescreen more available.
You simply canNOT convince these people that what they are seeing in p&s (or especially "mid-screen") is not the whole picture. 
I have two friends who are connoisseurs of antiques and brilliantly-tasteful decorators but who are notoriously cheap and clueless about tvs, etc. They steadfastly refused to drive the thirty miles to Clinton, Ms. and see TITANIC on the big screen with all the sonic trappings.  But they rented it on the p&s vhs tape when it came out and watched it on a 13" screen with the model's tinny mono sound.  They told me the next day that it "wasn't much" and that they didn't see what the fuss was about.
I told them that there was no discussion-- that they simply hadn't seen the picture!!!
 
Apparently in Europe and the UK (correct me if I'm misinformed, folk-to-the-east) letterboxing has been common on TV for years.
Steven Spielberg has been criticized forever for using 1:85 to 1 (approx. VistaVIsion ratio) in most of his films as opposed to 2:35 to 1 (approx. Panavision ratio) as he did in Jaws, Close Encounters and the Indy Jones films.  But it's obvious to me  that Spielberg as well as Coppola in the Godfather films, uses 1:85 to 1 Ratio because it isn't so butchered in television pan & scan versions.  I don't mean to read these directors' minds, but I truly believe that's one of the prime considerations.
In recent years there has been controversy over several director-ordered full-screen dvd releases from the Kubrick catalog-- specifically Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining.  But I believe that Kubrick knew exactly what he wanted.  I recently acquired The Shining.  The disclaimer on the box and the disc says that it was an "unmatted" version that Kubrick called for in home theatre.  And I believe it.  Because the picture is PERFECTLY framed in the full television screen.  When I saw Eyes Wide Shut on pay-per-view when it was released that way it was the same thing. 
James Cameron is a disliker of letterboxing and plans his own pan&scan versions for video.  I suppose the tape of Titanic that my friends saw would have been acceptable on a reasonable-sized tv screen.  I watched part of the p&s on HBO or one of the other costly non-letterboxing services that I won't subscribe to because they won't give me ALL the movie I'm paying for.  The Titanic was perfectly watchable because Cameron had shot it in a matted form ala Kubrick-- wherein the "masked" parts of the top and bottom of the screen were removed, actually offering More information and the sides lost much less than usual.  Not my choice as a viewer, but if the director prepared it, well... I can't argue with that.
My sister was here a couple of years ago and said, looking at my system in action, "I suppose you want films letterboxed."
I replied, "I want the film the way I saw it in the theatre. If it's full-screen that's fine with me.  But if it's Ben-Hur, I want to see ALL the horses at once!"
 
But, believe me, pan and scan is infinitely preferable to the "mid-screen" mish-mash that my young friend was watching on their new system.  I have to have them come over here and shove letterboxed films down his throat. 
Or at least some good, old-fashioned black and white masterpieces.  They recently watched The Night of the Hunter with me.  The kid was fascinated.
Next will be Sunset Boulevard!!  And then he gets Ben-Hur--- with ALL the horses!!
 
Joe B.
 
PS-- Redneck Video Rental Cackle for all:  In Vicksburg one day about seven or so years ago one of the rental clerks told me about a coveralled ole'boy type who brought back the rented vhs tape of an Italian Oscar-winner (name escapes me, but NOT Cinema Paradiso.). He complained that it wasn't in English and you "had to READ it!"  The girl explained that the fact that it was in Italian with English subtitles was written on the box.  The old neck (who had obviously only ogled the Lollabrigida-clones on the box) grumbled, "I didn't READ the box!!!"
 
Arghhh!!!
Joe


"JRS MoviePosterBid.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Y'know, I always thought AMC was just making it up when they said during their promos that "some viewers feel cheated when they view a film in letterbox format because of the black bands at the top and bottom of the screen..."  But apparently they were telling the truth -- some people actually object to viewing a letterbox version of a film and complain to the station when they see it (!)
 
This is what comes from lifting films like "Dumb and Dumber" to the status of social acceptability folks.
 
How can anyone object to being shown the WHOLE picture?
 
Why would they ever want to see less then the whole picture? They want to loose half the scene, just so what's left "fills the screen" of their TV set? That is what matters to them?
 
And now, just to please these idiots and coddle them in their lunacy, the manufacturers are putting a button on DVDs to automatically cut off the left and right sections of a widescreen movie -- just so the middle part will "fill the screen"?  Unbelievable...
 
To think that it has come to this, after 50 years of Cinemascope and 70mm -- and these kids growing up on widescreen. After letterbox showings on TV have been around for over 20 years. Yet they still don't understand that is it a *good thing* when they see a letterbox image on their TV screen?
 
I do believe there is no hope left for western civilization.
 
-- JR
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 18:04
Subject: Re: [MOPO] The Stooges in color? Soitenly!

Hi from Joe B.
JR is absolutely right on this one.  It's a frustrating situation.
 
It's true that the colorization-- no matter how clever or well done-- subverts the original. But-- Three Stooges shorts or Little Rascals shorts or Roy Rogers westerns are NOT "The Maltese Falcon," "Citizen Kane" or "Night of the Hunter"-- films whose mood would be totally destroyed by colorization.
So if it will encourage younger folk to see these classic funnies, I have no problem-- particularly since a pristine black & white restoration can be toggled back and forth (for those of us who remember Gabby Hayes fondly in monotone).  After all many young people will check out the b&w original and maybe like it.  Our friend Tom Martin's son made a very respectable black and white film and enjoys working in black and white and he's still in his teens.
 
It's the letterboxing thing that gets me.  Many mainstream films are releasing separate pan and scan and letterboxed discs so they can include all the extras.  At least when both versions are available on the same disc or in the same set it allows for choice and those with letterbox-itis may be converted when they can instantly see what they are missing-- particularly if they are young.
But there's a new feature on many newer dvd players that is really tacky!  It' is an automatic "letterbox-defeat."  And it's called just that. 
This is worse than pan & scan because at least p&s is planned for and engineered.  But the letterbox-defeat merely cuts out the sides and shows just the middle of the picture without regard to anything else.
At my friend's house recently his teenaged son was showing off their new system (purchased at Target!!) and treated me to the Pod-Race from Star Wars Phantom Menace in glorious "mid-screen" (I refuse to call it pan and scan 'cause it Doesn't!!).  It was, of course, wretched and one could barely make out what was going on.  I told him not to expect me to waste two seconds watching a widescreen movie like that when I come to visit. 
But he got "his" in a couple of minutes.  He dropped in a widescreen teen flick, put the letterbox-defeat on and within two minutes, saw the girl of his dreams in a bikini-- disappear from the screen "off-stage-left." 
You never saw a teen reach for the remote so quickly in your life!!
 
Joe B.

"JRS MoviePosterBid.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The legal argument on this was resolved long ago -- whomever "owns" the film can colorize it if they want and there's nothing anyone can do to stop them. Whether they should or not will be debated forever, but there's no question that a colorized version of a black-and-white film is something that a lot of younger viewers will watch while they would not watch the black-and-white version. Sad but true.
 
Since that is the reality of the situation, I applaud the fact that these producers are including BOTH a nicely-restored black-and-white version and the colorized version on the same DVD.  That actually satisfies both young consumers and older purists. It's a far better solution than just putting out a colorized version only and leaving the purists out of luck.
 
-- JR
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:41
Subject: [MOPO] The Stooges in color? Soitenly!

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
August 10, 2004

The DVD era is resurrecting the great colorization
debate of the 1980s, and at the heart of the matter
are Moe, Larry and Curly.

Sony's Columbia TriStar home-video unit is releasing
two Three Stooges DVDs that allow viewers to watch the
original black-and-white or digitally colorized
versions. Purists consider it desecration, while Sony
executives say the process can introduce movie
classics to young audiences reluctant to watch
anything in black and white.

The Stooges discs coming out today also give die-hard
fans better black-and-white versions, the studio
insists.

To prepare for the colorization process, Sony did a
more extensive restoration than it had with previous
black-and-white- only Stooges DVDs, said Bob Simmons,
a technical specialist who worked on the project.

"The best thing about this DVD release is it gives the
consumer the ultima! ! te choice," said Suzanne White,
vice president of marketing for Columbia TriStar.
"They can watch the very best, the finest restored
image of the black-and- white version, or watch the
new colorized version and switch instantaneously
between the two." The new DVDs, "Goofs on the Loose"
and "Stooged and Confoosed," contain four shorts each
featuring Moe and Curly Howard and Larry Fine.

Offering a choice does not appease colorization
critics, who include Sam Raimi, director of Sony's
"Spider-Man" blockbusters. "I don't think they should
mess with black and white," said Raimi, who is such a
Stooges fan that credits on some of his movies label
extras as "fake Shemps," a reference to doubles used
to complete Stooges shorts after the death of Shemp
Howard, who both preceded and succeeded brother Curly
in the act.

"I think they should just leave it as they are and try
to preserve them as best they can," Raimi said. "I
f! ! eel like it's an artistic interpretation that's not
anybody's right to make except the director's."



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

         Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
   ___________________________________________________________________
              How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List

       Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L

    The author of! this! message is solely responsible for its content.

Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.


Do you Yahoo!?
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.


Do you Yahoo!?
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!

Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.

Reply via email to