The threads and posts are there to see.
But of course everybody else is wrong and you're right.
No surprise there

Not that you know where they are, or what they're about, or have even read them.


You don't know me, you ignorant little man.

You would be surprised how revealing a post history search is.
It shows all your posts in all the threads you've commented in .
The hardest thing to work out is how you're still here if this is the way you conduct yourself all the time.

As for not knowing you - apart from being a good thing it also means that like any other forum member I can make decisions about anyone based on their posts .
How else would you suggest its done?

It's no surprise that most of the threads you comment in seem to veer away from the thread subject because of your manner.

I'm not ignorant and you don't know whether I'm little or male .
Clearly you have some kind of personality disorder so perhaps you should be viewed with pity instead of the obvious.

Politician's answer, again.



Hello Mr Pot, meet Mr Kettle(!)

Your delusion increases by the day.
It's far from a politicians answer as its correct and goes straight to the point which is that all your posts and attempts at being a smartarse are there for all to see so anyone can read any of the threads and see why you get up the nose of many forum members.

The only thing I can think of why you're still here is because whoever was posting under your username in 2003 is not the same "person" that is doing it now.

It's a shame really because I actually have sympathy for your campaigns against DOG's and for movies to be seen in their correct ratio so it's unfortunate that both campaigns are handicapped by having you as a spokeman.

I have posted in support of some of your posts elsewhere but that was before I cottoned onto how much of a dick you are.

Are you really one of the people shown on the website that your profile links to as your homepage?

If it is , its not a good idea to reveal who you are when your posts are so inflammatory

Believe it or not in general people believe that if there is black bars at the top and bottom they are losing part of the picture.

I'm surprised the channels that have regularly shown 2.35:1 films haven't given a Q&A anywhere for those viewers who think that, but C4 just went (mostly) all-out with it, and the BBC have been on half-measures since around Xmas (ITV and C5 seem to have given up).

All of the Austin Powers films were shot in that bloody awful Super 35 format (where it's simply 1.33:1 or 1.85:1 with the top and bottom shaved off), but the 2.35:1 version remains definitive because that's what was seen in cinemas. Many times, the film will be 'opened up' for TV screenings, but in this case, it looks like a 2.35:1 element was used and simply cropped at the sides. We're basically getting a teeny-tiny amount of the original 35mm real estate!...


Look, I don't like interfering in other people's online wars, but "be more pacific"s post was only tangentially related to the topic at hand and was primarily designed to rile DVDfever into making some kind of angry remark, thereby 'legitimising' (falsely) "be more pacific"s point of view. Like many of us here, DVDfever has moaned occasionally about certain aspects of the broadcasting landscape, but he hasn't attacked anyone posting in this thread, nor has he demonstrated anything other than an interest in the subject of this particular debate (ie. OAR movies on TV). What he may - or may not - do in other threads should be challenged at source, not randomly dropped into other areas of the forum.

If someone is being a 'smart arse', the best way to deal with it is to ignore it, and to avoid that person's posts. Instead, "be more pacific" chose to round up a large number of quotes and make his own 'smart arse' remark designed to provoke a negative reaction. In other words, he was doing exactly the same thing he's accusing DVDfever of doing. Nor is it the first time "bmp" has made such a posting in this thread, without offering any other significant contribution to the thread itself. This displays an alarming degree of obsessive behaviour that has more to do with his dislike of DVDfever than commenting on the issue we're SUPPOSED to be covering.

I don't mean to dump a load all over you, knackyknickknoc. I'm simply making a general observation, with the aim of nipping this thing in the bud. We're here to talk about the earth-shattering importance (!!) of films being screened on TV at their original aspect ratio, not engaging in schoolyard cat-fights. If people like "bmp" turn this into a sniping, sneering stream of abuse and counter-abuse, then I for one will be out of here faster than you can say: "Sod this for a lark! Life's too short, and I've got better things to do with my time." And that would be a real shame.

I would generally agree with that , however I don't object to 16:9 presentations of 2.35:1 films if they are not cropped, that is if nothing is missing and the 16:9 gives us more image.
The behind the scenes footage often shows that nowadays directors take into account the "tv safe" area when composing and both ratios are available for the director to view on his monitor so I think in some cases saying the cinema version is the definitive version is not totally correct if the director has put thought into compositions for tv broadcasts.

Films like Jurrassic Park for example are an even bigger problem.
Effects scenes shot in widescreen so the 16: 9 version gives more width while the rest of the film is shot open and the 16:9 version is actually cropped.

I'm surprised we've not yet had any letters in the Radio Times asking the BBC about their 2.35:1 broadcasts.

Getting back on track, Casino is on ITV 4 now in 2.35:1

It's never that cut and dried, though. For example, if there's any CGI then that'll generally get cropped (although, as I understand it, there was additional CGI in some scenes for Independence Day to make 16:9 more tolerable) and even if there isn't, directors may reframe scenes to focus on an actor or a situation, rather than leave it stranded in the middle of the screen amongst extraneous sky and ground.

As DVDfever indicates, things are never quite as simple as you imagine! Some films may be 'opened up' in the manner you describe, but don't be fooled into thinking you're simply given the 2.35:1 theatrical area with the top and bottom exposed. Given the nature of cinematography, and the way each shot is framed to convey a particular emotion, such an approach would be impossible to sustain throughout an entire feature film.

Instead, we're back to the days when scope movies were reframed for 4:3 TV sets.In other words, the telecine operator will use the 16:9 'template' and pan and scan the original 1.37:1 negative area, locating and 'capturing' the optimum spot from one shot to another. Yes, you're getting 'more' of the image, but it's COMPLETELY reframed from the original 2.35:1 presentation. Sometimes the 16:9 template will zoom in for a closeup, other times it'll pull back and cover a huge swathe of the original image - in either case, it changes the nature of the shot as originally intended, conveying the same emotion, but in an entirely different way. The heavy use of visual effects in some films makes it worse, because many of those scenes are badly cropped for 16:9.

In every single case, the only version that can truly be called definitive, regardless of whether the director framed for multiple ratios on-set, is the theatrical version, because that contains everything you were MEANT to see in the first place. The 16:9 version is a poor substitute for the Real Thing.

Super 35 is truly the WORST 'widescreen' format in the history of cinema...

I am aware that its very difficult to use any movie as a cut and dried template for any other film.
I just mentioned that Jurassic Park is one where the effects were shot for 16:9 but the rest of the movie was not.

Clearly it would be virtually impossible for any 2.35:1 film to be the 4:3 version with top and bottom cropping all the way through .

Not movies but the CGI remastered episodes of Star Trek TOS had the new CGI effects created for 16:9 so those of us with the Blurays actually have cropped images during the CGI sections while CBS Action show it in 16:9 so the live action scenes are cropped instead.

I know which I prefer, and the Blurays do still have the original effects too as an option

It wouldn't be impossible, bit given that it's never an exact science, you can't ever compare one film with another, especially not films made in Super 35 (with a theatrical ratio of 2.35:1) with Jurassic Park, which is neither.

But I can use Jurassic Park to illustrate the fact that widescreen images do not always mean you are seeing more than 4:3/16:9 versions - which is the point I was making.

Channel 4 stumbled badly last night. A reframed 1.90:1 version of SHOWGIRLS on Film 4, and a cropped 16:9 version of ENEMY AT THE GATES on More 4. They've shown both prints many times before, but it's still a disappointment. I mean, where on earth do they GET these bloody awful prints?...

No, because no two films are made the same. You're trying to make a comparison that's just not that cut and dried.

You could argue in an empty room.

What was I comparing Jurassic Park with ? Nothing .

I used Jurassic Park as an example of how widescreen does not always equate to more image - and that is a fact.
And while no 2 films can be directly compared the fact of the matter is that the techniques used in JP of shooting effects scenes wide and the rest open is also apparent on lots of other movies and there's also plenty of examples of 2.35:1 films aswell as 16:9 films where the image is cropped compared to the 4:3 image .
But which side or area that gets cropped changes throughout the movie and from scene to scene

If you want to call the theatrical version the definitive one thats fine , but it does not change the facts of what I've posted.

I wouldn't have said your personality was that bad, but that's your assessment...

Guys, you've made your point, and it doesn't look like you're going to agree, so let's move on.

TRAINING DAY at 2.35:1 on ITV 4 last night.

2.35:1 movies across the Freeview platform next week (7 - 13 May):

I've implemented the arrangement suggested by Paddy. Wasn't sure about it at first, but it might grow on me. Let me know what you think.


Saturday (7 May)

• ALIEN: RESURRECTION (E4)
• BEN-HUR (Channel 5) [2.76:1]
• CASINO (ITV 4)
• FUNNY GIRL (5 USA)
• THE GREEN BERETS (Channel 5)
• IRON MAN (Film 4)
• LEGEND (BBC 2)
• MADE OF HONOR (5 Star)
• MAGNUM FORCE (ITV 1)
• THE MATRIX (ITV 2)
• THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE (Film 4)
• THE SIMPSONS MOVIE (Film 4)
• STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (Film 4)
• THE THREE MUSKETEERS (Film 4)
• THE TRAIN ROBBERS (Channel 5)
• TWISTER (ITV 2)
• WHAT LIES BENEATH (C4)


Sunday (8 May)

• ABOUT A BOY (ITV 1)
• ALIEN: RESURRECTION (E4)
• ALONG CAME A SPIDER (Film 4)
• THE DESCENT (Film 4)
• DOLORES CLAIBORNE (ITV 3)
• FIDDLER ON THE ROOF (ITV 3)
• JAR CITY [Mýrin] (BBC 4)
• THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN (E4)
• THE RED BARON [Der Rote Baron] (BBC 2)
• TWISTER (ITV 2)
• X2 (Channel 5)


Monday (9 May)

• AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER (Film 4)
• ALEXANDER (ITV 2)
• THE BARBARIAN AND THE GEISHA (More 4)
• FIRST MEN IN THE MOON (C4)
• HEARTBREAKERS (Channel 5)
• KISS THE GIRLS (Film 4)
• KULL THE CONQUEROR (ITV 4)
• SERENITY (ITV 4)
• THREE COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN (Film 4) [2.55:1]


Tuesday (10 May)

• ADRIFT [Open Water 2] (Film 4)
• THE COMANCHEROS (Film 4)
• THE CONQUEROR (More 4) [2.55:1]
• JAR CITY [Mýrin] (BBC 4)
• JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH (C4)
• MARS ATTACKS! (ITV 1)
• THE MATRIX (ITV 2)
• TRAINING DAY (ITV 4)


Wednesday (11 May)

• BAD COMPANY (BBC 1)
• BLACK KNIGHT (E4)
• BRIDGET JONES'S DIARY (ITV 2)
• COLLATERAL (More 4)
• HOW TO STEAL A MILLION (More 4)
• MONTE CARLO OR BUST! (Film 4)
• PLANET OF THE APES (Film 4)
• SHOWGIRLS (Film 4)


Thursday (12 May)

• 300 (5 USA)
• BATTLE FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES (Film 4)
• BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES (Film 4)
• COACH CARTER (Film 4)
• CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (Film 4)
• DOLORES CLAIBORNE (ITV 3)
• HUSH (Film 4)
• THE ISLAND (ITV 2)
• SERENITY (ITV 4)


Friday (13 May)

• AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER (Film 4)
• ALONG CAME A SPIDER (Film 4)
• DAMIEN: OMEN II (Film 4)
• AN EDUCATION (BBC 2)
• THREE COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN (Film 4) [2.55:1]

Not being funny, Libretio, but knick.. and I can work out when we've finished discussing it.

I only saw a few minutes to observe it but Channel 5's broadcast last Saturday of BEN-HUR in 16:9 looked truly awful. Not just the massive cropping which ruined the framing but also the poor quality image.

I'm sure you can. But if you're just going to trade unpleasantries, with no hope of a resolution, then it puts a downer on the entire thread. If you want that, then fair enough, but it means I'll take my leave.

Well, I'd said all I had to say at this point, anyway.


I'd miss you in this thread if you did go, but that's your decision to make.