• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
Channels Showing Full Widescreen Films
<<
<
37 of 136
>>
>
DVDfever
22-05-2011
Originally Posted by Dar W:
“Deja Vu on BBC1 and Cinderella Man on BBC2 are both being screened at there original ratios at the moment”

I saw too late that DV was in 2.35:1 and saw that it was on BBC1 Scotland an hour later (cue 'deja vu' joke there), and set that one up. However, like with Absolute Power in April, the Clueless Crew were on hand at the BBC tonight and showed a 16:9 version. I didn't think they could get it wrong again, but oh silly me, this is the BBC we're talking about and they're not the brightest of the bunch when it comes to showing widescreen films properly.

Complaint made to the BBC (a non-sarky one before the usual few who follow me about open up their mouths to let their belly rumble).

Edit: Judgement Night was 2.35:1 for the credits, but windowboxed so I could tell it wasn't going to last. And it didn't. It was then 16:9.
Libretio
22-05-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Edit: Judgement Night was 2.35:1 for the credits, but windowboxed so I could tell it wasn't going to last. And it didn't. It was then 16:9. ”

Yes, 'twas a veritable smorgasbord of CinemaScopic goodness on the BBC last night, though they rather spoiled it by fobbing off everyone in Scotland with an El Crappo version of DEJA VU (anyone know why this happens?), and then fobing off everyone in the entire country with an equally El Crappo version of JUDGMENT NIGHT...

Don't get me wrong: I'm grateful for all of the 2.35:1 presentations on the Beeb to date (and, hopefully, all those to come), but the policy is so piecemeal at the moment, it pays to keep on top of it with complaints like these. In other words, let 'em know that we know...
DVDfever
22-05-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“Yes, 'twas a veritable smorgasbord of CinemaScopic goodness on the BBC last night, though they rather spoiled it by fobbing off everyone in Scotland with an El Crappo version of DEJA VU (anyone know why this happens?), and then fobing off everyone in the entire country with an equally El Crappo version of JUDGMENT NIGHT...

Don't get me wrong: I'm grateful for all of the 2.35:1 presentations on the Beeb to date (and, hopefully, all those to come), but the policy is so piecemeal at the moment, it pays to keep on top of it with complaints like these. In other words, let 'em know that we know...”

Indeed. Trouble is, they don't always listen. I complained about Absolute Power last time and they came back with the standard, "16:9 films are shown because..." clearly having skimmed through my complaint but not actually seen WHY I was complaining!
mllfap
22-05-2011
There is no point in complaining.
Isn't it obvious that the BBC will now show new purchases in 2.35:1 when applicable but they're not going to buy in all new versions of movies just to satisfy a few whingers.

They didn't bother when 2.35:1 was never broadcast so they won't now that they've finally decided to do the right thing.
They probably think that viewers should think themselves lucky for what they are getting.

If the ratio is that important then do what others have been doing for more than 10 years - buy the dvd (or Bluray)

If you want to see films on free tv you have to put up with the compromises
DVDfever
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“There is no point in complaining.
Isn't it obvious that the BBC will now show new purchases in 2.35:1 when applicable but they're not going to buy in all new versions of movies just to satisfy a few whingers.”

What an utterly pointless post. So broadcasters shouldn't care about quality, then?
PowerJC
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“There is no point in complaining.
Isn't it obvious that the BBC will now show new purchases in 2.35:1 when applicable but they're not going to buy in all new versions of movies just to satisfy a few whingers.”

Though when BBC Scotland gets a cropped version and the rest of the UK are getting the same film in 2.35:1 it probably is worth complaining, as they should be neutral across the UK.
Libretio
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“There is no point in complaining.
Isn't it obvious that the BBC will now show new purchases in 2.35:1 when applicable but they're not going to buy in all new versions of movies just to satisfy a few whingers.”

If it wasn't for the whingers (and I'm not sure you were trying to colour everyone in this thread with that particular term, though I can see why some may have taken mild offence!), it's likely we'd be putting up with cropped/altered 16:9 versions of scope films on DVD. It's no good throwing in the towel just because you think your voice doesn't count. From simple acorns, oak trees spring...

Originally Posted by mllfap:
“They didn't bother when 2.35:1 was never broadcast so they won't now that they've finally decided to do the right thing.
They probably think that viewers should think themselves lucky for what they are getting.”

I think there's some truth in that. For instance, people have been complaining for some time now about the way closing credits on regular programmes (as well as some films) are squeezed, cropped and otherwise abused, but the Beeb has blithely ignored the lot of 'em. Just like other broadcasters have ignored complaints about on-screen DOGs. That doesn't mean you should stop complaining, since it's still possible to raise enough of a stink over some issues.

Originally Posted by mllfap:
“If the ratio is that important then do what others have been doing for more than 10 years - buy the dvd (or Bluray)”

I've been using a DVD rental service for some time now, and have seen MANY films that either wouldn't get shown on TV, or if they did, would be cropped to buggery. Saturday night, I 'enjoyed' (if that's the word) Hammer's SHE (in glorious Hammerscope) and the appallingly awful THE RED NIGHTS OF THE GESTAPO (in slightly less glorious Techniscope). But viewers' access to such services doesn't let broadcast TV off the hook, since the 'whingers' pay their TV licence along with everyone else. And that's what this thread is all about...
mllfap
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“What an utterly pointless post. So broadcasters shouldn't care about quality, then?”

No more pointless than you whinging every time the BBC fail to show a film in 2.35:1.
They have started to do what you wanted but don't expect them to get new copies of every film.

We now know they are showing new films in correct ratios so job done.
Utterly pointless to post every time they show an existing copy in 16:9 that will likely be 2.35:1 if they buy it again.

Get over it

Originally Posted by PowerJC:
“Though when BBC Scotland gets a cropped version and the rest of the UK are getting the same film in 2.35:1 it probably is worth complaining, as they should be neutral across the UK.”

Yes , I agree that oddity is worth asking them about .
mllfap
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“. And that's what this thread is all about...”

I agree its worth pointing out when somebody shows a film in 2.35:1 as its still not par for the course .
But do we need to read whinging every time BBC show a film that is not 2.35:1?

It's clear they've moved on and are now buying new purchases in the correct ratios but it's a bit stupid to think they are going to get all new copies of every film they have the rights to.

If the BBC considered the matter important enough to comment we know what they would say.
"Films are now purchased in their correct ratios but we still have films that were purchased before this decision was made " -- so there's no point at all in complaining every single time the BBC show a 16:9 film.

Whinging should be reserved for relevant matters like films in the wrong ratio that have been correct before or perhaps incorrect ratios on C4/Film4 who by and large do things right most of the time

I'm all for correct ratios but I look at a 2.35:1 broadcast as a bonus after decades of Laserdisc and dvd.
But then I've not watched or recorded a movie to keep from network tv for 25 years
DVDfever
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“If it wasn't for the whingers (and I'm not sure you were trying to colour everyone in this thread with that particular term, though I can see why some may have taken mild offence!), it's likely we'd be putting up with cropped/altered 16:9 versions of scope films on DVD. It's no good throwing in the towel just because you think your voice doesn't count. From simple acorns, oak trees spring... ”

Indeed. Back in 2000, that's why Medusa's Snake in the Eagle's Shadow was cropped. Taken from the following link:
http://dvdfever.co.uk/reviews/snakein.shtml

The film was originally made in a ratio of 2.35:1 (Shawscope), but has been cropped here to 16:9, albeit anamorphic, losing approximately 25% of its original screen width and rendering fight sequences incomprehensible. It still suffers scratches on the print and the average bitrate is a so-so 4.48Mb/s, hovering around that mark for the duration of the film.

Why crop and result in such a missed opportunity? The following comes courtesy of the DVD Debate, which answers the query and it comes straight from Brian White, Head DVD producer at Medusa :

"The reason we decided to re-master this movie into 16:9 format was to cater for the widest possible commercial audience. The hard-core collectors may all prefer 2:35:1, but we have found that many kids with 14, 17 and 21" television sets are amongst the most regular buyers of Jackie Chan movies.

Unfortunately, due to the tiny viewing area offered with the 2:35:1 format on smaller TV sets, we often get asked by this target audience to provide 'pan & scan' versions of our movies. As the hard-core collectors detest 'p & s' with a passion, I thought the 16:9 anamorphic/1:85:1 widescreen ratio, would be a good compromise that would appeal to both markets.

In addition, had we conformed the feature to 2:35:1 anamorphic standard, most of the nation's DVD players, are currently not equiped to handle this ratio correctly, and therefore the image would be stretched."


Originally Posted by mllfap:
“No more pointless than you whinging every time the BBC fail to show a film in 2.35:1.
They have started to do what you wanted but don't expect them to get new copies of every film.”

You see, mllfap? You clearly have an appalling level of comprehension because that was NOT what I was complaining about. If you can't even manage that then your attempt at an argument is nilled from the start.

Quote:
“Get over it ”

So back atcha!

Dear oh dear...
mllfap
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“. Who on earth is making these decisions on a film-by-film basis?”

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“People who clearly just aren't right in the head ”

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“ the BBC have been on half-measures since around Xmas”

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“ the Clueless Crew were on hand at the BBC tonight and showed a 16:9 version. I didn't think they could get it wrong again, but oh silly me, this is the BBC we're talking about

Edit: Judgement Night was 2.35:1 for the credits, but windowboxed so I could tell it wasn't going to last.:”

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“. I complained about Absolute Power last time and they came back with the standard, "16:9 films are shown because..."”


Not only is it all you go on about , you've already had the explanation from the BBC but you still persist in whining.

Looking back through this thread it's easy to see why so many forum members treat you like an arse and why you have problems on other threads too.

You know why the BBC are showing and will continue to show cropped films for a long time so what is the point in complaining?
They've made the required move by starting to show them as we want to see them and things will continue to improve .
What does your whinging achieve?

Do you seriously believe they will buy new copies ?
They didn't even care when they were not showing 2.35:1 at all so why do you think they will bother now?
DVDfever
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“Not only is it all you go on about , you've already had the explanation from the BBC but you still persist in whining.”

(sigh). The only times I've actually complained to the BBC about this issue recently is with regards to the films being shown in different ratios between different BBC1 variants.

Quote:
“Looking back through this thread it's easy to see why so many forum members treat you like an arse and why you have problems on other threads too.”

I don't have any such problems. Again, your level of comprehension shows you up. There's a handful of haters who follow me around, that's all.

Quote:
“What does your whinging achieve?”

As for general complaints about 16:9-cropped films, I'm not the only one who complains, so why pick on me? And this thread is about widescreen films on TV which is what I'm talking about. If you're not here to discuss it then move on and stop trolling.
mllfap
23-05-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“I don't have any such problems..... There's a handful of haters who follow me around, that's all..”

What a surprise.

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“

And this thread is about widescreen films on TV which is what I'm talking about.”

Only part of the time - most of the time you spend whinging about the BBC not showing a 2.35:1 film in that ratio for which there is now no need.

The BBC have bowed to pressure and have started showing them correctly but as has already been stated many times they will carry on showing the wrong ratio for a very long time on many films that were purchased before the change to 2.35:1 was made.
Are you really going to pointlessly mention every film they don't show in 2.35:1 ?
Surely it's better to mention the ones that they do show right?
DVDfever
24-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“What a surprise.”

Not at all. It's the same few users, compared to loads of others who don't do that.

Quote:
“Only part of the time - most of the time you spend whinging about the BBC not showing a 2.35:1 film in that ratio for which there is now no need.

The BBC have bowed to pressure and have started showing them correctly but as has already been stated many times they will carry on showing the wrong ratio for a very long time on many films that were purchased before the change to 2.35:1 was made.
Are you really going to pointlessly mention every film they don't show in 2.35:1 ?
Surely it's better to mention the ones that they do show right?”

Are you going to continue missing the point?
DVDfever
24-05-2011
I've put Freeze Frame (ITV) on and despite IMDB listing it as 1.78:1, the elongated opening credits (we haven't yet reached a director credit, and the image is slightly windowboxed) is 2.35:1.

Parts of it are shown through a camcorder lens, and there's various recording info (date/time/etc) around the screen, so cropping that will rob the film of its point.

I bet as soon as I hit 'send' it will go to 16:9...
DVDfever
25-05-2011
Well, I wish I'd recorded it now. Bloody brilliant stuff (like Lenny Henry, I can't abide Lee Evans trying to be funny but he put in a fantastic turn in a drama role), 2.35:1 throughout and NO chatter or scrunching over the end credits!

It's very cheap on Amazon and Play, though.
Libretio
25-05-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Well, I wish I'd recorded it now. Bloody brilliant stuff (like Lenny Henry, I can't abide Lee Evans trying to be funny but he put in a fantastic turn in a drama role), 2.35:1 throughout and NO chatter or scrunching over the end credits!

It's very cheap on Amazon and Play, though.”

Until you mentioned it, I had no idea this was 2.35:1. But a couple of DVD reviews (of the continental Europe version) confirm that it was, indeed, meant to be seen at the scope ratio.

You learn something new every day...
Kevin1960
26-05-2011
The old Bruce Lee film is currently on ITV4 in 2.35:1. The virtually invisible DOG sits fairly nicely just above the picture.
Libretio
27-05-2011
Originally Posted by Kevin1960:
“The old Bruce Lee film [ENTER THE DRAGON] is currently on ITV4 in 2.35:1.”

It is indeed. Sadly, we're only given a stereo version of the original mono soundtrack, a revision imposed on an 'anniversary' theatrical release and carried over to various home video incarnations. And now, TV broadcasts as well.

Nit-picking? Not at all. 'Upgrading' mono soundtracks is no different from cropping widescreen images and colourising black and white movies. And because most people don't seem to care, the industry is able to get away with it.

Still, despite this caveat, I'm pleased to see the film given the scope treatment it deserves.
Libretio
27-05-2011
2.35:1 movies across the Freeview platform next week (28 May - 3 June):

Even though it's a Film 4 production, C4 has never broadcast anything other than a 1.78:1 version of THE WOODLANDERS, and I'm not expecting anything different next week.


Saturday (28 May)

• 2046 (Film 4)
• AIRPORT (5 USA) [2.21:1]
• THE CHEYENNE SOCIAL CLUB (BBC 2)
• THE DEER HUNTER (ITV 4)
• FACE/OFF (BBC 1)
• FANTASTIC FOUR (Film 4)
• FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (ITV 1)
• JAWS: THE REVENGE (ITV 4)
• KILL BILL VOL. 1 (BBC 3)
• LAST OF THE DOGMEN (Channel 5)
• LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE (More 4)
• NANNY McPHEE (ITV 2)
• RUN FATBOY RUN (Film 4)
• STEAL [Riders] (BBC 1)
• TITANIC (C4)
• TWO MULES FOR SISTER SARA (Channel 5)


Sunday (29 May)

• BOOGIE NIGHTS (ITV 4)
• CAROUSEL (Film 4) [2.55:1]
• CONTACT (Channel 5)
• THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON (C4)
• THE ENEMY BELOW (Film 4)
• ENTRAPMENT (E4)
• EQUILIBRIUM (C4)
• THE LONG SHIPS (BBC 2) [2.21:1]
• MISSION TO MARS (Channel 5)
• PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN'S CHEST (BBC 1)
• THE SQUARE (Film 4)
• X-MEN (Film 4)


Monday (30 May)

• BLAZING SADDLES (ITV 4)
• DODGEBALL: A TRUE UNDERDOG STORY (C4)
• ENTRAPMENT (E4)
• A FEW GOOD MEN (Channel 5)
• GUNS OF THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (Film 4)
• THE ITALIAN JOB (C4)
• LARA CROFT: TOMB RAIDER - THE CRADLE OF LIFE (BBC 3)
• MISS CONGENIALITY 2: ARMED & FABULOUS (ITV 1)
• ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE (ITV 1)
• PILLOW TALK (ITV 3)
• THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING (Film 4)
• VON RYAN'S EXPRESS (More 4)
• WALL•E (BBC 1)


Tuesday (31 May)

• BABYLON A.D. (Film 4)
• ENTER THE DRAGON (ITV 4)
• GUNS OF THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (Film 4)
• ROMEO MUST DIE (5 USA)
• UNFORGIVEN (ITV 4)


Wednesday (1 June)

• BOOGIE NIGHTS (ITV 4)
• CAN-CAN (Film 4) [2.21:1]
• THE GREAT SIOUX MASSACRE (C4)
• KILL BILL VOL. 1 (BBC 3)
• MAD MAX 2 (ITV 4)
• PAYBACK (5 USA)
• QUENTIN DURWARD (More 4) [2.55:1]
• WHAT A GIRL WANTS (5 Star)


Thursday (2 June)

• BLAZING SADDLES (ITV 4)
• ESCAPE TO BURMA (BBC 2) [2.00:1]
• LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN (Film 4)
• MONSTER'S BALL (Film 4)
• RESIDENT EVIL: APOCALYPSE (Channel 5)
• RUN FATBOY RUN (Film 4)
• THE SECRET LIFE OF BEES (Film 4)
• THE THING (ITV 4)


Friday (3 June)

• ACE VENTURA: WHEN NATURE CALLS (BBC 1)
• THE COMANCHEROS (Film 4)
• DISCLOSURE (ITV 2)
• FROM HELL (5 USA)
• LOVE EXPOSURE [Ai no Mukidashi] (Film 4)
• THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING (Film 4)
• UNLEASHED [Danny the Dog] (ITV 4)
• WHEN EIGHT BELLS TOLL (C4)
• THE WOODLANDERS (Film 4)
• X-MEN (Film 4)
mllfap
27-05-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“It is indeed. Sadly, we're only given a stereo version of the original mono soundtrack, a revision imposed on an 'anniversary' theatrical release and carried over to various home video incarnations. And now, TV broadcasts as well.

Nit-picking? Not at all. 'Upgrading' mono soundtracks is no different from cropping widescreen images and colourising black and white movies. And because most people don't seem to care, the industry is able to get away with it.

Still, despite this caveat, I'm pleased to see the film given the scope treatment it deserves.”

Have to disagree there.
Many films benefit from surround remixes and the soundtrack is often a huge improvement .

The sounds available are often lost and not even heard when all buried away in a single mono channel.
The new surround remix of the original Psycho uncovered sounds in the track that even those who worked on the film had never heard before, like the bird sounds in mothers bedroom as the PI approaches it before his murder.

Granted , some films don't need surround remixes and some that are done are not very good but the Bond films and so many other movies really do benefit.

Purists sometimes have the option on dvd/bluray
Kevin1960
28-05-2011
Currently on BBC2 in 2.35:1

Airport is on 5USA; opening credits in OAR but then changed to 16:9.
Libretio
28-05-2011
Originally Posted by mllfap:
“Have to disagree there.
Many films benefit from surround remixes and the soundtrack is often a huge improvement .

The sounds available are often lost and not even heard when all buried away in a single mono channel.
The new surround remix of the original Psycho uncovered sounds in the track that even those who worked on the film had never heard before, like the bird sounds in mothers bedroom as the PI approaches it before his murder.

Granted , some films don't need surround remixes and some that are done are not very good but the Bond films and so many other movies really do benefit.

Purists sometimes have the option on dvd/bluray”

[Sharp intake of breath] We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, I'm afraid.

There's a case to be made for these remixes when multi-channel versions can be extracted from the original recordings. But '5.1' has become the mantra of a generation weaned on DVD (and now Blu-ray), where the technology exists to take any old soundtrack and tart it up with a flurry of audio bells 'n' whistles. Whether or not the remix unearths new sounds is immaterial, since it still represents a home video revision of the original film. Like colourisation of black and white movies, as I mentioned earlier.

The revision of soundtracks has come about exclusively because the technology is there, not because it's especially warranted. A good film is a good film (or a bad film is... etc.) whether mono, stereo or digital 5.1. What matters - or, at least, what should matter - is that the film is recreated to the original theatrical specifications, unless there are very good reasons for doing otherwise.

Why else would the likes of high-end distributors like the BFI in the UK and Criterion in the US opt ONLY for the original audiovisual materials when recreating movies for home consumption? Other companies choose 5.1 because they think it will generate more money, and certainly not for 'artistic' reasons!

And though I understand what you mean when you refer to people like myself as 'purists', I've never liked that word in this context, because it suggests there's something peripheral about people who make the case for original soundtracks (these are the same people who have campaigned for original ratios since the destructive days of VHS), as though audio revisions are somehow acceptable just because they're viewed as a commercial imperative. For example, it makes me angry to see so many thick-headed online reviewers demonstrate so little knowledge of film history when they 'review' the 5.1 or 7.1 version of a film originally released in mono or 2-channel (or 4-channel), and then either ignore the original version altogether or dismiss it as something for the 'purists'. The original sound is as important as the original ratio, no matter what the subjective view of a 5.1 or 7.1 revision might be!

I know you'll offer further debate on this one (and very welcome, too!), but I've discussed this topic (for and against) with many other online commentators, and I promise you, there is not a single argument you can bring to the table which will change my mind on this issue. Like the subject of cruelty to animals for the sake of 'entertainment', you'll find me completely intractable.

In the immortal words of the beloved Mrs. Slocombe: I am unanimous in that!
DVDfever
28-05-2011
Originally Posted by Kevin1960:
“Currently on BBC2 in 2.35:1 ”

It's not as good as The Cheyenne Silver Social Club...

(I'll get me coat...)

PS. For anyone who googles her, she's definitely NSFW.
Libretio
28-05-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“(I'll get me coat...)”

If I'm understanding you correctly, a dirty mac might be more appropriate...
<<
<
37 of 136
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map