![Digital Theatre [DTheatre.com]](images/logo.png){kind=logo}
|
Starring on Dtheatre's Stage: Latest Movie News & Trailers, TV News and Productions,
Special Free Guides, Gadgets and Expert Reviews on Varity of Exciting Zones. We actually have a special expert responsible for every post series. Come back soon, you will always find new interesting things! |
By Wind(up)bird January 27, 2005 5:51 AM
A lawsuit has surfaced suggesting that a certain number of MGM DVDs advertised as being presented in widescreen actually weren't. ?The suit suggests MGM took pan-and-scan versions of the flicks and placed bars over the top and bottom of the screen. Bastards! Click over for the GIANT list of DVDs possibly affected.
| comments: 3
MGM is correct, the lawsuits in error.. 
reply
Posted by hellblazer (No Email) on January 31, 2005 4:27 AM
some films are shot "open frame" at a ratio of 1.33 to 1 (same as a tv set) and are matted in the movie theatre by the projectors apature gate to 1.85 to 1 ratio. this is to preserve the directors original intent. on "open frame" films the video release can show the extra material at the top and bottom of the screen without resorting to "pan and scan" (this additonal picture often includes sound booms and unfinished bits of sets) so this lawsuit settlement is SERIOUSLY IN ERROR as MGM CORRECTLY state on the discs that the widescreen bars preserve the original theatrical format (of films shot "open frame" that is. )
Im a theatre projectionist so trust me, theres nothing wrong with any of the DVDs on this list.all thats been cut out is empty space above peoples heads and unimportant stuff at the bottom
Whats staggering is some of the films on this list were shot "hard matted" (ie the black borders are exposed onto the negative) at 1.85 ratio and ARE CORRECTLY presented as such by MGM
and its sheer stupidity that theyre even on the list in the first place.
I cannot believe that the judges in this instance have a very inept understanding of the difference between "open " and "hard Mattes" or correct theatrical ratios.
im sure the lawsuit could easilly be overturned by any testimony from a film director,cameraman, projectionist etc etc
RE: MGM is correct, the lawsuits in error.. reply
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on February 2, 2005 2:36 AM
Are u 100% sure?
RE: MGM is correct, the lawsuits in error.. reply
Posted by chappai (biodredd@yahoo.com) on February 3, 2005 6:47 AM
I own a few of the titles on this list. The fact that some thought they had to waste public money by bringing this to court is insane. There are a couple of things that occur in pan and scan copies of films that just don't appear on the films I own that are on this list. First, two characters can never have a face to face conversation unless their noses are almost touching, and then most of the back of each head will be cut off. This results in clever editing to avaoid scanning where you will see shots of each character talking which can destroy the director's intent. That doesn't occur in these films. Another thing, even on DVDs. film grain can be quite apparent and images fuzzy as the image is now blown up to a degree to fill the screen from top to bottom. The films on this list that I own don't even seem to have this issue and finally, the credits are obviously squeezed at the beginning and end to look long and tall instead of spread across the screen. Its a crappy excuse for a lawsuit. Next you know, someone will be suing WB for using cheap DVD cases made of cardboard.
 CONAN THE BARBARIAN |
 CAPTAIN AMERICA |
 CRAZY, STUPID, LOVE |
 THE SMURF |
 COWBOYS AND ALIENS |
 BAD TEACHER |
 MR. POPPERS PENGUINS |
 GREEN LANTERN |
