Search results

And if we get stuck with the 2.0 framing that's closer to the 70mm blow-up on home-video, why didn't we *also* get the multi-channel audio for the DVD instead of the (pretty lame) 2.0 192 kbps Dolby?

From Criterion, certainly true. But there's nothing magical about Criterion's ability to create a 1080p HD transfer. In fact, many of their DVDs derived from their HD transfers have been pretty sub-par... lots of rining and generally lacking in detail. They are really good about getting color...

With any luck, someone will release a future BD version with a transfer that is *not* approved by the director/cinematographer. ;) They can use the current Criterion transfer as a reference for color timing and just do an optimum 1080p transfer of a full-scope source. Surely somewhere out there...

I presume that presenting them on home video in 2.0 form would involve opening up the matte versus cropping off the left/right of the vertically-reduced 2.35:1 frame.

Sigh... took me a while to scroll down and see that laugh icon! :crazy:

That's only because I put faith in Criterion to deliver a film on DVD in its original aspect ratio. When I first started watching the movie I actually actually thought "huh, I thought that this film was regular 2.35:1 on my old Korean Copy..." but since I didn't own the disc any longer I...

hehe... that dvdfile reviewer is me. ;) Thanks guys for this thread and for the poster who directed me here... because I wouldn't have known that the cropping had even taken place were it not for this very informative thread. In fact, I was about to publish that review giving all positive...

You can email Criterion and let them know the reason that you're not purchasing this DVD set. That will send a message. This DVD is a "holdover" anyway... it's the 1080p Blu-ray Disc where we really have to worry, bcs that would be the definitive version and possibly the last release for a...

My bad. It had. After the first few dozen back/forth posts I lost track! :)

Whew! c'mon guys, Doug is not going to change his mind (I have pages and pages about debates regarding lossless audio to prove it! ;) ) Doug has his opinion and others have theirs. Everyone has expressed themselves well... but there's no way to express yourself that's going to change...

BTW, I contacted Criterion and sent them a link to my DVD review and asked if they could answer some of the details concerning this DVD regarding the image cropping/zooming from 2.35:1 to 2:1. I'll report back if they respond.

How was it projected in the theater when it was released? If 2.00:1 is the correct aspect ratio for the film, why wasn't it projected as such? Why did the creative team chose to have release prints at 2.35:1 for the film that one nine Academy Awards, only to have someone change it for home-video...

that's not the crux of the argument for OAR. The arguement for OAR is based on what the proper and intended aspect ratio was for the film during its original theatrical release. That's what we want, and why we want it. Whether more or less image content is acheived by following that rule...

Sorry that I didn't make it clear, I realized that and was adding to your conclusions.

It's entirely one thing for a creative artist to take advantage of a second opportunity to revisit their work and present the uncompromised edition that they had always wished to deliver due to financial, political, or practical restructions during the initial editing/filming process. It's...

Doug, just how many posts in a row does a guy need to make? :D That would be due to his lack understanding regarding how home-cinema has evolved in the age of high-definition given the state of high-resolution wide-angle projection systems that not only provide the same viewing-angle as...

Just like Lucas was subconciously composing a trilogy for JarJar for many years before he realized it. ;)

Doug, we all understand what you're saying. However, it's not arrogance for a film enthusiast to want to be able to see the same framing that he saw projected in the theater... since obviously the director had approved that aspect ratio for public release. If 2.35:1 was not the proper...

Guys, anyone interested take a look at my review at dvdfile and let me know if my categorization of the new framing and aspect-ratio issue seems to approriately reflect the right attitude for those with a strong affinity for this film. No doubt in my mind that the cropping is destructive to...

Wow. Sure glad I found this thread. I've modified my review of this DVD accordingly!!!