What's new

All studios- please STOP calling pan and scan "FULLSCREEN"! (1 Viewer)

Jesse Skeen

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 1999
Messages
5,033
I'm not going to get into how I feel about pan-and-scan; one of the main selling points of DVD before it came out was that it would be able to show all movies in both widescreen and pan-and-scan, and if some people want to watch their movies that way then so be it. However, I have to first say that I have a big problem with these separate releases where one will contain only widescreen and the other only pan and scan- in addition to causing more trouble for consumers and retailers as they have to make sure they're getting the "right" version, it of course makes the preferred version harder to find at some stores and invites a 'competition' to see which format sells more. MGM has started using DVD-18s for some movies that require it to include BOTH versions on ONE disc. Perhaps DVD-18 is still not reliable enough to produce in mass quantities for several titles, but DVD-9 wasn't reliable in the beginning either but it's become commonplace now. (No, I don't care about the lack of printing on 2-sided discs as DVD was designed to be a 2-sided medium, though it seems like it would be easy to print on the entire center of the disc- "Scooby Doo" could have Shaggy on one side and Scooby on the other, for example.)
In cases where it's just not possible to do two transfers, the "pan and scan" function of the DVD player should be used- for 1.85 movies it will crop the picture for regular TVs if people desire to watch it that way. Only on 2.35 movies does this present a problem. I have seen a few discs unintentionally use this (like Elite's Drive-In Discs) and the function DOES work, but most discs just don't use it.
Now, regardless of whether the choice is given on the same disc or by separate releases, it is VERY misleading and confusing to have the pan-and-scan version labeled as "Fullscreen" or "Standard"- the average consumer at first glance may think that this version shows the Full screen picture in the Standard format, and the "Widescreen" version is just for people who like those funny black bars. MGM actually labeled their first DVDs as "Pan and Scan" but have changed it to "Standard", doing nobody any good. If there MUST be a pan-and-scan version for consumers to choose (and by no means whatsoever should it be the ONLY version available!) it should be labeled as such. Additionally, if two versions are available, it should be clearly indicated that the "Widescreen" version is the one that shows the movie as it was meant to be seen, and the other one shows the movie "without the black bars" but constitutes an alteration of the film in the process.
With the advent of 16x9 TVs (which DVD was DESIGNED for from the get-go), the term "Fullscreen" is even more ridiculous, as if it is played on one of these TVs the screen is neither "filled" nor is it possible to view the full picture.
So please, if pan-and-scan DVDs are going to keep coming out, they should be labeled TRUTHFULLY- that on a regular, 4x3 TV it will show without "the black bars", but that it is not the way the movie was intended to be seen.
 

Thomas Newton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Messages
2,303
Real Name
Thomas Newton
To really inform buyers properly, you'd need to cover all of the following situations.
  • Shown as intended (x.yz:1 aspect ratio; note special cases like multiple intended compositions for one movie (Justice League) or multiple ratios within a movie (Dr. Strangelove))
  • Butchered to fit a 4:3 TV (pan and scan)
  • Butchered to fit a 16:9 TV (pan and scan or tilt and scan)
  • Open matte (may show more of the picture than intended)
  • Recomposed for a 4:3 TV (e.g., as in the 4:3 version of A Bug's Life) (only likely for computer-animated films)
  • Recomposed for a 16:9 TV
 

rutger_s

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 7, 2000
Messages
878
I wonder why they never use:

-Standard Television
-High-Definition Television
-16:9 Widescreen
-4:3 Crop Open-Matte
-16:9 Crop Open-Matte
-4:3 Pan & Scan
-16:9 Pan & Scan

Oh yeah, because its easier to just say Fullscreen or Fullframe on the artwork. Not only that, not all 4:3 fullscreen transfers are 4:3 pan & scan. Some are 4:3 crop open-matte, meaning you see a lot more information on the top and bottom of the frame.
 

TheoGB

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 18, 2001
Messages
1,744
I guess "Specially ruined for standard televisions" wasn't considered a strong seller...;)
 

James L White

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 29, 2002
Messages
840
I wish they'd stop calling P&S "standard" that's even worse than "fullscreen" because standard makes it sound like that how the movies were meant to be seen
 

Jodee

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 13, 1999
Messages
1,044
How about "Modified Screen"?

That is easy to say and conveys the right message.
 

Patrick McCart

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2001
Messages
8,196
Location
Georgia (the state)
Real Name
Patrick McCart
Actually Fullscreen and Widescreen are widely known, thus those who want OAR know which to get...and those who want non-OAR can get what they want.

1.33:1 movies (Citizen Kane, Gone With The Wind, etc) are called Standard, so it would cause just more confusion. People are actually sending complaints to Warner for putting out a pan & scan Citizen Kane...they don't realize that 1.33:1 is the OAR for the film.

So far, all dual versions (JP films, Oceans 11, etc) have wither "Widescreen Edition" or "Full Screen Edition" or something like that.

DVD manufacturers have to use the KISS method on covers... Keep It Simple, Stupid...
 

Jesse Skeen

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 1999
Messages
5,033
Except the term "FULL SCREEN" isn't simple. Anchor Bay sort of gets it right since their covers say "reformatted to fit 4x3 TVs" (though the disc often shows the choices as Widescreen or Full Frame, which makes no sense, especially if you're playing it on a 16x9 TV.)
 

Brian McHale

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 5, 1999
Messages
514
Real Name
Brian McHale
I think it's hard to come up with labeling that would be considered simple enough by the studios, but would still please OAR purists.

That being said, however, the one thing that really needs to be changed is the caveat that all P&S movies have at the beginning. To start watching a movie on my widescreen TV and see "This film has been modified to fit your screen" is a slap in the face to 16:9 TV owners.

And before all the "why are you watching P&S " posts start showing up, I don't buy P&S, but I will occasionally rent it.
 

Daniel L

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 8, 1999
Messages
179
The studio have to but this disclaimer on all films due to contractual obligations...

Dan Linzmeier
 

Patrick McCart

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2001
Messages
8,196
Location
Georgia (the state)
Real Name
Patrick McCart
Except the term "FULL SCREEN" isn't simple. Anchor Bay sort of gets it right since their covers say "reformatted to fit 4x3 TVs" (though the disc often shows the choices as Widescreen or Full Frame, which makes no sense, especially if you're playing it on a 16x9 TV.)
How is "Formatted to fit 4:3 TVs" simpler than "fullscreen"?

First, most people (OAR purists or not) know what they'll get if they get widescreen or fullscreen. Second, the rear side of the cover says "formatted to fit standard televisions" or something like that.

By putting the lengthy (in comparison) "formatted" line you request, it's just going to confuse people.

Are we trying to encourage widescreen by promoting the advantages of it or trying to confuse the buyer into avoiding the title completely?
 

John Berggren

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 17, 1999
Messages
3,237
I wish they'd use Modified Aspect Ratio.

Why can't "Modified" be where Widescreen is? Fullscreen sounds like a lovely option (even better perhaps than widescreen) when it's assumed that full means all.
 

John_Berger

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2001
Messages
2,489
I wish they'd use Modified Aspect Ratio.
Beat me to it. The studios should be using

- "Original Aspect Ratio"
- "Modified Aspect Ratio"

Those two selections cover ALL of the bases. Even 1.33:1 movies can then be put under the "Original Aspect Ratio" tag if the movies were meant to be seen in 1.33:1, like Citizen Kane or The Shining.
 

Brian McHale

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 5, 1999
Messages
514
Real Name
Brian McHale
Beat me to it. The studios should be using

- "Original Aspect Ratio"
- "Modified Aspect Ratio"

Those two selections cover ALL of the bases.
Intellectually, I would agree. However, the studios want to make it obvious to J6P when he is buying something that will fill up his 20" 4:3 TV. The studios don't really care that the terminology they use is questionable, they just want to sell as many DVDs as they can. The people who are interested in OAR are more knowledgeable about the format and will be able to read between the lines to figure out if the disc contains the version they want. J6P just wants to make sure that it will fill up his screen.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,816
Messages
5,123,862
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top