HBO re-releases From the Earth to the Moon"... in WS (1 Viewer)

[Nelson Au]

Another poster in the Movies Software section says he had been an aquantance of a camera man on the production of From the Earth to the Moon and that he recalls the mini series was filmed with both AR in mind. So either 4:3 or the widescreen format is correct. However, he is unable to confirm this. I too wonder if this can be confirmed.

Regarding the original packaging of the DVD set, I can see some are unhappy with how they fall apart. The silver outer cover of mine has come apart, a little hotmelt glue will fix it up. But I think you have to keep in mind this was an early DVD set and while this market was still new, they were experimenting with packaging. I appreciate that they tried things other then the expected, the folding out aspect added to the "special-ness" of the historical content and celebrates it. The new cover art is very nice too.

 

[Rick P]

I believe it's been on HBO HD in the past few months.... 16:9 and all that...

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Considering that HBO crops 2.35:1 films to fit the 16x9 screen on HBO-HD, I wouldn't make any assumptions about the proper aspect ratio for FTETTM by how it is now shown on that channel. HBO is not exactly a stickler for OAR.

 

[Rick P]

the only way we're going to know is a screen cap comparision when it comes out...

 

[Keith I]

It could be that it was shot in 16:9 and that frame was cropped to 4:3 (e.g., C.S.I.) instead of being shot 4:3 and cropped to 16:9. So for the anamorphic widescreen version, we'd see extra images on the sides. Sure, it may have extra space if the 4:3 framing was tight, but we might not be "missing" anything, just seeing more. But some people may not like this anyway. I really don't think it will be pan-n-scanned.

As TravisR said, other shows were shot 16:9 during that time, so it is possible that it was shot 16:9.

But like Rick P says, we might not know until actual images are released.
-

 

[PaulP]

The problem with this argument is that the majority of shots, in my opinion, look to be composed for 4:3.

 

[Keith I]

Yes, it could have been (and probably was) "composed" for 4:3 but it could have been "shot" 16:9, so there will be extra information on the sides. HBO then would cut off (matte) the left and right side for 4:3 viewing. So if two people were talking facing each other and both of their heads filled the 4:3 frame, on the 16:9 version, we'll see some extra background to the left and right sides of their heads.

If it was shot 4:3 and THEN cropped to 16:9 (i.e. cut off/matted the top and bottom of the image) and the two heads filled the 4:3 frame, then you'd see part of their heads cut off and that would definitely get everyone upset. This is what Warner did for the initial Kung Fu: Season 1 set and then rereleased it properly.

People with 4:3 monitors will see the image letterboxed but it still contains more information. However, the entire image will be smaller due to the letterboxing. "Purists" may still not like this since they aren't seeing what they originally saw which was less information in the image and a larger image filling their screens.

People with 16:9 monitors might be pleased since it WILL "fill" their monitor screens (and be anamorphic to boot giving better resolution) but they will see more image on the sides. Unless they are "purists" and don't want to see extra information on the sides.

Again, all of this is MAYBE if it was shot 16:9 and cropped to 4:3, not the other way around.

 

[TravisR]

People will argue that the director of photography intended the 4:3 ratio even if it was indeed shot 16:9. And all that extra space on the sides is wasted and not meant to be seen. The perfect example would be Buffy which, as most people know, was shot 16:9 but only meant to be seen 4:3.

I guess some of those people have psychic ability in order to read the DP's mind.

 

[Kraig Lang]

Just saw that the new release is soon upon us. Anyone heard any more about the OAR?

This is one I will gladly double dip for as long as it's presented appropriately.

Thanks

 

[Yee-Ming]

Stop me if I'm wrong, but I thought anamorphic was only relevant to 16:9 material, whether native 16:9 (and therefore "fullscreen" on a 16:9 display), or even wider material (2.35:1) with small letterboxing? I.e. native 4:3 material has the same "full" horizontal resolution as anything native 16:9, in that no black letterbox bars are hard-encoded, just that each line isn't as "long" as in 16:9 material?

Anyway, still wondering if the new release is "open matte" 16:9, which might be of some interest to me if hte transfer is improved, or if it's tilt-and-scan, in which case I'll pass. Happily, I'm re-watching my current set, up to ep 7, and so far no glitches at all. Surprising, really, since disc rot is such a big problem out here in the tropics.

 

[Harry-N]

Any reviews on this one yet?

I'm curious, having just finished watching the older version. All of the discs played through just fine, but on our newer 16x9 HDTV, the whole series had what looked like scan lines appearing any time there was any motion. I tried switching between progressive scan and interlaced and the interlaced setting looked a little better, but the anomaly was still there.

We were watching in it's native 4x3 size, not stretching it at all, and I tried it in two differengt players, both of which gave the same results.

So now I'm hoping that the new set will be better mastered, yet framed properly as well.

Harry

 

[PaulaJ]

DVDTalk just posted their review of the new edition of From the Earth to the Moon. They posted some screencaps and from what I see, looks like they opened the picture a bit on the sides in some shots but cropped the top and bottom. ;(

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=17788

 

[Eric F]

Yes, but that's to be expected from something shown open matte. It's going to be especially noticable on old 4:3 clips.

 

[David Dias]

I don't know, I don't think it sounds like a worthy upgrade. I think I'll hold on to the original release.

 

[Andrew Bunk]

On a side note, this is the second release of FTETTM with NO printing on the spine. Must be trying to stay consistent.

 

[Jeremy Little]

Glad to see that I'll be saving a few bucks. I am also glad that neither the case nor the discs of my original set are falling apart.:b

 

[Harry-N]

I splurged and bought the new set and did a side by side comparison using the PnP feature of my 55" TV. The colors are much more vivid on the new set, but the real issue here is the aspect ratio.

Watching the two run simultaneously, it became evident that for the great bulk of shots there's a bit more information on the two sides (a little more left - not as much on the right). There's a tiny bit less headroom on the widescreen version, and a fair amount cropped off of the bottom. In all of the scenes I viewed (about a third of the first episode), the info cropped off of the bottom was generally as useless as the info that has been added to the sides.

I see this as a win-win situation for all involved, in that it really doesn't matter all that much which version you buy, as both have adequate looking composition to me, IMHO.

Purists should stick with the 1.33 set, while those with 16x9 sets may want to view it in its newer aspect ratio of 1.78:1.

One change I noticed was on the opening credits. On the fullscreen version, though the picture appears letterboxed, the printed credits would float just above and below the frame line. On the new version, these shots are still letterboxed (looking like about 2.35:1 to me), but the printed credits are now fully contained within that frame.

I also observed what looked like a different decay rate for the credits as they faded from white to black, indicating that perhaps the credit sequences were re-done for this set.

I'm not sorry I bought this at all - on the contrary, I like this series so much that I'm happy to have both versions.

Harry

 

[MattSav]

Thank you everyone for the information about the WS reissue of this set. I especially liked the links to the full-frame vs. WS comparisons. I've been on the fence about picking it up, but it sounds like the WS version has better picture quality. I can live with the slight cropping, and it will look better on my 65" RP WS display. The inclusion of the DTS track makes it a winner for me.

 

[PaulP]

Gotta love the double standards in the DVD community. Widescreen-to-fullscreen - bad; fullscreen-to-widescreen - good... :frowning:

 

[Harry-N]

...and of course it's just not possible for a title to be "correct" both ways, right?