Is the 1.33:1 Aspect Ratio making a comeback? (1 Viewer)

[Mark-P]

In the past 3 years there have been 4 theatrical movies shot in the vintage 1.33:1 aspect ratio. Fascinating - what is old is new again!
Fish Tank (2009)
Meek's Cutoff (2010)
The Artist (2011)
Wuthering Heights (2011)

 

[Stan]

In the past 3 years there have been 4 theatrical movies shot in the vintage 1.33:1 aspect ratio. Fascinating - what is old is new again!
Fish Tank (2009)
Meek's Cutoff (2010)
The Artist (2011)
Wuthering Heights (2011)

I certainly hope not. Going back to the old projection ratios would be quite a turn off. If they think that by going retro, there may be some success due to massive publicity, but don't see it lasting long..
There may be a small group of artsy, elitist types who would enjoy it, but doubtful enough to make much of a profit and keep on producing films in that style.
What's next, blurry black and white films with scratches, missing frames and choppy soundtracks so we can remember the old days? Doubtful.

 

[Malcolm R]

What's next, blurry black and white films with scratches, missing frames and choppy soundtracks so we can remember the old days? Doubtful.

Next thing you know, they'll be making silent films again.

 

[WillG]

What's next, blurry black and white films with scratches, missing frames and choppy soundtracks so we can remember the old days? Doubtful.

Except for the black and white, 2007's "Grindhouse" did exactly that. But, yes, it was a box office failure, so it's pretty much certain that's the last we'll see of that experiment.

 

[Mark-P]

Actually, emulating film-styles of the past is not unheard of. While The Artist is the most recent example, others include Far From Heaven (replicating the 1950s), The Good German (replicating 1940s Black & White), Down with Love (replicating 1960s CinemaScope, complete with rear-projection driving), and don't forget Super 8 which emulates the look and style of an 80s film.

 

[Mark-P]

Respectfully, I completely disagree with this point of view. It's only a turn-off to the black bar haters. Filmmakers have a variety of aspect ratios to choose from when beginning to shoot a film. One film may warrant a panoramic 2.4:1 and another may look better in a more confined 1.66:1. There is no reason 1.33:1 should be verboten to modern filmmakers. It was a valid ratio for half a century and can still be valid today. The only people who might not like it are those who feel that all new movies should be standardized to one aspect ratio - 16:9 to match the current TV standard.

I certainly hope not. Going back to the old projection ratios would be quite a turn off. If they think that by going retro, there may be some success due to massive publicity, but don't see it lasting long..
There may be a small group of artsy, elitist types who would enjoy it, but doubtful enough to make much of a profit and keep on producing films in that style.
What's next, blurry black and white films with scratches, missing frames and choppy soundtracks so we can remember the old days? Doubtful.

 

[Mark-P]

And here's the latest brand-new movie shot and presented in 1.33:1! http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_reviews_58/tabu_blu-ray.htm

 

[SilverWook]

Except for the black and white, 2007's "Grindhouse" did exactly that. But, yes, it was a box office failure, so it's pretty much certain that's the last we'll see of that experiment.

"Amazon Women on the Moon" did essentially the same thing in the 80's, emulating a bad print as shown on late night tv. There are several grindhouse style fanedits of other movies floating around.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Call of Cthulhu was a DVD-only release a couple of years ago that was black & white, 1.33:1 and silent (with a music score) for a period feel. The DVD offers the option of listening to a clean soundtrack or one with faked scratches and pops. HTF covered the release *brilliantly* here: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/t/229750/htf-review-the-call-of-cthulhu

 

[Wayne_j]

Also attempting retro in the 70's was New York, New York. Scorsese originally wanted to shoot it in 1.37 technicolor and then he found out that no 3-strip cameras were available to shoot with so he went with 1.66 eastman color.

 

[Mark-P]

Just to keep this thread up to date, here is the sixth recent release shot in 1.33:1
Blancanieves
Are there any others that I have missed?

 

[SilverWook]

Can current digital movie cameras actually shoot in 1.33:1? Or does the image have to be cropped at the sides in post?

 

[Mark-P]

Can current digital movie cameras actually shoot in 1.33:1? Or does the image have to be cropped at the sides in post?

I have no idea what professional cameras are capable of, but these new movies are all presented pillar-boxed in theaters.

 

[leopold411]

I certainly hope not. Going back to the old projection ratios would be quite a turn off. If they think that by going retro, there may be some success due to massive publicity, but don't see it lasting long.. There may be a small group of artsy, elitist types who would enjoy it, but doubtful enough to make much of a profit and keep on producing films in that style. What's next, blurry black and white films with scratches, missing frames and choppy soundtracks so we can remember the old days? Doubtful.

Wes Andersons new film The Grand Budapest Hotel is shot in 4 x 3, he's been nominated for 3 oscars and a palme d'Or. Andrea Arnolds Fish Tank won the BAFTA and the Jury prize at Cannes and The Artist won 5 Oscars. I don't think its just a nostalgic fad (although maybe with The Artist) its a stylistic choice. The box like format forces the viewer to intimately focus on a small area rather than a large landscape. I'm surprised more directors are not playing around with the possibilities of different aspect ratios (photographers do all the time), instead most tend to go with the latest trend which doesn't always fit well with their films intention.

 

[Mark-P]

Bumping this thread with the latest new movie shot in 1.33:1 and subsequently also in black & white.

Ida (2014) which was last year's Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Language Film.

 

[Mark-P]

So now for two years in a row the Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Language Film has been shot in 1.33:1.
From Hungary: Son of Saul
http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2426189081

 

[Lord Dalek]

So far this 1.33 revival appears to be driven entirely by period pieces. Everything else is good ol' 2.35.

 

[Mark-P]

And here’s another new film in good old 1.33:1. Cold War. It looks like it might be a good one.
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Cold-War-Blu-ray/210123/#Review

 

[English Invader]

The concept of Aspect Ratio is quite a new thing to me. For many years, my only TV was a 14" TV/VCR combi and everything was 4:3 pan and scan (not that I even knew what that was) and Widescreen was just something a few tapes had that was supposed to herald something special but just meant you had black bars on the top and bottom of the screen.

Now that I have a flatscreen and know a bit more about how films are made, I'm enjoying learning about all the different ways films are displayed and their various pros and cons. My flatscreen is a older model with legacy ports so I was able to hook up a VCR as well as a Blu-Ray player and I always put the pillars up for VHS (apart from the Widescreen editions) and it's great to be able to appreciate them in a way that just wasn't possible when 99.9% of the human race had 4:3 CRTs that were incapable of showing films exactly as they were intended in the cinema. And the tragedy is that most people didn't know what they were missing (and they still don't when they're watching that Casablanca DVD at full stretch and complaining about the forced black bars on the Blu-Ray).

I think the aspect ratio can be as much a part of the creative vision as any other part of film-making and, if a director has ideas that fit an older style, he should go for it. There are some truly great films that were deliberately filmed in black and white when colour was available like Paper Moon, Young Frankenstein and Schindler's List and those films would be much lesser experiences if they were colourised. Why can't aspect ratio and silent film be the same? (see Barry Lyndon for a classic example of a talkie that owes a lot to the silent era).

 

[Lord Dalek]

And here’s another new film in good old 1.33:1. Cold War. It looks like it might be a good one.
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Cold-War-Blu-ray/210123/#Review

All that means is the guy who made Ida REALLY likes 1.37:1 for some reason. You're making mountains out of molehills here.