Shane Blu-ray... in 1:66?

Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by PaulaJ, Mar 22, 2013.

  1. lukejosephchung

    lukejosephchung Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    391
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA., USA
    Real Name:
    Luke J. Chung
    History and documentation has already shown that "Shane" was produced and photographed in Academy Ratio 1.37:1...1.66:1 was a commercial concession by Stevens Sr. to Paramount after they sat on the film for 2 years...creator's intent is sancrosact in this example and is being properly honored by the new blu-ray, IMHO...
     
    WadeM and Cine_Capsulas like this.
  2. Bob Furmanek

    Bob Furmanek Insider
    Insider

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    4,678
    INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS was shot for 1.85:1.
     
  3. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    5,892
    Likes Received:
    477
    "Ordinary directors"? What the wocka does THAT mean???
     
  4. HDvision

    HDvision Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    190
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Real Name:
    David
    Invasion of the Body Snatchers is in superscope (about 2.00:1) on Blu. Thought I would appreciate the high def 1.85:1 version, it represents the theatrical ratio of the film, as any Blu-ray should first and foremost.

    I'm not against the academy Shane... It's just that it should come with the theatrical ratio and not replace it.
     
  5. lukejosephchung

    lukejosephchung Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    391
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA., USA
    Real Name:
    Luke J. Chung
    George Stevens, Jr. makes it clear in his interview that it was Warner and not him that chose to release the "Shane" blu-ray with only the Academy Ratio presentation...price-point considerations for them make your alternative economically unfeasible, which is why we're at this impasse!!!
     
  6. WadeM

    WadeM Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    962
    Likes Received:
    50
    Since Pan & Scan compromises the aspect ratio that the film was composed in, your argument could easily fall back on yourself, and IMO, would be more accurate. Pan & Scan has nothing to do with anyone not wanting to see a film in its theatrical ratio, but instead has to do with people not wanting to see black bars and/or not being happy with a picture that's smaller than their TV screen. And it has nothing to do with people wanting to see square or "boxy" images. The "Pan & Scan brigade" that you refer to are the same ones who want a 1.78:1 aspect ration on their widescreen TVs, regardless of the ratio that a film was composed in--yes, they want a wide picture instead of a square. Those of us who support the 1.37:1 ratio that Shane was composed in are fighting against compromising that composition. Period. The same reason we fight against Pan & Scan and what you call the "Pan & Scan brigade".

    It's the Pan & Scan brigade who prefer the 1.66:1 because it will fill up more of their widescreen TV screen. The people I know who used to like Pan & Scan on their old TVs, now stretch the image on their new widescreen TVs. That's why AMC is stretching the image on their broadcast. As the NY Post article stated: Stevens hopes the 1:66 version will at least used to replace the widescreen version of "Shane'' he says is currently being shown on AMC. "Instead of cropping the top and the bottom, they've stretched the picture the picture so it looks like Jack Palace's horse is 12 feet long,'' he says. "I know my father would prefer my 1:66 version to that.''
    Read more: George Stevens Jr. speaks out on the 'Shane' controversy http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/movies/george_stevens_jr_speaks_out_on_eYV1jnxnoOs92gpzodhqEN#ixzz2RfSokl8E


    Look, I know you don't like Pan & Scan, but, really, your recent arguments go too far.
    You can argue it, but I don't buy it.
     
  7. Paul Penna

    Paul Penna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    586
    Likes Received:
    85
    Back in the olden days of home video/theater when concern over what TV-screen formatting was doing to feature film images started becoming an issue for significant numbers of people, "theatrical aspect ratio" was the term most often used to refer to that kind of TV formatting not happening. There wasn't anything magical or doctrinaire about the word "theatrical" per se. All people meant by "theatrical aspect ratio" was they didn't want feature films chopped and sliced just so they'd fill a 4x3 TV screen. There was little if any awareness of the complication the widescreen transitional period brought to the relatively small number of films affected, such as Shane. Nobody was really considering a distinction between theatrical and intended as the term became common parlance. So I don't think history supports the idea that a literal interpretation of "theatrical aspect ratio" was always the sacred goal of the original framers.
     
    Pete York likes this.
  8. Russell G

    Russell G Fake Shemp
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,087
    Likes Received:
    534
    Location:
    Deadmonton
    Real Name:
    Russell
    yeah, the extra buck or two it would cost in manufacturing will bankrupt the studio.

    The only reason for Warner's to not include both versions at this point is to price gouge the fans by releasing it separately.
     
  9. Bob Furmanek

    Bob Furmanek Insider
    Insider

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    4,678
  10. Douglas R

    Douglas R Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,041
    Likes Received:
    385
    Location:
    London, United Kingdom
    Real Name:
    Doug
    I can play the standard ratio trailer but the widescreen one says "The uploader has not made this video available in your country" :(
     
  11. Tom Logan

    Tom Logan Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    120
    Very instructive: You know cropping is bad when the diminutive Mr. Ladd gets the top of his head lopped off. We also lose many of the Tetons' nipples.
     
  12. Bob Furmanek

    Bob Furmanek Insider
    Insider

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    4,678
    Oh, sorry about that Doug. The widescreen trailer was uploaded by Paramount. I have no way to change their settings!
     
  13. Colin Jacobson

    Colin Jacobson Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2000
    Messages:
    5,892
    Likes Received:
    477
    Just got this e-mail:

    "The street date for the George Stevens production of SHANE in Blu-ray™ has been moved to from June 4, 2013 to August 13, 2013 in order to complete remastering in the original 1:37 aspect ratio"
     
  14. Mark-P

    Mark-P Producer

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    879
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Real Name:
    Mark Probst
    Amazon now has a back cover image. Aspect ratio 1.37 and audio is DTS-HD Master Audio: English 2S (whatever that means?)
    91P99JXoxpL._SL1500_.jpg
     
  15. Brandon Conway

    Brandon Conway captveg

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    8,339
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    Real Name:
    Brandon Conway
    2S is 2.0 Stereo L/R.
     
  16. Lromero1396

    Lromero1396 Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2012
    Messages:
    640
    Likes Received:
    33
    Didn't Shane have a 3-track stereo mix created during post-production?
     
  17. Brandon Conway

    Brandon Conway captveg

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    8,339
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    Real Name:
    Brandon Conway
    To quote Bob Furmanek from earlier in the thread:
     
  18. PaulaJ

    PaulaJ Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2000
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    58
    Er, that pic of an obviously older Alan Ladd in the embroidered vest -- what movie is that from? Because it's sure not from Shane.
     
  19. Cine_Capsulas

    Cine_Capsulas Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2013
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    200
    Location:
    Brazil
    Real Name:
    Gustavo H. Razera
    It sure is! :)
     
  20. PaulaJ

    PaulaJ Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2000
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    58
    Um.....no.
     

Share This Page