The Fox and the Hound 25th Anniversary Coming - OAR? (1 Viewer)

[MatthewA]

Ultimate Disney has the review up. The disc doesn't sound like much of an improvement over the old one.

Disney, this is 2006. Two-thousand-and-Freaking-Six. DVD has been around for nearly a decade, HD discs are a reality, and real Mickey Mouse organizations are regularly putting out better DVDs than the home of Mickey Mouse.

 

[Jay Pennington]

I think this likely. In the 80s I saw a re-release of The Rescuers, I believe, that was badly projected, revealing more of the bottom of the frame than we were intended to see. How do I know it wasn't supposed to be seen? Because one could see where the painting stopped at the bottom of the cels, loosely along a line that was part of the Xeroxed animation drawings, with uncolored lines crossing slightly beneath.

 

[Arnie G]

Again no sale from me. Without a better transfer or at least great extras, I won't be buying. :frowning:

 

[MatthewA]

My theory that this was a rush job meant to create awareness for The Fox and the Hound 2 is apparently correct.

And if they can't get Little Mermaid right, whatever made me think a pre-renaissance film would get treated any better?

 

[Jason_V]

MatthewA...fancy meeting you here.

I am seriously rethinking picking this up tomorrow. I absolutely hate to reward a shoddy release. The only part of me that says to buy this is the completist.

 

[Beast]

I honestly don't think that with all their other Animated Features in OAR, that they'd release this one Full Screen. It just doesn't make a lot of sense. I wish Disney would say something about this, because the conflicting reports about the intended aspect ratio really doesn't help.

 

[MatthewA]

You can always buy it used if you want it that badly.

 

[AaronMan]

Brad Bird was an animator on this as well.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

The disc is dreadful.

Not only is it 1.33:1 MAR, but the image quality is an abomination:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...53#post2987853

 

[Lyle_JP]

I wasn't aware that there was any question about this one. Every so-called "widescreen" presentation I've ver seen of it has appeared to be cropped from the 1.33 version without any additional side picture revealed. I'm confidant that the negative was photographed in 1.33. Perhaps the animators were using upper and lower "safe zones" in case the film was projected with matting. But to my eye, this film has always looked most pleasing composition-wise in 1.33.

-Lyle J.P.