THE LITTLE MERMAID Platinum Edition: October 3rd, 2006 (1 Viewer)

[Roy Batty]

Nope, maybe you would find that "much clearer", but it would go against what it is most largely accepted as standard terminology regarding aspect ratios and video screen transfer, and thus it would lead to confusion.

4:3 is non-anamorphic indeed, as oppossed to 16:9, both terms referring to video transfer.

1.33:1 would be used for aspect ratio.

In fact, video framed in 1.33:1 can be transferred as 16:9 (pillar boxing).

So 16:9 is the standard denomination for anamorphic video, and 4:3 the standard denomination for non-anamorphic video, whatever the aspect ratio may be.

 

[ScottR]

so does this one have the changed credits from the re-release with the songs being placed differently during the end titles? I believe Part of Your World was an instrumental in the original mix.

 

[TonyD]

i appreciate the explanation, but i already knew all that.

just saying i dont like it is all.

 

[Robert Harris]

I believe that it is important to place the comments in this thread in perspective, lest they be read by someone not seekinig the "ultimate" in home video experience.

The colors and audio on the latest release of Little Mermaid are fine for anyone viewing in what might be classified as a "self-contained" environment, and by that I refer to a monitor with speakers attached, regardless of size.

RAH

 

[george kaplan]

Well Roy, the most common packaging term for pan & scan is full screen, but that doesn't make that the prefered or an accurate term for discussing pan & scan on this forum.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Folks,

DVDs can be encoded in one of two frame shapes: 4x3 or 16x9.

Within those frame shapes, the image can be presented in any aspect ratio by filling unused area with black.

The older DVD was 4x3 encoded. The newer DVD is 16x9 encoded (the term "anamorphic", although common and accepted, is actually not accurate).

That was the context that I used 4x3 and 16x9 in. I assumed we all were already aware that the aspect ratio of the original DVD, in the 4x3 frame, was 1.66:1 letterboxed.

 

[EricTB]

I really enjoyed this film as a kid and would love to add this to my DVD collection. And at only 13.99 (price matching) it's a steal. This was Walt Disney's most excellent animated films.

 

[Roy Batty]

George, maybe it was due to my lack of fluency in English (my first language is Spanish), but what I meant by "most largely accepted as standard terminology" was the most widespread term among discriminating consumers, of course. The adoption (or lack thereof) of standard terms for video transfer format specifications both by the studios and the public caused quite a lot of confusion during the early days of DVD, but I would say that nowadays there is a consensus on 16:9 equalling anamorphic enhanced, while 4:3 equals to non-anamorphic transfer.

As for the real matter of discussion here, you all go and read this review from DVD Times and weep, and not exactly out of joy.

I am starting to feel quite worried about this release...

:frowning:

 

[Demis G]

So the bottom line is that we didnt get the original audio track and the video is NOT anamorphic ?

 

[GlennH]

Interesting. That reviewer is even more harsh in his comments on the video transfer (and the transfers of past Disney animation in general) but he seems fine with the audio, which David has lambasted here.

 

[Mark Anthony]

So Disney not only presented "The Tick" with some of the worst DVD video quality to date due in no small part to poor mastering, they are now applying the "it'll do" attitude to their animated classic's as well, and this is a company that want us to buy their products on high-def, if they can't get SD-DVD right after 10 years, then it's a very sad state of affairs.

M

 

[TonyD]

re read the part were you saw that.
NO ONE has said the current release is not enhanced.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I'm gonna get that review up TODAY. whew!


I'm not really expecting any other reviewer to be critical of the audio. Was any other reviewer critical of the audio on Mary Poppins? Or the dull, lifeless audio on Hello Dolly after Fox filtered all the HF out of the sound to get rid of tape hiss?

DVD reviewers tend not to "hear" problems like flat, unnatural mid-range frequencies. However, just like with Hello Dolly and Marry Poppins, to my ears the problems were so obvious I wasn't able to enjoy the film and immediately pulled out my old copies to compare. Yep... sure enough Ariel is there singing in all her natural, full-bodied glory on the old DVD. But sounds like someone has electronically flattened and made her vocals sound dry and electronic on th new DVD.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Well, maybe I'm just a moron, but I thought the new DVD looked and sounded pretty good. Definitely room for improvement, but not nearly as bad as I expected from the attacks it's received here. I tend to be pretty critical, but I don't see major concerns here, and I was looking/listening for them.

Feel free to pounce on me - just try to be gentle

 

[DeeF]

I've got the new disk, which I watched a couple of nights ago, and agree with the reviewers here: it's not good. The picture is soft, grainy and vaguely murky. I wish I could say that this represents the theatrical version well, but I really can't remember (only saw it once, in 1989).

And I was dismayed to find only one audio track, this new Disney Enhanced thing. Though I'm not an audiophile like David, I prefer having options. The newest Mary Poppins DVD had a new mix, but also contained the original stereo soundtrack, which was preferable.

 

[Dave Mack]

it sounds like the new audio track is VERY compressed. Seems to be a trend lately with DVDs and Especially CDS.
Drives me nuts...

 

[ZackR]

Maybe that's because they are being marketed to a generation who listens to compressed music through iPod earbuds...

I know what you mean though, and I can't stand it.

If the audio is so bad, I can see myself possibly making my own custom "Mermaid" disc combining the new video with my original disc's audio.

Hmm...

Thanks a lot, Disney. From the looks (sounds) of it, this is a really botched release. What a shame -- TLR always was a favorite.

 

[Mike Frezon]

 

[Robert Harris]

If Mr. Disney is in any way aware of this, and who is to say that he isn't, there will be phantom messages from his Blackberry telling the current execs to return to Lowry.

The gentleman after whom the company is named knew quality.

RAH

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

I wouldn't be too hopeful. At least here in r4, the last release (Lady and the Tramp) was released as a one-disc set with only ther 5.1 mix, even though the back of the case clearly announced it as also including the original mono mix. I was not happy.