Warner's Kiss Me Kate Mis-Framed (1 Viewer)

[Rob W]

This makes a lot of sense. It's quite obvious that the opening credits are within a 1:85-safe area of the frame which would allow for cropping .

 

[Jeff Adkins]

This reminds me of the whole debate about Manhattan where there were numerous posts saying the DVD was misframed and you could see more information on the LD and what a travesty, etc. Then we heard from the cinematographer who OK'd the DVD transfer and said the LD was misframed.

Jeff

 

[PatrickL]

So, if the reports are accurate, it appears that the DVD might be zoomed-in from its original full-frame and clipping off bits of the sides and top & bottom.

Sounds logical. Forgive my ignorance here, but since this doesn't seem to be an open-matte transfer, I want to know this: When the movie was screened in full Academy ratio initially, does that mean that those prints were absolutely of the entire full-frame of the negative or could they also have been of a "zoomed" portion of it, as the dvd seems to be?

 

[Peter Kline]

Thomas T, I guess we'll have to disagree.

History shows that "This Is Cinerama" was the top grossing film of 1952 even though it opened in late September and played in only one theatre!

1952
This Is Cinerama
(3 months in ONE theatre)
#1 box office champ

1953
This Is Cinerama
within top 10

1954
This Is Cinerama
within top 10

1955
Cinerama Holiday
#2 box office champ

1956
Seven Wonders of the World
#3 box office champ

1957
Search For Paradise
within top 20

1958
South Seas Adventure
within top 10

1962
How The West Was Won
#1 box office champ

1963
*Its a Mad Mad Mad World
#2 box office champ

1968
*2001, A Space Odyssey
#2 box office champ

*Presented in Cinerama at Cinerama theatres but not filmed in the Cinerama process.[/i]

The Cinerama format indeed started the widescreen era.
Its success forced the studios, as I said, to look for a cheaper way to make widescreen films. Truth be told, wide format films had been tried by the studios in the 30s, albeit in black and white and with optical sound. The public, and theatre owners, weren't ready for it.
"The Robe" was rushed into production as a Cinemascope film after it was originally planned as a standard 1.37:1 picture. Both a wide screen and flat version were filmed. The reason for the Cinemascope version was because of the overwhleming success of Cinerama. Indeed Cinerama was a novelty that lasted for 10 years and was expensive to shoot and to show. The travelogues became less and less popular although of the 5, 4 made it into the Top 10 grossing films each year they were released.

Incidentally, Cinerama also pioneered the "road show" format. Reserved seats, presentations featuring an overture, intermission, exit music, etc. Patrons could even buy a brochure of the film while in attendance. Throughout the late 50s, 60s and early 70s the "road show" presentation was used for the big 70mm films of the era when there were still large movie palaces across the U.S. and Canada.

 

[Joe Caps]

Because of all the hype for This is Cinerama, and all the hype about the upcoming release of The Robe, there was much talk all through 1953 of Wide Screen Films. True, some were faked up like the release of Shane and The Band Wagon, cutting off peoples legs and tops of heads. Some were composed Hard matt like Thunder Bay, Young Bess and quite a few more. there were over fifty films released in WIDESCREEN in 1953, pre The Robe. Widescreen meant anywhere from 1.70 10 1 to 1.85 to 1. Many of them had interlock stereo (stereo run from a separate roll of film and projector) Many of these are now lost. they were the oldest stereo tracks and many just disintegrated. Collectors did not have prints because theyhad no way to run the interlock stereo track. Many of these films had the left center and right tracks on mag stereo interlock. the optical track on the prints carried the surround!!
I've actually seen prints of Calamity Jane that ony had the surround on it.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Starting around May of 1953, all the studios starting shooting films for some type of widescreen presentation. (Note that this was over 4 months before THE ROBE premiered at New York's Roxy and Hollywood's Chinese theatres.) Each studio had their own preferred aspect ratio: Universal-International was 1.85; MGM was 1.75; Paramount was 1.66, Warner Brothers was 1.85, etc. These widescreen ratios would not apply to the films previously shot and going into release (although many received this treatment) but certainly applied to new productions.

There were quite a few 3-D films that were composed for these wider ratios, such as Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Mad Magician, Southwest Passage, Taza Son of Cochise, Gorilla at Large, The Bounty Hunter, Cat Women of the Moon, Top Banana, The Diamond Wizard, Gog, Revenge of the Creature, Dangerous Mission, etc.

The new dual-strip 3-D print of Kiss Me Kate is cropped on the left side of both prints, destroying the composition and losing important information. (For instance, the opening title triangle with the word "Kiss" on it is clipped on the left. This is unfortunate because it is meant to sit in front of the screen/stereo window, while "Me" is at the window - or base of the screen - and "Kate" sits further back behind the window. The clipping of the left destroys the composition of this great 3-D title sequence.) It's very possible that this new DVD is mastered from one of these off-center elements.

Pete's 11/53 quotes from director George Sidney should put this aspect ratio matter to rest. It's truly a shame that more care wasn't taken to preserve the integrity of the original intended presentation.

Also, un-like the information in the DVD about the 3-D release, Kiss Me Kate had a very wide 3-D release. It played most of its original, and sub-run bookings, in the depth version. The only major venue that played it flat was the Radio City Music Hall. There was such an unexpected demand for left/right 3-D prints, MGM had to go back to Technicolor to strike more dual-strip pairs. It was a tremendously succesful 3-D release.

Here's a little trivia: it was not the first 3-D musical. Paramount's Those Redheads from Seattle (with Theresa Brewer, Guy Mitchell and the Bell Sisters) opened in theatres in October, over a month before Kate.

Finally, the film was not shot twice. It's always amazing how much mis-information is out there. It gets repeated often enough until it starts to become accepted as fact!

Bob Furmanek
Curator, 3-D Film Archives

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Joe, THUNDER BAY was Universal-Internationals first "widescreen" release, and premiered at the Loew's State theatre on Times Square in May of 1953. It was presented 1.85, but is certainly composed for 1.37. It was also 3-track stereo, and those tracks are now lost.

This widescreen release was a last minute decision by the studio, and even the title sequence is composed for 1.37. The original 1953 dye-transfer Technicolor prints are printed 1.37, and are not hard-matted for 1.85.

Bob

 

[PatrickL]

But what I don't get, guys, is if the Academy ratio prints of the film that were screened initially were practically the full frame. 1.37:1 is so close to Academy ratio that I would assume they were, but that's clearly not what is on view on this dvd.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Patrick, here is what Bob said above:

The new dual-strip 3-D print of Kiss Me Kate is cropped on the left side of both prints, destroying the composition and losing important information. (For instance, the opening title triangle with the word "Kiss" on it is clipped on the left. This is unfortunate because it is meant to sit in front of the screen/stereo window, while "Me" is at the window - or base of the screen - and "Kate" sits further back behind the window. The clipping of the left destroys the composition of this great 3-D title sequence.) It's very possible that this new DVD is mastered from one of these off-center elements.

While a full-frame DVD *should* provide all of the original negative image, it sounds like this new DVD has been created from a master that is trimmed slightly.

 

[Peter Kline]

1.37:1 is so close to Academy ratio that I would assume they were, but that's clearly not what is on view on this dvd.

1:.37:1 IS Academy Ratio. It's obvious that care was not taken in mastering KMK for DVD. Unless there's a person who approves the master that knows what a film's aspect ratio should be, then this kind of thing happens. WB seems to be "passing the buck" on this one. (So what else is new?)

 

[PatrickL]

While a full-frame DVD *should* provide all of the original negative image, it sounds like this new DVD has been created from a master that is trimmed slightly.

Thanks Peter. I think it's more than the "slight trim" of an off-center element though. If it were just a matter of either the right eye or left eye print being used, I'd expect consisent clipping on one side and ample room everywhere else. "Zoomed" seems more like what the dvd is at times; there's a scene, for instance, when Keel makes an onstage entrance on a balcony where his head is at the very top of the image on the dvd. There's another for Kate's onstage introduction, where she's lit by spotlight in the upper right corner of the frame. Hard to imagine that these scenes could have withstood soft-mattes.

Before I fell in instant love with this movie on dvd, I'd only seen it once on television. I'm certainly no expert on how this movie should be framed but I think that the folks who have reported cropping are onto something more here than a negligible slice of picture off one side.

 

[Peter Kline]

What's a few millimeters between friends?

 

[Stephen PI]

A common thing that takes place in the telecine work area is that there is and always will be this inconsistantcy between facilities in the way a title is framed and/or cropped. If a title's 'oar' is 1.37:1 and you send the same film element to be transferred to two different facilities, despite the fact they are supposed to conform the film to the smpte specs - that all facilities have in their possession - they will most likely in the final result not match each other regarding cropping on sides and on top and bottom, and with no guarantee that either transfer will be correct. The only way to ensure that a transfer is not cropped incorrectly is to have a client present who is techically aware of this issue, and is there in telecine to ensure that the colorist sets up the picture to his satisfaction and stays on track throughout. The colorist's mind is on the grading of the color or b/w, they are usually glad to have somebody around who is knowledgeable on the subject so they can focus on the main aspect of their job.

With all these different versions of the same film on laserdisc and dvd, I think this problem and discussion of variable cropping will always exist. A typical example is the new transfer of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" in this case the cropping makes the film almost unwatchable for me, the laserdisc is certainly superior in this area.

 

[PatrickL]

The image on the dvd *is* reframed from the full frame, and Warners says that how it is supposed to be (according to a revision of the review by DVD Savant that I linked to earlier)

With all these different versions of the same film on laserdisc and dvd, I think this problem and discussion of variable cropping will always exist.

I'm sure that's true, especially with a film like this that was composed with different theatrical OARs in mind.

A note for anyone interested: TCM is showing a letterboxed version on May 11th at 4 in the morning.

 

[Greg_M]

Slight cropping differences can be expected on any release. But the cropping here is obviously a mistake.

No way MGM would have approved the framing as seen on the DVD. Characters are cut out of the DVD where they are clearly in the shot on the laserdisc.

 

[GerardoHP]

I don't know if MGM would have approved it or not, but I watched the whole film last night and was constantly distracted by the fact that the framing totally favors the right. And this is without having any other material to compare it to.

Not that I think it'll ever happen, but I wish WB would do with this what Universal did with Back to the Future -- re-do it and offer us an exchange.

It's a shame because the DVD sounds incredible and the color is great. And yet, it is so obviously misframed you can't watch the damned thing without being reminded in shot after shot.

 

[Stephen PI]

GerardoHP wrote:
I don't know if MGM would have approved it or not, but I watched the whole film last night and was constantly distracted by the fact that the framing totally favors the right. And this is without having any other material to compare it to.

I have yet to view this new dvd, but one thing that I also find terribly distracting is an off-center transfer.

 

[TedD]

Yup, looks like we've been had at the telecine again.

The LD: http://webpages.charter.net/tvdias/KMK_LD.JPG

The DVD: http://webpages.charter.net/tvdias/KMK_DVD.JPG

Oh, the horror of it all!

I cannot believe that WB can tell us that a good 20 to 30% of the image was not intended to be seen.

However, the good news is that there is nothing wrong with the centering of the image. The titles on the LD and the DVD match up except for the fact that the dvd is missing about 1 1/2" on each side when viewed on a 60x80 screen.

And, I could not help but noticing that the DVD actually switches between the left and right 3D camera interpositives several times during the film and also seems to switch to a softer look (sourced from later generations?) and back several times as well. (Play chapter 21 and pay attention to the perspective shift in the background objects.)

Ted

 

[GerardoHP]

Are you sure you're not referring to shots that are filtered to "protect" the stars on close-ups?

 

[TedD]

Yes, I'm sure, because they are not close ups, and it often happens in the middle of a scene.

Ted