- Joined: April 2000
- Post Count: 4,316
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Technically the world ISN'T round anyway. It's an oblate spheroid. But I see what you mean. I don't see the point in this practice anymore.
STOP THE MADNESS! STOP THE BUTCHERING AND ABANDONMENT OF TV SHOWS ON DVD!
My DVD List at DVD Aficionado, Now Featuring Blu-Ray
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: St. Hubert, Quebec
- Post Count: 2,074
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
I watched Thunderball last night. The credits thing was annoying (unnecessary--unless (and I very much doubt it) those specific moments are not available in a proper form like the rest of the film) though it did not ruin the entire experience. However, if "overscan" is the reason, then there are some displays with SERIOUS overscan issues. Even if some of the edges of the image get cropped, the actual text is far enough away from the edges to be in little danger of being lost to overscanning. I can turn it on or off with my PJ, and I should have thought to check last night, but the next time I give this a whirl (and it'll be relatively soon--I'd forgotten how nice the "Bond girls" were in this one, it's been over 15 years since I last watched it), I will enable overscan to see what happens.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: St. Hubert, Quebec
- Post Count: 2,074
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paul_Warren
Its obviously very wrong to do this but I can guess why they did it:
1: The majority of BD buyers will have a 16:9 HDTV.
2: The majority of those will use some form of digital zoom to make the 2:35 framing fill their 16:9 HDTV.
3: If you view those titles when they are zoomed to fill a 16:9 HDTV even with overscan tolerances I can guess they fill the screen still.
I know several people who complain if the material does not fill their beloved 16:9 HDTV some even zoom 4:3 material and are happy with it!!! Some zoom 2:35 even if it cuts off vital PQ info I have tried to educate them but they are happy to lose PQ to have a full screen image which is inferior as the digital zoom obviously removes PQ detail.
|
This makes more sense to me as a reason than mere "overscan" protection. I know several people who have NEVER accepted "black bars" and always went with "full screen" SD DVD back in the day and employ their zoom function with reckless abandon.
I used to try to "educate" people I saw doing this but, in the end, it was too much effort for too little reward (not to mention some people got testy about it and thought me "snobbish" and "elitest"). If someone is getting into HT and comes to me for advice, I show them stuff on my gear (not top of the line, but adequate enough to illustrate the advantages of doing it correctly) and I've been successful with some on that score. However, if they're already set in their ways, I don't bother anymore.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.
- Joined: March 2009
- Post Count: 70
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paul_Warren
I know several people who complain if the material does not fill their beloved 16:9 HDTV some even zoom 4:3 material and are happy with it!!! Some zoom 2:35 even if it cuts off vital PQ info I have tried to educate them but they are happy to lose PQ to have a full screen image which is inferior as the digital zoom obviously removes PQ detail.
|
It does seem slightly wrong, though, that classic movies which are being released in a so-called "definitive" presentation are catering to the lowest common demoninator of movie watchers.
Respect and preserve the film-makers' intentions:
1. Original aspect ratio
2. Natural film grain
3. Original theatrical captions/subtitles
- Joined: May 2008
- Location: The Netherlands
- Post Count: 717
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
I thought the credits were always put in the 'overscan safe zone', so to speak. Or is that something of recent years? That wouldn't explain the windowboxing on The World Is Not Enough, though.
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese
My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection
- Joined: March 2001
- Post Count: 3,970
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
They've got to be using old masters -- cleaning them up maybe, but not going back to the celluloid. There's no way they'd make these mistakes today if they were making fresh transfers from celluloid.
"Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted." -Krysta Now
-
ATimson
- Andrew Timson
-
- online
- Joined: September 2008
- Post Count: 294
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EnricoE
for anyone who assumes that mgm/ua didn't fuck things up as the titles where created that way should look closer into the special features. their you'll find the opening credit video without text and without any distortion from the windowboxing.
|
That just shows that the windowboxing happened between when the titles were shot and when the discs were produced. The unsqueezed textless version isn't proof that the squeezing didn't exist in some/all of the release prints.
"Niceness is the greatest human flaw, except for all the others."
--Brendan Moody
-
Stephen Brooks
- Stephen Brooks
-
- offline
- Joined: November 2003
- Location: Indianapolis area
- Post Count: 180
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Could someone please explain this whole overscan thing? I got my first 16x9 TV about a year ago, and I'm sure it has overscan because 1.78:1, 1.66:1, and 1.85:1 titles all fill the screen completely. But the image doesn't appear cropped or distorted in any way.
IMPERIAL OFFICER: Lord Vader, I can't find the Central Navigational Network!
VADER (points to control panel): This......is CNN.
- Joined: March 2001
- Post Count: 3,970
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ATimson
... isn't proof that the squeezing didn't exist in some/all of the release prints.
|
Even if some prints have the distorted image, that could have been corrected during the scanning of the film. I.e., make a higher-than-high-res scan of the distorted opening credit sequence (if there's no pristine, undistorted opening credit sequence to be found), and then stretch it horizontally until it is perfect again -- 5% or whatever is needed. (Or until the round globe is round instead of oval!).
I've got to believe that they must have saved the original, pristine-quality opening credit sequences somewhere. They invested so much time in them. To think some of them may only exist in bastardized form is sad.
Bond without perfect opening credit sequences is like ...like Benny Hill without perfect sequences of the Hills Angels.
"Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted." -Krysta Now
- Joined: May 2008
- Location: The Netherlands
- Post Count: 717
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stephen Brooks
Could someone please explain this whole overscan thing? I got my first 16x9 TV about a year ago, and I'm sure it has overscan because 1.78:1, 1.66:1, and 1.85:1 titles all fill the screen completely. But the image doesn't appear cropped or distorted in any way.
|
Overscan doesn't add distortion to a picture, you just miss some bits of the image. How much you miss depends on the television. If you have an LCD or a Plasma screen, there's a chance you can turn it off in the television menu. Apparently the Bond titles here are squeezed a little, so that all the credits can be seen. That adds the distortion.
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese
My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection
-
Douglas Monce
- Douglas Monce
-
- offline
- Joined: November 2006
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
- Post Count: 3,817
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Apparently Maurice Binder had a tendency to put credits well outside the title safe area of the frame. It has been reported here that some theaters had problems keeping the titles on the screen when Thunderball first ran in 1965. The windowboxing on that title at least seems to be on the print as a method of fixing that problem for theaters.
Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
-
Douglas Monce
- Douglas Monce
-
- offline
- Joined: November 2006
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
- Post Count: 3,817
re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stephen PI
That could have been my post you were describing. I ran the film in January 1966 and we had to do some adjustments to the screen masking, the aperture/mask projector plates were okay, to prevent some titles that were overlapping the edge of the screen.
|
I believe it was your post that I'm thinking of.
Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
- Joined: March 2001
- Post Count: 3,970
Re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
| So in the end, I found it acceptable. |
The mind will actually correct much of this, it's true. If you sit in a movie theatre on the far left or far right, pretty quickly you'll see things as normal even though if you snapped a pic of it everyone would be tall and narrow.
I think we can agree that these distorted opening sequences are "acceptable" -- but they aren't "good".
"Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted." -Krysta Now
- Joined: March 2009
- Post Count: 70
Re: MGM/UA Did it again: Windowboxing on opening credits of Moonraker!!!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gary Seven
If the globe in WINE is distorted by being "squeezed", why are they so many other perfectly round objects in the graphics throughout the sequence? Would they not also be more oval or squeezed? If the opening sequence is indeed squeezed, it seems that it would apply to all graphical objects and that was indeed NOT the case. I paid careful attention to that fact. So I question the validity of these claims.
|
It would be very interesting to get some kind of official response to this. If this genuinely was how the titles were shown in theatres (I honestly can't remember back 10 years!) it would be a fascinating insight to find out how, why, etc.
Respect and preserve the film-makers' intentions:
1. Original aspect ratio
2. Natural film grain
3. Original theatrical captions/subtitles
