1956 Invasion of the Body Snatchers - Anamorphic - When?

I think rather than looking forward to a 2:1 anamorphic transfer, we should try to get a proper unmatted version (1.33:1) released.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers was originally composed for 1.33:1, but was cropped to 2:1 for SuperScope upon release.

I'm hoping that the Academy Ratio version still exists... it would really be neat to see the original compositions, rather than the cropped SuperScope version.

I would enjoy seeing this on dvd. Only in the version that Siegel wanted though

The original elements are 1.37 with the SuperScope derived from them. All non-theatrical (16mm) prints have been the original. The only confusion has come with the "new" flat version being derived not from itself, ie. by doing nothing, but rather, from the 2:1 version. More professionalism from the folks at Republic / Artisan.

Hopefully any new releases on ANY of the Republic product will wait until after they can be properly handled by Paramount.

Interesting discussion. It spurred me to check my Criterion release LD of this film. As you know, Criterion is known for presenting films in their OAR.

I measured the vertical dimension and horizontal dimension of the film on my monitor and if I did the math right, I got 1.94, or 2:1! This is bad if this film even fooled the folks at Criterion by using the matted version. Also of interest then is how many films has this been done to. If you look at the Criterion extra with a demo of videoscope verses pan and scan, it made realize this film is a cropped or matted film that then had been cropped again for TV broadcasts and early videos!

The DVD box shows a 2.35:1 AR.

But Amazon shows it to be 2.00:1. (Plus there's also a Full-Frame version on the same disc.)

2.35 is correct for the anamorphic 35mm film element.

Prints were produced in standard cinemascope format, matted on the sides to 2:1 within the 2.35 frame.

RAH

Is an OAR release of Invasion of the Body Snatchers even possible?

I was under the impression that the 1.37:1 original negative and other materials were lost, and that the matted 2.0:1 Superscope version was all that remained as a source for transferring. (If this isn't true, it's hard to understand why Criterion wouldn't have gone back to the original materials for their LD edition.)

I'd love to be wrong about this, though...

The Criterion laserdisc properly transferred the film in its theatrical ratio.

Carlos, this thread also appeared here:

http://www.dvdmaniacs.net/forums/sho...threadid=14940

And if you want to be patient, it will also show up on DVDfile under the name Drag Princess, depending on whether or not he (yes, Christina/Julie is a he) notices this first.

No, it means that the same person is starting the same thread on many different boards at the same time.

RH --

Do you know if the original 1.37 elements still exist?

http://www.celtoslavica.de/chiaroscu.../invasion.html

This excellent artcle/review from American Cinematographer explains the AR change.

Also, www.widescreenmuseum.com mentions the cropping for SuperScope in that process' section in the widescreen formats wing.

The Oneg and all fine grain masters of this film _should_ be 1.37, as there would have been no rationale to produce anything otherwise.

The 2.35 (2:1) theatrical printing negatives would have been produced from an optically converted dupe negative. If that neg was damaged at any time, the lab should have returned to the FGMP for another.

The 1.33:1 version is absolutely and positively pan and scanned. Until a un-SuperScoped version appears (not likely) the widescreen version is the best way to see the movie.

Also, check out the full frame trailer on the DVD. It has images from the film in the proper aspect ratio BEFORE it was processed for SuperScope.

Reformatted. Literally: re-framed.

Cees

Thanks, Cees.

Gah! You're kidding! Trailers are a good source for showing bad framing, for sure.

How do the Artisan versions (2:1 and 1.33:1) compare to the French region 2 OOP Editions Monteparnasse:



???

Thanks, guys.

This film is in the National Film Registry; it truly deserves a SE with a great 1.37:1 transfer and other historical/retrospective ancillary materials.

Based on the quality of a number of Artisan DVDs, you might think that the original film elements are in dire need of restoration. In truth, all that the DVDs really give you is a vague idea of what the element used for transfer looked like. This may or may not have any bearing on the condition of whatever actual film elements are in the vaults.

"Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is one such example. "The Quiet Man" is another. Both are troublesome for different reasons ("The Quiet Man" has absolutely terrible color registration issues), but there could very well be excellent film elements available to create new low contrast prints and video masters through a variety of means. Artisan has just not pursued any of them for one reason or another.

Regards,

I'm aware of no problem with Quiet Man elements.

RAH

thanks folks for an interesting discussion about this movie.

Guess the history behind this is as equally interesting as Bodysnatchers itself

There ARE superb elements for The Quiet Man. UCLA holds the original acetate 3-strip camera negatives. Given the wonderful quality of other UCLA Technicolor restoration/preservation efforts (like She Wore a Yellow Ribbon and Rancho Notorious), a fantastic transfer could result from UCLA's elements.

Although, Artisan's transfer probably would have been a little bit better without the excessive color boosting and noise reduction.

I tried to upload images I took of the title shots from Invasion of the Body Snatchers Criterion Edition LD and the currently available DVD to compare AR. I couldn't do it, so I'll describe it as best as I can.

One disclaimer here, I don't have the ability to grab images yet off a DVD or LD yet, so the images I compare are crude digital images from a digital camera off the screen of a 32" direct view Sony monitor.

Here's what I've found, the proportion of the images are roughly the same. However on the title card of Invasion there is a logo for AA and a copyright on the bottom of the screen. The Criterion LD leaves some space from the bottom of the edge and more image left to right(and top too), the current DVD is cropped closer, so the logo and copyright are nearly cut off at the bottom of the screen and there's the corresponding reduction of image on the left and right side.

As Mr. Harris has already stated above, the Criterion LD is properly presenting the film. To my eye, it looks like the DVD is not right. However, I am still a little confused about the 1.37 AR. From what I read here, the film was originally filmed at 1.37, but the studio wanted Superscope, so it was reformatted to roughly 2:1 AR.

As Criterion presents the film at what appears to me to be approximately 2:1, and Mr. Harris says it's correctly presented, then the correct AR presentation is the Criterion LD, which follows that it is the way it was presented in theaters in 1956. So what's right? The way it was presented in the theater or the way Don Siegel and the DP's intent to film it at 1.37? Seems the rule is the way it was originally presented in theaters is correct.

Thanks for indulging my little experiement.