David Camp
Auditioning
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2002
- Messages
- 4
I love wide screen!
1.85 prints on the other hand have the whole unmatted image, so it's possible to show without the aperture plate (I've done this during a few empty showings, watching the boom mikes projected on the ceiling) or to misframe it so you see too much on the top and the bottom cut off.The local mupliplex is TERRIBLE with those 1.85 prints.
I ALWAYS will complain....
I'll say "I can see boom mikes, and the crew because the movie is framed wrong...".
Then... I get a blank stare... "So..?"
They don't seem to care, but always give me a free pass when I complain....
My wife didn't believe me at first, but she was amazed to see all the boom mikes in that Jamie Lee Curtis switcheroo movie.
Nick
Super 35 films never show more on the top and bottom in FX shots.That's not true. FX shots can be composed for both the 2.35:1 and 1.33:1 frames.
DJ
The film looks like 2.40:1 on DVD but I know for a fact that I saw it in 2.35:1.Where are you getting this fact from, exactly? Unless the threatre you saw the film at completely ignores SMPTE 35mm projection standards that have been in place for quite a long time, you saw the film projected at 2.39:1 (actually, it'd be 2.3913043478260869565217391304348:1, but who's counting?).
DJ
I just did a direct comparison between the DVD and the trailer and there's definately something wrong here. While some shots were fine others were blatantly wrong. T-101's arrival as well as the shot of the TX walking to the car were the most obvious. Who do I need to contact for this travisty?Trailers aren't exactly a reliable source for what the theatrical release of the film looked like. Trailers routinely have major differences from their finished films in color timing, effects, and so forth. That the trailer had some different framing than the DVD doesn't prove very much.
DJ