The Sting SE on 09/06/05 See Post #133 (1 Viewer)

[David Grove]

I don't really understand why the same level of strident opposition is directed to open matte versions as cropped or P&S versions. It is very practical to mask down an open matte to exactly the proper AR, right? So, why not save the strong opposition for the genuinely butchered releases?

Please note that I am not advocating non-OAR, just observing that those releases which can be easily viewed as OAR are different from those which can never be.

Just curious,

DG

 

[Haggai]

I can sort of see that, David, but in this HDTV era, there's really no excuse for not having widescreen movies in 16X9 enhanced OAR. That makes it just as bad as P&S, in my view.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Actually, Dave, the more I see it, the more I love it! It's one of those films I did not appreciate completely the first time I saw it (it was in the theatre and I was only about 12 or 13; it was a re-release). I think it can be a little heavily plotted and I've shown the film to friends who can't grasp everything the first time. Then again, you never know!

 

[Steve Tannehill]

Remember, it's not just masking the movie down to fit a 16x9 display. It is enhancing the resolution for a 16x9 display.

Original Aspect Ratio +
Enhanced for 16x9 display =
Improved Picture Quality on today's high-definition display devices.

Open Matte Aspect Ratio +
Zoom to fit 16x9 display =
Same old crap picture.

- Steve

 

[george kaplan]

Steve,

No doubt that open-matte is inferior to OAR. But unlike pan & scan, an open-matte transfer, if that's all that's available, of a great film at least let's you see the entire film. No way is it as bad as pan&scan.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

I'm excited to see it-- I never could tape it (except in EP speed) because it's over two hours long. TCM is really a godsend for OAR movies. Even Sundance and IFC and Fox Movies occasionally show films in full-frame transfers, which drives me up the wall. AMC is a write-off and the pay channels -- I don't have a 16x9 set yet -- seem to have no problem showing their original series in WS, but not their movies by and large (though I did see "Love Actually" at 1.85:1 over Xmas on HBO).

 

[Sean Richardson]

Can you be more specific? I only ask because I've seen the F word on TCM, and TCM has consistently denied modifying their movies in any way for content. So if they're lying, I'd like to know it.

Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean, the way you wrote it, are you saying that they said the F word but there were other things which seemed muted? Or that you knew they meant the F word but it was muted?

 

[Sean Richardson]

Mark - you should be able to find VHSes at 160 minutes at stores like CVS or Duane Reade (or, I dunno, maybe their equivalents in California). Some places like Tower and J&R even have 180 minutes. There are people who say that the tape is thinner on these, and it can snap easier (never had that happen to me) or that it affects playback, but even if that is true (which I'm not sure of, but sounds plausible), it's better than EP speed. I have tapes I made when I was younger at EP, and they still technically hold up, but they're barely watchable because I've gotten so used to, you know, quality picture.

[Also, I've never had any luck finding them anywhere, but I know that there are VHS at 130 minutes available. If memory serves, that should cover 'The Sting'.]

And HBO (and Showtime, I've noticed; I don't have Cinemax, so I don't know) has started showing more and more movies in 1.85, so there's progress there. It's not just 'Love Actually'. I actually even caught a letterboxed showing of 'Kundun' on Starz a month or two back! (Taped that on a T-160 )

 

[Clay_E]

True, but Fox Movie Channel also shows films in widescreen where available. Have a look around the monthly schedule on the website - there's even a separate page for movies airing in widescreen that month.

 

[TonyD]

sean, i can see how what i wrote could be confusing.
what it should have said was, i heard the f word several times in .....and justice for all, but other sections of dialogue were clearly muted.
several times during the movie.
and i have seen this before on tcm.

 

[Alan_H]

Mark, couldn't you just buy an 8-hour tape? You could tape it in SP mode with plenty of room to spare.

 

[Mark Bendiksen]

Hmmm...not too sure about this particular situation, but I'm almost 100% certain that TCM does not cut their movies (at least not anymore). Now, they do usually push any R-rated features to a bit later in the evening, but the one's that I have seen have been unedited. If they feel a movie is to "rough" to show then I think they simply don't show it at all.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

Yeah, I know about 8-hour tapes, but after an incident where my VCR decided to eat one of the thinner tapes for dinner, I've avoided them. Regardless, I have a TiVo now and can watch this with impunity come next week.

 

[Sean Richardson]

Mark - It's funny, that's why I stopped taping things at EP

There was a whole bunch of stuff on (on TCM, no less, tying both strands of this thread together) that I was casually interested in, not to keep but just to watch, so I set an EP tape up. When I got home, the tape was eaten and the VCR was broken. Learned my lesson.

But, knock on wood, I've been lucky with T-160s and 180s. I even managed to fit 'Last Temptation' onto a 160, because the tapes are always a *little* bit longer than advertised; the tape cuts off *right* as the credits end. (That was a while ago, I've upgraded to the Criterion.)

 

[Sean Richardson]

Other Mark - that's how I feel; I can't quite say 100%, because I've heard people accuse them of this before, but I've never seen it myself. I'm not familiar enough with '... And Justice For All' to know what they might be cutting if they left F in, or to know if there's some part of the movie where they mess with the audio, or what. I can't imagine the logic of a channel which keeps OAR, shows nudity and violence and F-words, but cuts certain specific things in their audio.

 

[Jim Dalton]

I hope the bozo's who head up the studios are reading these posts. We customers are a picky lot but what we demand most of all are good QUALITY releases, not these sub-standard ones.

I know I am speaking in general terms here - as not all people are wide-screen fans - but I would dare say that the majority of us ARE and would even prefer to record a movie off TCM or FMC that is presented in its OAR instead of shelling out our money for a poor quality release that is in fool screen.

If ever a movie deserved such treatment, it is THE STING!

 

[Tommy G]

I, too, have been holding out for an OAR version of The Sting but I've been on the fence about purchasing the MAR version of it. The reason being is I thought I read somewhere that GR Hill wanted it to have that "older" feel to it and originally shot it 4:3 so that it would seem like a movie from the 30's. Since everything was wide at the time, the studios put pressure to make it widescreen and thus just cropped the top and bottom to appease the masses. I'd like to find out for sure because if that is the case, we'd be missing out on the director's intent. If someone can pipe in who knows, it would be much appreciated.

 

[Mark Bendiksen]

Exactly. My best guess is that if there was something wrong with the audio of ...And Justice for All then it was not related to editing for content but rather some other sort of unintended glitch or problem.

 

[Mark Bendiksen]

Off topic: By the way, if you're reading this thread today (2/18), go and check out the TCM home page http://www.turnerclassicmovies.com/ and check out the Aliens display at the top. Now read the "schreech...schreech..." translation: "Letterboxing. Good."

I love Turner Classic Movies. I hope and pray they never succumb to the dark side like American Movie Classics did.

 

[Haggai]

We were talking about actors not liking to see their own films earlier up-thread, with regards to Redford and The Sting. This is from an interview with Samuel L. Jackson in the new March issue of Premiere: