-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

You must be a Jackass to like Pan & Scan


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
23 replies to this topic

#1 of 24 Johnny G

Johnny G

    Supporting Actor

  • 791 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 12 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 06:39 AM

I just noticed that US Direct have more pre-orders for the Pan & Scan version of Jackass than the Widescreen version.

I visit their site regularly & where there are both versions, Pan & Scan rarely makes the top 10.

eg

Sales chart
3. The Ring WS (P&S #48)
10. Tuxedo WS (P&S #29)
15. Four Feathers WS (P&S #28)

Pre-orders
1. 8 Mile WS (P&S #18)
2. Harry Potter 2 WS (P&S not charted)
9. Red Dragon WS (P&S not charted)

There are many other exampled of WS versions in the top 50 but the P&S not charting so why is Jackass so different?

#2 of 24 Jon Robertson

Jon Robertson

    Screenwriter

  • 1,568 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2001

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:06 AM

Quote:
You must be a Jackass to like Pan & Scan
Quite right. I can't think of any film in the last few years with cinematography more precise or exquisite than Jackass: The Movie. Certain the most beautiful framing since Carl Dreyer rode out of town.

#3 of 24 Jon Martin

Jon Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,219 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 19 2002

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:11 AM

I don't think you can use the word pan and scan with JACKASS. It was shot with video cameras and then cropped for theatrical viewing.

Pan and Scan is when they take a widescreen image and "pan or scan" that image to fit into a 1.33 TV frame.

#4 of 24 Carl Johnson

Carl Johnson

    Screenwriter

  • 1,919 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 1999

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:20 AM

That's not suprising. P&S is the common mans format and if there ever was a common mans movie it's Jackass. I bet the Jerry Springer movie sold more in P&S too.

#5 of 24 Rob Lutter

Rob Lutter

    Producer

  • 4,528 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 03 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:20 AM

It's still MARed from the original theatrical aspect ratio.

#6 of 24 Adam Tyner

Adam Tyner

    Screenwriter

  • 1,413 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:22 AM

Quote:
It was shot with video cameras and then cropped for theatrical viewing.

Are you sure they didn't shoot 16x9 on video?

#7 of 24 Johnny G

Johnny G

    Supporting Actor

  • 791 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 12 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 07:41 AM

according to imdb, it was shot in 1.78:1

#8 of 24 Jesse Skeen

Jesse Skeen

    Producer

  • 4,001 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 1999

Posted February 27 2003 - 08:26 AM

There isn't a pan and scan version of "Ringmaster" available. Posted Image
Home video oddities, old commercials and other junk: http://www.youtube.com/user/eyeh8nbc

#9 of 24 Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter

  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 08:52 AM

Quote:
don't think you can use the word pan and scan with JACKASS. It was shot with video cameras and then cropped for theatrical viewing.

A lot of the stuff in the film was framed with 1.78:1 in mind. A lot of video cameras (such as miniDV) can shoot in 16:9, not just 1.33:1. There is some stuff in the film was originally shot for the television show, but was just matted to 1.78:1.


#10 of 24 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted February 27 2003 - 08:55 AM

Posted Image Johnny,

you've got my vote for best topic header of the year! Posted Image
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#11 of 24 Joe McKeown

Joe McKeown

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 139 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted February 27 2003 - 09:19 AM

I thought Pan and Scan was more popular in "Family oriented" pictures. I can just hear the soccer mom's "Hmmm, Jackass.. my kids would love that..."
-- When someone asks you if you're a god, you say "YES"

my collection

#12 of 24 William Ward

William Ward

    Supporting Actor

  • 705 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 01 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 09:39 AM

I'd not heed an online store's ranking to determine success of P&S vs Widescreen. The informed choice is widescreen, and many of the people who are informed, use online stores.

If I were to venture a guess, I'd say WS wins by the slimmest of margins over the P&S versions most of the time. Remember to take into account Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Walgreens, grocery stores, etc... Where there are far more uninformed purchases than informed....


Amazon is the same way.....

Very rarely will you see a P&S title within range of its WS counterpart....
William

#13 of 24 Martin Fontaine

Martin Fontaine

    Supporting Actor

  • 628 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2001

Posted February 27 2003 - 02:01 PM

What I still don't understand, is with it's short length of 1:20, why didn't they release it with both ARs on the same disk or dual-sided. This way, you're not at the mercy of the stores making the AR decision for the consumers and therefore giving the studio an excuse to think about dropping OAR altogether.

If I would have waited to rent this, I'd be mad because the place I can easily rent from (Convenience Store 2 minutes walk from here) ONLY carries Pan & Scan and will not listen to me and will not tell his boss to get OAR disks unless I threaten him with a gun (And I won't go that far!) Even though NO ONE has ever complained about black bars on OAR-Only titles and that I'm the only one who complains about MAR disks, he still chooses P&S. So just like thoes who stopped going to Wal-Mart even for Non-DVD Related purchases because of P&S DVDs, I buy my chocolat bars, beer, lottery tickets and other stuff elsewhere.
My DVDs | My Equipment
No OAR = No Sale!
If you don't want black bars, then you don't want DVD!

#14 of 24 Jon Martin

Jon Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,219 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 19 2002

Posted February 27 2003 - 02:25 PM

Quote:
A lot of the stuff in the film was framed with 1.78:1 in mind. A lot of video cameras (such as miniDV) can shoot in 16:9, not just 1.33:1. There is some stuff in the film was originally shot for the television show, but was just matted to 1.78:1.


I don't think any shots in the film were framed in any special way, they just shot stuff with cameras, not really caring about the aspect ratio.

I'd be more interested in how the transfer will be. Like with Blair Witch which was shot on video, transferred to film and then that film transfer was used for the video release making a very ugly transfer. I'm hoping Jackass will go video to video.

#15 of 24 Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter

  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted February 27 2003 - 02:37 PM

Quote:
I'm hoping Jackass will go video to video.

I don't think so. Not all of Jackass was shot on video, a few minutes worth were shot on Super 16 (the opening sequence and the Son of Jackass ending).


#16 of 24 Tom Vet

Tom Vet

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 84 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 25 2003

Posted February 27 2003 - 09:33 PM

You guys that want wide screen better not buy The Day The Earth Stood Stood Still as it is coming out in industry standard (1.37:1), it was made before 1953 movie "The Robe" which started widescreen. The Adventures of Robin Hood with Errol Flynn would be industry standard, even though the film that cost $2 million dollars in 1938 is in color.

If you want wide screen you will have to cut out every movie made for TV, your favorite TV series and a host a of a lot of Movies like "THEM" which I own made in 1954, in industry standard OAR. "Gone With The Wind" "Citizen Cane" all are industry standard. You better re-think your widescreen, unless you want to cut out some of the all time classics.

#17 of 24 James L White

James L White

    Supporting Actor

  • 840 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 29 2002

Posted February 27 2003 - 10:57 PM

Quote:
You guys that want wide screen better not buy The Day The Earth Stood Stood Still as it is coming out in industry standard (1.37:1), it was made before 1953 movie "The Robe" which started widescreen. The Adventures of Robin Hood with Errol Flynn would be industry standard, even though the film that cost $2 million dollars in 1938 is in color.

If you want wide screen you will have to cut out every movie made for TV, your favorite TV series and a host a of a lot of Movies like "THEM" which I own made in 1954, in industry standard OAR. "Gone With The Wind" "Citizen Cane" all are industry standard. You better re-think your widescreen, unless you want to cut out some of the all time classics.
we have no problem with non WS formats if the film's/show's OAR is 4:3 but if it's not and the DVD is in MAR that's our problem.
Samsung HL-S5688W 56" DLP
Panasonic TC-P50X1 50" Plasma TV (bedroom)
Toshiba HD-A2 HD DVD's
Panasonic BMP-BD60
Sony BDP300 Blu Rays (bedroom)

#18 of 24 Johnny G

Johnny G

    Supporting Actor

  • 791 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 12 2000

Posted February 28 2003 - 01:37 AM

Tom, no offence but you should not disregard a film just because of how it's filmed, It's A Wonderful Life is one of my favourite movies & if anyone butchered it by matting it to 16x9, I'd rather never watch it again!

#19 of 24 MarkHastings

MarkHastings

    Executive Producer

  • 12,013 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 27 2003

Posted February 28 2003 - 03:09 AM

Quote:
You better re-think your widescreen, unless you want to cut out some of the all time classics.
Where to start? Where to start? Posted Image

For one thing, you're taking the whole 'widescreen' thing the wrong way. When people say they are 'pro-widescreen' they aren't referring to the fact that they want everything formatted to 1.78:1 or wider, they just simply refer to the fact that they don't want any pan & scanning or open matte transfers, that's all.

If you want to get anal/technical about it, then you can also say that 1.33:1 is ALSO widescreen because the width is longer than the height. Posted Image

#20 of 24 Greg_Y

Greg_Y

    Screenwriter

  • 1,479 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 1999

Posted February 28 2003 - 03:10 AM

.


Back to Archived Threads 2001-2004



Forum Nav Content I Follow