Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

X-files on BD anytime soon ?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 of 77 OFFLINE   FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン



  • 5,040 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted January 26 2014 - 02:22 PM

Well no, I don't really belong to that camp, but I believe the OAR.

 

OAR is the aspect ratio how the film or tv show was originally shown on the movie theaters or tv (talking about the wide release). Despite what some people believe, you can't "change" the OAR 20 years later - not even Chris Carter can do that. 4:3 is and always will be the OAR of X-Files. The decision was made back then, it's not being made now.

 

If Chris Carter (or some other person with enough credibility) now says that 1.78:1 is/was his preferred aspect ratio, then fine, I can live with that. But even then the OAR is 4:3.

 

"OAR" and "director's/series creator's preferred aspect ratio" are sometimes two different things (we all remember e.g. Kubrick debates, Storaro's decision to frame certain films in 2.20:1 on home video, the history of the low budget film like The Evil Dead, etc). We can of course debate which one is "better" and all that, but I don't see any real debate when it comes to OAR of X-Files (seasons 1-4).

 

1.78:1 is fine if/when they re-run the remastered series in HD channels. I actually fully understand the decision. But Blu-ray is another matter. At least it should be another matter. We'll see.

 

I know it was probably a typo but Storaro wanted 2.00:1, i could have lived with 2.20:1, i agree with original aspect ratio all the way, i dislike the fact Titanic was opened up for it's 3D release as the effects sequences were done at 2.00:1 and you lose some image at the sides, with regards to The X Files we really need more info to come out but if they had a safe area for 16/9 and it's a big if at this stage, then i'll take it even though 4/3 is the original aspect ratio.


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#62 of 77 OFFLINE   Hollywoodaholic

Hollywoodaholic

    Edge of Glory?



  • 1,415 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 08 2007
  • Real Name:Wayne
  • LocationSomewhere in Florida

Posted January 26 2014 - 03:25 PM

If X-Files cinematographer John Bartley says he "protected for 16x9," doesn't that tell you the whole deal? He shot for 4:3 but was thinking ahead for any possible wider presentation. That's been my experience with all these television DPs. They have the "TV Safe" frame on the monitor, but even they understand (and often hope and argue) that's not the be all and end all.



#63 of 77 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,070 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted January 26 2014 - 04:16 PM

If X-Files cinematographer John Bartley says he "protected for 16x9," doesn't that tell you the whole deal? He shot for 4:3 but was thinking ahead for any possible wider presentation.

Just because he knew widescreen TVs were on the horizon doesn't mean that he paid any attention to composing the shots for that AR. Hopefully he did protect for 16x9 because opening the sides to show a bunch of empty space is infinitely preferable to me over cropping the shot to get a 16x9 image (which is what the screencaps clearly show).



#64 of 77 OFFLINE   questrider

questrider

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 207 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 07 2003
  • Real Name:Brian

Posted January 26 2014 - 04:32 PM

Shouldn't it also come to pass that The X-Files was originally broadcast in 480i/p SD? Thus, regardless of whether the Blu-rays are 4:3 or 16:9, shouldn't it matter to some of you purists because the fact that they will be 1080p HD offers more detail than was ever originally intended to be seen during the original television broadcast run. That in and of itself also goes against this "as originally intended" argument. Where is the Original Definition Resolution (ODR — I call dibs on coining this phrase! Just kidding.) defenders? In that case, keep your DVDs and watch them to your heart's content because those are truly "as originally intended" in all their 4:3 480i/p SD glory.

 

Me? I'm very interested in watching the entire series again in 16:9 1080p. Bring it.



#65 of 77 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,070 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted January 26 2014 - 04:39 PM

^ Increasing the resolution of a show shot on 35mm film is not comparable to altering the intended photography simply to fill a modern TV screen.



#66 of 77 OFFLINE   Hollywoodaholic

Hollywoodaholic

    Edge of Glory?



  • 1,415 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 08 2007
  • Real Name:Wayne
  • LocationSomewhere in Florida

Posted January 26 2014 - 05:46 PM

Circles (non Crop kind). I'm with Brian on this. I'll double dip for the HD set (or at least seasons 1-6) and won't look back. I'll re-visit Twin Peaks the same way. Worshippers of the sacred and immutable OAR are welcome to buy my traded DVD sets at a reduced price on Amazon.



#67 of 77 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,070 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted January 26 2014 - 07:19 PM

I'll re-visit Twin Peaks the same way.

Based on CBS/Paramount's history and that Lynch is apparently involved with the set to some degree, I don't think they're going to change the aspect ratio on that show.



#68 of 77 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,269 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted January 27 2014 - 03:54 AM

"protected for 16x9" ...Very different thing than "framing/composing for 16:9". That's the point that some of us are trying to make here. We do get the "safe area for 16:9".People see these aspect ratio issues a bit differently. Some people hate those "black bars", some feel that "more is more" and some people feel that it should be the OAR that's on the BD.(Twin Peaks in 1.78:1? I very highly doubt it.)

#69 of 77 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,269 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted March 13 2014 - 01:44 PM

Some comments from Carter:"Q = If the series does come to Blu-ray, do you know if the early seasons will be released in 4:3 (as originally broadcast) or 16:9?A = I'm imagining that they'll be released in 4:3. When we began filming the show in 1992, we actually (except for maybe the pilot) considered HD all along. And so there was image and opportunity to expand and modify the aspect ratio. But the fact is these are all decisions made by 20th Century Fox, which I'm occasionally consulted on."( http://www.reddit.co..._xfiles/cfqd5a6 )

#70 of 77 OFFLINE   Hollywoodaholic

Hollywoodaholic

    Edge of Glory?



  • 1,415 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 08 2007
  • Real Name:Wayne
  • LocationSomewhere in Florida

Posted March 13 2014 - 02:01 PM

Note that he's talking about the early seasons only. But it sounds like it was, with the exception of the Pilot, framed for 16x9 and shot (or released) at 4:3.



#71 of 77 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,070 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted March 13 2014 - 02:51 PM

But it sounds like it was, with the exception of the Pilot, framed for 16x9 and shot (or released) at 4:3.

While they likely shot the series 1.78, they would have framed the show for 1.33 since that was the only way that the show would be seen in the early to mid-90's.

 

On a semi-related note, I wonder why, if they shot the whole series (save the pilot) in widescreen, weren't the first four seasons in widescreen on DVD too? I mean I'm glad that they kept the correct AR but I'm just curious as to why they made the switch with the fifth season DVDs.



#72 of 77 OFFLINE   Simon Massey

Simon Massey

    Screenwriter



  • 2,190 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 09 2001
  • Real Name:Simon Massey
  • LocationKuwait

Posted March 14 2014 - 02:33 AM

Agreed, Travis R.

 

Hollywoodaholic, if Carter comes out and says the show was framed for 1.78, fine, But twisting his words to suit your logic doesn't help. If he and the filmmakers framed for 16x9 which he doesn't say, why does Carter as the creator of the series imagine a release in 4x3 ?

Look you are probably going to get your wish because I fully expect a 16x9 release anyway, but please don't suggest this is somehow the intended version.

 

I also do not like this comment from the interviewers which suggests that this is not simple a case of expanding the image.

 

[color=rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:small;background-color:rgb(255,255,204);]The German broadcasts of the first season are in 16:9 widescreen, but the show didn't go widescreen until Season 5 (as evidenced by the DVD releases), meaning that what's being shown is a mix of 4:3 footage cropped for 16:9, and expanded, cropped widescreen footage (meaning that the picture has been widened to show more of the originally-filmed picture, but cropped on the top and bottom to fit the standard 16:9 aspect ratio).[/color]



#73 of 77 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,269 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted March 14 2014 - 05:07 AM

" framed for 16x9 and shot (or released) at 4:3."Nice try, but he doesn't say that. And quite frankly it sounds that Carter is not that involved with the HD transfers (although he doesn't really say that either). Fox decides and if that's the case they're going to release first seasons in 16:9 also on BD. That would be my guess, since it's easier to create one 16:9 master for HDTV, BD, streaming...

#74 of 77 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,070 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted March 14 2014 - 05:30 AM

Look you are probably going to get your wish because I fully expect a 16x9 release anyway...

 

...they're going to release first seasons in 16:9 also on BD.

You guys are bringing me down. :) I had some renewed hope when Carter said that he imagined that Fox would release it at 4:3.



#75 of 77 OFFLINE   Simon Massey

Simon Massey

    Screenwriter



  • 2,190 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 09 2001
  • Real Name:Simon Massey
  • LocationKuwait

Posted March 14 2014 - 05:35 AM

To be honest these best scenario would be a dual version of both 16:9 and 4:3 - that is my one hope since it has been done before

#76 of 77 OFFLINE   Simon Massey

Simon Massey

    Screenwriter



  • 2,190 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 09 2001
  • Real Name:Simon Massey
  • LocationKuwait

Posted March 14 2014 - 05:43 AM

Watched the recent release of the Jungle Book from Disney and it seems that is a classic case of botched framing to suit fitting the TV frame - looks awful .

#77 of 77 OFFLINE   Jari K

Jari K

    Producer



  • 3,269 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2007

Posted March 14 2014 - 10:13 AM

"I had some renewed hope when Carter said that he imagined that Fox would release it at 4:3."Perhaps Carter doesn't really care. 4:3, 16:9, whatever. Some of these series "creators" are not that technical savvy. What they care is the overall story lines, characters and "the world" of the series.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users