A Hard Day's Night Pan & Scan from Miramax?!? (1 Viewer)

[Ted Todorov]

I can't beleive no one has mentioned this (from DVD file):

After many delays and postponements, looks like that long awaited new Miramax Collector's Series release of The Beatles classic A Hard Day's Night will finally see the light of day on DVD on 9/24. Presented in a newly remastered 1.37:1 transfer with a remixed 5.1 Dolby surround track, this two-disc set includes plenty of extras: a new original documentary with more than 30 minutes of never-before-seen footage, another 20 minutes of behind-the-scenes material, not one but three audio commentary tracks with the cast and two with the filmmakers, the "Running, Jumping, Standing Still" short film, , a scrapbook, music retrospective, and trailers. Retail is $29.95.

Unless my memory is failing me A Hard Day's Night is OAR 1.66:1, and the previously announced Miramax release which never materialized was supposed to be anamorphic widescreen. Unless DVD File has made a mistake, Disney has screwed us for real -- one of the most beloved films of all time -- Pan & Scan only.
The Dutch R2 release is anamorphic widescreen. Again, if DVD File's report is true, time to start a massive protest -- and to buy the Dutch DVD...
Link Removed
Ted

 

[Greg_M]

As long as the title isn't pan and scanned = sale

 

[Jeffrey Gray]

The film was shot at 1.37:1, and intended to be matted down to anything from 1.55:1 to 1.66:1 to 1.85:1. A 1.37:1 version would show the most picture information possible, as it would be open-matte. (We've discussed this with many 50s/60s films given full-frame transfers on DVD; this is just another one of those films that was shot in Academy ratio and exhibited in matted widescreen.)

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

Criterion's laserdisc was also at 1.37:1.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Presented for the first time on home video in its original widescreen format, this restored print is nothing short of amazing. The framing looks much more natural and spacious than the cramped 1.33:1 version that has been available up till now, and the restoration job is hugely impressive.

So many of these so called "open matte" transfers seem to lose information on the sides -- no doubt because they are zoomed in to hide boom mikes, etc. Pan & Scan by any other name, is still Pan & Scan.

Ted

 

[John Berggren]

I'd be interested in the final answer on this one, as I'll be wary of picking it up until I'm sure.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Pan & Scan by any other name, is still Pan & Scan.

Not when neither panning nor scanning is involved in the process, and zooming is neither panning nor scanning. P&S isn't an all-inclusive term, it's a specific process. If you want to use an all-inclusive term, use MAR.

DJ

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I played this film theatrically way back during the first reissue in 1983 (the "Dolby Stereo" reissue). The print was full-frame (Academy ratio) but the leaders had a notation of "1.66" on them (I had to run it 1.85 as my theater did not have the capability to run 1.66 or 1.37; it looked a little cramped at 1.85, but not terrible). They were the original leaders from the 1964 release as they had the old United Artists logo on them. So it sounds like Miramax is releasing an open-matte version, if this report is true.

 

[Ted Todorov]

If you want to use an all-inclusive term, use MAR.

OK, I'll settle for MAR. In any case Peter confirms that OAR is 1.66:1, so unless DVD File's info is incorrect, we have been screwed -- pardon me -- marred.

Ted

 

[Steve Meskell]

Screw the OAR/MAR....
What happened to the DTS???
I really wanted to hear the Boys in DTS
I have a feeling this will be one of those releases that pisses off the people in all regions.(more extras for R1,and better sound and possibly a better picture on that R2 release.

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

The film was shot at 1.37:1, and intended to be matted down to anything from 1.55:1 to 1.66:1 to 1.85:1.

If this is true, then 1.37:1, 1.66:1 and 1.85:1 could potentially all be considered "correct" ratios.

Anyone have any information from Richard Lester? Wasn't he involved in Criterion's old laserdisc?

Has anyone seen a comparison between that Dutch widescreen disc and either the new Miramax transfer or Criterion's transfer to see if anything has actually been cropped at the sides?

As to the comment about zooming in to avoid boom mics etc: if the film was shot for 1.37:1, then there would be no booms to crop out. And if the film was shot for 1.37:1, then a 1.37:1 transfer would not be MAR.

 

[Damin J Toell]

In any case Peter confirms that OAR is 1.66:1, so unless DVD File's info is incorrect, we have been screwed -- pardon me -- marred.

I'm curious, however, as to the framing on Criterion's LD releases. If they went for 1.33:1, and given that they usually act upon the requests of directors, I'm left wondering if it's the preferred AR of Richard Lester. If so, that's good enough for me.

DJ

 

[Ted Todorov]

As to the comment about zooming in to avoid boom mics etc: if the film was shot for 1.37:1, then there would be no booms to crop out. And if the film was shot for 1.37:1, then a 1.37:1 transfer would not be MAR.

That is totally false. Most 1.85:1 or less AR films are shot in 1.37:1. They are not intended to be viewed in 1.37:1 and therefore not protected for 1.37:1 and may well have boom mikes galore in the 1.37:1 frame (as well as masking tape on the floor for actor's marks, etc., etc.)

AFAIK, Criterion did release a (small) number of MAR laser disks -- Criterion is/was not the last word in OAR.

Ted

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Following-up, it sounds like this release has been OAF'ed (Original Audio Format) as well. The film's original theatrical release was in mono only - DVDFile's report makes no mention of the original mono track being present - only the 5.1 "remix". Let's hope their report is incomplete and the disc contains the mono mix as well as correct aspect ratio picture (unless, as Damin points out, Lester wants the picture framed at 1.37).

 

[Derek Miner]

I asked Paul Rutan, who restored A Hard Day's Night about this back in 1999, and this was his reply:

No, Both pictures are photographed in the 1:66-1 format (520 X 825) which was the standard in England at that time. They also play well in the 1:33-1 format (600 X 825)(except in the concert sequences of "HDN" where you can see some empty seats in the balcony). 16 X 9 is basically the cinemascope format which is 340 X 835. So what happens if you take movies like "HDN" and "Help!" and convert them to 16 X 9 (without a matte on both sides) is severe cropping of the top and bottom (Not a good thing).

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

That is totally false. Most 1.85:1 or less AR films are shot in 1.37:1. They are not intended to be viewed in 1.37:1 and therefore not protected for 1.37:1 and may well have boom mikes galore in the 1.37:1 frame (as well as masking tape on the floor for actor's marks, etc., etc.)

Ted: you'll note that I said "shot for 1.37:1". Just as Citizen Kane was shot for 1.37:1 and therefore a 1.37:1 presentation of Citizen Kane on video is accurate and does not show extraneous information, so may be the case here with A Hard Day's Night.
The strongest evidence in any direction so far is the 1.66 header on that print, referenced above, but Criterion are not known for MAR'ing films (though their LDs of Crash and Robocop were both opened up from 1.85 to 1.66 at the requests of their directors).

 

[Damin J Toell]

Criterion are not known for MAR'ing films (though their LDs of Crash and Robocop were both opened up from 1.85 to 1.66 at the requests of their directors).

Criterion also framed Dead Ringers at Cronenberg's preferred 1.66:1, although it almost certainly played at 1.85:1 in the U.S. Personally, I give much greater importance to the director's preferred framing over whatever AR it was theatrically exhibited at (which is generally limited to 1.85:1 and 2.39:1 in the most theatres in the U.S.).
DJ

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

...and those two Paul Rutan comments seems to seal it up. Damn my slow typing! Actually, I busted up my left thumb the day I came back from my honeymoon, and now every time I try to use the space bar is absolute agony.

Also, the absence of the mono restoration track would really really annoy me. So, no 1.66 and no mono track means no sale.

Though if Richard Lester comes out and says he prefers the films to be shown unmatted on TV, then I suppose that would be okay with me. But the lack of the mono track would still make me avoid the disc.

 

[Derek Miner]

Aaron, in general principle I agree with you, but for A Hard Day's Night, the 5.1 version that played in theatres was only mildly different from the original mono. I saw Miramax's version on two different occasions, and I recall everything other than the music being in mono. And the songs were remixed from the original tapes to sound like they are supposed to in the mono version (NOT like they do on the MPI DVD) but with a little ambience.

 

[george kaplan]

On the current dvd, it's full frame until the closing credits which are widescreen. I assumed this meant it was p&s and had to open up for the credits.