International Any Thoughts On The Long Awaited "Sodom and Gomorrah" Anyone get it yet? (1 Viewer)

[haineshisway]

Matt Hough review

"The film was originally presented in 1.85:1, but this 1.33:1 presentation isn’t the open matte frame with loads of headroom. Rather, it’s a weirdly zoomed in and then cropped image with characters often cut in half on either side of the frame and yet sometimes still with ridiculous amounts of headroom showing! "

Yes, exactly what I said - it had to either be open matte or zoomed in - apparently the latter. I may take a chance on this Blu-ray.

 

[Matt Hough]

Matt Hough review

"The film was originally presented in 1.85:1, but this 1.33:1 presentation isn’t the open matte frame with loads of headroom. Rather, it’s a weirdly zoomed in and then cropped image with characters often cut in half on either side of the frame and yet sometimes still with ridiculous amounts of headroom showing! "

Yes, that DVD-R copy of the film has to be one of the worst DVDs ever produced of an A-list film. Shameful in every respect.

 

[RobertMG]

You're not trying to say that Fox released Sodom here in the US as pan-and-scan - it's a 1.85 movie. Nothing to do with pan-and-scan. The worst it could be is open matte at Academy ratio, or full frame zoomed in a bit.

said the MOD dvd is pan and scan and on FXM it is ltbx but the print is horrible

here is the review from dvdtalk just a brief bit


Rather than create a new high-definition transfer, one that could be utilized not only for a marginal MOD release such as this but also for free and cable television release, home video (including Blu-ray), and digital download in the U.S. and other markets in which Fox holds rights, instead they've fallen back on a transfer at least 20 years old, perhaps significantly older. Its greatest sin is that it pans-and-scans the film, shot for 1.85:1 widescreen but apparently shot "hard-matte," leaving panning-and-scanning as the only option to fit the image onto 4:3 television monitors.