Chariots of Fire,The Life of Emile Zola&The Broadway Melody of 1929 in February (1 Viewer)

[PeterMano]

One of my questions with Chariots is, aspect ratio. The packaging lists 1.85 as the ratio, but British films are typically in the 1.66 aspect ratio.

WB really screwed up with Excalibur as the film had miserable cropping, cut off heads, etc.

Can anyone comment, whether there are any cropping problems of this kind with Chariots.

 

[Walter Kittel]

In terms of framing, approximately 2% image area is restored to each side of the presentation compared to the original 1.33:1 release. The film is presented in 1.85:1 with 16x9 enhancement.

Vertical composistion did have me questionioning the A.R. however. There are some shots that look tight ( with mild chopping of caps on characters heads for instance during the College Dash, and the line of chalk at the same event ) and there are other shots that look so wonderfully balanced that I fluxuated between wondering if the compositions were cropped or represented an accurate theatrical presentation. One example is the line of seats extending to the frame's upper right corner in the aftermath of Abraham's race with Liddell, while Harold speaks with Sybil. Headroom and camera movment are well executed in this particular scene.

I am assuming that the U.S. theatrical presentation was presented at 1.85:1. Despite my fond memories of seeing this film in 1981 I make no claims regarding my actual memories of that event. Overall, I was pleased with the framing, but I realize that this is subjective.

- Walter.

 

[PeterMano]

I always worry with the 1.66 films. I don't know why it's so hard to just leave well enough alone.

I have a few discs that are aboslute horror shows. MGM's treatment of A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. A 2.35 film squeezed into a 1.78 frame. Argghhhh!!! Painful to watch. They release the film in widescreen and still manage to butcher it.

WB also did a hack job with The Gypsy Moths. The framing was terrible. Frankheimer did a lot of his films in 1.66.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Disney knows how to properly 16x9 encode a 1.66:1 image...but for some reason WB and MGM both make you choose...you get 1.78/1.85 in 16x9 or 1.66:1 in 4x3 lbx only...which sucks royally in terms of loosing image resolution for 1.66:1 and also makes it cumbersome with subtitled foreign films when you zoom on a 16x9 display.

If WB had a clue (grrr) and *knew* how to 16x9 encode a 1.66:1 title...I'd have loved Chariots in 1.66:1. But given the stupid choice that they seem to have, I'd rather it 1.85:1 with 16x9 than 1.66:1 in 4x3...at least the former is presentable on a large-screen system and reasonably mimics what I saw theatrically...whereas the second option is problematic for a 16x9 display like mine and suffers from poorer image quality when magnified.

 

[Ruz-El]

I plan on getting Broadway Melody for sure, but I'm on the fence with Zola. Can anyone tell me what the film is like, maybe comparing it to titles that are similar in regards to pacing, and general feel? I'm leening to getting it for the extras alone (I'm a sucker for vintage shorts), but a french revolutionary drama doesn't exactly get me excited. Although Paul Muni rocks.

Damn, I need convincing!

Chariots is the only title I'm not interested in. I never really got into it, and "Chariots Of Eggs" is enough for me on the SCTV set

 

[PeterMano]

So Chariots is a 1.66 aspect ratio. I thought so, but wasn't exactly sure. I'll rent first before buying.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I can't confirm this, of course, but I'm reasonably sure that Chariots was presented at 1.85:1 in U.S. theaters, even if it was matted to 1.66:1 in European theaters.

At any rate, the new DVD, like most of Warner's presentations of "flat" films, is actually 1:78:1, which in my opinion, looks fine.

Beyond framing, the new transfer really is pretty good. Of course, I've never seen the original DVD, so I'm just comparing to my old VHS.

I'm pretty happy with the new disc(s).

 

[Adam_S]

saw a print of chariots a couple years ago, I'm pretty certain it was 1.85:1 because I saw a few months later Witness for the Prosecution in 1.66:1 at the same theatre and you could tell a difference.

Adam

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

Nobody has yet mentioned the sound on SE Chariots of Fire....the old version sounds muffled in comparision! I was amazed even in the opening scene where the footfalls in the surf were audible as distinct splashes. All throughout the film the audio detail was very much improved.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

yes, the sound on the older DVD was an abonination...muffled beyond belief. I'm hopeful that the new disc sounds better...and your comments indicate that it does...wonderful.

 

[Tim_P_76]

I have only watched Chariots of Fire last night, havent watched the extras. For the most part picture is very clear. Print is clean for the most part; little to no grain present. I did wish the opening and closing running scenes were a bit cleaner. Thats where grain and age shows up. Age and budget don't help I'm sure. I also noticed frame jitter more than a couple of times which always bug me. This noticeable in the college and some interior scenes. Telecine or Gate problems? I noticed no cropping problems. This is the second time I have seen this film presented in 1.85(first on TCM).

Sound wise, the 5.1 does wonders for the Vangelis score. It does open the dialogue up. A couple of times dialogue is still low and muffled, mainly with multiple conversations beginning or ending. And yes you can hear the foot splashes at the end along with the waves which made me feel right at home A revelation from my VHS copy.

Packaging was well done with a keepcase and slip cover that helps match with Warner's other 2 disc SE's. Overall a great theatrical represensation.

 

[William Miller]

Funny Thing Happened was not 2.35. The DVD is correct and looks fine.

 

[andrew markworthy]

The Chariots of Fire release is head and shoulders better than the previous one - one of the early shots in Caius College hall beautifully illustrates this - you suddenly realise effort went into the lighting. However, I recall the movie being a bit 'warmer' colour-wise when I saw it at the cinema (unlike most folks who saw this post-Oscar I really did see it on the day it was released in a decent print; I liked it so much I dragged a couple of friends back to see it the following evening), though this could of course be my memory playing tricks. Sound is excellent and a lot better than the original release in the cinemas.

The extras are good - a respectable if at times rather pedestrian commentary, an excellent documentary and a pleasant filmed discussion by many of the original cast.

One minor quibble - the version is not necessarily the 'original'. Given that the film was first shown in the UK, the original version should have the indoor cricket match at the beginning (missing from the US version) and not the scene at the railway station (which is missing from the UK version). Although the cricket match scene is shown in the extras it's a shame that seamless branching couldn't have been used to allow people to see either the American or Brit version of the film.

 

[Rob Willey]

If you believe that then you need to get off the fence and get Emile Zola -- it's one of his best performances.

"J'accuse!"

Rob

 

[oscar_merkx]

I received Chariots of Fire today and I am going to enjoy it

 

[PeterMano]

Well, then I'm in error about the aspect ratio, but it looks cropped to me. I could have swore when I saw it theaterically, it was a scope film. Course, that's hmm, how many years ago.

I'll have to rewatch it.