Do you know anybody that prefers Fullscreen over Widescreen? (1 Viewer)

[Joon Hartzell]

I know someone who prefers fullscreen to barvision. Me! And I'm a chess grandmaster who has won several tournaments. Some movies, like "Lawrence of Arabia" are so small in widescreen you can't see anything. What's the use of watching it like that if you can't see the actors at all? It's good for the theater, because that screen is very big. But I can't see anything on my 20" TV, and I think the action is more energetic when it is full screen.

 

[Lev-S]

i watched WS with my PS2 running coax on a 20" RCA so that is total CRIZZAP IMHO.

 

[Bryan X]

It's not widescreen that is the problem, it's your 20" TV.

 

[Zachary Cohen]

I never buy fullscreen DVDs but frankly the pompous attitude of many widescreen advocates is beginning to annoy me. If you want to attempt to convince someone then that is fine. If they don't care, then that is there decision. Sounds rational, doesn't it?


What? WHAT? There's a person..HERE...offering a dissenting opinion! Must MOCK HIM because he must be an idiotic teenager who is using coax cables on his PS2 and using slang words and abbreviations, despite in his post he did none of the above. WS OAR MAR FS.

 

[JeremySt]

You're still not seeing whats going on. Your could be missing quite a bit of the original frame. I'd rather look at the mona lisa from far away than only a portion of it close up.

MAR is a poor presentation, no matter what your tv size. Ive heard this argument many times before, and it cuts no ice with me.

 

[Douglas Bailey]

I'm not criticising your points, just pointing out that this is not the right place to argue against widescreen presentation.

 

[Lev-S]

In Buzz Lightyear voice, "You're mocking me, aren't you?"

 

[Jesse Skeen]

No, I've got several discs with both versions of the movie, and they don't have the hell compressed out of them. For longer movies use DVD-18 (2-sided, dual layer, equivalent to 2 separate discs eliminating the need for separate releases) or enable the auto pan&scan (I have a few discs that at least have it enabled, so it can't be that big a deal), or simply leave it alone and people can get a player with a zoom feature to crop it to their hearts' content. One of the BIG selling points of DVD before it actually came out was the ability to put multiple versions of the same movie on one disc, eliminating the need for multiple inventory of the same title and no more excuses for no widescreen releases! With regards to theatrical/directors' cuts and what have you, that feature has been used far too little- when they do use it it works!

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Jesse, that's a seperate issue. Seamless branching doesn't take a lot of extra space because the two versions use most of the same data. With widescreen and fullscreen, you have to encode the entire movie twice. If it's longer than 90 minutes, it'll look bad and double-sided discs represent a significant increase in manufacturing costs. There are plenty of good reasons not to put both versions in one SKU.

 

[Marc_Sulinski]

I don't think panning and scanning really solves this problem either. Also, do you really think that someone who would watch a pan-n-scan movie would really notice or care if it was just zoomed in and not panned-n-scanned? If that person cared that much, he/she would want to see the widescreen version.

 

[Shea]

Yeah..I know of people who have widescreen TV's and still insist on buying fullscreen dvd's. Albertson's grocery stores in my area ONLY sell fullscreens. Last night at midnight where I went to get my copy of ROTK, several people were saying "let's just make sure we remember to get the full screen version!" Was driving me nuts.

 

[Marc_Sulinski]

Now this makes absolutely no sense to me. Why would you buy a widescreen TV and then buy a fullscreen DVD?

 

[Benjamin.D]

Shouldn't directors have some say so in this issue? It's their creation, their art.

Ben

 

[Mark_vdH]

Fullscreen dvd + Widescreen TV + 'Smart Zoom' = Widescreen TV 'filled'.

Anamorphic 2.35:1 dvds leave black borders on widescreen TVs....

 

[Jesse Skeen]

Yes, it's strange that back in 1987 Steven Speilberg insisted that Color Purple and Innerspace be issued only in letterbox not just on laserdisc but also VHS and Beta (he later did the same with Always). If you want a pan & scan version of either of these you are out of luck. However now you can get his latest films in pan and scan on DVD, even ET and Schindler's List which are supposedly his favorites- you'd think he'd just say no to that.

 

[Marc Colella]

Some directors do have a say in the issue, and still choose to release P&S versions... like $teven $peilberg, who not only has the say for his own films, but other films released by Dreamworks.

When $$$ talks, artistic integrity walks.

 

[Zachary Cohen]

Hey, I realized that this is not the place to be arguing my point, so I'm going to stop now. But one thing...


I'm not arguing against widescreen presentation as I don't own a single DVD thats not in its original aspect ratio, but simply stating that if people want to buy pan and scan or full screen products then they should be allowed to do so.

 

[Marc_Sulinski]

But that would be a "double zoom", right? Wouldn't just zooming in on the 2.35:1 image work better?

 

[Kramer Lowry]

 

[Greg*go]

My mom prefers fullscreen, insisting that she sees more of the picture. She tried to watch Freaky Friday in widescreen, but it was cutting off the tops of peoples heads. Then she tried it in Fullscreen, and all was right with the world. The fact that Freaky Friday (the only movie my mom will do this test on because she knows it proves her point) was shot in 35 mm is yet another reason why I hate Jamie Lee Curtis now.