FOX-- Ferngully in OAR or NO SALE!

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Dan Hitchman, Dec 4, 2001.

  1. Dan Hitchman

    Dan Hitchman Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 1999
    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just finished reading on the software section that Ferngully (Fox) and Universal's Balto will not be released to DVD with their proper widescreen aspect ratios.
    This is getting ridiculous.
    I thought Fox had left behind this pan and scan/open matte only crap when Mr. Staddon stepped in and Fox started asking for consumer input (all good things since we now have more DTS and anamorphic enhanced widescreen).
    I will be simple and blunt, once again...
    NO OAR = NO SALE.
    Please at least give us the option of watching these types of films in their correct aspect ratios, but don't lock us out by releasing full frame or cropped versions only.
    What about those consumers with widescreen HDTV's??
    Dan
     
  2. cafink

    cafink Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    3,043
    Likes Received:
    37
    Real Name:
    Carl Fink
    Can't speak for anyone else of course, but personally…

    If "Ferngully" is OAR, I will purchase it.

    If it's pan and scan, I will not.

    Simple as that.
     
  3. Glennica

    Glennica Agent

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2001
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why bother to release any film in a butchered format?

    Give us OAR for EVERY TITLE!
     
  4. Sean Conklin

    Sean Conklin Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,720
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  5. John Berggren

    John Berggren Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 1999
    Messages:
    3,238
    Likes Received:
    1
    I didn't post on this when I saw it announced because I couldn't find the OAR information for these titles, however, it disturbs me greatly that FOX of all studios is releasing MAR only product.

    It's a shame. I usually make it a point to buy new Fox DVDs. I'll have to be more careful in the future.
     
  6. Jeff Ulmer

    Jeff Ulmer Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 1998
    Messages:
    5,584
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  7. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,322
    Likes Received:
    226
    If this is true, this will be the one sin that Fox has not committed before- releasing a DVD in pan and scan that was available previously on LASERDISC in widescreen!! This movie is under 90 minutes long, so there's no reason not to put BOTH versions on the SAME disc!!!
     
  8. Joshua Clinard

    Joshua Clinard Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    69
    Location:
    Abilene, TX
    Real Name:
    Joshua Clinard
    NO OAR = NO SALE!

    I hope Peter Staddon sees this!
     
  9. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,555
    Likes Received:
    186
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    This is probably a dual-format release.

    Fox has both the colorized and B&W versions of those Shirley Temple movies, so that seems to be no problem.

    I don't buy DVD's without the correct ratio (Besides Ben-Hur), and I won't buy this even if it was 1.85:1 like it should be.

    Ferngully is crap, but even crap needs OAR.
     
  10. Dan Hitchman

    Dan Hitchman Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 1999
    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure there are more forum members who feel strongly about OAR on all films!

    Dan
     
  11. Chris M

    Chris M Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    0
    I also noticed this, and started a thread in the Software forum, but after a lot of searching on the net I kind of came to the conclusion that Ferngully's OAR is actually 1.33:1. IMDB doesn't list it's AR, and neither does any other website. We have the VHS and there is no mention of it being resized and it looks like the titles were made for 1.33:1 as well.

    However, if there was an LD in widescreen then I am angry (again) that Fox would do this!

    Peter, please respond and calm our fears!

    Thanks,

    Chris.
     
  12. Dan Hitchman

    Dan Hitchman Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 1999
    Messages:
    2,713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,

    Ferngully was shown theatrically at either 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 widescreen. It's been awhile since I saw the movie, but it was indeed drawn to be shown in widescreen at commercial theaters.

    OAR or definitely a no buy! I can't believe they couldn't at least have both a widescreen and so-called "full screen" version on the disc since it's so short.

    If this info. is accurate Fox has left a sour taste in my mouth. What film will be non-OAR next then? Are they on the road to ruin like Warner Brothers and now Universal?

    Dan
     
  13. Larry Sutliff

    Larry Sutliff Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2000
    Messages:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    10
    No OAR, no sale. Period.
     
  14. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,322
    Likes Received:
    226
    The laserdisc is about 1.66:1, and the movie is VERY short- even with it all in CAV format it only takes up 3 sides. (There was also a pan and scan LD in CLV format.)
     
  15. Dan Brecher

    Dan Brecher Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 1999
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    0
    I always found Furngully to be a rather delightful little film, and a nice looking one at that, I remember even my PAL VHS copy looked realy nice so obviously an anamorphic widescreen transfer would be high in demand from me.

    I hope it doesn't come to pass that the disc is full frame for no good reason.

    Dan (UK)
     

Share This Page