DVD Review HTF Review: Brokeback Mountain (1 Viewer)

[Michael Reuben]

But that has nothing to do with how the film was shot.

M.

 

[MattHR]

I know that. I was just commenting that the theatre doesn't respect the intended ratios of most of the films they project.

 

[TonyD]

i looked at those fullshots in the link.

and...."no sir i don't like it."

especially themountain and trees shot.

too much trees in the bottom and too much above the mountains in the top.

looks like images from a tv show.
the wide shots look like a movie.

any of the extra image in those shots is unessasary and isnt important for any one to see.

its just more ground, the top of the shack, the top of a hat, etc.



oh, wait a minute.
is that an entire forum dedicated to brokeback mountain?

 

[Brian W.]

The "mountains" and "trees" I saw in the full frame looked good to me!

 

[TonyD]

the person who posted those comparison shots was showing that the wide screen version is better.

one comment here.

".....it loses most of its artistry: the rifle is half gone, and Jack is butted against the edge of the frame. The extra grass at bottom adds no interest, and the extra line of hill foliage at the top doesn't improve things--defusing the power of the curved geometry below. This one isn't too bad, really, but some of the most haunting shots in the movie are, um, let's just say... not as good in version 2.

More is not always better. That'll be one of the recurring themes in these posts. Sometimes there's huge interest to be found in what's added. Other times it's just negative space, or clutter, or worse--a distraction. And sometimes, as in the shot above, the careful balance of the composition just can't be recreated in a squarer shape."


i wish this was still april 1st so i could believe these last few posts are a joke.

 

[Steve Tannehill]

Well, anyone comparing the composition of Heath Ledger butt shots is kinda missing the point, right? I mean, it's Original Aspect Ratio, not Original Asspect Ratio.

- Steve

 

[ZacharyTait]

Anyone notice that the shot of Heath Ledger in the commercial promoting the DVD is reversed? Its the shot of him standing at the 4th of July picnic with the fireworks going off behind him (Beautiful shot, by the way). In the movie, he's looking to the right. In the commercial, he's looking to the left. Oops.

 

[Randy B A]

In that shot of him standing by the trailer there are power lines visible in the open mat frame. I am guessing those were not intended to be seen? I have not watched the movie yet, so I don't know.

 

[Dustin James]

.

 

[Juan C]

Is the theater owner's name Storaro?

 

[Mark-P]

I believe electricity was discovered long before the 1960s.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I fixed that for you, Dustin.

Good take on the shirts and relationships. I am sure he loved Alma, but I don't think he was *IN* love with Alma.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

You're on the prowl to hump anything that DOESN'T move?

 

[DeeF]

I never suggested that the full screen edition was better, but I do find it interesting how little of the open matte is actually captured in the movie itself. I guess I would have thought by now that film itself would be more naturally adapted to the widescreen ratio, but it really isn't true -- in a way, all we're doing is reducing the amount of information that can be captured on 35mm film.

I do agree that the widescreen version is more properly composed. But in this instance, I'm happy to have both versions.

 

[Sam Davatchi]

That link is definitely spoiler material. I have not seen the movie and didn't know that we actually see naked cowboys
in this movie. MY EYES, MY EYES......

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Aw, shucks!!!

(BTW, I am currently working on a review of a film that touches on some of the subjects being discussed in this thread -- unless my Fun With Dick & Jane screener magically shows up, it should be up next.)

 

[John Koehler]

Dustin...

your post is absolutely the best I have read ANYWHERE on the subject matter of this magnificent film. I am archiving it!

Mike's review at dvdfile is also excellent and worth a read.

http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?opt...=5397&Itemid=3

 

[Kevin Hewell]

Sam,

I wouldn't worry too much. They don't show all that much so your eyes should be safe. Plus, I thought the French were OK with that sort of thing.

 

[Randy B A]

I just thought that Ang Lee's or the DP's vision may have been to show the wide open space without the power lines in the shot. Not theat electricity was not invented during the time frame.

More is not better unless it involves nudity

 

[Nick Martin]

The emotions of this thread are varied quite a bit. It seems to be in a positive state now, but there has certainly been some negatives...in the end, it's all great - such passion for this film is very special indeed. I never felt uneasy about the subject matter, or the more intimate scenes...what does make me uncomfortable is that there are people uncomfortable with these issues in this time. The fact that 'straight' people have concerns or are potentially disgusted by films like this...I never had a problem with it. I guess I can't understand why others do.

On the subject of OAR, I wonder why instead of P&S, films aren't released as completely open matte (films that are shot that way, at least) when offering up fullscreen versions?

That way, you could either see it as the filmmakers intended- widescreen, or see absolutely everything. It's not like this film is full of hard matted effects shots.