Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DVD' started by ChadM, Aug 10, 2004.
??? The previously-released widescreen versions of A Bug's Life have always been anamorphic.
Incorrect. The initial release was letterboxed, but not anamorphic.
I thought all versions of A Bug's Life was anamorphic except for the P&S release.
The first release was non-anamorphic. Do you have a TV that takes advantage of anamorphic dvds?
That's correct. The first DVD was non-anamorphic. The 2 disc CE (which is out of print I believe) and the newest version (released around the time Finding Nemo came out) are anamorphic. The second anamorphic release is also THX ceritified, while the others are not.
Yes the TV is HiDef Wide and the version of A Bugs Life I have is most definitely not anamorphic. Let me explain the question further - with several titles coming out in enhanced mode (goodfellas, rounders, etc) that were previously letterboxed I am starting to think about weeding out some of the letterboxed titles in my collection. I was thinking a bugs life would be a good test case.
That's what I did and sold around 65-70. Slowly I am replacing them, such as "The Thing"; "Christine S.E."; "Candyman S.E."; "Videodrome S.E." etc.
Ah, OK, I bought the 2 disc SE several years ago, and completely forgot there was a non-anamorphic version before that. To answer the question then... YES!!!!
It's absolutely worth it to upgrade. The anamorphic version has some of the best picture quality I've ever seen. I've heard that the non-anamorphic version is pretty good, but why not go for the extra 33% resolution?
Agreed. Excellent presentation. And a great film to boot.
The 2-disc CE is in print and can easily be obtained for $20 in many places. I'd advise getting it.
The 2-disc CE was reissued (with a few Finding Nemo extras)and and is one of the few times I have double-dipped on a title. The anamorphic transfer is a real sparkler.
All of the transfers (non-anamorphic 2.35:1, recomposed 4:3, anamorphic 2.35:1) released of A Bug's Life have been excellent. If you are interested in the very well-produced extras or are disatisfied with the vertical resolution of the disc you have, it is worth an upgrade, otherwise, you have all you need. The transfers are otherwise identical and there is no significant improvement in the compression. All versions released include the recomposed 4:3 version on the same disc as one of the OAR versions, so you can't avoid it if your try. Regards,
The 16x9 version is absolutely 100% worth the upgrade. In fact, it's one of the best A:A comparisons...exactly the same digital source...one downconverted from HD to 4x3 lbx, one to 16x9 lbx...so you're really seeing an apples to apples demonstration of just what improvement you get with 16x9 encoding on a 16x9 capable display. And it's good One of the "reference" transfers out there. Somehow managed to escape most of the EE we see on Disney DVDs today. -dave
Slightly off topic for this thread... but what are people's feelings towards the "recomposed" 4:3 version? I watched it once (I still have just the original release), and I honestly thought it worked ok. It felt more made for TV (or pre-1953), and not really in a bad way. I think they did a pretty good job of it. I still prefer the widescreen version, but this was an interesting idea for a CGI film. I'm also not eager to see this feat repeated -- 2.35 is a very satisfying (and underused) AR for animation. But I thought it was a fascinating experiment. Have any other CGI films taken this route?
Hm. Parts of Titan AE were CG, but that's the only sort-of example I have. I'd bet that The Incredibles will be 2.35:1, though.
Yeah, the recomposed 4:3 version also works great. But one prefers widescreen for the cinema effect.
Ok based on the recommendations here I got it and I have to say I am impressed. Much better looking film now. The extra resolution really helps. Makes it less "jagged". I don't know if that is the right word. David, funny you said that the transfer escapes "most" of the EE that tends to plague Disney films, because that was one flaw I noted, albeit it a minor one. Thanks for the help, now I am going to determine which DVD's I may need to replace. Luckily I was pretty good about holding off on non-anamorphic DVD's early in building my collection.
What does the cover of the old version look like? I may find it and rent it and then do a side by side comparison.