Mark Pytel
Second Unit
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2003
- Messages
- 319
- Real Name
- Mark Pytel
I really like movies, both coming from a wide variety of genres, so therefore I tend to buy or rent a lot of movies. Having gone to film school, and just using good common sense, I know the importance of OAR. Plus with it being 2009 and widescreen tv's being normal fare nowaday, I simply just can't understand the full frame only release of a widescreen movie.
My question then is, why does lionsgate still release fullframe only transfers of their older release films? I have no problem with their new release films such as iron man, etc as those dvd and most new features have great transfers. No what I am referring to are the films from the 80's and 90's that they own. It seems that unless the film is with a popular actor, or is highlander, the film is relegated to the bottom bin with a ff transfer. Granted, some of those films are not high art, but i'd still like to see them they way they were intended. Plus a pan and scan version of a 2:35 movie looks horribly crappy on my widescreen tv!
Plus, I'm pretty sure they hate Christopher Lambert! LOL Besides Highlander, every other movie they own of his has gotten shoddy treatment. What stinks is that a lot of his 90's films were shot in scope so the dvd looks really bad with 40% of the picture gone.
My biggest complaint is that I was so looking forward to the upcoming lost 80's collection, (repossessed, homer and eddie etc) actually wanting to buy them all, but I read on the dvd talk forum that many of the upcoming dvds are going to be full frame thus getting rid of my potential purchase.
Now all the other companies are releasing almost everything in OAR, heck even universal is going back and re-releasing some of their old full frame dvd's, so why is lionsgate still stuck in this pattern that budget or low volume dvd's are fullframe only? Is this since they are a smaller company? Do they even own./have the masters/negative for the original prints? Now, I don't work in dvd transfer production so I don't know the actual costs, but it can't cost that much to do a straight 16:9 transfer. I'd gather creating a pan and scan version costs more as that creates more work.
I am not asking for warner bros style restorations or slick transfers, Hell I'd take a non-restored crappy looking widescreen dvd over these full frame disasters. I used to thing that van damme got the short end of the stick as so many of his bad-good movies were on dvd in bad transfers, but with universal re-releasing all of them in new widescreen transfers, it seems that Chris Lambert is now the king of crappily transfered dvd's.
I was looking on Lionsgates website and I can't seem to find a comment/request area. Does anyone know what their contact info/ address is so I can send them a letter?
Let me know what everyone else thinks about this
-mark
My question then is, why does lionsgate still release fullframe only transfers of their older release films? I have no problem with their new release films such as iron man, etc as those dvd and most new features have great transfers. No what I am referring to are the films from the 80's and 90's that they own. It seems that unless the film is with a popular actor, or is highlander, the film is relegated to the bottom bin with a ff transfer. Granted, some of those films are not high art, but i'd still like to see them they way they were intended. Plus a pan and scan version of a 2:35 movie looks horribly crappy on my widescreen tv!
Plus, I'm pretty sure they hate Christopher Lambert! LOL Besides Highlander, every other movie they own of his has gotten shoddy treatment. What stinks is that a lot of his 90's films were shot in scope so the dvd looks really bad with 40% of the picture gone.
My biggest complaint is that I was so looking forward to the upcoming lost 80's collection, (repossessed, homer and eddie etc) actually wanting to buy them all, but I read on the dvd talk forum that many of the upcoming dvds are going to be full frame thus getting rid of my potential purchase.
Now all the other companies are releasing almost everything in OAR, heck even universal is going back and re-releasing some of their old full frame dvd's, so why is lionsgate still stuck in this pattern that budget or low volume dvd's are fullframe only? Is this since they are a smaller company? Do they even own./have the masters/negative for the original prints? Now, I don't work in dvd transfer production so I don't know the actual costs, but it can't cost that much to do a straight 16:9 transfer. I'd gather creating a pan and scan version costs more as that creates more work.
I am not asking for warner bros style restorations or slick transfers, Hell I'd take a non-restored crappy looking widescreen dvd over these full frame disasters. I used to thing that van damme got the short end of the stick as so many of his bad-good movies were on dvd in bad transfers, but with universal re-releasing all of them in new widescreen transfers, it seems that Chris Lambert is now the king of crappily transfered dvd's.
I was looking on Lionsgates website and I can't seem to find a comment/request area. Does anyone know what their contact info/ address is so I can send them a letter?
Let me know what everyone else thinks about this
-mark