Redux - framing screenshots

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Patrick Mirza, Nov 30, 2001.

  1. Patrick Mirza

    Patrick Mirza Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 1999
    Messages:
    877
    Likes Received:
    0
    I decided to check the 2.0:1 framing of Apocalypse Now Redux to its original 2.35 composed frame.
    I used the trailer included on the DVD.
    The results were disheartening...
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    I have 15 more screenshots here
     
  2. CharlesD

    CharlesD Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ouch! Those screen shots are a good example of why cropping a movie is just as bad as pan&scan. This concept of 2:1 as a standard (see link in the original post) is simply ridiculous IMO.

    If I had known this I probably would not have bought the DVD. Luckily I have not had a chance to watch it yet, so it is still sealed, maybe I should just return it!
     
  3. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,555
    Likes Received:
    186
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    The DOP shot the film with 2:1 in mind with a full availible picture of 2.35:1.

     
  4. Moe Dickstein

    Moe Dickstein Filmmaker

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,267
    Likes Received:
    919
    Location:
    West Hollywood, CA
    Real Name:
    T R Wilkinson
    Storaro and Coppola did NOT compose AN for 2.0

    Storaro has made this decision in the last few years to re-format his ORIGINAL 2.35:1 frame to 2.0 for TV

    newer films he has shot HAVE been composed for 2.0 - Picking up the pieces, etc.

    AN and Tucker, however, were NOT composed for the 2.0 ratio and should be released in their full ratios. Shame on Coppola for going along with this foolishness.

    Please look at the panning and scanning on the tucker end credits and tell me they MEANT that...
     
  5. Patrick Mirza

    Patrick Mirza Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 1999
    Messages:
    877
    Likes Received:
    0
    Moe's right. AN was composed and shot in 2.35... this 2:1 reframing was an afterthought by Storaro which he adopted and forced onto Tucker and AN.

    Redux's transfer and color pallette are outstanding, but there is definite picture information that is missing.

     
  6. MathewM

    MathewM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    After watching Redux, and liking what Copolla has tried to do with the film dramatically (I always felt the movie until Redux to be too distant) I was really pissed to watch the trailer in it's 2.35 glory. Storaro is senile if he believes that he framed this film for a 2.1 transfer. The whole thing feels like you're watching it in a shoebox. There's no breathing room on the sides of the framed, everyone is cramped. I'll give him some leeway on a couple of wide establishing shots that keep the subject enough in the middle not to lose effect, but the rest of it is severly butchered.

    For the guy who said that AN would be fine framed 1.66, you're, well no offense a little off.
     
  7. Dick

    Dick Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 1999
    Messages:
    6,011
    Likes Received:
    2,009
    Location:
    Maine
    Real Name:
    Rick
    How can Storarro (and/or Coppola) say the film was "composed for 2.0"? In the example above, one of seven helicopters is completely MISSING! If this was the intent from the outset, Storarro is a much lesser DOP than I'd thought. Further, as pointed out above, there are shots throughout the film in which characters (even ones speaking) are cut in half. 2.0 might have been a good compromise for VHS, but for DVD it is a pitiful choice and I too am severely disappointed with Coppola for allowing one of his three or four finest works be massacred by the musings of a brain-dead DOP.
     

Share This Page