What's new

So did anyone actually buy Summer Lovers? (1 Viewer)

Rain

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
5,015
Real Name
Rain
For what it's worth, both IMDB and Leonard Maltin's movie guide state this film was shot in Panavision. If that is correct, the OAR would be 2.40:1 and the DVD obviously significantly cropped if it is a "full frame" presentation.
 

Jon Hertzberg

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 6, 2001
Messages
1,541
Real Name
Jonathan
Those sources may be correct. Or the aspect ratio may be, as the film's press kit states, 1.85:1. Until Randal Kleiser gives a definitive answer, it isn't so clear.

Jon
 

Jon Martin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2002
Messages
2,218
From watching the DVD, I find it hard to believe that all that much was cropped off the sides. All the conversation scenes seem to take place with both characters in the center of the frame, with plenty of room on the left and right. A lot of room above and below making it look like matting was the way they went.

I've seen plenty of poorly framed full frame versions of Panavision films, this couldn't possibly be Panavision, or else they didn't know how to benefit from widescreen photography.
 

Jeff Ulmer

Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Aug 23, 1998
Messages
5,582
Unfortunately, my inquiry went unanswered, so what the actual aspect ratio is remains a mystery to me.
 

Jon Hertzberg

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 6, 2001
Messages
1,541
Real Name
Jonathan
Know this is an old thread, but I thought there might still be some interest.

I just obtained my own copy of the Summer Lovers presskit and in two places, "Production Information" and "Final Credits", the aspect ratio is stated as 1.85:1.

There is no mention of "anamorphic 35mm" or anything indicating a scope process.

Clearly, the Maltin and IMDb (probably gleaned from Maltin) information, indicating that this is a scope film, are wrong.

Jon
 

Jeff Ulmer

Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Aug 23, 1998
Messages
5,582
Thanks Jon. At least now I can decide whether or not to buy this if it is cheap. Had it been 2.35 there is little way I could justify spending nything on it. This release isn't my prefered way of seeing the film, but I can matte it myself here.

It wouldn't be the first time the IMDB was wrong.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 1999
Messages
46
You can also look for anamorphic distortions to determine whether it was shot that way. Look for out of focus backgrounds being horizontally compressed, also lens flares that contain a horizontal line stretching across the screen.
 

Jeff Ulmer

Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Aug 23, 1998
Messages
5,582
While a 2.35 ratio would have those distortions if shot with anamorphic lenses, Super 35 can also be at 2.35:1 but is shot flat. In that case though, the image would not necessarily be cropped on the sides, but have lots of extra image at the top and bottom.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,070
Messages
5,130,055
Members
144,283
Latest member
Nielmb
Recent bookmarks
0
Top