1. Visit this thread for your chance to win a selection of Lionsgate action films on UV!
    Dismiss Notice

Spielberg 1.85:1 over 2.35:1

Discussion in 'Movies' started by GerardoHP, Jun 17, 2002.

  1. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    Does anyone know if Steven Spielberg ever officially spoke out about preferring 1.85:1 to scope? Being a wide-widescreen lover, I personally wish some of his big action films like JURASSIC PARK and MINORITY REPORT were shot in scope. I can understand the aesthetics of choosing one format over the other, still...
     
  2. Jason Whyte

    Jason Whyte Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Spielberg never really actively disliked anamorphic or Super 35, he just didn't think it was necessary for any of the films he has made since 1993.

    And that all changes this friday. "Minority Report" is a scope film.

    Jason
     
  3. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    Are you sure? I thought it was 1.85:1, probably from reading it on the IMDb.
     
  4. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
     
  5. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    170
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    I think the main reason why he has opted to use more 1.85:1 lately is simply because of the easiness of using CGI.

    Scope films will slightly distort the image a little, which can make added CGI look wrong or be a pain to fit right.

    IMO, some movies work better with flat (1.85:1) than a scope (2.35:1) film. For example, Jurassic Park is just right for 1.85:1. 2.35:1 just isn't needed for a film like this. However, 1.85:1 would have been awful for Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
     
  6. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    Patrick, do they work better this way or is it that it's hard to imagine them in a format different than the one they were shot in? I think the dinosaurs of JP could have filled the frame and would have worked great in scope.
     
  7. Jason Whyte

    Jason Whyte Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    A projectionist over at film-tech.com who has ran an exhibitors print has confirmed this is Super 35; the information at IMDB.com has been updated recently because of this.

    Jason
     
  8. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    Great!
     
  9. Timon Russo

    Timon Russo Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 10, 2000
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    ONE of my DVDs SOMEWHERE has an extra or commentary or SOMETHING in which the person apparently asked Spielberg why 1.85 for JP and he said "because dinosaurs are tall". Wish I could remember who was saying that.
     
  10. Adam Lenhardt

    Adam Lenhardt Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2001
    Messages:
    17,320
    Likes Received:
    1,921
    Location:
    Albany, NY
    Besides, Indy 4 will most likely be scope.
     
  11. Richard Kim

    Richard Kim Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  12. Dan Brecher

    Dan Brecher Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 1999
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    0
    In my opinion the thought he suddenly gave up on scope was completely unjustified. If you look back over his catalogue, especially at all his flat features since Hook, it's clear (to me at least) they all benefit from their chosen ratios.

    Scope to me is overused, like stedicam I guess. A lot of filmmakers dive head long into using it without really making good use of the ratio, and Spielberg makes good use of his ratios.

    Dan
     
  13. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    Richard, the trailer format bears more relation to the format of the feature it's playing with than to the feature it's advertising. Scope trailers are often extracted from 1.85:1 features and placed at the lead of a scope feature reel to avoid having to switch projection lenses in the middle of a show. Likewise, flat trailers (which you can often see as extras on DVD's) are extracted from scope films to play with non-scope presentations.
     
  14. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  15. Richard Kim

    Richard Kim Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  16. Rich Malloy

    Rich Malloy Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2000
    Messages:
    3,998
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeff, sometimes a grittier look is exactly what the material calls for. I mean, if you don't like Super-35, what do you think of the 16mm segments in "Saving Private Ryan"? Another case of "Spielberg should've known better"?
     
  17. GerardoHP

    GerardoHP Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2001
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Real Name:
    Gerardo Paron
    I don't necessarily think grain is a bad thing and I think it can be used to great dramatic effect to enhance the grittiness of the story, like in Se7en or SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.
     
  18. Richard Kim

    Richard Kim Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    From an interview with Speilberg in the Houston Chronicle:

     
  19. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    2
     
  20. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    170
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
     

Share This Page