Terminator 3 DVD -Interesting Observation (1 Viewer)

[Grant H]

I was shocked in theatres by how little they pushed the nudity envelope. You'd have thought with a fresh star who was a virtual unknown they'd have gone for all they could like they did with Natasha Henstridge in "Species." Certainly the money wouldn't have been a problem. They picked from thousands of girls and I'm sure they all had to check off "Nudity OK" and knew there would be some if they ever saw a Terminator film.

It's even more shocking that as conservative as the JUSTIFIED nudity was in this film, that it was made much more conservative in the widescreen version we got. Something's rotting in the state of DVD production.

Curious to see if anyone finds any other zoomboxed shots. It's easy for us guys to remember the nudity I guess. If anybody else remembers any shots being much different in theaters speak up. Don't know why we Widescreeners get a censored version. I thought the studios thought of Full Frame as "Family Friendly". Of course we know better with all those open-matte examples listed in this thread.

 

[Sean Frost]

So is it 100% agreed that this is not the version shown in theaters? If so I can't believe they did this and it is so unacceptable. Does anyone know if this was done to any other DVDs?

 

[Travis_W]

I knew something was up right from the opening Warner logo. Who do we contact and what do we say? They won't do a thing if only one of us gets to them.

 

[Porfirio]

I updated the screen grabs and tried to match the frames as best as possible.

http://daredvl_1.tripod.com/Comparison/Untitled-2.htm

 

[Grant H]

That's even more revealing. (In more ways than one.)

Defintely a LOT of image lost on the sides AND top and bottom.

I emailed Bill Hunt at The Digital Bits about this thread. Hopefully Warner Bros. will correct the problem if confronted with it.

 

[Vincent_P]

Thanks for the updated screen grab, that shot definitely seems to support your point re: the "zoomboxing".

Vincent

 

[Lev-S]

SO glad I held off from buying it yesterday!

I know it's illegal, but it would be nice to compare the DVD image to a DVD screener image somewhere. That way everybody's suspiscions could be confirmed as opposed to "I swear I remember her jubblies in the theater..."

 

[Grant H]

Wish I had; then again if Warner does the honorable things and gives me a corrected replaclement free of charge, I'll still have gotten a better price than will be available down the road.

Of course, if they don't correct it, I may wish I'd bought the Full Screen. Yikes!! I'll admit I went to see Kristanna, not a geriatric Terminator, funny as he is. Full screen is closer to theatrical (at least in the parts that got me to shell out my money at the cineplex.) If not for the hot chick factor, would have waited for DVD anyway since it was Cameron-less.

 

[Lev-S]

Grant H you are a consumate OAR warrior!

 

[Tom_Bechet]

so how come that the R3 is the same and it is from columbia. if this is really the case (and it was a mistake and not a directorial decision) then how are they going to replace every single DVD worldwide???

The UKR2 will be out soon and I doubt that that one is different. actually I'll have a chat with the guy on the R2project who reviewed the UKR2. let's see if he has the same problems.

 

[Grant H]

Don't know if this is the right place to email or not, but it should be a start at least. A link to this thread may be a good idea (except for them seeing what pervs some of us are).


http://www2.warnerbros.com/web/help/help_feedback.jsp

 

[TonyD]

in post 59 of the other thread i asked...

did it look like the first scene as arnie appears, that his love handles were alittle darker then in the theater?

when i saw this at the movies his "handles" were very clear, here they were not at all, very dark in that area?

nobody responded to that though.

even so i think there was some adjustments of several types made to this movie for the dvd.

 

[Grant H]

I did mention earlier that I thought shadow detail went to black awfully quickly compared to what I saw in theaters. Considering I can usually make out more shadow on DVD than in the not-so-great theaters I attend, I found this surprising.

 

[Joshua_W]

Since this was Super-35 movie, isn't it very possible that the image the DVD might be a totally different image than the theatrical release?

A movie shot Scope has a single shape, as does a matted flat movie. But with Super-35, various different extractions can be taken from the original negative, and it's not as simple as placing hard mattes onto the film.

Could the T3 transfer have been taken from the original negative -- and not necessarily a theatrical print or print that accurately reflected the theatrical framing -- and then recomposited for home video, not unlike making the full-frame transfer.

 

[Russell B]

I didn't see the breasts at all in the theater version.

 

[Grant H]

I think you're right, Josh. I think someone was given free reign instead of sticking to the director's framing.

There's no real excuse for that since surely the whole film was digitized anyway, and they'd have had a digital version properly framed and saved for making the theatrical prints. Maybe this was lost and someone started over or unnecessarily went back and did his own framing for the DVD.

I just hope Mostow doesn't say the DVD framing is ok with him when it's not what was in theatres. We won't get any corrected version that way. (and I might be looking to make a trade).

I've emailed WB already at the above link. I was polite, but firm. Firm that it wasn't what I saw in theaters, and it should be corrected. I only saw it in theaters once, but it's not like it was 20 years ago. My memory is good. (Frighteningly good when it comes to good-looking women. Ask my friends. )

 

[Mike Gariepy]

To try and get a better idea of the diff, I overlapped the two images provided as best I could with the tools I have...

 

[Will_B]

Another scene that would be worth comparing is when the T800 exits the helicopter near the end of the film (in the mountain). That shot was supposed to be a triumph, showing the T800 as it hadn't ever been shown before. But you can't really see anything below the chin in the letterbox version of the DVD. I'd like to know if the zoom boxing ruined their effort.

Second point/question: Does the full screen version of T3 (which at least avoids the zoomboxing problem that this thread has revealed) suffer from FX shots being zoomed-in, or did they create the FX as full screen? (I know that a few years ago, FX work was hard matted to the widescreen only because computers didn't have as much power then, but I hear that some films today do the effects all the way to the edges. What's the case for T3?).

 

[Russell B]

I didn't see the breasts at all in the theater version.

 

[Jonny K]

Call me crazy, but It's my understanding that DVD is all about home theater - recreating the theater experience at home. Now if the DVD isn't showing the same thing that was in the theater...is it still a home theater experience?

Just as I'm convinced that widescreen lets you see more picture this happens...


Jonny K. :rolleyes