The Grinch P&S kicks widescreens butt. (1 Viewer)

[Jacob_St]

DVDFILE has the full story. It outsold the widescreen 2 to 1! DVDFILE brings up a good question. Do all the DVD's that Blockbuster and Hollywood buy for rent part of the total?

 

[Rob T]

they probably do and technically that's how it should be, but I don't agree.

 

[Tom Czr]

Member removed & banned from this forum by owner

 

[Kendal Kirk]

Well, being that of the 45+ P&S vs. 4 WS that were on the self at Wal-Mart when I got mine, it may be a matter of supply, not demand. Infact, I had to return our origional purchase because my wife picked up the full screen by mistake.

 

[Dan Brecher]

Thanks for that, Tom. You've got mail!

Dan (UK)

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

I only think pan and scan outsold widescreen as pan and scan was offered everywhere compared to the widescreen which wasn't (look at The Mummy Returns, lots of stores offered both flavors). IMO, we will see if pan & scan will beat widescreen again come Tuesday. We got two versions of Jurassic Park III coming out, that, and it's going against one of the biggest blockbusters of the year (Rush Hour 2) which is widescreen only.

This Grinch is a moron movie...who cares if its P&S or Wide?
Are some of the people in this forum for real?

Yes we are. I got movies that you would classify as "moron movies" (Stay Tuned, 2Gether, The Rage: Carrie 2, Bring It On, Scary Movie, Toys, etc)... does that mean I'm a moron?

 

[Keith_R]

Tom has a good point, some of these movies that we complain about being in P&S are moron movies (ie. The Grinch, Cats and Dogs.) The only real value they have is to further our war against P&s by making one more DVD WS. As far as I'm concerned these types of movies are for kids and kids alone. I believe that OAR is important for all movies but we should not take it so critically with a movie like The Grinch. Honestly, do we really need to raise our kids in a strict code of OAR?

 

[RicP]

Honestly, do we really need to raise our kids in a strict code of OAR?

It has nothing to do with a "strict code", it has to do with wanting to watch a film the way it was shot, conceived, and projected theatrically.
Don't try and use the "it's for kids" excuse to somehow excuse the butchering of cinematic art.
And YES I think the Grinch is art, as are most films. Whether you like them or not does not diminish their artistic contribution.
I guess that makes me a moron too huh Tom? BTW, Welcome to the forum :rolleyes

 

[Todd Hochard]

I'm with Ric.

Are some of the people in this forum for real?

Being a member, aren't you part of "the people?"

Todd

P.S. I happen to like Grinch and Cats & Dogs. I must be the world's biggest moron.

 

[AndrewA]

When did we start on judging people by the likes and dislikes on movies? I though the issue of P&S vs. Widescreen(OAR) and the stand that this forum takes on them are fairly clear.

I don't care what movie it is, something I may or may not be interested in, but when it comes to the trend that can cause the lobby for widescreen to falter, I'll support an OAR issue of any sort of movie.

BTW, is Willy Wonka in your "moron" movie list as well?

 

[Cees Alons]

Honestly, do we really need to raise our kids in a strict code of OAR?

"Strict code" - no. "Love, appreciation and understanding" - yes!

Cees

 

[george kaplan]

Please, let's stay away from personal attacks on each others taste in music and focus on the issues at hand.
All movies, regardless of how good (in your opinion), or the target audience, deserve to be released in their OAR.
Now, at one level I don't give a rat's ass if a p&s outsells an OAR as long as both are available.
However, if studios are going to (and they will :frowning draw conclusions from this that they should only release p&s because it's more popular,
Then it becomes vital to point out to them that these numbers mean nothing the way things are done.
Hmm, I think I'll find out who's more popular, Green Day or Frank Sinatra. Well, I went to the mall and asked 1 teenager. Then I went to a retirement home and asked 50 residents. Frank Sinatra was the overwhelming choice. BFD.

 

[Matt Birchall]

"In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was Protestant. Then they came for me - and by that time no one was left to speak up for me."

Yeah, I know, quite a different subject matter, but the idea is the same:

If we don't do something when they decide to release a "moron" movie like The Grinch or Cats & Dogs in pan and scan only, then what's to stop them from releasing one of our personal favorites in pan and scan on down the line?

What if nobody threw a fit about Willy Wonka and Cats and Dogs a few months ago? Might we have seen a pan and scan only version of Harry Potter, which a lot of people around here liked and probably think is more "important" of a movie than Cats and Dogs?

For the record, I loathe The Grinch. I'm a huge Jim Carrey fan, and I absolutely hated that movie. But it's not about the movie itself, it's the principle of the thing. Every movie, no matter how important or insignificant, should be presented in it's OAR. Every movie is important and special to somebody, and they deserve to see it the way it was meant to be seen.

-mwb-

 

[Jim A. Banville]

All movies, regardless of how good (in your opinion), or the target audience, deserve to be released in their OAR.

Except the new version of "Super Speedway"
The widescreen zealots don't mind watching a 4:3 film chopped up (or stretched) to fill their 16:9 TV, but don't you dare chop up a widescreen film to fit a 4:3 TV

 

[Neil Joseph]

I don't care if it is the most idiotic movie around (I actually hated The Grinch anyway) but I feel it should be released in it's oar (same applies to any other movie out there. It's the principle that matters.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

You see, this is what bothers me here, Tom is yet another example of a newbie joining the forum without reading the rules or our mission statement. Please Vince, get that new mission statement going so we won't have this sort of corruption in our forum.
I don't give a damn if they made a movie about a day in the life of a rock, if the director and cinematographer took the love and care to compose that film for a widescreen ratio, that's how I want it, period!
This "some movies are worthy, and some are just too dumb to matter" bullshit really gets under my skin!
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go throw some cold water on my face.

 

[SteveGon]

Tom, just apologize and move on. We're pretty forgiving around here!
P.S. Don't ever call Drop Dead Fred a piece of crap. Boy, did I take some flak for that...

 

[Damin J Toell]

every movie is a "moron movie" according to someone out there. if some films aren't "worthy" of being presented properly, no films are. therefore, the issue of proper presentation should have zero relation to the film's perceived quality; films should be properly presented because that's the right way to treat all films.

DJ

 

[Brett Hancock]

Well sense I am working on some history homework I ran bye a quote that seems kind of relevant to this discussion.

"I may not agree with what you have to say but I will defend your right to say it"

Basically I chose this quote because even if u dont like a movie the people who do should be allowed to see in its OAR. If the worst movie in the world is shown in pan and scan whats to say other movies cant be shown in pan and scan as well. Just because said person doesnt like a particular movie it should still be shown in its OAR because out there somebody likes it and they should be able to see it how it was meant to be. Tom bye your logic if someone consideres 2001 a moron movie then it shouldn't be shown in widescreen which obviously from your post you wouldn't want. Just my 2 cents peace.

 

[Kimmo Jaskari]

Well, the thread went down the toilet fast, but I for one consider these numbers disheartening. It's no secret that the studios care not one iota for what is right, merely what pays. Even though no doubt the p&s were more easily accessible - and the collectors set was p&s as well - they will just latch onto the fact that they sold more p&s and use that as yet another reason to consider releasing p&s over OAR.

There is always the temptation to do away with the OAR entirely. After all, not having the OAR version there will give them plenty of space for extras and reduce their costs in that they don't have to prepare more than one version of the movie. Guess all we can do is protest as vigorously as possible whenever they probe if they can get away with it (as with Cats & Dogs and Willy Wonka).