The Shining OAR or MAR (1 Viewer)

[Ric Easton]

And to think, Ryan L B hasn't posted since 2002. It's unlikely he'll finally get his answer. Now I'm gonna hit the ol' zoom on my widesscreen tv and see if I can see those helicopter blades!

 

[Vincent_P]

Both times I saw THE SHINING in 35mm projected at 1.85:1, I could still see the helicoptor blades at the very top of the frame in that final shot of the opening credit crawl of the Overlook hotel.

However, I did not see the helicoptor shadow on the mountainside either time, although other folks have insisted elsewhere that it's visible in 1.85:1.

Vincent

 

[Douglas Bailey]

Vincent_P, that was my conclusion, too; the helicopter blades are visible even with 1.66:1 or 1.85:1 matting, but the helicopter shadow on the hillside is hidden when the film is matted.

 

[Mark Lucas]

Either way it's all intentional, right?

 

[Rob Lutter]

This film and Full Metal Jacket look great zoomed to 16x9 on an HDTV...

I don't think any modicum of complaining is going to get these anamorphically released though. Seems like whomever was put in charge of Kubrick's estate (I don't know who that is) is working under instructions for otherwise no matter how technology advances.

 

[Sean Patrick]

INHD occasionally shows FULL METAL JACKET in HD @ 1.85:1 - looks fantastic framed that way.

THE SHINING also looks good when the remastered dvd is zoomed to 16:9, but occasionally there are some shots that looks a little crowded that way.

 

[Ron Reda]

I hate to open up a can of worms here, but "The Shining" is on Spike TV and it sparked a conversation between my wife and I about Kubrick's compositional style. At that point, I mentioned how I enjoyed his use of height in the frame and how the 2001 SK Collection DVD is in 4x3 and not widescreen. Anyway, this got me hooked on a fact finding mission and I discovered all kinds of interesting tidbits about the film and it's OAR. That leads me to this...

I recently saw the film on HDNet movies and it appeared to be in 16x9 (definitely NOT 4x3). Since I had never seen the film like this, I watched it and enjoyed it quite a bit (not a comment on whether I'm pro or con-OAR), especially since it looked gorgeous in HD. Here's the question...since HDNet claims on their site that they present films in their OAR, what does their presentation of this film in 16x9 mean? Are they defying Kubrick (which I doubt) or is this not considered a "home video" presentation as Kubrick defined?

 

[Patrick McCart]

Kubrick filmed The Shining for 1.85:1 matting. For the 1991 video master he approved, he requested it to be unmatted.

I hate to open up a can of worms here, but "The Shining" is on Spike TV and it sparked a conversation between my wife and I about Kubrick's compositional style. At that point, I mentioned how I enjoyed his use of height in the frame and how the 2001 SK Collection DVD is in 4x3 and not widescreen. Anyway, this got me hooked on a fact finding mission and I discovered all kinds of interesting tidbits about the film and it's OAR. That leads me to this...
I recently saw the film on HDNet movies and it appeared to be in 16x9 (definitely NOT 4x3). Since I had never seen the film like this, I watched it and enjoyed it quite a bit (not a comment on whether I'm pro or con-OAR), especially since it looked gorgeous in HD. Here's the question...since HDNet claims on their site that they present films in their OAR, what does their presentation of this film in 16x9 mean? Are they defying Kubrick (which I doubt) or is this not considered a "home video" presentation as Kubrick defined?

 

[Juan C]

Sorry to bump this thread from the dead, but http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/shining.htm

The 1.33:1 edition has more picture on the top and bottom but is cropped on the sides!!

 

[Richard--W]

With regard to aspect ratio, everyone should check out Kubrick's annotations on the storyboard in post #193 here:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...d.php?t=230803
The balance and composition is restored to the film on the new DVD.
It's about time!