What aspect ratio was "The Shining" shot in? (1 Viewer)

[Michael Silla]

Rented "The Shining" last night. Loved it - my second time seeing the film. The DVD is in 1.33:1 (Full frame) - deos anyone know if it was shot in 2.35:1?

Reason being, this film absolutely CRIES OUT for a wide aspect ratio. Some of the shots of the Colorado wilderness are simply gorgeous. Hopefully, a second DVD release is on the horizon?

Apologies if this has been recently covered in another thread.

Michael

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

As with several Kubrick films, The Shining was shot in Academy Standard aspect ratio and then matted for theatrical presentations. What you are seeing on the DVD has not been significantly altered from the camera negative.
From IMDB.com:
Technical Specifications for
Shining, The (1980)
Camera
Arriflex Cameras
Film negative format (mm/video inches)
35 mm
Cinematographic process
Spherical
Printed film format
35 mm
Aspect ratio
1.37 : 1 (negative ratio)
1.66 : 1 (intended ratio)

 

[Jerry Gracia]

It was shot to fit the nice'ol picture box at home.
Seriously though, 4:3 is the correct aspect ratio according to everything I've read in the past.

 

[Rich Malloy]

2.35:1???? Ack!

But if you're really adamant about this, you could construct some mattes to attach to your set, allowing you to "set" the aspect ratio however you prefer. I recommend using mattes anyway (particularly if you have a rear projector).

 

[Christ Reynolds]

kubrick preferred the 4:3 aspect ratio. see eyes wide shut, the shining....i'm thankful we have an anamorphic version 2001, it would be a shame to watch that in 4:3.

CJ

 

[Kevin M]

Kubrick only "preferred" 4:3 because it didn't compromise his frame composition when transfered to standard television....of course after the introduction of home video and the gradual inroads of letterboxing starting (in earnest) in the 80's you would think he could have relaxed a bit on his framing concerns by the time Full Metal Jacket or certainly Eyes Wide Shut came along.

 

[Craig_T]

This movie would be destroyed and downright unwatchable at a 2.35:1 aspect ratio.

 

[Nate Anderson]

i'm thankful we have an anamorphic version 2001, it would be a shame to watch that in 4:3.

He started using 4:3 because of what that forced ratio did to 2001. It's terrible!

 

[David Von Pein]

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hlight=shining

 

[Vic_T]

He wanted you to see the films exactly as he saw them when he looked through the camera lens and composed them on set. He was no fan of 1.85, because he felt that you were losing part of the image he composed. Now he knew that, with a film like The Shining or Full Metal Jacket, that they would have to be shown in theaters in 1.85 format. But for video, he could present the full frame as he composed it - that's what he wanted.

 

[Jean-Michel]

I suspect the TV explanation has at least a grain of truth to it, but it's pretty obvious the guy was fond of nonstandard ARs. Dr. Strangelove switched between two ratios (1.33:1 and 1.66:1), which is fairly uncommon (although The Crocodile Hunter movie did it, thereby proving its director to be the equal of Kubrick in every way), and his preferred framing for A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon appears to have been 1.55:1 (since that's what the LDs and DVDs were framed at).

 

[Damin J Toell]

Kubrick used 4:3 with mono sound for almost all his movies. The exceptions being 2001 (because it's a BIG sci fi epic), Spartacus (he was a director for hire), and Lolita (1.66:1).

Also:
Dr. Stangelove: 1.37:1/~1.66:1
A Clockwork Orange: ~1.66:1
Barry Lyndon: ~1.66:1
DJ

 

[Jason Whyte]

"He started using 4:3 because of what that forced ratio did to 2001. It's terrible!"

Even worse, you should see the pan-and-scan version of the 35mm print transfer of this film! The image is cropped on the sides AND on the top and bottom of the screen! Nothing better than seeing Dr. Heywood Floyd arrive on the space station and as he's talking to the receptionist, the top frame line is merely skimming half his eyes!!

As for the Shining, I've always looked at it as approved for 1.85:1 theatrically, 1.33:1 on video.

Jason

 

[BarryS]

He started using 4:3 because of what that forced ratio did to 2001. It's terrible!

Okay, I'm confused. 2001 was matted? I just thought it was a 70mm Super Panavision film, aspect ratio 2.20:1? Why should matting be necessary?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Barry,

I think the poster meant what happened to 2001 when it was broadcast (pan & scan) on television.