WHV Press Release: Full Metal Jacket (1987) (4k UHD) (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

[TD valign="top"]

[TD valign="top"]

[/TD]

[/TD]

[TD valign="top"]

[TD valign="top"]

[/TD]

[/TD]

[TD valign="top"]

[TD valign="top"] WARNER BROS. HOME ENTERTAINMENT ANNOUNCES
FULL METAL JACKET
TO BE RELEASED ON 4K UHD BLU-RAY™ COMBO PACK
AND DIGITAL

STANLEY KUBRICK’S VIETNAM WAR CLASSIC TO BE AVAILABLE IN
4K RESOLUTION WITH HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE (HDR) FOR THE FIRST TIME
​

BURBANK, CA, August 13, 2020 – Warner Bros. Home Entertainment announced today that Full Metal Jacket, Stanley Kubrick’s acclaimed 1987 Vietnam War masterpiece, will be released on Ultra HD Blu-ray and Digital on September 22. Based on Gustav Hasford’s 1979 novel “The Short-Timers,” Full Metal Jacket was produced and directed by Kubrick from a screenplay by Kubrick, Michael Herr and Hasford.
The film stars Matthew Modine ( Birdy , Vision Quest , television’s “ Stranger Things ”), Adam Baldwin ( Independence Day , Serenity ), Vincent D’Onofrio ( Men in Black , Jurassic World ), Lee Ermey ( Seven , Toy Story franchise), Dorian Harewood ( Gothika , Assault on Precinct 13 ), Arliss Howard ( Amistad , Moneyball ), Kevyn Major Howard ( Alien Nation ), and Ed O’Ross ( Dick Tracy ). Jan Harlan served as Executive Producer and Philip Hobbs served as Co-Producer.
Full Metal Jacket was nominated for an Oscar® at the 60th Academy Awards for Best Adapted Screenplay for Stanley Kubrick, Michael Herr and Gustav Hasford.
Recognized as one of the most accomplished, innovative, and influential directors in film history, Stanley Kubrick was a perfectionist who maintained complete artistic control and privacy during the shooting, and even the subsequent marketing of his movies. Many of Kubrick’s acclaimed works were received as controversial and provocative, yet still regarded as brilliant and visionary. Kubrick’s films earned 19 Oscar® nominations including three for Best Picture ( Dr. Strangelove , A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon ) and four for Directing ( Dr. Strangelove , 2001: A Space Odyssey , A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon ). In 1960, Kubrick’s Spartacus won four Oscars® (Actor in a Supporting Role, Art Direction, Cinematography and Costume Design). In 1968 Kubrick won the Oscar® for Special Visual Effects for 2001: A Space Odyssey .
The 4K remastering was done using a new 4K scan of the original 35mm camera negative at Warner Bros. Motion Picture Imaging. Stanley Kubrick’s former personal assistant Leon Vitali worked closely with the team at Warner Bros. during the mastering process.
Ultra HD showcases 4K resolution with High Dynamic Range (HDR) and a wider color spectrum, offering consumers brighter, deeper, more lifelike colors for a home entertainment viewing experience like never before.
The Full Metal Jacket Ultra HD Blu-ray Combo Pack features an Ultra HD Blu-ray disc with the feature film in 4K with HDR, a Blu-ray disc with the film in high definition and the previously released special features in high definition, and a Digital version of the movie. Fans can also own Full Metal Jacket in 4K Ultra HD via purchase from select digital retailers beginning on September 22.
SYNOPSIS
A superb ensemble falls in for Stanley Kubrick’s brilliant saga about the Vietnam War and the dehumanizing process that turns people into trained killers. The scathing indictment of a film was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Screenplay. ‘Joker’ (Matthew Modine), ‘Animal Mother’ (Adam Baldwin), ‘Gomer’ (Vincent D’Onofrio), ‘Eightball’ (Dorian Harewood) and ‘Cowboy’ (Arliss Howard) are some of the Marine recruits experiencing boot-camp hell under the punishing command of the foul-mouthed Sergeant Hartman (R. Lee Ermy). The action is savage, the story unsparing, and the dialogue is spiked with scathing humor.

Blu-ray Elements​

The Full Metal Jacket Blu-ray disc contains the following previously released special features:
· Commentary by Adam Baldwin, Vincent D’Onofrio, R. Lee Ermey and Critic/Screenwriter Jay Cocks
· Featurette Full Metal Jacket: Between Good and Evil
· Theatrical Trailer

DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION ELEMENTS​

On September 22 Full Metal Jacket 4K UHD will be available to own for streaming and download to watch anywhere in high definition and standard definition on favorite devices from select digital retailers including GooglePlay, Vudu, Xbox and others, and will be made available digitally on Video On Demand services from cable and satellite providers, and on select gaming consoles.

​

BASICS
PRODUCT ERP
Ultra HD Blu-ray Combo Pack $24.99*

Street Date: September 22, 2020
Ultra HD Blu-ray Languages: English, Latin Spanish, Parisian French, German,
Ultra HD Blu-ray Subtitles: English SDH, Latin Spanish, Parisian French, Arabic, Complex Chinese, Castilian Spanish, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, German SDH, Italian SDH, Italian Forced, Japanese, Japanese, Forced, Korean, Norwegian, Polish, Romanian, Swedish, Thai
Blu-ray Languages: English 5.1 DTS-HDMA, English 1.0, Français 5.1, Español 5.1
Blu-ray Subtitles: English, Français, & Español
RT : 116:23
Rating: R
[/TD]

[/TD]

Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link. As an Amazon Associate HTF earns from qualifying purchases

 

[Robert Crawford]

I bought the HD digital on iTunes for $4.99 so I'm hoping it upgrades to 4K come September 22nd.

 

[WinstonCely]

Does anyone have any idea if this will have the 1.37:1 original aspect ratio, or the cropped 1.85:1? I'm guessing cropped, but HBO Max is currently showing the "boxy" version right now:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2020/06/see-hd-boxy-jacket-while-you-can/

Granted, this is going to open a can of worms...

 

[Josh Steinberg]

1.85:1 is the original aspect ratio for Full Metal Jacket. As with the overwhelming majority of films shot with spherical lenses, the entire 1.33:1 frame was exposed and protected, but with the intention of being matted to 1.85:1 for projection. Because Kubrick understood that his films would be seen on television for longer than they would in theaters, and since television at that time was 1.33:1, he engaged in the common practice of “protecting” the entire frame, that is, making sure that boom mikes and such were not included. He also felt that with the smaller TVs at lower resolutions in use then, that having extra headroom revealed was preferable to black bars. But it would be a mistake to assume Kubrick’s preferences for how his films should be shown on analog televisions of the 20th century were representative of his entire view.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I bought the HD digital on iTunes for $4.99 so I'm hoping it upgrades to 4K come September 22nd.

I did the same. Great minds think alike?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I see that imbecile Wells is still at it.

 

[WinstonCely]

1.85:1 is the original aspect ratio for Full Metal Jacket. As with the overwhelming majority of films shot with spherical lenses, the entire 1.33:1 frame was exposed and protected, but with the intention of being matted to 1.85:1 for projection. Because Kubrick understood that his films would be seen on television for longer than they would in theaters, and since television at that time was 1.33:1, he engaged in the common practice of “protecting” the entire frame, that is, making sure that boom mikes and such were not included. He also felt that with the smaller TVs at lower resolutions in use then, that having extra headroom revealed was preferable to black bars. But it would be a mistake to assume Kubrick’s preferences for how his films should be shown on analog televisions of the 20th century were representative of his entire view.

From what I've read it wasn't that Kubrick necessarily wanted it framed for 1.85, it was that he had no alternative. Once the 80's rolled around and the move towards multiplexes which kept the filmmaker from making acute/specific choices in ratio, he had no choice but to ensure that 1.85 was accounted for while filming, even though he preferred the 1.37. In other words, from what I've read - and I'm always open to other information and interpretations!!! - he was filming knowing it would get theatrical as 1.85, but TV 1.33 (slightly different from the filmed 1.37) and TV having a longer lifespan (in theory) would be the more accurate viewing experience.

I don't know. Listening to Leon Vitali (yes, I know the past arguments against his standpoints as well) we should be given the change to view the "4:3" version. The compositional differences in Kubrick's last two films are striking, and I'd love to see them in all their HD or 4K glory.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

[TD valign="top"]

Warner just issued an official press release for which I updated the first post of this thread​

[/TD]

[TD valign="top"][/TD]

 

[darkrock17]

Why did WB switch from the iconic helmet poster to a zigzag line of the platoon?

 

[WinstonCely]

Why did WB switch from the iconic helmet poster to a zigzag line of the platoon?

'Cause they wanted to disregard the striking simplicity of the original poster. Not to mention, did anyone else notice they don't have Vincent D'Onofrio's character in the design?! I mean, his character is kind of a big part of the movie...

Granted, I actually like the Best Buy metal case design they came up with for this release. It retained the helmet motif while updating it slightly. I think it retains some of the simplicity of the original while adding some Matthew Modine love.

 

[darkrock17]

'Cause they wanted to disregard the striking simplicity of the original poster. Not to mention, did anyone else notice they don't have Vincent D'Onofrio's character in the design?! I mean, his character is kind of a big part of the movie...

Granted, I actually like the Best Buy metal case design they came up with for this release. It retained the helmet motif while updating it slightly. I think it retains some of the simplicity of the original while adding some Matthew Modine love.

Good ole Private Pyle, without him there's no movie.

Best Buy's steelbook does look good it has an Apocalypse Now! feel to it.

 

[Worth]

...Listening to Leon Vitali (yes, I know the past arguments against his standpoints as well) we should be given the change to view the "4:3" version. The compositional differences in Kubrick's last two films are striking, and I'd love to see them in all their HD or 4K glory.

Vitali supervised the new transfers for this and The Shining, so if he really believed Kubrick wanted these films to be viewed in Academy ratio, he could have had them presented that way. The fact that he didn't, suggests that his previous comments only applied to the older, NTSC masters.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Kubrick’s (and by extension, Vitali’s) comments of aspect ratio have always been made in the context of their time and the technology available at the time. It’s disingenuous to say that because Kubrick felt 4x3 was the best presentation of spherically shot films on home video in NTSC resolution circa the 1980s, that it meant that Kubrick only wanted his films to be seen in 4x3.

 

[WinstonCely]

Kubrick’s (and by extension, Vitali’s) comments of aspect ratio have always been made in the context of their time and the technology available at the time. It’s disingenuous to say that because Kubrick felt 4x3 was the best presentation of spherically shot films on home video in NTSC resolution circa the 1980s, that it meant that Kubrick only wanted his films to be seen in 4x3.

Based on Kubrick's embrace of newer technology (video assist, computers, lens', etc) I agree that he would be open to the idea of newer technology lending itself to aspect ratio differences. Then again, we're talking about an individual that grew up in a different time than we are, where there is a good chance that he prefered an older format. Regardless, I still believe there's a great opportunity for debate on the subject.

 

[Carl David]

Leon Vitali's interviews with DVD Talk and The Digital Bits gives great insight into the aspect ratio issue.

As a close aide and key collaborator of Mr Kubrick he is probably as close as we are going to get in relation to Stanley's wishes and artisitc choices.

I have included a snippet from both interviews below.

DVD Talk interview:

One of the areas of greatest debate in the DVD community is about aspect ratios. The two films that people talk about the most in terms of aspect ratio are Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut, maybe because those are the ones that have been seen theatrical by the DVD buying audience. But people will go through kind of frame by frame and say "In the trailer of Eyes Wide Shut, you can see a sign on the street that you can't see on the full frame video. You can see an extra character…" So how do you address the differences between the theatrical releases of Eyes Wide Shut and of Full Metal Jacket in the DVD releases?

The original video release of Full Metal Jacket was in the supervised hands and owned by Stanley. The thing about Stanley, he was a photographer. That's how he started. He had a still photographer's eye. So when he composed a picture through the camera, he was setting up for what he saw through the camera - the full picture. That was very important to him. It really was. It was an instinct that never ever left him. What he wanted the videos to reflect was how he shot the film through the camera, what was on the original neg and what his composition when he was shooting it was. That's why Full Metal Jacket is in full frame. If people looked, okay? What you get on the video that you didn't get in the theatrical because of the 185 masking, was what Stanley was invisioning. You assume these soldiers in the world that they're in. And he uses wide angle uses to shoot. I mean an 18 millimeter lens was the commonest one. He used 24 sometimes. Wide angle lenses. It was important to him the relationship between things. You can see in Full Metal Jacket how small the people were in relation to this huge landscape.

The thing with Eyes Wide Shot, it was how he saw the thing through the camera and how he set it up. That's what he wanted to reflect in his videos. He did not like 1.85:1. You lose 27% of the picture on 1.85. Stanley was a purist. This was one of the ways it was manifested.

If full frame was so important why didn't Kubrick release them theatrically that way?

After Barry Lyndon, more and more theaters were showing films 1.85 or in Cinemascope even if it wasn't shot that way. He had no control. He couldn't go around every cinema and say "You show this film in 1.66" as you could with Clockwork Orange, because then the projectors had 1.66 mask. With multi-plexes things are different and so they only show a film in 1.85 or in 2.21, the Cinemascope. You know? You cannot put a mask in 1.66 as it should be for Clockwork Orange. You can't put a 1.77 in as it should be for Barry Lyndon and that's what Stanley understood with The Shining onwards. He realized that his films we're going to be shown in 1.85 whether he liked it or not. You can't tell all the theaters now how to show your movies. They say it's 1.85, that's it. Stanley realized that masking for 1.85 would far outweigh having 1.66 projected at 1.85. We did a re-release of Clockwork in the U.K. and it's 1.66. It's composed for 1.66. It's shot in 1.66, and the whole shebang. Well, you know, they had to screen it in 1.85. I can't tell you how much it hurt that film.

That must have been awful.

It's horrible. It's horrible. It's heartbreaking. I mean, it's heartbreaking. You realize that when we got to The Shining, this was after the release of Barry Lyndon, this is how it was all being done. He realized that the best thing he could do is to at least do it so that he understood that beside the 1.85 frame line, they were going to have the composition that he would want you to see. From The Shining and Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut, Stanley had marks on the camera lens so he could see where the 1.85 lines. He composed his shots for 1.66, which is the full screen, but he wouldn't be hurt by going to 1.85 if he had to do it.

So he did the reverse of what most directors do, who look at the 'TV Safe Area', Stanley looked at the '1.85 Safe Area'.

Absolutely. Absolutely.

Full DVD Talk interview link here:

Kubrick Questions Finally Answered - An In Depth Talk with Leon Vitali

DVD Talk no-nonsense movie news and information about DVDs including - DVD reviews, news, bargains, release schedules, coupons, and discussion areas.

www.dvdtalk.com

The Digital Bits interview:


Bill Hunt: So let’s talk about this new DVD set. One of the features of DVD is the ability to present widescreen aspect-ratio films anamoprhically, to allow for the highest possible resolution when watching on widescreen TV sets. And our understanding is that there were only three Kubrick films that were intended to be seen in a widescreen aspect ratio...


Leon Vitali: Correct. There was Spartacus and 2001. And then there was Lolita, which was 1.66. The important thing to know about Stanley, is that he wanted all of his films shown on video – anything that wasn’t a theatrical presentation – in the original camera ratio that he shot it in. 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.


Now Lolita is 1.66 and Dr. Strangelove is sometimes like 1.33, but sometimes you see a little bit of a mask in there. That’s the thing about Stanley – as long as he was pleased with the individual composition of a shot for maximum dramatic effect, he didn’t mind that the aspect ratio might be slightly different. Or, for example, that you might see the helicopter blades in The Shining. As long as the shot was good for him, it didn’t matter. He thought it was part of his artistic license.


Todd Doogan: So the idea was always to present the original in-camera aspect ratio on DVD.


Leon Vitali: Absolutely.


Bill Hunt: Was there ever talk about doing alternate anamorphic widescreen versions of the later films – the ones that were shown theatrically at 1.85? So you could have both versions on DVD?


Leon Vitali: Yes, it was discussed. But Stanley just wasn’t interested.


Todd Doogan: So 2001 is going to be in anamorphic widescreen on DVD. But a lot of people are going to have a question as to why Lolita, which is 1.66, isn’t anamorphic on DVD...


Leon Vitali: Well... Stanley just didn’t want it done. You know, someone could have a disagreement with that, but the only thing I can tell you is that that’s what he wanted. And we didn’t feel it was appropriate to go against his wishes.

Link to The Digital Bits interview:

Vintage Bits Interview: Leon Vitali talks Stanley Kubrick on DVD

[Editor’s Note: This interview was originally posted on The Digital Bits on 5/4/01. It refers to the original and much-maligned Kubrick DVD collection release and also the better and properly remastered 2001 DVDs. It hints at future HD releases, but this was five years prior to the debut of...

thedigitalbits.com

This should hopefully clear up any confusion on the matter.

 

[Carl David]

Does anyone have any idea if this will have the 1.37:1 original aspect ratio, or the cropped 1.85:1? I'm guessing cropped, but HBO Max is currently showing the "boxy" version right now:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2020/06/see-hd-boxy-jacket-while-you-can/

Granted, this is going to open a can of worms...

Hopefully, it will be presented in the 1:66 ratio Stanley shot it in.

See my post in the thread for more information on that.

 

[Carl David]

Vitali supervised the new transfers for this and The Shining, so if he really believed Kubrick wanted these films to be viewed in Academy ratio, he could have had them presented that way. The fact that he didn't, suggests that his previous comments only applied to the older, NTSC masters.

Mr Vitali is on record stating that Stanley shot FMJ in 1:66.

I do not have The Shining on 4k so do not know what ratio that is presented in but it should be 1.66 for the correct representation.

If Leon Vitali supervised that and it's not in that ratio then all I can say is that it is a very odd decision.

I am hoping FMJ will be released in 1.66. If Mr Vitali is on the project then I am hopeful this will be the case.

 

[Worth]

The Shining is 1.78 on the new blu-ray and 4K disc. It was 1.78 on the blu-ray released before that, and 1.78 on the DVD released before that, all transfers that were supervised by Vitali. So somewhere along the line, he changed his mind about it being 1.33 or 1.66.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Mr Vitali is on record stating that Stanley shot FMJ in 1:66.

I do not have The Shining on 4k so do not know what ratio that is presented in but it should be 1.66 for the correct representation.

If Leon Vitali supervised that and it's not in that ratio then all I can say is that it is a very odd decision.

I am hoping FMJ will be released in 1.66. If Mr Vitali is on the project then I am hopeful this will be the case.

Kubrick’s storyboards for The Shining state 1.85, stands to reason he would not have decided to shoot his next film in a theatrical ratio that was obsolete in the USA.

 

[Carl David]

Kubrick’s storyboards for The Shining state 1.85, stands to reason he would not have decided to shoot his next film in a theatrical ratio that was obsolete in the USA.

Can you elaborate on that?

Who were the storyboards created for? Could they not have been used to simplify or generalise his artistic intent?

Mr Vitali does mention that Stanley shot in 1.66 knowing perfectly well it would be matted in theatres for 1.85 and that was a reluctant compromise he made. It seems it was a trade off he accepted as opposed to shooting the picture specifically in a 1.85 frame.

Stands to reason for me that Mr Kubrick would prefer not to lose 27% of the picture with a 1.85 ratio and keep to 1.66.

For me, I will go with Leon Vitali's comments on it. He was as close to Stanley as anyone creatively so as far as I am concerned he is the authority on the matter.

It would be nice if both presentations are available with the release so at least they can be both watched and compared and all admirers of the movie will be happy.

If only one is provided I personally would like 1.66 over 1.85.