|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Lord of the Rings DVD
|
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 07-22-2002 02:23 PM
Has there ever been a dual-layer/dual-sided/dual-disc set? That would be cool. But it would also be more expensive to make than a dual-layer/single-sided/four-disc set.As for the whole theatrical cut vs. extended cut issue, I personally go with whatever the director's preference is. He's the artist. We should watch it the way he wants us to, good or bad. If it's bad, then we can talk about how big of a moron he is, but we, as viewers, should follow his wishes when viewing his art. It shouldn't be some sort of interactive medium. And I don't think having to swap discs during a 3 1/2 hour movie is that big of a deal. It's an excuse to pee. Laserdiscs had to be flipped over every hour.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Appelt
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 505
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-03-2004 02:47 PM
John, some of the Kubrick DVDs are in wrong formats. THE SHINING, EYES WIDE SHUT and FULL METAL JACKET were composed to be shown in cinemas either masked for widescreen 1.85 (U.S.) or 1.66:1 (Europe). The opening titles that this 1.37:1 DVD format is correct are nonsense. Here's more about the format on THE SHINING:
The SHINING helicopter shot / 1.85 wide screen
If you run THE SHINING on DVD, switch to cinema mode (cropping to about 16:9 which is between the two widescreen cinema formats), and you will notice that the picture composition makes much more sense. That goes, BTW, also for THE KILLING which was shot to be compatible with both 1.37 and wide screen projection.
Jim Leko wrote
quote:
Brad, I have heard of animated version of The Hobbit, but I have never heard of an animated version of the LoTR trilogy.
Well, there was the 1978 animated feature film directed by Ralph Bakshi which covered the first two books, but the second part was made as a TV animation film only, so it would be fair enough to say that the whole trilogy has been filmed in animation.
Lord of the Rings (1978)
the Return of the King (1980)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 03-08-2004 07:48 AM
quote:
The LOTR special editions are well designed to this, given the 2nd disc of the films have little of that FBI garbage you have to chapter past.
Does anyone know if there is ANY way to by-pass all that header junk and force the player to start the movie AT THE MOVIE? I mean, I would like to even be able to pass all those animated menus that the DVD creators think are so clever. I have a curtain in front of the screen (projection video) and want to get as close to a theatrical feel as I can by opening the curtain at the start of the movie. I have gotten so frustrated at not being able to start at the first frame of the movie. The only solution I could come up with was to buy a little 8in TV that I use as a monitor just so I can see when all the gack is passed and I can then switch on the signal to the video projector so my audience sees only the film and not the FBI grabage (hey, I bought the freakin disc, damnit, so why am I forced to sit through 30 seconds of an ugly big red screen of mood-distroying, presentation-marring FBI crap?). I have thought of actually burning a DVD and cutting out all the junk and starting it at the film proper. I understand there is software out there that can do that (although you have to get the product that is still on vendor's shelves because the software company has a lawsuit on them brought by our good friends at the MPAA that enjoins them from shipping any more).
And I am sure we all catch that irony -- the the FBI warning about how it's illegal to copy the DVD which forces the owner to COPY THE DVD?!!
As for providing full-frame versions of scope films for theatres that can't actually show a film the way it was intended, i.e., in Scope but use top masking.....NO. NO. NO! Theatres that can't show a film the way the director composed it shouldn't be permitted to book it. Scope films are intended to be shown 2.39:1. Period. They also were intended to be show larger than non-anamorphic films, rather than letterboxed.
Disney did this with the rerelease of FANTASIA. There has to be SOMEWHERE in the world of cinema where what the director put on the film and wanted the audience to see is actually what the audience sees! There certainly in no guarantee of this in the world of video. Let's not move that vaguery and easy disregard of the director's/cinematographer's vision into the movie theatre as well.
I am equally as adament about using print reductions for 1.37 presentations. If the theatre can't afford to buy, rent or swap the correct lens and aperture plate to present a film shot in 1.37, then maybe they should get out of the theatre business and run a fast food establishment. Catering to those marginal theatres that are not committed to proper presentation by making special compromise prints for them just so they don't have to outfit themselves with the proper equipment, is wrong-headed. Let's keep the theatre as the last bastion where films can be seen properly, untampered, and, like Donald Sutherland says in the orange juice commercial, "unfooled around with."
Brad is right on the money about all that "added footage not seen in theatres" that they throw into the DVD. It wasn't seen in theatres because it was EDITED OUT. Hel-lo!! And it was edited out for a reason....the Director thought it shouldn't be there.
Scenario: DVD "author" prepairing for the DVD release to his assistant -- "Hey Jack, do me a favor; go into the editing room and bring back any footage you find in the garbage pails or on the floor...we're putting together the "Special Edition."
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brian Michael Weidemann
Expert cat molester
Posts: 944
From: Costa Mesa, CA United States
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 03-11-2004 05:23 PM
I understand in some situations that the directors themselves have a full cut of their movie, but the studios want a cut that's 20 minutes shorter because it will sell better, so it becomes a game what to cut out, what to leave in, what to shorten, what's "unnecessary", etc. Not all footage removed from a movie was taken out because it was crap; or, theoretically, the director wouldn't have SHOT it in the first place. Sure, there are exceptions all over the place ... the studios INSISTING that the DVD release have extra stuff that the director explicitly DIDN'T want left in, the director realizing that the movie flows better without a sequence that was the best thing he ever shot, etc.
I'm one to buy anamorphic widescreen DVD's exclusively, but I try not to get on the case of people who seem to prefer fullscreen without "those annoying black bars". Yes I cringe at the notion, but then they cringe at the black bars, as unenlightened as they may be.
If it's a matter of them not seeing the movie the way the director intended, then it's no different than burning mp3's of a CD or adjusting the EQ on your stereo ... it won't sound the way the artist, producer, and mixer intended; it's a matter of personal preference. And if the listener/movie-watcher doesn't know how to appreciate a film or music the way they were intended, then it's his own loss.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic