Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Sequels & Remakes Shot In A Different Format Than Their Predecessors

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Sequels & Remakes Shot In A Different Format Than Their Predecessors (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Sequels & Remakes Shot In A Different Format Than Their Predecessors

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 02-10-2006 12:28 AM

quote:
...and it [Pink Panther] had two film companies go together on this one.

Remember, MGM is owned by Sony now. 'Pink Panther' was finished prior to the sale, IIRC. Sony just isn't putting the 'A Sony Pictures Entertainment Company' line under the MGM logo. Yet.

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 02-10-2006 03:02 AM

The First terminator was flat. The other two were scope.

I haven't seen the movie yet but I found it interesting that Capote was scope.

They need to take in these walmart stores and any store that sells TVs and put a standard TV next to a Wide screen TV playing the same movie only one full screen on the standard set and wide screen 16:9 on the wide screen set. Maybe people will realize the difference. Probably not....

the first three Halloween movies were scope. John Carpenter is another director that has I believe shot everything scope. Then you had 3 flat Halloweens then I think the last two were scope.

[ 02-10-2006, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: Darryl Spicer ]

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-10-2006 05:14 PM

Carpenter's first movie, DARK STAR, was flat, but that started off as a student film.

What about color sequels to black and white movies? The only one I can think of is GODZILLA. Are there any others?

It seems that most sequels or remakes get wider and, in my opinion, better. But I don't think that that would be true in going from black and white to color. A clear cut case of where it absolutely doesn't work is PSYCHO.

As a side note, Steven Soderbergh wanted to shoot OCEAN'S ELEVEN in black and white, but the studio wouldn't let him.

| IP: Logged

Jeremy Jorgenson
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1002
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 02-10-2006 06:08 PM

quote: Mike Schindler
What about color sequels to black and white movies?

The Hustler & The Color of Money ... first one was b&w scope, second was color flat ... right? Unless it doesn't count as a sequel when it comes out 25 years later. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

John Lasher
Master Film Handler

Posts: 493
From: Newark, DE
Registered: Aug 2001

posted 02-11-2006 12:48 AM

The Shaggy Dog=b/w; Sequels/Remakes=color

Short Circuit = scope
Short Circuit 2 = flat

If you think of AVP as a sequel to the "Predator" franchise, both "Predator"s were flat, AVP was super-35.

Also, with one exception, all the Three Stooges films were b/w academy. The exception, of course, is Snow White And The Three Stooges which was in color and 'scope.

| IP: Logged

Robert Harrison
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 239
From: Harwood Heights, Illinois, USA
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 02-11-2006 04:13 PM

Okay, let's add to the list the original "Shaft." It was flat while the two sequels, "Shaft's Big Score" and "Shaft in Africa" were scope. Finally, the remake of "Shaft" was scope, IIRC.

Burt Reynolds made two movies featuring the same character named Gator McCluskey back in the 70s. The first, "White Lightning," was flat and the sequel, "Gator," was scope.

"Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" was scope and "Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey" was flat.

"King Kong" (1933) was Academy flat and the two remakes were scope.

The first two Godzilla movies were black and white Academy ratio, with the following bunch scope and color through 1975. The next series of Godzillas were all flat. The third series, which started with "Godzilla 2000" have all been scope.

Also, I think the "Scary Movie" pictures began as scope and switched to flat. As did the Jim Varney "Ernest" pictures.

And then there are the Pixar/Disney movies which change aspect ratio from project to project.

I remember Martin Scorcese used to favor shooting 1.85 so his films would look okay on TV. Once widescreen laserdiscs arrived, he changed over to scope. That TV excuse was used also by Warren Beatty when he did "Dick Tracy" flat.

[ 02-11-2006, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: Robert Harrison ]

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-11-2006 04:29 PM

IFC shows a lot of Zatoichi movies. The character, Zatoichi, is a blind Japanese swordsman. Some of the early installments in the saga were standard frame and in black and white. This afternoon, IFC was showing The Blind Swordsman, which was in color and anamorphic widescreen (don't know if it was CinemaScope, TohoScope or whatever).

| IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 02-11-2006 05:07 PM

quote: Mike Schindler
What about color sequels to black and white movies? The only one I can think of is GODZILLA. Are there any others?

A remake as distinct from a sequel, but notable because Technicolor was a a key feature of the later version: The Wizard of Oz 1925/1939.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-11-2006 10:06 PM

I always thought it was cool how the new Shaft movie actually fits into the same continuity as the original films.

I can't believe I forgot Kevin Smith's films. CLERKS was B/W, the others, including the upcoming THE PASSION OF THE CLERKS, are color. Also, DOGMA and JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK were scope, which is fitting, given their much larger scale.

That being said, I love when scope is used for intimate little character movies. Look at Billy Wilder's work. ONE, TWO, THREE is basically a play, but it wouldn't be the same if it weren't scope. Black and white scope is about as cool as it gets.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-12-2006 11:44 AM

I don't really consider the Kevin Smith movies so much as sequels or sagas or anything like that. Clerks, Chasing Amy and Mallrats are all different movies with different characters. You just have Jay and Silent Bob showing up in all of them. Ben Affleck plays different characters in Chasing Amy, Mallrats and Dogma. The different formats aren't really that much of a disruption or continuity error. I think the black and white thing works pretty well for Clerks.

I like 'scope when the dramatic narrative and visuals are improved by the format.

However, I've been growing to dislike it more and more how so many movies are being released Super35 just to fill up the width of any movie screen. The composition in many of these shows is "safe" (and as a result, pretty loose and dead as well). They look okay in movie theaters and look okay on foolscreen DVDs. Basically, this is like an odd-ball version of pan and scan.

Very few directors seem to actually compose for 'scope with a Super35 frame. James Cameron and David Fincher both do it. A few other Super35 movies feel like normal 'scope movies. But there's a lot of others that really didn't feel like the format was properly used.

For instance, Top Gun actually looks better when its frame isn't cropped down to 2.39:1. Many of the aerial shots simply were not composed for that frame; they were composed more for 1.85:1 or even 1:33:1. That is one specific case where I really feel like something is being hidden by those black bars. The composition just feels like it.

This is one reason why I prefer the anamorphic lens format for widescreen. It forces the director, cinematographer (as well as the set decorator) to work with the 'scope frame rather than doing some half-hearted bridge between 'scope and TV formats.

| IP: Logged

Jeremy Jorgenson
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1002
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 02-12-2006 01:34 PM

An actor playing a different character in different movies shouldn't be a factor in determining whether one of those two movies is a sequel to the other or not.

Also, I feel that if a director or DP is going to play it safe (with regard to framing), s/he'll play it safe whether they are shooting anamorphic, spherical, film, video ... whatever. You certainly may have a point that if they are choosing to shoot anamorphic, they might be the type of person with a tendency to try and get more out of the framing of a film.

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 02-12-2006 05:37 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
Some of the early installments in the saga were standard frame and in black and white.

While some of the early BLIND SWORDSMAN (Zatoichi) series were filmed in B&W, all were shot in TohoScope.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-12-2006 05:44 PM

quote: Jeremy Jorgenson
An actor playing a different character in different movies shouldn't be a factor in determining whether one of those two movies is a sequel to the other or not.

Not only that, but Ben Affleck and Jason Lee both play multiple characters in JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK.

Super 35 used to be practically unwatchable with its incredibly grainy images. But since digital intermediates have become more and more popular, Super 35 has become less of a problem. It's now a matter of personal preference on the part of the filmmaker. But as far as I'm concerned, anamorphic is much better looking.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 02-12-2006 08:03 PM

Okey, let's go back to "Snow White and the Three Stooges" - (and do a bit off-topic on this one as well) This movie, I believe in all as I know was the only film that FOX had DeLuxe print up on the smaller "fox sprockethole" film, yet no mag tracks were added to the film stock. Just the regular optical track.

Thus, do we remember the paper bands that had color assignments per lens for the FOX releases: Flat was green, Scope was Red, Black was a mag/optical print,...and Blue was this Fox Sprocket optical release....

..and Walter Lang destroyed this movie being that he wasn't a comedy director. Thus, he shoved the boys far in the background to bring out Carol Heiss and her skating talents...and her only movie.

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 02-12-2006 08:45 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
For instance, Top Gun actually looks better when its frame isn't cropped down to 2.39:1. Many of the aerial shots simply were not composed for that frame; they were composed more for 1.85:1 or even 1:33:1. That is one specific case where I really feel like something is being hidden by those black bars. The composition just feels like it.

All arieal shots in Top Gun were shot in super35 do to the stress that was put on the cameras it was to expensive and to risky to use the anamorphic lenses on the planes.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.