Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Wild Thornberrys, "CinemaScope"

This is topic Wild Thornberrys, "CinemaScope" in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001542

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 12-13-2002, 09:47 PM:

Promotional materials for "The Wild Thornberrys Movie" are pointing out that the film is in 'scope. [Cool]

The voiceover in a TV ad mentions that it's in "CinemaScope", and this interview with Gabor Csupo (one of the creators) also mentions it: Gabor Csupo

A review that praises the filmmakers for using scope (scroll down): Cartoon Research Review

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-14-2002, 12:42 AM:

And Reel 5 is only credits. Just thought I'd throw that in.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 12-14-2002, 12:47 PM:

I believe "Iron Giant" was also a 'scope cartoon. I was excited about it when we showed it, even though no one showed up.

Then I saw a 24-hour marathon of it on TV. Do you think in ONE of those showings during the marathon they'd show the letterbox version? NOPE! It was horribly pan-n-scanned.

I think the release of Scope cartoons, (Anastasia, Iron Giant, Wild Thornberrys) shows that the studio is indeed releasing the movie for theaters first, and Home Video as an afterthought. The way it SHOULD be! [Cool]

=TMP=

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-14-2002, 04:22 PM:

quote:
Promotional materials for "The Wild Thornberrys Movie" are pointing out that the film is in 'scope.

The scope status of this title has been known for some time. It was added to Widescreen Review's online Scope Filmography several weeks ago.

Some other animated scope features from the past decade have included:
Atlantis: The Lost Empire
A Bug's Life
The Thief And The Cobbler (aka Arabian Knight)

...and perhaps another couple I'm overlooking.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 12-14-2002, 05:25 PM:

Also place 'Titan A.E.' on that animated Scope films list.

-Aaron

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 12-14-2002, 07:35 PM:

And Spirit Stallion of the Cimarron

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 12-14-2002, 08:33 PM:

Note that my point wasn't that the film is in scope, it was that the makers are actively promoting scope as a superior format.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-14-2002, 09:14 PM:

The king of this category (as in fairly recent Scope animated films) is Fox's "Anastasia" (1997) which was officially in CinemaScope per the credits although what that actually meant from a production standpoint we never did figure out. But I don't think any others can make that claim.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-14-2002, 10:19 PM:

Wasn't "Lady and the Tramp" one of the first animated features in CinemaScope?

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-14-2002, 10:27 PM:

quote:
The scope status of this title has been known for some time.

Possibly by at least (hopefully) the filmakers/animators in the planning stages. [Big Grin]

quote:
Wasn't "Lady and the Tramp" one of the first animated features in CinemaScope?

Yes, the first actually. Both a standard academy and scope version were filmed.

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 12-14-2002, 10:33 PM:

http://animationhistory.com/lady/Animation/animation.html

Found that interesting tidbit about Lady and the Tramp being the first scope animated feature.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-14-2002, 10:38 PM:

I remember some Tom and Jerry cartoons being in CinemaScope.

Of other recent animated 'scope films, you might throw in "Osmosis Jones" (of course some of it is live action, but a great deal of it is animated).

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-14-2002, 11:08 PM:

quote:
I remember some Tom and Jerry cartoons being in CinemaScope.

Yes! I'm lucky enough to have many of them on laserdisc, letterboxed. I hate to see them on TV with the opening titles letterboxed than they go to full chop when the cartoon starts, especially after seeing them properly on laserdisc.

Wasn't "Toot, Whistle, Plunk, and Boom" the first cartoon ever done in Cinemascope? It was a short cartoon, not a movie.

Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 12-14-2002, 11:16 PM:

"Winds of Change" aka "Metamorphesus" from 1976 was scope, and anime to boot [Cool]

Josh

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-14-2002, 11:58 PM:

quote:
Wasn't "Toot, Whistle, Plunk, and Boom" the first cartoon ever done in Cinemascope?

Yes. It debuted with the second CinemaScope feature, Fox's How To Marry a Millionaire" on November 10,1953 at Brandt's Globe and Loew's State theatres on Broadway in NYC. It was billed as one of the "first great shorts in CinemaScope;" the other being The Coronation Parade, also part of the same program.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 12-15-2002, 07:07 AM:

OK, so he makes the distinction that it isn't just in scope, but he says it's in CinemaScope. So what makes it CinemaScope? Theoretically, wouldn't it have to be shot with old Bausch & Lomb CinemaScope anamorphic lenses for him to call it CinemaScope? Then again, CinemaScope really isn't the process, it's just the name....Fox's trademark moniker for the anamporphic process. So how does Csupo get to call it CinemaScope? He had to get permission from Fox for sure (is the film a Fox release?). He couldn't very well have used Panavision anamorphic lenses to shoot it. That would be weird credit crawl -- A CinemaScope Picture filmed with Panavision Lenses.

Mind you, I love the idea that the CinemaScope name is once again coming back to life (I never for the life of me could figure out why Fox abandoned it so unceremoniouly), but I just wonder what exactly does it mean in this context.

Frank

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-15-2002, 09:46 AM:

I believe that the recent Warner Bros. cartoon version of "The King and I" was scope.

If I'm remembering the right movie, I think they were making a big deal about it because it was the first animated feature in a long time to use scope.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-15-2002, 04:51 PM:

Manny wrote:

quote:
I believe that the recent Warner Bros. cartoon version of "The King and I" was scope.

Nope, it was flat.

Frank wrote:

quote:
That would be weird credit crawl -- A CinemaScope Picture filmed with Panavision Lenses.

Several pictures (many from MGM) from the late 1950s/early '60s *did* contain that very credit (or one worded in a similar manner).

quote:
So what makes it CinemaScope? Theoretically, wouldn't it have to be shot with old Bausch & Lomb CinemaScope anamorphic lenses for him to call it CinemaScope?

With animated productions today, who knows. Most contemporary animated productions seem to be created as a digital file then recorded out to a film negative. Which may explain why some sources cite these types of productions as being in generic "Digital Widescreen." Some animated productions have, however, used "process" credits such as "Celco" (Osmosis Jones and The Iron Giant) or "PixarVision" (Monsters, Inc.) and, as previously pointed out here, "CinemaScope" (Anastasia and Titan A.E.).

Paul wrote:

quote:
[For Lady And The Tramp] Both a standard academy and scope version were filmed.

And in a really dumb move (if you ask me), Disney chose to pan-and-scan the scope version in the mid-80s when it was prepared for its first video release rather than simply using the Academy version and transferring it "as is."

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 12-15-2002, 05:39 PM:

quote:
from Steve K:...
..."Anastasia" (1997) which was officially in CinemaScope per the credits although what that actually meant from a production standpoint we never did figure out. But I don't think any others can make that claim.

Does Fox still "own" the name?... or has that somehow gone the way of public domain? Seems I recall past unsuccessful lawsuits over terms that might once have been trademarks but later became part of the industrial lexicon.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-15-2002, 05:57 PM:

David wrote:

quote:
Note that my point wasn't that the film is in scope, it was that the makers are actively promoting scope as a superior format.

Your point is taken, and appreciated. Sorry to cause your thread to "drift" by having it turn into a discussion of animated scope films in general. "Drifting" has to be expected in these forums. Obviously, there are many here who have a love of or preference for the scope format, though one has to wonder if it truly is superior anymore given the plethora of digital and spherical origination formats converted to scope and far-too-many theaters set up with fixed or common-width screens (scope was never intended to be smaller than flat!!!).

Since others have thrown out several scope titles in this thread, here's a more complete animated scope filmography for you guys to digest, discuss, criticize, add to, etc...

Animated scope feature films:
Lady And The Tramp (1955/CinemaScope)
Sleeping Beauty (1958/Technirama)
Metamorphoses (aka Winds Of Change/1977/Panavision)
The Black Cauldron (1985/Technirama)
The Thief And The Cobbler (aka Arabian Knight/1995/Panavision)
Anastasia (1997/CinemaScope)
A Bug's Life (1998)
The Iron Giant (1999/Celco)
Titan A.E. (2000/CinemaScope)
Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)
Spirit: Stallion Of The Cimarron (2002)
The Wild Thornberrys Movie (2002)

Live-action/animation combo scope productions:
Guitar Picks & Roach Clips (1976/Panavision)
Pink Floyd: The Wall (1982/Panavision)
Tron (1982/Super Panavision-VistaVision)
Osmosis Jones (2001/Clairmont-Celco)
Looney Tunes: Back In Action (2003/Super 35)

Unsure of process:
Raggedy Ann and Andy (1977/might be Panavision)
Akira (1988/some sources suggest 65mm origination)

What's missing (excluding shorts)?

One could add substantially to this list depending on how one defines "animation." With today's productions and the extensive use of CGI, the definition of animation has certainly broadened. A common credit today is: "Visual Effects & Animation By..."

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 12-15-2002, 06:07 PM:

I realized after my initial post that someone might read it and think "He's excited about the release of a cartoon in 'scope -- what's the big deal?" when in fact what I was really getting at was how rare it is to hear a film (any film, let alone a cartoon) being actively promoted as being in 'scope.

As far as the thread drifting, heck, it's all good. [Wink]

Let me assist the thread in drifting even more: Why did filmmakers stop using the Panavision (or CinemaScope) logo in the opening credits the way they did in the past? If the makers go the whole 9 yards and film anamorphically, they should stick the logo in their movie right up front and be proud of it. It's a simple thing they could do to make seeing their film in a theatre a little special. It seems like these days the Panavision logo rarely shows up in the end credits, and half of those times it's misused.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 12-15-2002, 06:09 PM:

quote:
Does Fox still "own" the name?

Yes, they do. Matter of fact they had let it slip for a good number of years, and 're-registered' it in 1996

-Aaron

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-15-2002, 06:35 PM:

quote:
Why did filmmakers stop using the Panavision (or CinemaScope) logo in the opening credits the way they did in the past?

I imagine that has more to do with most productions from the last few decades having all of the credits being moved to the end save for the stars and department heads/key above-the-line personnel that remained at the beginning.

I agree that the process, especially if it's worth blabbing about (genuine anamorphic or better yet a 65mm process), would be ideal along side the director of photography's credit in the opening titles (e.g. "Photographed by so-and-so in Super Panavision 70").

Believe it or not, at many of the recent 70mm screenings at the American Cinematheque in L.A., the "70mm" process credit received applause (Patton, Lord Jim, 2001, Hello, Dolly!, etc)

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-16-2002, 01:23 AM:

quote:
Disney chose to pan-and-scan the scope version in the mid-80s when it was prepared for its first video release rather than simply using the Academy version and transferring it "as is."

Is it possible the original 1.37 version was in bad shape and transferring it "as is" wouldn't have made a very pretty transfer? Have no idea, just guessing here. It would have been nice that since they did use the 1.37 version for the last full-frame release that they could have included both on the DVD, but of course they didnt.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-16-2002, 01:28 AM:

quote:
Disney chose to pan-and-scan the scope version in the mid-80s when it was prepared for its first video release rather than simply using the Academy version and transferring it "as is."

Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 12-16-2002, 01:40 AM:

Akira was shot on 70mm, as the documentary short on it mentions retransferring the origional 70mm negative.

Josh

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-16-2002, 03:15 AM:

Paul wrote:

quote:
Is it possible the original 1.37 version was in bad shape and transferring it "as is" wouldn't have made a very pretty transfer?

I meant "as is" as in no reframing would need to be performed if the Academy version was used. As for Disney choosing not to use the Academy version...not according to a telecine colorist involved with the project, who claimed the Disney decision-makers didn't even know to look for an alternate, Academy-format version.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-16-2002, 01:56 PM:

There was a time when the end credits would specify either "cameras and lenses by Panavision" (flat) or "filmed in Panavision" (scope). They don't seem to make a distinction anymore, they just put the Panavision logo in there with the Dolby, DTS and IATSE logos.

There's a lot of confusion out there regarding what Panavision is.

Also -- speaking of confusion -- could we clarify whether the "v" in "Panavision" is upper or lower case. I've never seen it capitalized, but that doesn't mean it isn't correct.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-16-2002, 02:23 PM:

quote:
There was a time when the end credits would specify either "cameras and lenses by Panavision" (flat) or "filmed in Panavision" (scope). They don't seem to make a distinction anymore, they just put the Panavision logo in there with the Dolby, DTS and IATSE logos. There's a lot of confusion out there regarding what Panavision is.

Actually, I could point to numerous instances of inconsistent usage of the Panavision credits dating back to the 1960s. The misuse of the credits is not a recent thing. The camera credit usage isn't "governed" in much the same way the digital sound logos aren't. Blaming the (mis)use of the credits for someone not being able to correctly identify the process a particular film was shot in seems silly to me. (I'm reminded of the time someone insisted I was full of crap for stating in print that Titanic was a Super 35 production when this person "knew" it was anamorphic due to the "Filmed in Panavision" credit that appears in the end titles.) All one needs to do is learn what to observe during the course of the movie, or use reputable sources for obtaining the information.

quote:
Also -- speaking of confusion -- could we clarify whether the "v" in "Panavision" is upper or lower case.

Based on all of the communication I've done with the company as well as the company literature I've seen, I am led to believe the "v" is lower case... "Panavision"

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-16-2002, 02:58 PM:

quote:
Akira was shot on 70mm, as the documentary short on it mentions retransferring the origional 70mm negative.

Did the Japanese use 70mm negative instead of 65? And why not use the full apeture that 65mm photography allows for (seems a waste to me, although I guess it was done for the Jaque Tati film PLAYTIME. BTW, was PLAYTIME matted in the camera at 1.66, or hard-matted in the film lab?)

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-16-2002, 05:16 PM:

There was a reference to The Wild Thornberrys Movie and its CinemaScope status in the Los Angeles Times today.

"Thornberrys movie plan: Pretend series never existed. 'Big' is the operative word. The lushly painted African vistas are presented in CinemaScope (relatively uncommon for animation), and the voice cast includes..."

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 12-16-2002, 05:38 PM:

Titan AE

The first cinemascope film I saw in a cinema. [Smile]