It was the best of weeks, it was the worst of weeks (15 - 21 September). Two more 'accidents', in which scope movies were cropped to 1.78:1, even though 2.35:1 masters are currently held by Film 4. Hideous animal cruelty. And, on Channel 4, filmmaker Dibakar Banerjee had the sheer unmitigated gall to produce an Indian film (KHOSLA KA GHOSLA!) with spherical lenses and a 1.85:1 aspect ratio, without having the decency to inform me beforehand! An Indian film, mind you!! Yes, I stuffed up on that one, listing it as a scope movie when it had no business being on my list at all. But 1.85:1 Indian movies are so rare, it's virtually unheard of! Colour me suitably embarrassed...

Good news: Film 4 finally secured properly-letterboxed versions of JEAN DE FLORETTE and its sequel. The bad news: They were striped across the top of the screen. FER GAWD'S SAKE, PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!! Did anyone notice the tiny subtitles on the 4:3 Ingmar Bergman film shown last week on Film 4? If they can have subtitles that size on such a film, they can reduce the size of the subtitles on scope movies and position the image across the centre of the screen. This is REALLY beginning to get on my nerves now. Nurse, me heart pills...

Ahem! Anyways, on with the show:

A huge Lottery win to all those responsible for the following properly-framed movies on Film 4 last week:

8mm
CATTLE EMPIRE
ELECTION
JEAN DE FLORETTE
MANON DES SOURCES: JEAN DE FLORETTE 2ème PARTIE
MY BEST FRIEND'S WEDDING
THE TRANSPORTER

And an account with Northern Rock to all those Lottery winners responsible for the following cropped/altered movies:

MEMOIRS OF AN INVISIBLE MAN
PICNIC
PUSHING TIN
RAT RACE
THE SPANISH GARDENER
THE TRUE STORY OF JESSE JAMES

quote:

Originally posted by Libretio:
….. And, on Channel 4, filmmaker Dibakar Banerjee had the sheer unmitigated gall to produce an Indian film (KHOSLA KA GHOSLA!) with spherical lenses and a 1.85:1 aspect ratio, without having the decency to inform me beforehand! An Indian film, mind you!! Yes, I stuffed up on that one, listing it as a scope movie when it had no business being on my list at all. But 1.85:1 Indian movies are so rare, it's virtually unheard of! Colour me suitably embarrassed...

Yes, it was unusual to see an Indian film in 1.85:1. But after watching the opening, I decided that 1.85:1 looked correct, and it wasn't a cropped 'scope film, so I kept it. Very entertaining film too, IMO - black comedy drama? Might even be considered surreal in an English setting - you buy a plot of land to build a house, then find some local power broker has "seized" it and wants half the purchase price to give it back, the police and politicians are only interested in getting their cut, and you get thrown in jail when you take direct action to recover your land…..!

Now to reverse the issue in hand, so to speak. What's the 'gen' on the mid-50's Columbia titles that have started popping up in 16:9 incarnations of late? Off the top of my head I'm thinking Fritz Lang's Human Desire and today's 5 Against The House.

Although my understanding is limited I gather that academy ratio was almost universally the standard, save the odd widescreen experiment or tow, until the advent of feature-length Cinemascope subjects in 1953. I also thought that it remained so for non-Scope features in the years immediately following, until the development of all sorts of widescreen processes really took off proper.

These two titles were not scope, so I would have thought they were originally 1.37:1. Have they been tampered with for TV, and if so what's the relative damage?

ClientFan, almost as soon as CinemaScope was announced to the trade as a viable screen format, 'widescreen' became all the rage. Not only scope titles, but those shot with spherical lenses, too. From 1953 onwards, some films framed with 1.37:1 in mind were released cropped, anywhere from 1.66:1 to 1.85:1, while others were 'protected' within the 1.37:1 frame for wider ratios, and released accordingly.

For mid-1950's productions, at a time when 1.37 and 1.85 were still jostling for supremacy, it's almost impossible to know which ratio was intended on a film-by-film basis without having access to studio records or to bona fide 35mm prints (where the intended ratio is almost always marked). No doubt Film 4 - or Columbia - checked their records before making TV prints of the films you mentioned, and they're letterboxed to the correct dimensions.

We will hope

I've now got a 4:3 recording of Human Desire and last week's 16:9 screening to compare at some point... in the future

quote:

Originally posted by ClientFan:
I've now got a 4:3 recording of Human Desire and last week's 16:9 screening to compare at some point... in the future

I've only seen it in the 16:9 version, but it looked all right to my untrained eye - no "obvious" cropping.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, More4 broadcast it in anamorphic widescreen but without a widescreen switching signal, so perhaps they too were expecting a 4:3 print. Fortunately, by fiddling with recording settings for the HDD/DVD dub, I was able to impose a widescreen switching signal on my DVD-R copy.

Just got in from work and, having set my DVD-R for this afternoon's Fathom in the hope of getting "the full picture", was glad to have seen that hope fulfilled. Now I can finally dispose of my 16:9 copy - well done C4.

Once again though I noticed that sound problem apology card popping up at the end - does anyone know for definite whether this one was spurious too? I've had a quick flick through (my chapter stops were set at 5 mins) and didn't pick up on anything obvious.

quote:

Originally posted by ClientFan:
Just got in from work and, having set my DVD-R for this afternoon's Fathom in the hope of getting "the full picture", was glad to have seen that hope fulfilled. Now I can finally dispose of my 16:9 copy - well done C4.

Once again though I noticed that sound problem apology card popping up at the end - does anyone know for definite whether this one was spurious too? I've had a quick flick through (my chapter stops were set at 5 mins) and didn't pick up on anything obvious.

Hey, another "Fathom" fan! Admittedly, I enjoy it more for Ms Welch's effortless ability to fill a skimpy lime green bikini, than for her acting ability or the plot!

I've had my copy for 3 years in the R1 Raquel Welch Collection, so I didn't monitor this afternoon's broadcast. But on two other films where the sound problem apology card appeared, it was a mistake and there was no problem.

BTW, thanks for the info about "5 Against The House" aspect ratio. I failed to record it on Sunday, so I'll catch it on Thursday, with my recorder set to 16:9 (not essential with HDD, but matching recording AR to actual AR improves dubbing speed from 1x to 16x).

Yep, a properly-letterboxed FATHOM, but not BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. I know we should be grateful for small mercies, but still!...

I noticed sound problems on two recent Film 4 broadcasts: THE HUNTERS and THE TRUE STORY OF JESSE JAMES, both released theatrically in 4-track magnetic sound with directional dialogue. On the first film - as I reported earlier - all the sound came out of every speaker, including the rear surrounds, which meant everything (dialogue, ambient effects, etc.) came as much from behind as in front! It was the same thing with ...Jesse James, though not as pronounced. With THE HUNTERS, it was so bad, I had no choice but to switch off. In both cases, the surrounding material (previews, commercial breaks) featured perfectly-balanced audio.

Not sure what the problem with FATHOM might have been, since my records indicate it was released with a mono soundtrack. Not that my records are entirely infallible, mind...

Not much to cheer about on Film 4 next week, at least as far as scope movies are concerned, though I'll certainly be taking a look at Five's 10pm screening of THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT, to see whether their version differs from Film 4's 9pm broadcasts (no one from the channel bothered to answer my enquiries on the subject of the film possibly being edited on Film 4, so at the moment, I'm still none the wiser - this should end the speculation once and for all).

It will also be interesting to see which version of MR. NICE GUY is screened on Channel 4. I hope it's properly-letterboxed, with the original multi-lingual soundtrack (Cantonese, English and Mandarin) - the HK version is dubbed entirely in Cantonese, even though the different languages are actually a vital part of the plot! I hope to god it's not the re-edited, rescored US version...

Oh, and HAZAARON KHWAISHEIN AISI is merely assumed as scope. Most 'Bollywood' movies are shot in some form of widescreen, but recent experience has taught me it's unwise to rely on assumptions, especially with films whose screen format I'm unable to confirm before adding them to these lists.



29 September - 5 October



Film 4

BATTLE OF BRITAIN (Panavision)
THE BATTLE OF THE RIVER PLATE (VistaVision) [1.85:1]
THE BUSINESS (HD Widescreen)

FROM HELL TO TEXAS (CinemaScope)

GALLIPOLI (Panavision)

THE LEFT HAND OF GOD (CinemaScope) [2.55:1]

OUT OF TIME (Super 35)

SCREAM (J-D-C Scope)



Terrestrial / Freeview

1941 (Panavision)

THE AFFAIR OF THE NECKLACE (Super 35)
THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT (Panavision)
THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN (Panavision)

THE CABLE GUY (Super 35)
THE CORE (Panavision)
CREEP (Super 35)
'CROCODILE' DUNDEE (Panavision)

DALEKS' INVASION EARTH 2150 A.D. (Techniscope)
DAY OF THE EVIL GUN (Panavision)
DIE HARD (Panavision)

ENTRAPMENT (Panavision)

GOLD (Panavision)
GUN FURY (Columbia 3-D) [1.75:1]

HAZAARON KHWAISHEIN AISI
HELL IN THE PACIFIC (Panavision)
HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS [Shi Mian Mai Fu] (Super 35)

ICEMAN (Panavision)

THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT (Super 35)

MAID IN MANHATTAN (Panavision)
THE MAN WHO NEVER WAS (CinemaScope) [2.55:1]
MR. NICE GUY [Yi Ge Hao Ren] (Anamorphic)
THE NIGHT OF THE GENERALS (Panavision)

OLD SCHOOL (Super 35)

PAHELI (Kowa Scope)
PHONE BOOTH (Super 35)

A SHOT AT GLORY (Panavision)
SPY GAME (Panavision)

UNDISPUTED (Super 35)

WESTWORLD (Panavision)
WIMBLEDON (Super 35)



Next update: Tuesday 2 October

Good heavens! It looks like "Picnic" is being broadcast in an AR of 2.35:1. An improvement on last week's cropped 1.85:1 offering, although not quite right according to IMDB, which has the OAR as 2.55:1. Perhaps Libretio could advise?

Even if it's still a bit cropped, it's probably worth investing 19p to dub my HDD recording to DVD-R.

Regarding "The Long Kiss Goodnight", I have the anamorphic R1 DVD, which was a replacement for my non-anamorphic R2 UK DVD, so I won't be tuning in to C5. I know the first UK TV screening included the Santa Sleigh Pursuit scene, which was cut, for pacing, from the theatrical version, does not feature on the R1/R2 DVDs, and was not shown in subsequent TV broadcasts AFAIK. But I suspect Libretio has in mind censorship-type cuts for violence and/or language. One thing's for sure: C5 won't show it in 2.35:1 (I dare them to prove me wrong), although as a Super 35 film, I suppose we may get an "open matte" version.

Good heavens! It looks like "Picnic" is being broadcast in an AR of 2.35:1. An improvement on last week's cropped 1.85:1 offering, although not quite right according to IMDB, which has the OAR as 2.55:1.

The film was produced in 1955 and released with a 4-track mag stereo soundtrack, and the stereo version would certainly have been framed at 2.55:1 (only with the widespread introduction of magoptical soundtracks - with the mono and stereo tracks on the same print - did the screen shape 'settle' at 2.35:1). Given the various technical vagaries which existed during the mid-1950's, it's possible this one did have a magoptical track. Or maybe Film 4 is reluctant to go as wide as 2.55:1, given how small such an image appears, even on 16:9 TV's...

But I suspect Libretio has in mind censorship-type cuts for violence and/or language.

I do, indeed. And there's one specific scene I shall be paying special attention to...

...as a Super 35 film, I suppose we may get an "open matte" version.

Which, as far as I'm concerned, is no better than pan-scanning. You'd be surprised how many people think it's OK for broadcasters to do this with Super 35 films, and yet many of 'em would be horrified if the same thing was done with a 1.85:1 movie opened up to 1.33:1 for DVD.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Moran:
Good heavens! It looks like "Picnic" is being broadcast in an AR of 2.35:1.

Bumcheeks! I didn't bother with this thinking it would be the same grainy blown-up print shown a few days ago, and knowing my luck they'll foul up on all subsequent screenings. It's getting to the stage that there are so many different versions of any given title flying around the Channel I think I may be wise to record everything just in case!

Or maybe Film 4 is reluctant to go as wide as 2.55:1, given how small such an image appears, even on 16:9 TV's...

Didn't they only just recently do full pictorial justice to There's No Business Like Showbusiness? Over the last few months I've noticed that the roster of Fox films being shown in OAR are titles that have recently had their last-run on the Sky Channels - in OAR. Maybe they are renting out the very same masters?

Good heavens again! Now they're showing "The Left Hand of God" in OAR 2.55:1 (as measured with "cursorpos" on my PC screen).

I hope ClientFan followed his own advice. Or perhaps he doesn't care for this film?

I did indeed follow my own advice, although I cannot as yet say whether or not I care for the film. I have amassed a rather large pile of recordings over the years that have still yet to be watched, though I compulsively make the recordings as we can't predict the future - who's to say what kind of films broadcasters will be screening 10 years from now, and to what standards?

I did however notice that the colour was rather unprepossessing, to a degree which I doubt was originally 'in camera'. Seems to have been an OAR but washed-out print unfortunately.

Even more unfortunately, the sound was 'off' again, with dialogue and ambient effects coming out of all speakers at once. This seems to be confined to Fox titles originally released in 4-track magnetic stereo, and I can't understand why Film 4 hasn't checked these issues before broadcast. Nice to see the film in its original ratio, of course - three cheers for Film 4! - but these sound issues on older films are becoming a real problem.

How's about taking a look at this, Film 4? Is there anyone out there? Or should we try communicating through a Ouija board?!...

Sadly, GALLIPOLI was still cropped to 1.78:1 last night. Adding salt to the wound, it was also broadcast in a stereo remix of the original mono. Ironically, the audio was properly balanced across the entire soundstage...

Libretio - Yes, I noticed the sound was "off" on "The Left hand of God", when I watched it in full this morning. I think you have made me sensitive to the issue! It even sounded odd downmixed to L/R speakers only, but better than 5.0.

Still, as you say, three cheers for the OAR. And if Film4 can do it for this one, perhaps we shouldn't give up hope for an OAR broadcast of "Death Drums along the River" and "Green Fire".

ClientFan - I agree it looked faded. From a very limited comparison, I think it was from the same print which they broadcast in May in a cropped 1.78:1 version. But nice to have OAR.

I would say there's no hope at all for Green Fire given that it's an MGM title, and Ted Turner certainly doesn't seem in any hurry to upgrade TCM UK's battered, washed-out pan-scan print.

Last week's output (22 - 28 September) was eye-opening, in more ways than one. Though initially screened at 1.78:1, both PICNIC and BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY were subsequently broadcast at their correct scope ratios, which was hugely welcome. The same could also be said of THE LEFT HAND OF GOD, but - as reported earlier - the sound quality was 'off'. This seems to be occurring regularly on films released theatrically in 4-track mag stereo, so I checked the sound on RIVER OF NO RETURN (badly cropped to 1.78:1 from 2.55:1), and it was perfectly balanced. Given that I've noted similar problems with THE HUNTERS and THE TRUE STORY OF JESSE JAMES, it seems something's definitely amiss with Film 4's quality control, at least as far as 4-track movies are concerned. I'll be keeping a closer eye on this problem in the future.

One final thing: I caught up with WE WERE SOLDIERS earlier this week, which was correctly letterboxed at 2.39:1 (approximate). The image was positioned across the centre of the screen, and there were subtitled passages whenever characters were speaking Vietnamese. The first line of the subs were placed *on* the image, while the second line appeared in the lower matte. From this example, my mind is made up: THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO STRIPE SCOPE IMAGES ACROSS THE TOP OF THE SCREEN TO ACCOMMODATE 'LARGER' SUBTITLES. These were perfectly clear and legible at all times, no matter what was happening on-screen, and the fact they were half-on/half-off the image made no difference to their legibility whatsoever. It makes no difference that the film contained only short passages of Vietnamese dialogue, there's no question the subs would have been OK had they been used throughout the entire picture. If Film 4/Channel 4 continues to shove the image into the upper-half of the 16:9 frame for foreign-language movies, it will simply alienate viewers like myself who simply cannot abide such an unnecessary practice!! I know some of you guys are OK with it, but following the example of WE WERE SOLDIERS, it's clear the subs used by Film 4 are perfectly fine no matter where the image is positioned. And, in the immortal words of a certain Mrs. Slocombe, I am unanimous in that!!

So, a lifetime subscription to Cosmopolitan magazine to all those responsible for the following properly-letterboxed movies on Film 4 last week:

THE BATTLE OF THE RIVER PLATE
BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY
ELECTION
FATHOM
THE GIRL CAN'T HELP IT
THE LEFT HAND OF GOD
O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU?
PICNIC
WE WERE SOLDIERS

And a lifetime subscription to Housewives Hooters to all those responsible for the following cropped/altered movies:

APOCALYPSE NOW
ESCAPE TO ATHENA
GALLIPOLI
RIVER OF NO RETURN
THE SPANISH GARDENER

You may like to know that BLACKADDER GOES FORTH, due for screening on BBC2 tonight (29 September), was actually screened theatrically in Imax format, framed at 1.44:1! The TV version will most likely be 1.78:1, but such films really need to be seen on the E-N-O-R-M-O-U-S Imax screen to be fully appreciated.

Try to avoid the re-edited, rescored version of Jackie Chan's WHO AM I? being screened on Five US next week. Not only has it been altered for American sensibilities, the only print Five has ever screened to date has been horribly cropped to 1.33:1. Chan always makes good use of the wide, w-i-d-e screen, especially in his trademark fight scenes, so this version is nothing less than a complete disaster!



6 - 12 October



Film 4

THE BEDROOM WINDOW (J-D-C Scope)
THE BUSINESS (HD Widescreen)

THE CIDER HOUSE RULES (Super 35)
CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER (Panavision)

DAYS OF THUNDER (Panavision)
DOCTOR AT LARGE (VistaVision) [1.85:1

EQUILIBRIUM (Super 35)

FROM HELL TO TEXAS (CinemaScope)

HILARY & JACKIE (Super 35)

STAR TREK: NEMESIS (Panavision)

THE WORLD [Shi Jie] (HD Widescreen)



Terrestrial / Freeview

AGENT CODY BANKS 2: DESTINATION LONDON (Panavision)
ALIEN (Panavision)

BLUFFMASTER! *
BROKEN ARROW [1996] (Super 35)

CRIMSON TIDE (Panavision)
'CROCODILE' DUNDEE II (Panavision)

DAMN THE DEFIANT! [HMS Defiant] (CinemaScope)
DEATHWATCH (Super 35)
DIE HARD 2 (Panavision)
DOLORES CLAIBORNE (Panavision)

ELECTION [1999] (Super 35)
ELEKTRA (Panavision)
ENOUGH (Panavision)
EYE OF THE BEHOLDER (Super 35)

FLASH GORDON [1980] (Todd-AO 35)
FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE [Per Qualche Dollari in Più] (Techniscope)

HELL AND HIGH WATER (CinemaScope) [2.55:1]
HITCH (Super 35)

A KNIGHT'S TALE (Super 35)

MEN OF WAR (Super 35)
MERRILL'S MARAUDERS (CinemaScope)
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE [1996] (Panavision)
THE MUMMY [1999] (Panavision)

THE OTHER SISTER (Super 35)

PAYBACK (Super 35)
PHONE BOOTH (Super 35)

TAXI NO. 9.2.11 *
THE THIN RED LINE [1998] (Panavision)
A TIME TO KILL (Panavision)

WHERE EAGLES DARE (Panavision)
WHO AM I? [Wo Shi Shei] (Panavision / Technovision)



* Once again, I'm listing the two 'Bollywood' movies in the Terrestrial/Freeview section without being able to confirm beforehand they were actually shot in widescreen. I'm assuming they were, but we all know where assumption has gotten me in the past!!...

Next update: Tuesday 9 October