Posted on 12/06/2004 11:15:57 AM PST by ambrose
The reaosn for that is those old LDs had the pre-tampered with Star Wars which Lucas has said will never be on DVD and and Branagh's Hamlet has yet to be released on DVD.
Is Hamlet going to be released on DVD?
Weird. The only HD channels I got are STZHD, HBOHD, SHOHD, BRAVO HD and INHD. No TNT HD in Brooklyn. Is the image actually HD? Or do htey just display it in the middle of the screen with black bars on top, bottom, left and right?
I don't really see it as phoney. As I mentioned, I have sometimes seen microphones in their entirety in the area that is blacked out in the final version. I saw as story on this over a decade ago. Even though the film was shot in "tv" aspect ratio, the artistic vision was in the taped off "widescreen" area, which is why the director would sometimes miss things in the top and bottom areas like mics - and con-trails in westerns.
That said, I noticed it in My Bodyguard because the tops of peoples heads were cut off in the letterboxed version. It looks like it was filmed for tv aspect ratio.
I would assume so. I guess its a size issue with that 242 minutes film. There's a fair amount of demand for it online. Schools could could sure use a completely visualized versio of the play which otherwise only exists in drab BBC editions.
What was the resolution on the laser disc like?
I have two HDTVs... one at 51" and another at 42"... VOOM offers a HD TNT channel which actually does show HD movies at 1080i at 4:3 aspect and edits them for language and content. My feeling is... why even bother?
I understand that the genesis of wide screen movies was a response to a new form of competition: television.
It tanked, and Wayne spent the next 9 years working in ultra-low-budget Poverty Row B-Westerns.
But with DVDs there's no reason to actually offer both. You can set the player to be full screen and it only shows the center. Yeah you get no "pan and scan" but from what I've seen lately the studios have gotten really lazy and most fullscreen DVDs are merely cropped with little if any panning.
Size isn't an issue anymore... with dual layer authoring now on DVD. I've never heard that Hamlet would ever be available on DVD because of title issues. Which makes my copy of it on LD even more valuable. Same goes with my several copies of the OT of SW on LD I still own.
My Bodyguard with Matt Dillon or The Bodyguard with Costner?
>>The reaosn for that is those old LDs had the pre-tampered with Star Wars which Lucas has said will never be on DVD and and Branagh's Hamlet has yet to be released on DVD.<<
And I had Pink Floyd's Pulse concert on Laserdisk. Pre-divorce, that is...
What about Dr. Strangelove? Stanley Kubrick did not like letterboxing, approved of a mixed aspect ratio transfer in later years, and used copious amounts of "full screen" stock footage in his film.
LD offered letterboxing and 5.1 dolby digital sound which VHS couldn't.
What do you mean by title issues? They can't have another movie named Hamlet? :-)
Exactly. I have no problems watching a full-screen movie on my 32" TV.
If memory serves, it is pretty close to non-progressive scan DVD, except it isn't digital.
On a projection tv in the late seventies and early 80's even, tape didn't come close.
Tape has never been an acceptable pre-recorded medium to me, even in 1970 when I was the only guy I knew who had cassette in my car - all home recorded tapes.
And this in a crappy 1963 rambler classic!!!
Widescreen films only started being made in the 1950s.
Nice. I have a tiny 1 bedroom (rent is $ in NYC), so I am only getting ~65" image on my wall ( from about ~8 feet). HD looks pretty amazing even though the native resolution of the projector is 1024 by 768.
Half Life 2 looks niiiiiiiice :]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.