is jungle book 16x9 ratio that bad?

[drfsupercenter]

You've never been to a Disney theme park, have you? They've had Circle-Vision 360 presentations for decades. America the Beautiful, Reflections of China, O Canada, The Timekeeper, etc.

The last time I was at Magic Kingdom and Epcot, I was like 8... and we never stayed late enough to see those attractions. I was just at Hollywood Studios (literally right after the name change), and saw Fantasmic, but that was just a large 3D show.

As far as the aspect ratios go, I don't really study old movies, it just seems that most movies I go to in theaters are 2.35:1, and some of the older films I have on DVD are 16:9. It could just be coincidence.

And since you seem to be the expert on aspect ratios, perhaps you might know, why is Atlantis: The Lost Empire 2.35:1? It was animated using CAPS, wasn't it? Going from 1.66 to 2.35 is a HUGE change, that's like cutting the film in half. The DVD also has a fullscreen version, but I think it's just cropped from the 2.35 version like Lady and the Tramp was...

[Flanger-Hanger]

And since you seem to be the expert on aspect ratios, perhaps you might know, why is Atlantis: The Lost Empire 2.35:1? It was animated using CAPS, wasn't it? Going from 1.66 to 2.35 is a HUGE change, that's like cutting the film in half. The DVD also has a fullscreen version, but I think it's just cropped from the 2.35 version like Lady and the Tramp was...

It was done in that ratio to be more like the old epic adventure films of the 1950s and 1960s which had ratios between 2.20:1 and 2.55:1. Since that was the kind of film they were trying to make in the first place, a larger ratio made more sense.

(IMO Atlantis is no where near as good as those old adventure films anyway, but that's a different topic)

[Escapay]

As far as the aspect ratios go, I don't really study old movies,

And there lies the problem. Widescreen didn't start with Star Wars.

And since you seem to be the expert on aspect ratios

That honor belongs to deathie mouse. I'm a mere novice compared to him.

why is Atlantis: The Lost Empire 2.35:1? It was animated using CAPS, wasn't it? Going from 1.66 to 2.35 is a HUGE change, that's like cutting the film in half. The DVD also has a fullscreen version, but I think it's just cropped from the 2.35 version like Lady and the Tramp was...

It was done in that ratio to be more like the old epic adventure films of the 1950s and 1960s which had ratios between 2.20:1 and 2.55:1. Since that was the kind of film they were trying to make in the first place, a larger ratio made more sense.

Wire Hanger already explained it, but there's additional info as well.

Atlantis was animated in both 2.35:1 and in 1.66:1, but it's not as simple as it sounds.

It was always the intention of the filmmakers to present the movie in 2.35:1. So no matter how much animation is seen or unseen, it will be presented in 2.35:1 and no amount of argument or debate will change the statement "2.35:1 is the Intended Aspect Ratio of Atlantis: The Lost Empire"

(I purposely chose not to use the word "original" because it has been overused and misused many times regarding aspect ratios)

For some scenes, they storyboarded in 2.35:1 and initially animate in 1.66:1, then "extended" the sides with additional animation (to get the intended 2.35:1 frame). This is similar to how some of Pixar's re-animated scenes from 2.35:1 to 1.33:1 (for the fullscreen version) would simply extend the top and bottom of a frame.

And for other scenes, it's again storyboarded in 2.35:1 and animated in 1.66:1. However, it is then matted down to 2.35:1, because they know that the central 2.35:1 dimensions of the 1.66:1 frame is what they wanted to be seen in the first place.

And I must re-iterate once again, the filmmakers WANTED it in 2.35:1, so the unseen animation from the 1.66:1 frame is NOT NECESSARY.

It's been awhile since I watched the making-of documentary for Atlantis, but I'm very certain that either in the documentary or in the commentary, they discuss animating in 2.35:1, touching on both methods (extending the frame or matting the frame).

Regarding the DVD fullscreen version, I have no idea whether it's P&S or a hybrid of P&S and open-matte (since CGI and visual effects shots would naturally be hard-matted to 2.35:1). It's only on the single-disc version (which in itself is quite nice for a single-disc), and I have the two-disc collector's edition (which is the better buy for fans of the film and of excellent DVD presentations).

(IMO Atlantis is no where near as good as those old adventure films anyway, but that's a different topic)

That's because when it comes to old adventure films, nothing tops the epic known as The 7th Voyage of Sinbad

Albert

[drfsupercenter]

And there lies the problem. Widescreen didn't start with Star Wars.

Funny you should say that, Star Wars was the first movie I saw in widescreen

Atlantis was animated in both 2.35:1 and in 1.66:1, but it's not as simple as it sounds.

That honor belongs to deathie mouse. I'm a mere novice compared to him.

Well you're the one who's been correcting me lately so I assumed you were the expert
I'm just one of those people who wants the originals, and with today's crap about matted versions being the "intended" ratios, I sometimes mix my facts up...



Thanks for clearing that up... Here I thought they just matted the thing and was like "holy crap, you're losing almost half the picture!"

And as far as fullscreen goes, I bought it on VHS back when it came out, and was just recently at my library and they had a DVD. I never even knew about a 2-disc, but I'll put it on the next Christmas wishlist

Was Atlantis the only one to be animated in 1.66 and then shown in 2.35? I know films like Beauty and the Beast were shown slightly cropped but that's just such a huge difference I thought maybe I was mis-informed.

[Escapay]

And there lies the problem. Widescreen didn't start with Star Wars.

Funny you should say that, Star Wars was the first movie I saw in widescreen

I had a feeling it would have been Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or Lord of the Rings.

That honor belongs to deathie mouse. I'm a mere novice compared to him.

Well you're the one who's been correcting me lately so I assumed you were the expert

It's the Ted Mosby in me that corrects people far too often.

But yeah, if you ask deathie enough questions, he'll give like...20-page essays on widescreen. Just check out some of his old posts and you'll find a boatload of information.

and with today's crap about matted versions being the "intended" ratios, I sometimes mix my facts up...

Oh wow, that reminded me of the stupid MGM fiasco regarding matted pictures.

The Digital Bits' Two Cents regarding the lawsuit.

In short, though, these two people sued MGM about something like false advertising when it came to their DVDs. They claimed that the widescreen transfers they were getting were just the fullscreen ones matted. And...they were. Because that's how those movies were made, and the two people obviously never heard of theatrical matting. So they thought that MGM was cheating widescreen fans out of the "full" image by matting what they thought was a P&S of widescreen.

Really stupid stuff, and I still can't believe that MGM just settled it out of court rather than give them a course in Theatrical Matting 101.

I never even knew about a 2-disc, but I'll put it on the next Christmas wishlist

It is by far one of, if not THE, best DVDs that Disney ever put together. IMO, it outranks even the Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs: Platinum Edition in terms of DVD presentation and bonus content.

Was Atlantis the only one to be animated in 1.66 and then shown in 2.35?

Except for Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Brother Bear, all the CAPS-animated films were animated in 1.66:1 and matted to theatres in 1.85:1 (the first 20 minutes of Brother Bear are 1.85:1 as well, before spreading to its 2.35:1 ratio).

Albert

[drfsupercenter]

Hm, OK. I do have the 2-disc version (is there any other version?) of Brother Bear, and I did see that one in theaters... but at first I thought my DVD player was broken as it had these huge bars and I couldn't figure out why.

The Simpsons Movie does the same thing, even though that isn't Disney or animated even similar to them.

It is by far one of, if not THE, best DVDs that Disney ever put together. IMO, it outranks even the Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs: Platinum Edition in terms of DVD presentation and bonus content.

I will be sure to look at that then - I've also been trying to get my hands on Toy Story's 3-disc "Ultimate Toy Story Box" since I heard that was pretty good too. (Instead of the two special editions - I want the sfx-only audio track! And I don't even care about DTS since I can't decode it...)

Really stupid stuff, and I still can't believe that MGM just settled it out of court rather than give them a course in Theatrical Matting 101.

LOL, now if only they could talk to Disney about their DVD release of Aladdin and the King of Thieves, the box says it's 4:3 and of course it isn't... And what's up with the cropping direct-to-video movies like The Lion King 2 anyway, it's not like they were shown in theaters in 16:9!

[steve]

Hm, OK. I do have the 2-disc version (is there any other version?) of Brother Bear...

In Region 2 there is only a 1-disc edition released, with a horribly cropped version of the film that doesn't change ratio.

[Jules]

And what's up with the cropping direct-to-video movies like The Lion King 2 anyway, it's not like they were shown in theaters in 16:9!

Hmm... I think The Lion King II was made in widescreen, so you are not seeing any cropping in the DVD release, as opposed to Aladdin III. At least, that's the impression I've always had. Also, keep in mind that The Lion King II was apparently given theatrical release in Europe (though I never remember it being released in my country ).

[REINIER]

It wasn't, according to disney belgium it wasn't deemed worthy of it's predecessor and therefore not theatrically released.

I still can't grasp one would make a ''classic'' sequel like the
Rescuers down Under and not give The Lion King 2 the proper tribute it deserves, still it's my favorite dtdvd sequel.

How on earth Bambi 2 was released in cinema's I still can't figure out, I watched it in cinema and it was painfully obvious this movie was made for tv-release, however good it may be.

[steve]

I still can't grasp one would make a ''classic'' sequel like the Rescuers down Under and not give The Lion King 2 the proper tribute it deserves, still it's my favorite dtdvd sequel.

Rescuers Down Under was produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation (now Walt Disney Animation Studios), whereas The Lion King II was produced by Walt Disney Television Animation.

[Mollyzkoubou]

And I don't even care about DTS since I can't decode it...)

mplayer ftw, as always...

[KubrickFan]

Hm, OK. I do have the 2-disc version (is there any other version?) of Brother Bear...

In Region 2 there is only a 1-disc edition released, with a horribly cropped version of the film that doesn't change ratio.

The worst part is that it isn't even in 1.85:1, like the beginning. It's in 1.66:1 so that there is information cut off in both sequences.