Sleeping Beauty Confirmed for DVD AND BLU-RAY in 2008 !!!

[Escapay]

Given the fact that Lady and the Tramp got one (though they got the wrong one), I have a feeling Disney may do the same for Sleeping Beauty, in order to appease the few 4:3 fans that are left in the world (and their kids).
It'll also be unpopular with those of us expecting the 2.25:1 Technirama negative! (Of course, I'd be just as satisfied with the 2.20:1 70mm print)

Albert

I'm confused about the 2.25:1 ratio you mentioned. From what I understand, SB was animated and projected at 2.20:1 (70mm) and also projected at 2.35:1(35mm), giving it two intended aspect ratios. (Though I would only ever watch the 70mm version as there is more info to it)

So, is the 2.25:1 supposed to be the intended ratio?

When a film is first shot in Technirama, it's shot sideways with 35mm film (like VistaVision or IMAX), resulting in a ratio of 2.25:1. However, when it's transferred to 70mm prints it becomes 2.20:1, which is generally the "intended" ratio.

Thus, 2.55:1 is already way off from any of the expected ratios (2.25:1 from the original 35mm negative, 2.20:1 from the 70mm prints, or 2.35:1 from the 35mm prints) and would be very unpopular with a lot of people.

Albert

[2099net]

When a film is first shot in Technirama, it's shot sideways with 35mm film (like VistaVision or IMAX), resulting in a ratio of 2.25:1. However, when it's transferred to 70mm prints it becomes 2.20:1, which is generally the "intended" ratio.

Presumably the change in aspect ratios is because the 70mm prints also had a soundtrack down the side?

[Escapay]

When a film is first shot in Technirama, it's shot sideways with 35mm film (like VistaVision or IMAX), resulting in a ratio of 2.25:1. However, when it's transferred to 70mm prints it becomes 2.20:1, which is generally the "intended" ratio.

Presumably the change in aspect ratios is because the 70mm prints also had a soundtrack down the side?

That too. I keep forgetting about the soundtrack, which is ironic since I always remember deathie explaining over and over how Academy films are really 1.37:1 and not 1.33:1 because of the soundtrack.

Albert

[AlwaysOAR]

When a film is first shot in Technirama, it's shot sideways with 35mm film (like VistaVision or IMAX), resulting in a ratio of 2.25:1. However, when it's transferred to 70mm prints it becomes 2.20:1, which is generally the "intended" ratio.

Thus, 2.55:1 is already way off from any of the expected ratios (2.25:1 from the original 35mm negative, 2.20:1 from the 70mm prints, or 2.35:1 from the 35mm prints) and would be very unpopular with a lot of people.

Albert

Thanks Escapay! I guessed it was something like that, but just wanted some confirmation about the intended ratio. I'm hoping the marketing people messed up when giving the aspect ratio for the upcoming release, perhaps thinking SB has the same ratio as LatT.

[Disneykid]

Hollywood in Hi-Def posted a brief article about an event promoting the BD. There's also a video included from the presentation which shows off some of the BD-live features:

http://www.hollywoodinhidef.com/blog_detail.php?id=207

This video also gives us our first real taste of the restoration, albeit via camcorder quality. From the looks of it, the color palette seems to be warmer than the SE's transfer. I wish the camerman could've just filmed the screens as they were instead of zooming in repeatedly. The zooming prevents us from really taking in the new picture (which I care about much more than the BD-live features).

What's particularly interesting is this quote:

"The two-disc set will also include a new picture-in-picture commentary by Pixar's John Lasseter, Andreas Deja and Leonard Maltin."

So I guess the old commentary (or as Scaps calls it, the audio documentary) will be dropped. Considering how great that was, I'm hoping the new documentary is essentially a video version of that track mixed with new comments (the latter of which we know they've filmed).

[PrincePhillipFan]

Thanks for posting the link, Disneykid! It's interesting to see the new transfer, and from what I can see, I think it looks really well done. It's a bit warmer than the old transfer, but not really too drastic.

The only thing that really frustrates me is all these features on this Blu-Ray. I understand them wanting to step up technology, but all this chat and video stuff in the movie is just ridiculous and annoying to me. All I want is the movie in good restoration quality and some great bonus features, like that new making of, the virtual walk through tour, and the deleted songs.

I'm probably not going to buy a Blu-ray player for a while, but I do hope that the Blu-ray release is going to be like what Snow White's release is to DVD, in terms of bonus features.

[steve]

From the above link:

the "Sleeping Beauty" Blu-ray Disc also features the original Super Technirama 70 (similar to CinemaScope) 2.55:1 widescreen format for the first time since its initial theatrical release, a restored hi-def print, and 7.1 HD sound sourced from the original recording tapes found in Germany.

From earlier in this thread:

2.55:1 has never been, nor should it ever be, the aspect ratio for Sleeping Beauty.

Again:

...the original Super Technirama 70 (similar to CinemaScope) 2.55:1 widescreen format for the first time since its initial theatrical release...

And again:

2.55:1 has never been...the aspect ratio for Sleeping Beauty.

SAY WHA?!

EDIT/UPDATE: On this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqsVrZrA4rk at 2.59: "We were actually able to create the original aspect ratio of the film, which was two-five-five, which has never been done before in any medium."

[Disney Duster]

I'm wondering about the aspect ratio too...

I, too wish they would cut the connecting to other people while you watch the movie. And did anyone else wanna barf at that "Daddy's" video message to his little girl? I bet he had a hard time saying those lines.

HEY, Disneykid! I already asked you where you saw those promotional images in this thread, and how you knew they were only publicity photos, and you didn't answer. Now they actually look a lot like this new transfer we're seeing! I think they were stills from the newly restored film!

[steve]

I think they were stills from the newly restored film!

Are you sure? Cause blue Flora looks wrong to me. Does someone have a screencap from the old DVD to compare?

[Escapay]

So I guess the old commentary (or as Scaps calls it, the audio documentary) will be dropped. Considering how great that was, I'm hoping the new documentary is essentially a video version of that track mixed with new comments (the latter of which we know they've filmed).

Kelvin remembered "audio documentary"! Makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside (unless it's the peach I just ate...though normally one doesn't eat the fuzz of a peach...)

I'm hoping that it does get retained as well, and like you said, as a video version. The one problem, of course, would be that it'd likely be edited down to something that's in the 45 minute range. Not that 45 minutes is bad, but the past few Platinum docs always have that feeling that the interviewees always have more to say, but it had to be cut out so that an hour's worth of game footage could be included instead. I forget who said it here, but I always agreed with him/her that any documentary for a DAC should be 90 minutes.

From the above link:

the "Sleeping Beauty" Blu-ray Disc also features the original Super Technirama 70 (similar to CinemaScope) 2.55:1 widescreen format for the first time since its initial theatrical release, a restored hi-def print, and 7.1 HD sound sourced from the original recording tapes found in Germany.

From earlier in this thread:

2.55:1 has never been, nor should it ever be, the aspect ratio for Sleeping Beauty.

Again:

...the original Super Technirama 70 (similar to CinemaScope) 2.55:1 widescreen format for the first time since its initial theatrical release...

And again:

2.55:1 has never been...the aspect ratio for Sleeping Beauty.

SAY WHA?!

EDIT/UPDATE: On this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqsVrZrA4rk at 2.59: "We were actually able to create the original aspect ratio of the film, which was two-five-five, which has never been done before in any medium."

For starters, 2.55:1 has been done before Sleeping Beauty, so whoever said the youtube quote (I haven't watched the video) is wrong.

Also, while I'm sure Scott Hennrick knows his stuff when it comes to hidef or whatever he specializes in, he's still wrong about 2.55:1

Both Super Technirama 70 and Technirama are the same process (horizontally shooting a film through 35mm) but with different names based on what type of film the print is derived from. It's called Super Technirama 70 when they transfer the negative to 70mm blow-ups, and that will only yield a 2.20:1 ratio (actually 2.21:1, but it's a minor quibble). It's Technirama all by its lonesome when it's vertically transferred to 35mm film.

Widescreen Museum goes into better detail and provides a comparison picture...

Technirama Specs



Anything larger than 2.35:1 (such as the 2.55:1 or the 2.59:1 that's mentioned) is wrong for Sleeping Beauty, no matter how Disney tries to spin it. This is one of the few cases where wider *is not* better. In addition, the remark of how Super Technirama 70 is similar to CinemaScope...that's a rather empty statement as any projection process after 1952 with an anamorphic lens will undoubtedly be "similar to CinemaScope". It's like saying "Ariel is similar to Aurora" because both are Disney Princesses.

Albert

[steve]

Sorry, I forgot to give the name of the person I quoted - it's Robert Chapek, President of Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment.

I can't wait until Sleeping Beauty (and Sword in the Stone) are available. I'm so fed up with all this confusion over aspect ratios.

[Flanger-Hanger]

it's the best I could do on such short notice. Yes they are slightly squished but that's the website's fault not mine.

[steve]

Thanks, Flanger-Hanger! My suspicions are confirmed...



...the blues and pinks in the first picture are way off - the pinks are too red and the blues are too purple...



...and Malificent's skin is green, not grey! It looks like someone's upped the saturation on real screencaps to make the film look more colourful. If the real restoration looks like that, there'll be murder.

[PrincePhillipFan]

Dang, Flanger-Hanger beat me to posting the pictures.

Anyway, I agree, compared to the old picture, the new ones look very saturated. The picture is certainly a lot sharper, but the colors look slightly off. Then again, this might be how Disney intended it during its original release. For example, here's a picture of a production cell/promo picture from the 50s I scanned in from the Art Of Walt Disney book:



And a screencap from the actual film:



The picture of Phillip and Samson is much sharper in the first one, but the colors seem very light to me, and it's missing the foreground thorn cell in front of them.

[Disney Villain]

Thank you so much Disneykid for that article. Words cannot express my excitement. I'll admit the new BD live features are not necessary, but they add to the experience. I just can't see this as the norm for Home Video in the future- it's all too much. Regardless I'm still very excited and I can't wait to see the BD Live features in action. The new audio commentary sounds very interesting. I'd love to hear John Lasseter talk about my favorite film. The article also mentions that there will be a game where Maleficent can read your mind- now that is dream come true for me This is going to be an amazing release; we will be totally immersed into Aurora's world, and I can't wait.

Escapay thank you for all your aspect ratio facts. I've learned quite allot!

Regarding the colors, I agree with Disney Duster. I’ve made some image comparisons using screen-caps from the 2003 SE DVD, and the Blu-Ray event YouTube video that was just posted. I'm going to assume that the movie clips used in the Blu-Ray event video are fully-restored HD clips that will be on the upcoming release. Here are my comparisons:









As you can see, on the Blu-Ray print the pink is much, much darker and almost a red color. Even Fauna's clothes are much darker shades of green than in the 2003 SE DVD release.

[Disneykid]

HEY, Disneykid! I already asked you where you saw those promotional images in this thread, and how you knew they were only publicity photos, and you didn't answer. Now they actually look a lot like this new transfer we're seeing! I think they were stills from the newly restored film!

I think you may actually be right. The reason I said they were just promotional stills is because Disney never issues direct film frames from their new restorations as publicity photos for animated classics. They've always relied on stock photos for that purpose (remember the photo of the prince kissing Cinderella's hand...in the middle of the crowded ball room?). I had trouble tracking down old publicity photos for Sleeping Beauty from past releases, so whether these are from the new restoration is still up in the air.

I will admit, though, that the warmer, bolder color scheme found in the presentation seems to match the three photos we've seen thus far. Did anyone else notice that these are actually closer to the original 80s VHS and laserdisc?

http://www.ultimatedisney.com/forum/vie ... hp?t=18815

Obviously they're not identical, but there's a definite leaning towards the color scheme of that release than of the two subsequent ones.

[yukitora]

The colors of the fairies to seem way to saturated (if that's the right word, maybe the simpler "darker" fits better), but the backgrounds seem a lot better. I always thought the S.E. seemed kinda faded/washed out, but I just used my TV to adjust that.

I hope they don't make the pink dress too red, or her blue dress too purple, as Aurora's dress is so iconic in their original colours.

[steve]

First of all, I don't think a YouTube video of another video is an accurate indication of what the colours will be like. Sure, it suggests they'll be deeper and darker, but given the washed-out 2003 release, we all could have guessed that. I honestly don't know how no-one has a problem with the suggestion that perhaps the pinks are more red in the new restoration - it's supposed to be "Make it pink!" not "Make it red!"

And am I the only one who doesn't believe that Malificent doesn't have blue skin?!

[candydog]

Ooh Sleeping Beauty on it's way! It's most likely my favourite Disney movie ever (subject to change without notice). Anyway I will actually be buying the DVD and Blu-Ray as I'm a little paranoid about missing my chance during the DVD upgrades on many Disney movies. Anywho - the picture quality does look better - the pinks are a little darker, but what the hey? I mean I would have preferred a red dress - it makes more sense that way - it gets on my nerves how Flora is now seen as "the pink fairy" when she clearly wears red.

[Disney Duster]

Thanks Disneykid! To be honest, I can't pick which one out of the three versions we've had so far it looks closest to, but it looks close to photos I've seen that supposedly came out when the movie first came out, as far as I remember. And of course I remember that incorrect background. Interestingly, I've seen that promotional image with Cinderella's dress silver and with it blue.

Thanks Disney Villain! By the way, can you see in one of the SE screen caps of Fauna that there's pink material next to her baking supplies? So Flora's using some of the same table, making it more of a mess! That's one detail we may not be getting in the new ratio!

Steve, if you haven't noticed, as with what candydog said, Flora's a red fairy. I'll brief you on something: before World war II, baby boys wore pink and girls wore blue. Why? Because pink is a bolder color, a lighter shade of aggresive red. Boys were supposed to be bold, aggresive, violent fighters...while girls were demure, passive, and quiet...like you are when you're...sleeping. Flora's the leader, and I wonder if it's an accident that she and Phillip are the main ones who kill Maleficent and they both have red capes. Anywho, Aurora's dress is pink, then changes to blue while she's sad over Phillip and under the sleeping spell. Then she wakes up and it turns pink again. Well, pink and blue alternating, which makes purple, which is a royal color. Yes, it's purple for a few frames in between changes, and the tale is of her losing her royalty and getting it back.

Of course, the dress should still be pink, but a redder pink makes more symbolic sense.

Also, Fauna's colors are now more yellow and brown, basically warmer. It would make more sense for her green to be warm while Maleficent's green is almost blue or gray, more sick looking.