DVDizzy Forum

Marky_198 wrote:And the film was intented for viewing on a huge theatre screen, so it shouldn't be watched on your tv at home. Especially not with the original aspect ratio as all the faces will be gone. Thank god for pan &scan to make the film acceptable for screens smaller than 20 feet wide.

The huge amounts of superfluous bricks and wallpaper on the sides would be acceptable if you could still see the faces properly in some shots.
This original aspect ratio was NOT what the filmmakers intended for home video.

In order tot that, I can't stand it when you get the feeling that the ends of a shot are the end of a drawing. It makes it look so empty and atmosphereless. It should be like a live action movie, what you see is not all there is. You just can tell there's more. That's what makes or breaks a film. The newer Disney classics do have that, but Sleeping Beauty's rescue was pan&scan.

I'm not following your logic. Because we can't view films at our homes, because they're not as big as theater screens, we should just cut up the sides of the picture? That doesn't make any sense to me.

Marky, do you have a widescreen tv?

Is the Blu-ray popping up in US retailers now? I live in Hong Kong, and I found and bought the US import here today! It's a bit pricey, but oh well, I don't think Hong Kong will be releasing locally produced Disney Blu-rays any time soon, they don't believe kids will care about hi-def...

Anyway, the film looks AMAZING. I compared it to the 2003 DVD on my HDTV, and the difference is night and day. The picture of the old DVD had washed-out colors and edge enhancement, even slightly fuzzy, but that of the Blu-ray looks incredibly sharp and detailed with vibrant colors. It's like seeing the film for the first time. I don't think the pristine look strips the movie of its "classic" feel; it only enhances it, enabling you to fully appreciate the hard work and vision of the artists involved.

The new audio mix sounds more dynamic as well. I've yet to go through all the bonus features, but I can say that: the making-of stuff are very substantial and informative; the Andreas Deja-John Lasseter-Leonard Maltin commentary's pretty interesting; but that 7.1 "Dragon Encounter" thing's kinda unimpressive and pointless.

This Blu-ray release of Sleeping Beauty proves how fresh and breathtaking classic Disney animated movies can be presented on the format. I just can't wait to see how Pinocchio, Snow White, Fantasia, Fantasia 2000, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and most of all, The Lion King looks on Blu-ray!

KubrickFan wrote:I'm not following your logic.

You're not meant to. Just get mad at him.

Could someone PLEASE post photo's of the Blu-ray set! Can't wait to receive mine to see what the actual discs, box, inserts and free DVD look like!

Am quite interested in the film though too!

Pretty please...

I'm waiting...

NOW!!!

(Ahem!)

Tara-a-bit

^pictures have already been posted!

http://gallery.me.com/mpalmieri809#1000 ... olor=black

thanks to jrboy!

pretty huh?

KubrickFan wrote:
I'm not following your logic. Because we can't view films at our homes, because they're not as big as theater screens, we should just cut up the sides of the picture? That doesn't make any sense to me.

I just wanted to make the point that according to your own logic, what we see in our homes is not what the filmmakers intented it to be.

Because the filmmakers intended the picture to be shown on a 20ft cinema screen. Because of that the faces are clear, the proportions are correct and the image works.
Home video didn't exist. The size of the cinema screen was the biggest reason for having this format in the first place.
When shown on a normal (widescreen) tv in your home it's way too small and it simply doesn't work anymore. Faces are too small and too distant.
Why do you think they created the pan&scan version in the first place when it came out on home video?
It would have been easy to put the "original version" with 2 black beams in the screen, having a miniscule picture.
But they chose not to. With a good reason.
You can tell that with the newer films like Aladdin they really payed attention to that. There are much more close-ups etc, because they INTENDED to bring it out on home video.
As for the viewing of Sleeping Beauty in your home, the makers intended the pan&scan version, because that's what they chose.

And even the widescreen tv's available at the moment are way too small to see the clear faces.

yukitora wrote:Marky, do you have a widescreen tv?

I do, a big one for tv standards.
But it's not even 5% of the size of a cinema screen.

2099net wrote:
OK Marky. So now, YOU the person who constantly says Walt's animated movies had more atmosphere than newer movies or DTVs or "restorations" are now saying Sleeping Beauty, perhaps the most artistic and visual of all Walt's movies - had a lack of atmosphere when it was shown in the theater? But it gained some back on P&S home video?

The format might have worked in theatre, it wouldn't (and doesn't) work on home tv's.

I think that you are picking at about 5% of this film. I don't seem to notice much of a difference in how far away characters were drawn in SB say vs. Aladdin. True, there is no way a Disney animator at the time would've been able to know people would've been able to watch these films at home. However, Sitting in a theatre watching the film on a 20 ft screen and your sitting 20-150 ft away makes the screen a little bit smaller. Even small in enough for the perseption to be the same as you watching it on your TV. That is something the Disney animators did anticipate and they did animate these movies to be viewed by everyone in the theatre.

Marky_198 wrote:Sleeping Beauty's rescue was pan&scan.

No wonder Blu-Ray.com makes fun of us.

albert

Hey, Marky has a good point. The image is a little too small for a lot of televisions, and way too small to be very enjoyable for some. I think if it was the original theatrical ratio, which is slightly bigger than the 2003 DVD (yup, that wasn't completely correct, either!), then it would look better. However, I don't think I'll have a problem with the size. I'll have to wait till I own it and watch it!

singerguy04 wrote:However, Sitting in a theatre watching the film on a 20 ft screen and your sitting 20-150 ft away makes the screen a little bit smaller. Even small in enough for the perseption to be the same as you watching it on your TV. That is something the Disney animators did anticipate and they did animate these movies to be viewed by everyone in the theatre.

You do have a good point there, but I think the comparison isn't right.
The perseption wouldn't be the same as your tv, as you would have to sit too far from the cinema screen to get the same perseption.

Well, it's not the OAR, so yes, 'expanded' should be the right term here.
It's the same when they show a restoration comparison, the 'before' image always looks much crappier and faded than the 'after' picture', even though the previous version didn't look at all like that. Or they say that it's the first time it's arrived on dvd, when it clearly wasn't the first time.

I thought we already said 2.55:1 was the OAR?

Escapay wrote:

Marky_198 wrote:Sleeping Beauty's rescue was pan&scan.

No wonder Blu-Ray.com makes fun of us.

albert

Let those shallow technical evolution-fetishists make fun

If they want to sit in front of their tv with a magnifying-glass to see facial expressions, and have a good time, it's up to them.

Hey Yukitora!!!

Thank you 4 the link!

I'll sleep SO much better tonight.

Sure is pretty!




Tara-a-bit

Mike and Marky (hey, it sounds like a comedy duo! Laurel & Hardy! Amos & Andy! Mike & Marky!), I can understand your reasonings, but really it can also simply be a matter of perspective...



albert

Are you referring to the widescreen vs. pan-and-scan?

And LOL at that picture... do you have two 2003 DVDs or is one a copy?

I have a similar portable player... and when watching widescreen movies I use it as the black bars make the movie tiny on my 25" CRT (vs. just having a 8" portable 16:9 screen a foot from my face)

But I'm not gonna pan-and-scan something just to watch it... I don't mind WATCHING a pan-and-scan movie if I just want to watch it (like, if it's airing on TV or something), but I want the OAR for keeps.

The only thing I don't like abou the Blu ray is how they made the backdrop "blue" as well...that's pretty tacky the DVD cover looks much classier.

Yea I know LOL at that picture one's pan & scan the other's not. If you wanted to help Escapay, I get that you can choose to get really up close to your non-widescreen TV, but until I see how this new super wide ratio looks on a non-widescreen TV...what the, I just said the new ratio makes it real hard to see on some TV's that statement is true and the original theatrical ratio would make it easier to see. It's true!

Yea Campbellz, now I'm so mad that all the future Blu-rays for animated classics are gonna have to have a blue background! They could frame it in silver instead of blue, like they used to have that silver swoosh in the corners.