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

[Stats87]

I'm really looking forward to this

Sadly, I've never actually seen Sleeping Beauty and it along with Treasure Planet and Home on the Range are the only Disney Classic Films I've never seen. I'll be grabbing the Blu-Ray version and the fact they include a DVD version as well is quite nice.

[merlinjones]

>>Sadly, I've never actually seen Sleeping Beauty and it along with Treasure Planet and Home on the Range are the only Disney Classic Films I've never seen.<<

Excuse me, but Sleeping Beauty is the ONLY Disney classic listed in that sentence...

[merlinjones]

Having seen the El Capitan presentation, it was nice to see the wider screen visual composition, but the sound mixers got a little too "creative" and put a strange reverb effect on Maleficent's soliloquy that is majorily distracting and unnecessary.

[Stats87]

>>Sadly, I've never actually seen Sleeping Beauty and it along with Treasure Planet and Home on the Range are the only Disney Classic Films I've never seen.<<

Excuse me, but Sleeping Beauty is the ONLY Disney classic listed in that sentence...

haha,

well by Classic I mean " 2D movies on the Animated Classics" list on this site, quality is another thing.

Although, I've been told that Treasure Planet was decent, but Home on the Range has always looked very mediocre to me.

[Fflewduur]

Official Specs (www.highdefdigest.com)...

HDD got a press release. (Odd that they didn't mention which bonus features will be presented in HD.) That doesn't explain why the official Disney Sleeping Beauty Blu-ray site lists DTS-HD MA....which is also the only location I've seen thus far that mentions the inclusion of an "English 4.0 Original Theatrical mix."
I'd love to include a direct link, but the page is all Flash---you can't get there from here, not without several intermediate clicks (as described above).

And the <a href="http://adisney.go.com/disneyvideos/anim ... >text-only version</a> of the page makes no mention of the audio format at all---it's listed simply as an "All-New 7.1 Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix" (and the 4.0 mix is simply the "Restored Original Theatrical Soundtrack").

I would have solidly bet against DTS-HD MA because I thought Disney had yet to release a BD with such a soundtrack, but apparently I would have been mistaken---the Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus concert BD released with DTS-HD MA.

[Chris]

Having seen the El Capitan presentation, it was nice to see the wider screen visual composition, but the sound mixers got a little too "creative" and put a strange reverb effect on Maleficent's soliloquy that is majorily distracting and unnecessary.

Merlin, how was the sound in terms of bass in the music track? Was there some in there that you can remember? The previous audio tracks for the video / DVD releases had hardly any.

[2099net]

Well I'm even more disappointed Vincent and Frankenweenie on Nightmare before Xmas weren't in HD now.

[JDCB1986]

There has been a lot of talk about this release having more footage on the left and right of the screen, making it an even wider transfer than we have seen in previous releases. I wonder if this is something that Disney commonly did and if so, will Pinocchio and other 1.33:1 films be brought to Bluray in a wider aspect ratio also ? Perhaps there is enough undeveloped negative to bring the films to 1.66:1 ? It would be so great to see many of those films in a Widescreen format that doesn't result from matting.

[PrincePhillipFan]

Thanks! It looks like it might be pricy, but after all it is my favorite Disney film, so I might as well splurge a little.

It will actually be a little cheaper than that, as you won't have to pay 17.5% sales tax if its posted to the US. However, the shipping will be more expensive than UK shipping, so it may end-up more or less the same as quoted above.

Thanks for the info! I preordered it earlier today, and the total with the shipping came to be about £32, which isn't so bad I guess considering the shipping here to US. I can't wait to see the set when it's released.

[merlinjones]

>>There has been a lot of talk about this release having more footage on the left and right of the screen, making it an even wider transfer than we have seen in previous releases. I wonder if this is something that Disney commonly did<<

No this was unique to the Technirama process for Sleeping Beauty which (on the negative) photographed two 35mm frames sideways -- it's an extra wide original image.

The early 1:33 films are full aperture "what you see is what you get" -- and require vertical pan & scan for wide screen. That results in picture and composition loss -- which means they should NEVER be seen that way - - and must have black bars on the sides to maintain the almost "square" shape intended.

[Disney Duster]

Oh, merlinjones, didn't you notice JDCB1986 talked about making the picture widescreen without matting, without faking it? Also, isn't there a technique that stretches the whole square picture to widescreen? As in not losing picture, just stretching the whole picture? Of course, it's a technique that should never be done.

Anyway, JDCB1986, I'm with you, I really want to see if we can get extra picture to those older square films. Your and my favorite are Cinderella, and I want to see more of that beautiful world.

And here's how we might be able to get it.

The new ratio we're getting for Sleeping Beauty is the fully animated ratio, the one it was drawn and painted and made in. I'm pretty sure that means all animated films' theatrical ratios are not the same ones they were animated in, so there is more picture that has yet to be seen by audiences. My hope is that future Blu-rays will have both the theatrical and animated ratios. I don't like how the older films feel so boxed in their squares, after becoming so used to widescreen, and it's probably also me wanting more.

BUT it is about what the artists want us to see, so it should really be the theatrical ratios...which...Sleeping Beauty's is not. Unless of course we think the artits would have wanted those interested, with home video, to see all the picture they made.

[ichabod]

More bonus from the BBFC?

IO LO SO (ONCE UPON A DREAM) Video Feature
Classified 15 September, 2008 . Run Time 4m 52s

Widescreen,SLEEPING BEAUTY - Disc 1 - Blu-ray additional material,

[yukitora]

that music video was posted on the BBFC site before. I don't know what it is though. A different video clip for a different region?

[merlinjones]

>>The new ratio we're getting for Sleeping Beauty is the fully animated ratio, the one it was drawn and painted and made in. I'm pretty sure that means all animated films' theatrical ratios are not the same ones they were animated in, so there is more picture that has yet to be seen by audiences.<<

This is not true. Again - - that "extra on the side" was unique to Sleeping Beauty's Technirama negative process. The 1:33 films have no more information on the negative that the full frame composition you have seen. Some of the 70's films have more info on the top and bottom as they were masked for widescreen - - but then you can often see the unpainted cel edges and lines that no one was supposed to see.

But to make the early 1:33 films wide would be to violate the intended artistic composition entirely. I have no doubt someone will try to "enhance" them but it is creatively an anathema, just as pan & scan was for standard TV. Just use black bars.

[Disney Duster]

That music video sounds like it has a foreign name, I bet it's a foreign language music video, with the title being that language's name for "Once Upon A Dream".

Merlinjones, I know for a fact that there is more artwork not seen for every film. It just might not be on the original negative. I have seen online the rest of the cels and backgrounds not seen on VHS or DVD.

The Little Mermaid's new DVD had a ratio that showed less than the previous DVD's. The previous DVD's was, I believe the animated ratio. But did you mean, merlinjones, only widescreen pictures would ever have more picture on the negative? I wonder if The Little Mermaid's animated ratio was on the negatives. If not, that means it IS possible to see more picture for every film by getting the animated ratio for every film, a ratio not seen on the film negatives.

[JDCB1986]

>>The new ratio we're getting for Sleeping Beauty is the fully animated ratio, the one it was drawn and painted and made in. I'm pretty sure that means all animated films' theatrical ratios are not the same ones they were animated in, so there is more picture that has yet to be seen by audiences.<<

This is not true. Again - - that "extra on the side" was unique to Sleeping Beauty's Technirama negative process. The 1:33 films have no more information on the negative that the full frame composition you have seen. Some of the 70's films have more info on the top and bottom as they were masked for widescreen - - but then you can often see the unpainted cel edges and lines that no one was supposed to see.

But to make the early 1:33 films wide would be to violate the intended artistic composition entirely. I have no doubt someone will try to "enhance" them but it is creatively an anathema, just as pan & scan was for standard TV. Just use black bars.

I have a feeling you are trying to sound more knowledgeable about this process than you really are.

It has been documented quite clearly that this extra negative space they found on the left and right of Sleeping Beauty is something they just recently found.

Where did they ever say "none of the films in the 1.33 aspect ratio had extra negative." ? They haven't. If this is the first time in over 50 years Sleeping Beauty has been released with the extra footage, what makes you think that there isn't a possibility for any of the 1.33 films to have additional footage the public hasn't seen before.

That being said... if there is more negative that hasn't been developed or seen, how is it violating the artistic composition if the film is a 1.33, but it's not violating the artistic composition on a Technirama film.

I'm not trying to argue... just interested in where you get your information and also, I never suggested stretching or matting to achieve the widescreen frame.

[merlinjones]

Well, regardless of the technical realities and specifications of the film negatives, apertures, formats, mattings and artwork shot -- to alter the composition intended by Walt Disney and his artists is simply bad taste and a desecration of art. So if they were shot and projected 1:33, they should be seen 1:33 on video as intended, regardless of the TV screen shape - - or that option should always be included on the disc.

(The above obviously does not refer to Sleeping Beauty, which was always intended to be seen as widescreen Technirama).

[JDCB1986]

(The above obviously does not refer to Sleeping Beauty, which was always intended to be seen as widescreen Technirama).

If it was always intended to be shown with this extra footage on the sides, it would have been shown with the footage on the sides from the beginning... however it wasn't and therefore, your argument that this film was meant to be seen with footage on the sides while some of the earlier classics were/are not is mute. You have nothing to back it up other than you want to be right. And there is nothing wrong with that... All I am saying, is that is they found extra footage on the left and right of Sleeping Beauty's negatives, who is to say there isn't extra footage on any other animated classics. And including that footage that is there and was animated by the original animators and painted by the original painters is not destroying the artistic composition of the film, it is showing more of their hard work, it's as simple as that.

I would totally understand your argument if we were talking about stretching or matting the frame (totally unacceptable), but that's simply not the case... If the animation is there and the paintings are there... Not including them would be silly.

[Escapay]

Consider Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs...

There's image seen in the cels that aren't seen on the film negative...








This is likely how all the shot-in-Academy films were done (well, likely how all animated films are done). And people complain about theatrically matting the 60s/70s films because it loses unnecessary image...

albert

[merlinjones]

That background painting is larger because the scene panned across it - - you were not meant to see any composition other than the one that they shot. That's just a fact.