DVDizzy Forum

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:It's getting complicateder and complicateder... Either way, I just hope they get it right.

I think "more complicated" is grammatically correct

TheSequelofDisney wrote:

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:It's getting complicateder and complicateder... Either way, I just hope they get it right.

I think "more complicated" is grammatically correct

Yeah, but complicateder sounds more kickass.

Escapay

Escapay wrote:

TheSequelofDisney wrote: I think "more complicated" is grammatically correct

Yeah, but complicateder sounds more kickass.

Escapay

That's true

I really hope that Disney decides to tell us what the OAR is for TF&TH. It would be a shame if it was presented in the wrong AR. Let's hope Disney know's what it's doing, like it normally does.

TheSequelofDisney wrote:Let's hope Disney know's what it's doing, like it normally does.

Normally? Ever since last year, one of the only things that Disney's been able to "do right" is aspect ratios. Almost all of their other DVD decisions are trivial.

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:Well, two of those images don't appear in a 4:3 ratio, but as for the rest, they don't seem P&S'd as far as I can tell - but that's just an opinion so far, I haven't really been able to make a serious comparison.

True, they look like they're open matte unlike the current DVD, which is definately P&S. But the images could have been separately created from the artwork (from the actual cells and BG paintings) - they do not prove the film was shot in 4:3. If the new DVD appears to be open matte, that's great, if it's 16:9 that's even better. But it might just as well end up being P&S after all.

TheSequelofDisney wrote:

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:It's getting complicateder and complicateder... Either way, I just hope they get it right.

I think "more complicated" is grammatically correct

Yes, I totally agree with you. But it just seemed like a good thing to write then and there.

Pasta67 wrote:

TheSequelofDisney wrote:Let's hope Disney know's what it's doing, like it normally does.

Normally? Ever since last year, one of the only things that Disney's been able to "do right" is aspect ratios. Almost all of their other DVD decisions are trivial.

Good thing, then, that we're talking about aspect ratios here - if that's the ONE thing they tend to get right.

Has anyone called The Company Disney to ask the aspect ratio?

(Escapay dials a number on the phone)
The Company Disney (TCD) : The Company Disney, how may we help you?
Escapay (E) : Yes, I'm calling regarding the aspect ratio on the new Fox and the Hound DVD.
TCD: Aspect Ratio? What's that?
E: You know, the size of the picture...the width vs. the height...the screen-
TCD: Oh, you mean fullscreen?
E: What?
TCD: Yes, all our films are in fullscreen. They're family friendly that way.
E: Yes, but was Fox and the Hound drawn and animated in the 1.33:1 aspect ratio, then matted for theatres, therefore the DVD release will be a correct 1.33:1 aspect ratio?
TCD: What the frack are you talking about?
E: The size of the picture...what is its original aspect ratio?
TCD: Every Disney film of ours will be released in a family friendly aspect ratio so you guys don't have to worry about those annoying black bars.
E: But I LIKE the black bars! It gives me the whole picture!
TCD: I'm sorry, but families don't like black bars.
E: So what about Fox and the Hound?
TCD: It'll come out October 10 to a Family-Friendly Wal-Mart near you. Thank you, and have a Disney Day!
(TCD hangs up, E looks angrily at phone)

Escapay

That's funny Escapay!

Good one. But it's sort of strange that no definite answer has ever seeped out from someone "in the know". After all, the question of the AR of F&H has been around for a while - it didn't just come up because of this upcoming DVD release.

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:Good one. But it's sort of strange that no definite answer has ever seeped out from someone "in the know". After all, the question of the AR of F&H has been around for a while - it didn't just come up because of this upcoming DVD release.

Oh yeah, it's been around for ages

There even was a similar AR problem with Disney's "classics" from the 60s and 70s, but the "Case of The Fox and the Hound" turned out to be the trickiest one.

Anyone got Don Hahn or Ted Berman on speed dial?

Perhaps we could send Teede in undercover again?

Mr. Toad wrote:Perhaps we could send Teede in undercover again?

Did she ever return after the first time she broke in? For all we know, she could still be in there.

Pasta67 wrote:

Mr. Toad wrote:Perhaps we could send Teede in undercover again?

Did she ever return after the first time she broke in? For all we know, she could still be in there.

Hmmm good point, last we saw she left in her overcoat disguise and was supposed to check in at 0800 hours. But that was like in March, maybe she turned double agent on us.

Mr. Toad wrote:Hmmm good point, last we saw she left in her overcoat disguise and was supposed to check in at 0800 hours. But that was like in March, maybe she turned double agent on us.

I have it on good authority that Teede was instrumental in Disney's acquisition of Pixar.

-Aaron

Luke wrote:They're just publicity pics, which says nothing of the DVD itself. As far as the review goes, I'm not sure if they are actual screencaps, because I didn't have the DVD when Jack wrote it.

Thanks for correcting me Luke. I took a look at some of the film tonight and you are certainly correct about the review pictures. The review picture is a mirror image of the frame from the film itself. In the movie, the frame actually includes even less of Tod's tail.

Pasta67 wrote:

Dammit, that just raises further questions! Hoy, of all the movies to re-release...

Think of it this way. Tod is still looking at Vixey. And Vixey is still shimmering in the golden rays of sunlight.