The Aristocats: 2-Disc (?) Special Edition DVD Discussion

[disneystarsfan]

NEW INFO!

The Special Editon release coming this February 5th 2008 will have an aspect ratio of 1:75:1 and 5.1 dolby digital surround sound There are also Bonus Features mentioned that will be on the dvd

Here is the link to the info. page Disney DVD .com:

http://disneydvd.disney.go.com/moviefin ... 31103.html

the 1-disc version of the cover art is used, so it looks like this confirms that it will only be 1 disc.

[SwordInTheStone777]

Why does Disney not care to put together a well made DVD?

It's like they don't care about quality and would rather throw something together and make a quick buck off it.

Why are almost all DVD's now a days have very little effort put into them?

[Sky Syndrome]

Duchess is my favorite character in the movie. She's so pretty. ^_^
I'm really tired of Disney releasing emaciated DVDs. Put meat on their bones, Disney! I can't say I'm double dipping when I buy this DVD since I don't have the Gold Collection one.

EDIT: Heh, noticed after I posted this reply that my rank is "Gold Collection".

[SwordInTheStone777]

^^ That's real sad then, Disney has really changed, they have really changed. I don't get that they have made wonderful animated masterpiece and then when it comes to putting them on DVD, its like they don't even care what they put on it.

[Flanger-Hanger]

My guess is that Disney is saving the rest of the goodies for Blu-ray. I have a feeling that if Sleeping Beauty makes money, this will be the next film to get the Blu-ray treatment.

[Simba3]

My guess is that Disney is saving the rest of the goodies for Blu-ray. I have a feeling that if Sleeping Beauty makes money, this will be the next film to get the Blu-ray treatment.

That doesn't make any sense. Sleeping Beauty will be released in October of 2008, while the Aristocats will be released in February of 2008 (8 months prior). So why if Sleeping Beauty sells well on Blu-Ray, would the Aristocats be re-released (after just recently getting a new DVD release) to Blu-Ray? No, I think after Sleeping Beauty the other Platinum's will come to Blu-Ray, followed by the repeated cycle of the first Platinums.

[Billy Moon]

Why does Disney not care to put together a well made DVD?

It's like they don't care about quality and would rather throw something together and make a quick buck off it.

Why are almost all DVD's now a days have very little effort put into them?

If you don't mind my asking, what did you expect to be on the DVD?

I'm glad that it will have widescreen picture and a "Disneyland" TV excerpt. It's not like they're releasing the same edition again under the "Special Edition" banner.

[Jules]

Does someone at Disney suffer from amnesia?

[musicradio77]

I don't need to get this on DVD next year when it comes out. The other day, Toon Disney was aired "The Aristocats", but I might look forward to record this film onto my DVD-R to add to my collection instead of wasting money of buying this 2-disc Special Edition when it comes out February 5th. I was the same movie that I have it on VHS which is the "Masterpiece" copy.

It only shows just the Walt Disney Pictures logo (circa 1990), sadly, the Buena Vista logo was removed for both the "Masterpiece" and Toon Disney showings. The "Special Edition" DVD will have the Buena Vista logo on it.

[SwordInTheStone777]

SwordInTheStone777 wrote:
Why does Disney not care to put together a well made DVD?

It's like they don't care about quality and would rather throw something together and make a quick buck off it.

Why are almost all DVD's now a days have very little effort put into them?

If you don't mind my asking, what did you expect to be on the DVD?

I'm glad that it will have widescreen picture and a "Disneyland" TV excerpt. It's not like they're releasing the same edition again under the "Special Edition" banner.

I was thinking Disney would put together a very well made Special Edition, with commentaries, documentaries, interviews, galleries, and trailers, but apparently Disney does not care to put these DVD's together and when they do it's only for Platinum Edition's, and even they aren't so well put together as well, leaving out trailers is for one, they have done with the pervious releases.

[TonyWDA]

Groovin' Jazz Edition ... yeah!

*saysomethingichabodsaysomethingichabodsaysomethingichabod*

Lol. It's been a while since I've heard that!:D

Sorry I was so steamed before. It's just that the name was never meant to be taken seriously the day I created it; it was all just a joke.

[David S.]

NEW INFO!

The Special Editon release coming this February 5th 2008 will have an aspect ratio of 1:75:1.

Well, that just plain SUCKS.

Sadly, I now have another out of print gold collection disc I will have to track down, because I will be BOYCOTTING this release, just like Robin Hood most wanted edition and Jungle Book Platinum, the first platinum I took a pass on!

ARISTOCATS, ROBIN HOOD, AND JUNGLE BOOK WERE DRAWN AND FILMED IN 1.33:1.

PERIOD.

Why can't BVHE get this?

On a film SHOT in widescreen like Lady and The Tramp, Sleeping Beauty, Lion King, etc. I WELCOME the black bars on the top and bottom of my screen because I know they are NOT blocking information on the top and bottom of the screen AND they are allwing me to see MORE on the sides.

But with the sick, twisted, evil, HORRID ABOMINATION known as "matted widescreen", one must suffer the indignity of knowing those two black bars one is staring at are actually BLOCKING picture on the top and bottom of the screen that SHOULD BE THERE, as this info ALWAYS has been on past releases, AND the bars are NOT giving more info on the sides because the movie was NOT DRAWN IN WIDESCREEN.

And EVERY TIME you see someone's head get cut off on the top and bottom of these transfers, you would think, "if only the ****ing black bars weren't there, I could see what I am missing!"

Well, I am not going to set myself up for that kind of frustration. "Matted widescreen" will be avoided in my collection with the same level of passion that many people avoid pan and scan with, especially when there are open matte transfers already available! (they are out of print and hard to find, but nonetheless in the CORRECT ratio and well worth tracking down)

Are YOU reading this, BVHE rep? I thought DVD was about CHOICES. WHERE is my optional FULLSCREEN discs for Jungle Book Platinum, Robin Hood Most Wanted, and Aristocats Special Edition? I would GLADLY pay you for those as I am not "boycotting" the titles, just the current cropped transfers.

And WHY can I buy 1.33:1 cropped versions of some titles FILMED at 1.66:1 or wider, (or have that option included on the disc) but NOT these three films which were DRAWN and FILMED at 1.33:1??!!!

I have heard that some IMAX films, which by nature are SHOT fullscreen, are being released to high-def DVD CROPPED with missing info on the top and bottom, in order to conform to the precious darling widescreen tv 1.78:1 ratio. Yet, there is nary a peep out of the high-end home theatre enthusiast community, who have historically outspokenly criticized "ignorant masses" for wanting pan and scan/cropped on the sides transfers of true wide films in order to fill 1.33:1 fullscreen TVs.

So, it is "okay" to crop off the top and bottom of 1.33:1 films to "fill the screen" of their trendy new 1.78:1 toys?

I find the general attitude of indifference in the industry about this issue, and the HYPOCRISY making it "okay" to crop off the top and bottom but "sacriledge" to do it on the sides, quite ridiculous and disturbing, to say the least!

In closing I offer this quote from Disney in the Darby O'Gill DVD packaging:

"DARBY O'GILL AND THE LITTLE PEOPLE is presented as it was originally shot, in a 1.33:1 aspect ratio. When released to theaters in 1959, the studio recommended projecting the image at 1.75:1, to satisfy the public's growing appetite for widescreen movies. To give the illusion of this wider image, theaters often needed to crop films at that time, and some of the picture was not seen. The following presentation has not been cropped, and none of the original image has been lost."

Notice the key word here is "to give the ILLUSION of this wider image"

With this intelligent, well written explanation on this DVD, BVHE showed that they actually GOT IT back then. Sadly, they don't get seem to "get it" anymore now. With their OWN WORDS, they offer indisputable PROOF that the recent "matted" transfers of Jungle Book, Robin Hood, and Aristocats are FLAWED, FLAWED, FLAWED!

[2099net]

All of Jim Cameron's movies are filmed 1.33:1. Are you boycotting those as well?

Admittedly the ideal solution is for Disney to include both versions on the disc, but the fact is most theatres - the majority, would have shown these films matted to some extent (the exact ratio can be debated) at the time that they were released.

[David S.]

Well, believe it or not I don't really care what the theatrical presentation of an animated movie was like, as long as the DVD preserves how it is DRAWN.

The excuse that these are being cropped to preserve the "original theatrical ratio" doesn't really fly with me. If there were no such thing as widescreen tvs, we wouldn't be hearing peep about the original "theatrical" ratio of animated movies animated and filmed open matte in a 1.33:1 ratio.

If they are intent to preserve the original "theatrical" experience, why not include reel change circles and simulated cell phone interuptions and the annoying little kid kicking the back of the seat!

My point being, these are all compromises associated with the theatrical experience, and that's how I view theatrically matting of an animated movie DRAWN in fullscreen. DVD has the potential to ELIMINATE all of these compromises - indeed - to eliminate the very grain that film as the "middle man" between artist and audience introduces to the process. A DVD of an animated movie has the potential to present a FLAWLESS "moving painting".

And I don't want that painting to be cropped on the top, bottom, or sides.

PS. Besides, these films weren't cropped in ALL theatres worldwide, anyway - some showed them open matte. And some of the films were subsequently reissued in their correct fullscreen ratio!

[SwordInTheStone777]

All animated Disney movies of the 60's and 70's where made in Widescreen. Disney has just been lazy to release them in their correct ratio, and cop out and release them in Full Screen instead.

[David S.]

I'm sorry, but they were NOT "made" in widescreen. They were matted in most theatres to a sort of FAKE widescreen by cropping off the top and bottom of the animated image to achive a 1.75:1 ratio. However, the films themselves were DRAWN and then PHOTOGRAPHED onto film in the traditional 1.37:1 Academy Ratio.

This has been covered and discussed on this site many times, and is explained here: http://www.ultimatedisney.com/oar.htm

The PROOF can be found in comparing side by side screencaps from the Robin Hood DVD review: http://www.ultimatedisney.com/robinhood-mostwanted.html (scroll down for comparison pics)

At first glance the "matted widescreen" version may APPEAR bigger because both caps have the same height (like they would appear on a widescreen TV) making the matted version appear like it has "more".

However, if you look CLOSELY at both photos, you can CLEARLY see that there is NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on the SIDES of the matted caption, and this matted widescreen caption has LESS information on the top and bottom of the frame than the fullscreen version.

Also, one could present a side by side comparison of the two ratios having the same WIDTH (like they would appear on a standard TV) and then you could more CLEARLY see that the fullscreen version not only looks "bigger", but has more info in the picture!

That the fullscreen version of these films has more info in the frame is not a subject of debate - it is an undisputable FACT.

PERIOD.

Let the people with widescreen TVs who want to crop their movies on the top and bottom to fill their screens and thus participate in the pan and scan of the new millenium do so by using their TVs to zoom in on the fullscreen image.

But DON'T encode the discs themselves in a compromised matted version ruinning the frame for the rest of us who want to see the ENTIRE fullscreen image AS DRAWN AND PHOTOGRAPHED by the animators.

[SwordInTheStone777]

Robin Hood in Widescreen is right, you can see the whole the picture, you can read the poster and see the roster up close instead of being away.

Your just one of those Full Screen fanatics.

[2099net]

Well, I watched half of the new Jungle Book last night, before falling to sleep, and I didn't find anything offensive. In fact I was surprised. I think the framing could have been looser - 1.66 sounds ideal. But it wasn't anywhere near as bad as I was expecting.

I don't think the film was made specifically to be framed at 1.66, 1.78 or 1.85, but I don't think it was specifically made to be framed for 1.33 either. I am pretty sure the Disney animators were clever enough to know it would be framed narrow on some cinema screens, and also open framed if/when it was shown on TV (and I think TV has been an input into Disney's framing decisions, as well as the fact that their actual physical equipment was capable of 1.33 exposures - just like all CAPS films (except Atlantis) are 1.66 because thats the ratio the equipment mandated).

Also I think its not quite accurate to suggest these new framings are being done JUST for widescreen TVs. The decision would presumably have been made many many months ago - probably before or during the restoration process. If not, it would have been made some time before the press released went out. Since that time, we've had two DVDs of High School Musical - filmed in widescreen, released only in full screen (including abroad, which traditionally have had widescreen transfers of full screen only US releases - such as The Country Bears). So Disney aren't focusing on Widescreen sets exclusively at this time.

[SwordInTheStone777]

Well, I watched half of the new Jungle Book last night, before falling to sleep, and I didn't find anything offensive. In fact I was surprised. I think the framing could have been looser - 1.66 sounds ideal. But it wasn't anywhere near as bad as I was expecting.

I don't think the film was made specifically to be framed at 1.66, 1.78 or 1.85, but I don't think it was specifically made to be framed for 1.33 either. I am pretty sure the Disney animators were clever enough to know it would be framed narrow on some cinema screens, and also open framed if/when it was shown on TV (and I think TV has been an input into Disney's framing decisions, as well as the fact that their actual physical equipment was capable of 1.33 exposures - just like all CAPS films (except Atlantis) are 1.66 because thats the ratio the equipment mandated).

Also I think its not quite accurate to suggest these new framings are being done JUST for widescreen TVs. The decision would presumably have been made many many months ago - probably before or during the restoration process. If not, it would have been made some time before the press released went out. Since that time, we've had two DVDs of High School Musical - filmed in widescreen, released only in full screen (including abroad, which traditionally have had widescreen transfers of full screen only US releases - such as The Country Bears). So Disney aren't focusing on Widescreen sets exclusively at this time.

How can you fall a sleep watching The Jungle Book?

I agee with you, that they were made in some format, but not Full Screen only.

Full Screen only people are anonying and are hopeless, cause they won't listen to you when to tell them that Widescreen is how it is meant to be shown.

[2099net]

Because I'm over 35, have to get up most mornings at 5am-ish (and even if I don't I wake up at that time), and don't get home from work on most days until about 7:45-ish.