my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » World's Fastest Indian

Author Topic: World's Fastest Indian Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-07-2006 10:41 AM                        I was all set to buy this DVD when I saw that is in 1:78, but labeled as Widescreen. It was a scope film. Anyone know if this is going to be released in 2:35 ???  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 10-07-2006 12:29 PM                        I bought the DVD, can't say that I really noticed anything "missing" in the 1.78 image. Would prefer the original aspect ratio though.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 10-07-2006 04:27 PM                     It's not cropped! Yes, this movie was scope, but in projection format only; the photography format was Super-35. The DVD transfer has filmmaker-endorsed 1.78:1 framing, so deal with it. The DVD of the director's previous film ("The Recruit") was handled in the same fashion.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-07-2006 06:22 PM                     Its a great film with great performances by great actors so just enjoy the DVD and forget what format its in. Some of it was filmed right in front of CLACO! Watch for the big Pancake House sign and the Sonic Drive in... just two doors down from us. Mark  |  IP: Logged John Koutsoumis Master Film Handler Posts: 261 From: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-08-2006 10:48 PM                     I ran this as a preview before it's release to a group of Motorcycle enthusiasts. Very good film and the cinematography in scope was fantastic. Wouldn't the DVD in 1.78 have too much head room? I find most scope films (be it super 35 or anamorphic) look more like a telemovie when transferred to full frame 16:9 as opposed to being 16:9 2.35/39 letterboxed.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 10-10-2006 01:09 AM                     quote: John Koutsoumis Wouldn't the DVD in 1.78 have too much head room? Not if it was shot with a "common topline."  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.