It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2025 6:44 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
rana
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
OUR MAN FLINT

I wonder if any one knows what was the Theatrical Aspect Ratio?? Or if any one has heard of this name. Inspired by the success of James Bond, this movie (starring James Coburn) too was a big hit.

I saw it's DVD today for about $11. Cover clearly stated 2.35:1 and Anamorphic. Was this the OAR?? I didn't think too many films were that wide screen in the early 60s.

Rana



Edited By rana on 1043181648
Top
 Profile  
 
ganti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 8:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 3:45 pm
Posts: 515
Location: columbus
Ranaji,
Well, what about these famous and classic movies ?
Doctor Zhivago (1965) Widescreen anamorphic - 2.35:1
Lawrence of Arabia (1962) Widescreen anamorphic - 2.2:1
The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) Widescreen anamorphic - 2.55:1

May be because they are very high budget movies!.



Edited By ganti on 1043182167
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 8:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
You are right Ganti. Mainly, the big budget movies used to be in wide screen. I think OMF was a low budget copy of James Bond idea. Even James Bond Films were not 2.35:1 (I think) then.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 11:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
Ganti, Lawrence of Arabia was not anamorphic, but was shot on 65mm film, from which 70mm prints (and 35mm anamorphic reductions) were made.

CinemaScope was introduced in 1953 with "The Robe," which was simultaneously shot 1.37:1. CS started at 2.66:1 "The Robe," then went down to 2.55:1 and eventually 2.40:1.

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcs1.htm



Edited By DragunR2 on 1043191886
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
As for CinemaScope only being used on high budget films:

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcs5.htm

Image

Fox relaxed their restrictions on the use of CinemaScope in black & white films. This gave producers more creative control of their works. Here is an example of the best of the best black & white films done in CinemaScope, MGM's presentation of producer Albert Zugsmith's monumental High School Confidential. Check out that cast. Never did MGM's motto of "More stars than in the universe" have more meaning. Just kidding, this is a piece of crap.


Image

Until 1959, Fox reserved the CinemaScope name only for "A" budget films, which were substantially all in Color by DeLuxe. Starting in 1957, what might be classed as "A-" films would sometimes be photographed in black & white. They might be "B" quality but Fox didn't treat them that way. Genuine low budget, or "B" films, did not carry a Fox banner. Instead they were produced for Fox by Regal Films and while the lenses were still the same Bausch & Lomb CinemaScope optics, the process was labeled Regalscope. Ultimately the company released a number of prestige films in CinemaScope and black & white, including The Diary of Anne Frank, The Longest Day, and Sink the Bismark!


Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 2:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
DragunR2, I assume from your observations that OMF may very well have been @ 2.35:1 OAR and this claim on the DVD cover is no gimmick.

What I find odd is that James Bond films that OMF copied, were not 2.35:1 at that time. May be it's just the studios practice. After all, OMF was an American Film and JB films originated in UK.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 4:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
Thunderball (1965) is the first 007 film to be shot with anamorphic lenses, according to IMDB and the DVDfile review of the DVD.
Top
 Profile  
 
ganti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 1:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 3:45 pm
Posts: 515
Location: columbus
Dragun,
Quote:
Ganti, Lawrence of Arabia was not anamorphic, but was shot on 65mm film, from which 70mm prints (and 35mm anamorphic reductions) were made.

I am talking about their DVD's and as per Amazon LOA is in Widescreen anamorphic.
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
ganti wrote:
Dragun,
Quote:
Ganti, Lawrence of Arabia was not anamorphic, but was shot on 65mm film, from which 70mm prints (and 35mm anamorphic reductions) were made.

I am talking about their DVD's and as per Amazon LOA is in Widescreen anamorphic.

Oh okay, by "anamorphic" you meant "enhanced for 16:9 TVs."
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
You are right DragunR2. "Enhanced for 16:9 TV" is the proper ID instead of "Anamorphic", although in the layman's terms, Anamorphic is commonly used instead.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
ganti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 3:45 pm
Posts: 515
Location: columbus
Rana and dragun,
According to the IMDB

Anamorphic Widescreen
AKA: 16:9 Enhanced
DVD mastering process whereby a film source with an aspect ratio greater than 4:3 (usually also greater than or equal to 16:9) is transferred to the DVD video master in such a way that the picture is vertically stretched by a factor of about 1.33 (e.g. if the picture had an aspect ratio of 16:9, it now has one of 4:3). The idea is to use as much resolution of the video master as possible so widescreen pictures use the 4:3 frame optimally, gaining another 33% of vertical resolution and looking markedly sharper. When playing a DVD with anamorphic widescreen the display (16:9 capable TV or projector and screen) has to vertically squeeze the picture by a factor of 0.75 so a circle is still a circle. If the display cannot do this the DVD player will do the squeezing and add black bars on the top and bottom of the picture. In that case the additional 33% resolution are not available.


And different studios use different terminology to indicate this.
http://www.imdb.com/Glossary/A
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
"Anamorphic" is commonly used for "Enhanced for Widescreen TV". But, purists freak out when they see "Anamorphic" used instead of "Enhanced for Widescreen TV". Word ANAMORPHIC applies to Film only.

Just like many unacceptable terms have become accepted with time, Anamorphic too has become acceptable term for "Enhanced for WS TV".

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
ganti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 3:45 pm
Posts: 515
Location: columbus
Columbia TriStar: Anamorphic Video (recently), often not labeled

DreamWorks: Anamorphic Widescreen

Universal: Anamorphic Widescreen

Trimark: Widescreen (if it says "Letterboxed", that's non-anamorphic)


20th Century Fox: Enhanced for Widescreen TVs, sometimes not labeled

Anchor Bay: Enhanced for 16x9 TVs

Artisan: 16:9 Fullscreen Version, or Enhanced for 16:9 Television

Buena Vista: Enhanced for 16x9 Televisions



Criterion: Enhanced for Widescreen Televisions, or simply "16:9"



Image: Enhanced for 16x9 TVs

MGM: Enhanced for 16x9 TVs

New Line: Enhanced for Widescreen TVs

Paramount: Enhanced for 16x9

USA: Widescreen 16x9

Warner Bros: Enhanced for Widescreen TVs


Rana
Quote:
Anamorphic" is commonly used for "Enhanced for Widescreen TV". But, purists freak out when they see "Anamorphic" used instead of "Enhanced for Widescreen TV". Word ANAMORPHIC applies to Film only.

The above are some common words used by most of the studios. I always thought that it is the other way. Can you give a link to any article stating about what you mentioned above?



Edited By ganti on 1043262189
Top
 Profile  
 
Sanjay
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 1:14 pm
Posts: 2256
Location: National Capital Region (India)
In asnwer to the original question of this thread, the original aspect ratio of 'Our Man Flint' is 2.35:1
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2003 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
That's a great referrence Ganti. I didn't know that all these terms/ phrases have been summed up some where.

BTW, one yhing you forgot to mention; Indian DVDs are termed Anamorphic as it is a saleable feature. They may or may not be enhanced for Widescreen TVs. Just like they claim DD 5.1 even if same audio panned in all 6 channels.

Regarding your enq about the link about "Anamorphic" for film only: I have read it many a times, don't remember where?? Most likely I read in the WidescreenReview Magazine. I'm sure DragunR2 can clarify this issue. He is expert in Film/ Cinematography.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group