"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

..Ah, cope... Ola!!!

(sorry, terrible, but it's early)

Olé! But isn't it really a copa?

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

Olé! But isn't it really a copa?

Nope, for those unable to cope, there's the copa...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgnHE...eature=related

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

^
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAixFYnDh4

I actually transcribed Hopper's monologue from that scene and posted it on my Facebook page as well as a thread about Hopper at the Film-Tech website. It's a great scene, especially with how creepy Hopper says "you" at the end of it.

I, too, cannot stand Storaro's insistence on re-framing the movies he worked on in 2:1 aspect ratio. The Last Emperor and Apocalypse Now were NOT composed in that aspect ratio. They were shot and composed for 'scope. Lots of objects and buildings are getting parts deleted in a nonsensical manner when the 2:1 ratio is applied. The 2:1 thing bothers me especially because I think I have a pretty good eye for proper composition. In 2:1 ratio those movies are not properly composed.

I think I'm at least a little bit qualified to assert my opinion on this matter since I am a professional graphic designer and illustrator with lots of experience as well as a formal art education (BFA, School of Visual Arts). I'm not a cinematographer, but I do know photography and illustration. Image composition is a big deal in either one of those fields.

Perhaps Storaro had a valid argument for insisting on the 2:1 ratio when it came to display on 4:3 ratio standard definition television sets. The 2:1 ratio does not make any logical sense when applied to an anamorphic enhanced DVD or high definition material on Blu-ray. Letter-boxing of 'scope images on 16x9 HDTV sets is pretty mild and the 1080p/24 format on Blu-ray shows quite a lot of image detail. The epic sweep of imagery in Apocalypse Now would look more impressive if the entire original 2.35:1 Technovision image is shown.

[Jeff Kleist]

Perhaps Storaro had a valid argument for insisting on the 2:1 ratio when it came to display on 4:3 ratio standard definition television sets. The 2:1 ratio does not make any logical sense when applied to an anamorphic enhanced DVD or high definition material on Blu-ray. Letter-boxing of 'scope images on 16x9 HDTV sets is pretty mild and the 1080p/24 format on Blu-ray shows quite a lot of image detail. The epic sweep of imagery in Apocalypse Now would look more impressive if the entire original 2.35:1 Technovision image is shown.

from what I've heard he's still mad everyone didn't go 2:1 (univisium he calls it I think), so I don't see him stopping his cropping any time soon

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

from what I've heard he's still mad everyone didn't go 2:1 (univisium he calls it I think), so I don't see him stopping his cropping any time soon

I really wish Coppola would override him in this case.

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

from what I've heard he's still mad everyone didn't go 2:1 (univisium he calls it I think), so I don't see him stopping his cropping any time soon

At the very least it seems Bill Lustig was able to "persuade" Storaro to supervise a 2.35:1 THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE- that is, if Storaro actually supervised that transfer, which he did give an interview on. Even if he didn't supervise it, it's a beautiful Blu-ray.

Myself, I've never felt that APOCALYPSE NOW- in either of its cuts- looked visually "compromised" at 2:1, but then again I've never seen it projected in 35mm. But still, I never felt I was "missing" anything of visual importance when viewing the film at 2:1 at home. THE LAST EMPEROR looked off in exactly one shot to me, a 3-shot of people being driven in a car where John Lone's face is cut in half. I think it could be argued that since Storaro knew that both of these films were going to be blown up and cropped to 2.2:1 for 70mm release that 2.2:1 could be considered the "official" aspect ratio for both of these, and thus 2.2:1 HD releases could be an acceptable compromise, since they were shown in "Roadshow" release in that shape to begin with.

Vincent

[Jeff Kleist]

I really wish Coppola would override him in this case.

Well, like I always say- You're free to call him an idiot, but the creator is never wrong

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

Myself, I've never felt that APOCALYPSE NOW- in either of its cuts- looked visually "compromised" at 2:1, but then again I've never seen it projected in 35mm.

There's a pan-and-scan right in the first shot of the film with the 2 helicopters...

Lopping off 20%-plus of the image is still not cool. With the "rule of thirds" you lose most of a third!

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There's a pan-and-scan right in the first shot of the film with the 2 helicopters...

Lopping off 20%-plus of the image is still not cool. With the "rule of thirds" you lose most of a third!

Attack me as you see fit to, Peter, but I repeat- I never felt I was missing anything while viewing APOCALYPSE NOW in a 2:1 ratio in either of its cuts. I have owned and viewed many times the original 2:1 letterboxed Paramount Laserdisc, the original DVD version, the "Redux" dvd, and the "complete dossier" DVD that included both cuts...

All of those are 2:1, and I've never felt like I was missing anything visually vital while viewing them. While as a purist I would love for the entire originally photographed image to be preserved, I will not lie and claim that I think the 2:1 cropped version looks compromised when viewed in motion.

Again, I'd love to see this presented in the shape as originally photographed (or possibly 2.2:1 as a "compromise" since that was the shape of the 70mm blow-ups) but I'm not going to avoid it if it is cropped/matted to 2:1 since I've never felt that aspect ratio has hurt the film when I've watched it that way in the past.

Vincent

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, like I always say- You're free to call him an idiot, but the creator is never wrong

Yes, Auteur 101... The challenge here is that you've got a DOP making the case across a wide number of films, making him (rightly or wrongly) the person making the decision. As such, the Auteur shifts from being the writer/director (Coppola) to being the "mere technician", as some described collaborators in some of the more ridiculous examples articulating the Auteur theory.

Now, Storarro is quite simply one of the most successful and artistic directors of photography that has ever worked in this medium, and of course his claim to the superiority (after the fact) of a particular aspect for home viewing should be taken into consideration. However, this is not the same, arguably, as FFC making that call himself. Now, the notion of the Auteur in this case bending to the will of his hired technician/collaborator complicates matters, naturally.

In the end, what many of us ask for is the preservation of the original aspect ratio. As has been discussed, the OAR is further mired in that there was both a 35mm and a Roadshow 70mm version. Questions of composition aside, I think many would be more than appeased if in some way the home BD presentation preserved the 2.35:1 aspect in some form. I wonder, is there a mode of BD encoding where the "zoom" function could be programmed as a specific function, where you'd hit a setting in the menu to say "2.1:1" and it'd show the film with a form of overscan? Yes, we'd lose (precious) resolution with the zoom, but it'd make the DOP happy, but we'd still get our expected full widescreen aspect.

All of this, though, is nonsense. Frankly, as per comments way above, I'd probably accept a more zoomed in image as long as we're getting both the original and appended/reduxed versions of the film. I fear, however, that we're getting the tighter cropped, redux-only on shiny disc.

Naturally, of course, I'll be buying it anyway. Bastards, always knowing that, in the end, I'm still picking up the damn discs. Sigh...

[Jeff Kleist]

Hey I don't like it either, but I'm not a hypocrite

I look a lot more forward to Tucker: A Man and His Dream

Total ouch on this weekend's BO, Prince of Persia was fluffy fun, and well, Sex and the City. I can't believe the round 4 of Shrek's pablum is making any money at all. The joke was gasping its last before the first one was over.

Toy Story 3 wash my blues away!

Dragon Ash also released the full version of their world cup video- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0wHL...u0&feature=sub

Those that enjoyed the excellent Imaginarium of Dr Panassus might dig one of their earlier works as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My945k0aJkY&feature=fvw

DA, whose work is probably unfortunately stuck at CD resolution started out as a punk band, hybridized hiphop and folk into it, moved toward gangsta rap, drum and bass, spanish guitar and reggae over the course of the last decade. Somehow they keep all the previous genres in their work and still function

The bass player has also taken in the last year to using a Master Replicas lightsaber for a pick You can see it in the wide shots

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Total ouch on this weekend's BO, Prince of Persia was fluffy fun, and well, Sex and the City. I can't believe the round 4 of Shrek's pablum is making any money at all. The joke was gasping its last before the first one was over.

Totally true! I manage the local Per-Plex Theater and word of mouth of Persia will seem to keep it around for another week or 2. Waiting for Sex and the City to make it's last drop, I watched the last ten minutes and almost got Baker acted. Marmaduke should kick Shrek off the proverbial couch (oh that crazy dog) this weekend as the new family fun flick. I mean really, Owen Wilson was born to play a...Well you know

[Jeff Kleist]

I bumped into him when he was here shooting Marley and Me, he was coming out of the food court area of the building as I was going in for a lunch meeting. Apparently he'd been down there learning his lines.

The scene was the last time he meets his friend from the paper on the street toward the end of the movie for those interested

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I bumped into him when he was here shooting Marley and Me, he was coming out of the food court area of the building as I was going in for a lunch meeting. Apparently he'd been down there learning his lines.

The scene was the last time he meets his friend from the paper on the street toward the end of the movie for those interested

[al cos.]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

I fear, however, that we're getting the tighter cropped, redux-only on shiny disc.

I must be gullible, that hadn't even occurred to me. The last dvd had both versions, yet we could have one of these blu-rays that has less stuff than the cheaper dvds they are supposed to replace? Hope not, it seems like older movies don't exactly need any help getting people to pass on buying them.

As for the ratio, it does look surprisingly good for having the sides cut off, and it always seemed like Coppola was thinking pretty heavily about the 70mm presentation.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by al cos.

I must be gullible, that hadn't even occurred to me. The last dvd had both versions, yet we could have one of these blu-rays that has less stuff than the cheaper dvds they are supposed to replace?

Oh, dude, where have you been?

[Buddy Christ]

2.35:1 please!! ^^^^

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

Attack me as you see fit to, Peter, but I repeat- I never felt I was missing anything while viewing APOCALYPSE NOW in a 2:1 ratio in either of its cuts. I have owned and viewed many times the original 2:1 letterboxed Paramount Laserdisc, the original DVD version, the "Redux" dvd, and the "complete dossier" DVD that included both cuts...

Attack?

I've had every version you have BTW, I remember having to go through 4-5 copies of the LD to get a decently pressed one without major dropouts and speckling. I do NOT miss that about LDs.

In any case, as a student of film it looks compromised to me, and the panning and scanning bothers me.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Hep

Thanks for the update Penton; this will be one of my most anticipated upgrades. Besides that, I've always associated Dennis Hopper with his character from Apocalypse Now, so a new scan will be a nice way for me to remember his contribution to film (although I bet you are more of an Easy Rider fan).

You’re welcome .
You know Hep, that fabulous “picture thingee below your name” (as my young niece likes to call it) has just inspired me to post a *cute* response.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Biggiesized

Penton, how soon will Blu-code v5 (BAE-VX1000) be released? Will it include MVC support or will that be a separate product (e.g. Blu-code 3D)?

Blu-code is a nice product for film encoding because its output has a very pleasing quantization structure. However, I don't think it fares as well for live content at 50/60 Hz. I've been using it on the SVT test sequences and I prefer other encoders.

Also, will it ever get Planar 420 input as an option instead of only YUY2 or V210?

The Code monkeys (they’re really not Blu - http://www.animalcorner.co.uk/wildli...blue.html#blue) tell me there is no Blu-Code Version 5 planned at this time.

Accordingly, it will not support MVC or other input options anticipated in the future.