Ant-Man (2015)

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by Gold Ranger

What is wrong with the way it was filmed?
I'm genuinely curious...

Full screen looks more like a tv show or it's been modified. Having black bars on the top and looks like a movie to me.

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

I never said that. You CAN have an opinion on how you like YOUR movies filmed. So, when you direct your own films, by all means, use whatever aspect ratio you wish them to be presented in.

But, to say that 1.85:1 has such a drastic effect on your experience of watching a film is quite a ludicrous opinion. It really isn't up to you to judge a film presentation solely based upon the size of the black bars (or lack thereof) during the presentation.

It's the equivalent of saying that you will never drive or look at any car ever made because some of them are painted with various shades of blue. It is a bit of a perspective to have on inherent factors that affect your enjoyment of entertainment.

So now you are are saying I can have an opinion,but not the wrong one. By the way I can still drive a car even if I don't care for the color baby blue

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by spencer777

Aspect ratio. Loses the movie experience for me.

Originally Posted by spencer777

Full screen looks more like a tv show or it's been modified. Having black bars on the top and looks like a movie to me.

Did you see the movie in theaters and, if so, did you like it? Not knocking your opinion of the aspect ratio, but at the end of the day, a good movie is a good movie regardless of what aspect ratio it has.

[Blu-Benny]

watch the movie in the dark.....then you /can't see if there are any black bars on the screen.

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Did you see the movie in theaters and, if so, did you like it? Not knocking your opinion of the aspect ratio, but at the end of the day, a good movie is a good movie regardless of what aspect ratio it has.

No, not a movie theater person. I will watch it probably won't buy it.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by spencer777

So now you are are saying I can have an opinion,but not the wrong one. By the way I can still drive a car even if I don't care for the color baby blue

And does driving a car that is painted baby blue affect your enjoyment of driving the car? Therein lies the comparison that I'm trying to make.

Ok. So my post went RIGHT over your head.

I was not saying that you can't have an opinion. I was saying that when you make your own film, you can make it using 2.35:1 if you wish (in response to the way you worded your sentence). As it stands, you can't tell me (or anyone for that matter) that a film isn't worth watching because of the aspect ratio that it was filmed in. THAT is seriously a ludicrous statement. And the car analogy was suppose to emphasize how ridiculous a statement you made about aspect ratios affecting your experience with a films presentation in such a way. It was NOT meant to be a literal translation of your personal opinion on cars.

[Sean B.]

Originally Posted by Optimus-Prime-Rox

It is called "Wish Fulfillment" on the DMA version.

It looks like that might not be the case. I got a video of it in my email from the joblo website's youtube page, and its got a different song in the background and it's called Casino Cheating. I would have preferred it having that other song in the background instead, but I guess beggars can't be choosers. Sadly, It doesn't look like its one of the deleted scenes on the Blu-ray after all . Here it is...

ANT-MAN Deleted Scene - Casino Cheating (2015) Marvel Movie HD - YouTube

[master gandhi]

I don't care for the car analogy (a lot of people like choosing the color of their car, and people don't question a person for disliking a shade of blue), but I agree that the aspect ratio is not up to the viewer. I hated the separate widescreen/fullscreen DVDs back in the day. It was enabling viewers to alter the director's intended framing. After all, a good portion of movies out there are 1.85:1 as opposed to 2.35:1. I can certainly see someone preferring one aspect ratio over another, but to borderline boycott a movie for being in an aspect ratio that you dislike is unusual for a film lover. IMO, of course.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

I don't care for the car analogy (a lot of people like choosing the color of their car, and people don't question a person for disliking a shade of blue), but I agree that the aspect ratio is not up to the viewer. I hated the separate widescreen/fullscreen DVDs back in the day. It was enabling viewers to alter the director's intended framing. After all, a good portion of movies out there are 1.85:1 as opposed to 2.35:1. I can certainly see someone preferring one aspect ratio over another, but to borderline boycott a movie for being in an aspect ratio that you dislike is unusual for a film lover. IMO, of course.

Yes, people like choosing the colour of their car and obviously people have a preference. And I am most certainly not questioning anyone for disliking a colour. However, in the grand scheme of things, the colour of the car doesn't really matter. It's how the car handles, how powerful it is, and the quality of the parts that make up that car that ultimately makes up the enjoyment factor of driving it. In my analogy, those factors are equated to the quality of the writing, directing, acting, staging, design, etc. Picking the aspect ratio of a film as a means of affecting a viewing experience negatively is like saying that all cars that are painted blue are terrible cars to drive.

But, regardless of that analogy, I know that we are on the same page here.

I just want spencer777 to realize too that I'm not trying to feud or fight. I'm just trying to rationally determine how an aspect ratio can be the limiting factor for their journey through entertainment. Do you honestly believe that if Ant-Man were filmed in 2.35:1 with the exact same framing and editing that it would be any better a film?

[Adam_WM]

[Gold Ranger]

All this Aspect Ratio talk and yet almost no one is arguing AGAINST the A.R. Shift that is happening to the Blu-Ray release of The X-Files...

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by spencer777

1.185:1 holding me back.

Ok

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Yes, people like choosing the colour of their car and obviously people have a preference. And I am most certainly not questioning anyone for disliking a colour. However, in the grand scheme of things, the colour of the car doesn't really matter. It's how the car handles, how powerful it is, and the quality of the parts that make up that car that ultimately makes up the enjoyment factor of driving it. In my analogy, those factors are equated to the quality of the writing, directing, acting, staging, design, etc. Picking the aspect ratio of a film as a means of affecting a viewing experience negatively is like saying that all cars that are painted blue are terrible cars to drive.

But, regardless of that analogy, I know that we are on the same page here.

I just want spencer777 to realize too that I'm not trying to feud or fight. I'm just trying to rationally determine how an aspect ratio can be the limiting factor for their journey through entertainment. Do you honestly believe that if Ant-Man were filmed in 2.35:1 with the exact same framing and editing that it would be any better a film?

For me yes I think the wider aspect ratio ads to the story of the film

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by spencer777

For me yes I think the wider aspect ratio ads to the story of the film

Wow. Ok then. Enjoy... or don't...

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by spencer777

1.185:1 holding me back.

So I guess you don't like any of these 2,657 blu-ray movies then:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/searc...tby=popularity

[Sman]

They chose 1:85:1 because they felt it would be best considering the size of their hero. I think if it was filmed in 2:35:1 it would take away from the scenes where Scott is shrunk. I'm sure if Marvel felt 2:35:1 was the best choice they would have used it since all of their other films excluding The Avengers (which was 1:78:1 due to the Battle of New York scenes) have it. I feel like the director knows what is best for his film so as long as the aspect ratio is approved by him, I could care less what it was filmed in.

[Blu-Benny]

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by Sman

They chose 1:85:1 because they felt it would be best considering the size of their hero. I think if it was filmed in 2:35:1 it would take away from the scenes where Scott is shrunk. I'm sure if Marvel felt 2:35:1 was the best choice they would have used it since all of their other films excluding The Avengers (which was 1:78:1 due to the Battle of New York scenes) have it. I feel like the director knows what is best for his film so as long as the aspect ratio is approved by him, I could care less what it was filmed in.

Makes sense, I will consider buying at the right price.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Sman

They chose 1:85:1 because they felt it would be best considering the size of their hero. I think if it was filmed in 2:35:1 it would take away from the scenes where Scott is shrunk. I'm sure if Marvel felt 2:35:1 was the best choice they would have used it since all of their other films excluding The Avengers (which was 1:78:1 due to the Battle of New York scenes) have it. I feel like the director knows what is best for his film so as long as the aspect ratio is approved by him, I could care less what it was filmed in.

Same reason as Jurassic Park, it's better for height

[spencer777]

Originally Posted by frogmort

So I guess you don't like any of these 2,657 blu-ray movies then:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/searc...tby=popularity

yep