Guardians of the Galaxy

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

My first Marvel studios BD, so I'm not sure what their other extras are like but I have to say I was pretty disappointed with the offerings here. They were interesting and well made and some of the bits like the outtake of the dance off were brilliant but all the content amounts to about forty five minutes. I'm just used to getting a little more.

It has been like that ever since Disney took over the reigns of the Marvel franchise. If Guardians Of The Galaxy has 45 minutes of extra content, that's about 20 minutes more than the others.

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

Never watched a home release with shifting aspect ratios before, it's pretty cool but why can't the film just fill my TV the whole time?

Not this again...

Do you want to see THE ENTIRE film? Or would you rather see 60% to 70% of the film? Because, filling your screen with the image would cut off 30% to 40% of what the director wants you to see.

[Pizzamorg]

Wow really? Given these films and the kind of people who buy them I would have expected really comprehensive extras.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

Wow really? Given these films and the kind of people who buy them I would have expected really comprehensive extras.

Unfortunately, Disney has cut back on a lot of their special features. They used to have some of the best, between them and WB, but now? Not so much. It sucks, because the Marvel movies used to have fantastic features. They deserve much better. The only real downfall of the merger.

[Groge511]

Originally Posted by camper

You are WAY over-thinking the joke.

Also, how the heck are you guys watching this film at home, it isn't even out yet?

Did I miss something? I've been dying for this one to come out.

I suppose I am
Yeah we got the film on the 24th Nov here in the UK!

[jwerk]

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

Wow really? Given these films and the kind of people who buy them I would have expected really comprehensive extras.

Nope, not from Disney

[disneywildcat]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

Unfortunately, Disney has cut back on a lot of their special features. They used to have some of the best, between them and WB, but now? Not so much. It sucks, because the Marvel movies used to have fantastic features. They deserve much better. The only real downfall of the merger.

To be fair, other studios had also cut back on bonus features, including Marvel's former distributor Paramount. And it doesn't seem that Marvel has much enthusiasm for making more material available (otherwise like Pixar they would have a bonus features disc, as Marvel and Pixar tend to control the releases of their films). Fortunately Marvel still likes having 3D for its releases. And I'm glad that Marvel still puts commentaries on their films.

[yeslek]

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

My first Marvel studios BD, so I'm not sure what their other extras are like but I have to say I was pretty disappointed with the offerings here. They were interesting and well made and some of the bits like the outtake of the dance off were brilliant but all the content amounts to about forty five minutes. I'm just used to getting a little more.

Iron Man 1 is the only MCU movie with great extras.
They seem to skip out on the rest - ya lucky to get 30mins of extras elsewhere

[Optimus]

Originally Posted by yeslek

Iron Man 1 is the only MCU movie with great extras.
They seem to skip out on the rest - ya lucky to get 30mins of extras elsewhere

I reckon the Incredible Hulk has pretty good features too.

[yeslek]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Do you want to see THE ENTIRE film? Or would you rather see 60% to 70% of the film? Because, filling your screen with the image would cut off 30% to 40% of what the director wants you to see.

not the way the screen opens up at the top and bottom compared to the 2D only disc - for this movie we GAIN image. So like the OP said - why couldnt it all have been filmed with the extra top and bottom?

[yeslek]

Originally Posted by OptimusL

I reckon the Incredible Hulk has pretty good features too.

yeah your right.

always forget whats on that disc if am honest

[disneywildcat]

Originally Posted by yeslek

not the way the screen opens up at the top and bottom compared to the 2D only disc - for this movie we GAIN image. So like the OP said - why couldnt it all have been filmed with the extra top and bottom?

It's possible the decision to expand the image of some scenes for IMAX wasn't made till after principal filming was completed, so some scenes may have needed to stay in the normal aspect ratio.

[yeslek]

Originally Posted by disneywildcat

It's possible the decision to expand the image of some scenes for IMAX wasn't made till after principal filming was completed, so some scenes may have needed to stay in the normal aspect ratio.

when watching the movie, it doesnt read like that though - you have to admit.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by yeslek

not the way the screen opens up at the top and bottom compared to the 2D only disc - for this movie we GAIN image. So like the OP said - why couldnt it all have been filmed with the extra top and bottom?

Because not all theatre have IMAX screens.

If filmed "with the extra tops and bottom," only the IMAX screens would have shown the film properly and the other 90% of viewers would have seen a cropped image with a bunch of heads being cut off at the eyebrows.

Trust me when I say that films being presented with black bars are the way the director intended them to be seen.

[Sean B.]

Originally Posted by Pizzamorg

Never understood the point of black bars, why take away a massive chunk of the screen? I know you get used to it but whenever the film filled the screen I was left wondering why it wasn't always doing that.

I think that it depends on the way that the movie is filmed, which gives an indication of the size of the picture of the movie on televisions.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Because not all theatre have IMAX screens.

If filmed "with the extra tops and bottom," only the IMAX screens would have shown the film properly and the other 90% of viewers would have seen a cropped image with a bunch of heads being cut off at the eyebrows.

Trust me when I say that films being presented with black bars are the way the director intended them to be seen.

You are completely wrong.

[Pizzamorg]

Maybe controversial opinion too but I honestly wouldn't much care about losing some side information because whenever the black bars slammed back into place during the film, it made me realise how much picture I am losing already. Sure I am not losing any actual information but what I am is using a 46 inch screen but actually watching a movie at 40 inches.

[Thomas Guycott]

It's because movies are made to be projected onto screens, not displayed on televisions.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

You are completely wrong.

Not completely. It would be actors cut off at the forehead or giant black bars on the sides (slightly visible ghost-like white bars on the sides actually) and a smaller overall projected image on the screen.

[camper]

Originally Posted by Mandalorian

The digital version is available.

Ahh...that makes sense. I think I saw that advertised somewhere, but I want to see it for the first time on disc to get the full experience.

Originally Posted by Groge511

I suppose I am
Yeah we got the film on the 24th Nov here in the UK!

Lucky dog! Oh well, only a few more days here anyway...still have to watch Winter Soldier again before its released, we've gone through the Marvel Movies at our house in the past couple weeks. Just finished Thor 2 just the other day.

[levcore]

Why can't people understand the artistic choices behind aspect ratios in this day and age? People have asked me directly why they didn't shoot the whole movie with Imax. I feel like banging my head against a wall. The movie looks how the director wants it to look. If a director likes having a 2:35 window to compose their shots in, let them have at it. It's their movie and hence their choice.

I personally think the aspect ratio of The Avengers makes it look like a TV movie, but that's exactly the ratio Whedon wants it to be in so who am i to complain? I prefer 2:35 over fullscreen anyday. I can admit that fullscreen is better for 3D but i love 2:35 framing and shots.