19 replies to this topic

[Turn]

I was wondering what the preferred way of watching Bond films on home video is. Do you prefer pan-and-scan (or full-frame, filling up the entire screen but losing part of the picture) mode or letterboxed (preserving the theatrical ratio with the black bands on the top and bottom of the screen).

I've thought about this several times in the past, and it's been a big issue recently since some studios are beginning to release certain DVD titles in pan-and-scan format only. Some are putting both formats on discs, and this could very well be an issue when the Bonds are rereleased later this year. It's a possiblity they could offer both formats, which I believe the early releases did, but had few or no special features.

I'm a letterbox supporter, personally. I remember being thrilled getting the VHS versions of the series back in 1996. For years, I heard about the scene in Diamonds Are Forever in Q's workshop where rockets are being loaded into the Aston Martin, but never being able to see it because the picture was cropped. Being able to see it was like seeing the movies in a whole new way.

[Tanger]

Definitely Letterbox, it's how movies were meant to be seen! Since I got DVD, I can't go back to pan-and-scan videos now.
You miss so much by not watching widescreen.

eg. GoldenEye - Archives. Bond and Natalya are behind book cases. Natlaya knocks books off. In pan/scan only Natalya can be seen, whereas in letterbox Natalya and Bond's reaction can be seen.
It just makes all the difference.
Letterbox rules!!!

[Icephoenix]

Letterbox for all the reasons above. lol, im such a fan when I play GoldenEye 64 I also put the view on Letterbox (aka Cinema Mode)

[Blofeld's Cat]

I much prefer letterbox format, but unfortunately, the VCD's I get locally are fullframe and therefore you lose the peripheral vision (except during title/end credits).

Letterboxing VCD's would be more convenient in putting the subtitling in the bottom black band, instead of having them encroach over the movie itself.

It's even worse then the movie itself has subtitling, which is then subtitled into Indonesian. Either all the subtitling takes up half the screen or the local subtitling is superinposed over the movie's.

Very frustrating.

[General Koskov]

Ever since I found out the black bars actually made you see more, I can't stand it when a film loses them part way through.

[freemo]

I used to always watch pan-and-scan until I discovered the glory of letterbox. Pan-and-scan is isn't too bad though, full screen and all, as long as it goes to letter box during the titles.

[Turn]

Plan Omega (27 May, 2002 08:32 p.m.):
One question, why were the w/s versions of VHS always more expensive if they were already the cinema version?

My guess is that the pan-and-scan versions were already readily available from years of their being out there. Having to transfer them to widescreen probably, and I'm guessing here, takes longer to format, plus they don't likely sell as well as the "ones with the black bars." Thus the price hike.

[Arrant]

Interestingly, there has been a move amongst filmmakers, toward shooting on Super 35mm. (James Cammeron,is a good example-shooting, both True Lies & Titanic in this format.)
This means that the full frame of the print is actually closer to the dimensions of the new 16-9 TV screens, than the 2:35:1

[General Koskov]

I used to hate letterboxing. I suppose I was sucked into the popular belief that it 'took away' from the picture.

Well now I'd rather watch 16.9 or widescreen, or whatever.

What really bugs me is when you think the film is going to be letterboxed-- because they usually are at the beginning--and then it's not.

I think this is due to credits because if you watch Bond title sequences, they are letterboxed no matter how the rest of the film is.

[ray t]

remember when bonds boat arrives at the casino in nassau at night?

in the dvd you can catch a glimpse of the old "Roman" or "tiki" torches flickering in the breeze thus giving the viewer a fuller flavour of a beautiful night in the bahamas.

on the regular version you do not notice this nor do you notice so many other stunning aspects of epic motion pictures like the bonds.

[rafterman]

widescreen all the way, even better is a widescreen TV, pan and scan sucks...I'm tired of all the people who complain about the black bars, that they lose picture....idiotic...I've got a DVD player with it's own 16x9 screen, so everything I watch is letterboxed....

[PaulZ108]

Same as zencat. Letterbox is the ONLY way to watch a film. Without it, you just can't see the film in its full glory. There should a law against tampering with the film's original proportions, as it greatly mars the work of the cinematographer.

[Mister Asterix]

I'm a Letterbox fan myself. I get very annoyed when someone's face get put half off screen and you don't get to see the person's reaction.

[zencat]

No question, letterbox is the only way to watch Bond (or any movie for that matter). I won't buy a movie that isn't letterboxed.

[Friedrich Baxter]

I disgust pan and scan. I REALLY prefer letterbox. I'm very glad that many tv-channels are switching to 16:9 viewscreen, although it's not exactly letterbox. But nevertheless, many movies on Dutch tv-channels are being showed pan-and-scan. You can take a better example for Germany. Many movies there are being watched in 16:9, or better, letterbox.

[Plan Omega]

Turn (21 Apr, 2002 04:34 a.m.):
I was wondering what the preferred way of watching Bond films on home video is. Do you prefer pan-and-scan (or full-frame, filling up the entire screen but losing part of the picture) mode or letterboxed (preserving the theatrical ratio with the black bands on the top and bottom of the screen).

I've thought about this several times in the past, and it's been a big issue recently since some studios are beginning to release certain DVD titles in pan-and-scan format only. Some are putting both formats on discs, and this could very well be an issue when the Bonds are rereleased later this year. It's a possiblity they could offer both formats, which I believe the early releases did, but had few or no special features.

I'm a letterbox supporter, personally. I remember being thrilled getting the VHS versions of the series back in 1996. For years, I heard about the scene in Diamonds Are Forever in Q's workshop where rockets are being loaded into the Aston Martin, but never being able to see it because the picture was cropped. Being able to see it was like seeing the movies in a whole new way.

I totally agree with turn and zencat, it really is the only way to see any film, but especially Bond. I rejoiced at the 30th Anniversary tapes being released in widescreen, we all know Thunderball viewed in pan and scan is nothing short of a crime. Those that know me well will tell you I'm a widescreen nut, and get any action/adventure type film in w/s as far as I can. Trust me it's always worth it.

One question, why were the w/s versions of VHS always more expensive if they were already the cinema version?

[Sanchez]

My preference is for letterbox.

[Colonel Mooney]

I agree with everybody posting on this thread!

WIDESCREEN RULES!

Now I always try to buy widescreen films.

The most annoying thing for me was when in 1999 all the Bonds were re-released in VHS, I dashed out and bought them all. Then, a few weeks later, a discovered that I could have got them all for the same price in Letterbox format in another shop. Damn!

Oli

[boeserzwilling]

WIDESCREEN!!!
It's the closest thing to the images shown in cinema, especially when you own a 16:9 TV set.
It's a Bond movie, not a game show!

[Loomis]

Pan-and-scan is the work of the devil. Get the Bonds on letterbox DVD and watch them on a good widescreen TV. Beats even the cinema experience, in my book.