Originally Posted By ToonKirby Per the insert inside the "101 Dalmatians" Platinum Edition, "Pinocchio" is scheduled for next spring. It will be a Platinum Edition (about time) and will also be released on Blu-Ray. Also, a 45th anniversary edition of "The Sword in the Stone" will be released this summer. - kch
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Are the Platinums once or twice per year? I thought they were twice, but I can't for the life of me figure out which one will be released in the fall. Anyway, I'm pretty happy to hear about this. Although I already have the Gold Classic version, I would assume that this version will have a lot more extras (since the other one hardly has any). It always does make me feel a little silly for getting the same movie twice in the same format though...
Originally Posted By basil fan Is it 2-disc? Phil's Hero Rules <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/disney/hero.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ disney/hero.html</a>
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror About freakin' time for "Pinocchio" to get the royal treatment. That masterpiece has been neglected for way too long. And yay for "Sword in the Stone." Not even close to a perfect movie, but charming and affecting.
Originally Posted By mawnck Please, Disney, PLEASE don't widescreen Pinocchio. Please, Disney, PLEASE don't widescreen Pinocchio. Please, Disney, PLEASE don't widescreen Pinocchio. Please, Disney, PLEASE don't widescreen Pinocchio. Please, Disney, PLEASE don't widescreen Pinocchio.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Didn't they already to some sort of big fancy edition for Sleeping Beauty? I wonder what new stuff they would have on it to justify releasing it again, when there are still copies of it on the shelf of some places.
Originally Posted By FiveBearRugs ^^^I believe it's because Sleeping Beauty will be coming to Blu-Ray. So what would the problem be with Disney widescreening Pinocchio? Weren't all of their films shot in the widescreen format? What is that you people call it? 1:87? 1:235? And wasn't Pinocchio one of the original 10 films to get the Platinum Edition treatment anyway?
Originally Posted By FiveBearRugs <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_Platinum_Editions" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W alt_Disney_Platinum_Editions</a>
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>So what would the problem be with Disney widescreening Pinocchio? Weren't all of their films shot in the widescreen format? What is that you people call it? 1:87? 1:235?<<< No. Disney films, and most films prior to the late 50's or so, were shot in an aspect ratio around 4:3, or 1.33 to 1. Essentially very close to a square aspect ratio. The advent of television, with its very similar aspect ratio, prompted studios to start shooting films in wider aspect ratios for grander experiences. When some theaters couldn't get the purposely widescreen movies, they artificially altered the plates on the projectors so that their films would LOOK widescreen. Eventually, alarmed because their movies were being mangled all over the country by theater owners, filmmakers adapted to a process (cameras, lenses, etc) so that almost ALL films were shot in a wider aspect ratio. "Sleeping Beauty" were anomalies for Disney in their exceptionally widescreen formats. But prior to this, their films were typically 4:3. Starting with 101 Dalmatians, their aspect ratios were 1.66 to 1. (not 1.75:1 as you'll see listed on the IMDB) Part of the reason they didn't go to a wider aspect ratio is that the standard animation cel or paper sheet dimensions are 10.5 x 12, and if you start going too wide, it means you're losing available space on the image dimensions, or you have to draw smaller, etc. More "line mileage" as it were. They changed to a more standard 1.85:1 in the 80's, I believe.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Starting with 101 Dalmatians, their aspect ratios were 1.66 to 1. (not 1.75:1 as you'll see listed on the IMDB)<< Ooh, ooh, I love this topic! Dalmatians and several subsequent movies were framed in such a way that you could run them 4:3 for TV, or 1.66:1 (with the top and bottom chopped off) in the theater. You can see how this worked if you have the old 4:3 DVDs or VHSs of Dalmatians, Sword, Jungle, Aristocats, or Robin Hood. Watch the opening credits - plenty of space top and bottom so the text doesn't get chopped in the theater. Later flicks got a genuine pan-and-scan for TV and home video releases. They've actually been screwing up the aspect ratio on most of the recent widescreen DVDs, since they've been trimming them to 1.78:1 to match the TV screens. This takes out a bit of picture that's really supposed to be there, and they have to do a bit of bobbing up and down (vertical pan-and-scan? pedestal-and-scan?) to keep everything in the picture. A proper widescreen DVD of these movies should have little slivers of black down the sides (which may or may not be visible depending on your TV), and Disney used to do it right. See the Aladdin DVD for example. IMHO, movies shot this way should be presented BOTH ways - 4:3 and 1.66:1 - on the BluRay releases, but I'm sure that's hoping for WAY too much. My fear is that the rampant and misguided anti-black-bars sentiment sweeping the country - the one that causes 85% of the widescreen TVs on the planet to be set up in "funhouse mirror" mode - will impact the 4:3 flicks on BluRay. Many theaters in the 70s would butcher the classics to widescreen format when they were reissued, and I can see some particularly diabolical Disney marketing whizzes insisting that they do it on BluRay as well, no doubt supported by reams of customer surveys. I know of at least one non-Disney 4:3 animated classic that was already messed up this way on DVD - "The Incredible Mr. Limpet" (which, thank goodness, also included the proper version on the same disc). I just hope the Disney folks know that, while we've been quietly gritting our teeth on the 1.78:1 thing, we're going to scream very loudly if they go hacking up Pinocchio and Snowy and Cinderella and such. (We meaning me and all my film-loving buddies the world over.) We have torches and pitchforks, and they're very wide. Don't mess with the classics.
Originally Posted By mawnck And as long as I'm being such a blabby old gasbag this morning, I'll note that having Sleeping Beauty as the first classic on BluRay makes sense for another reason besides its wide-screen-ness. SB was shot using an expensive film process called Technirama 70, which ran extra-wide film sideways through the projector to produce a super-wide, super-sharp picture (similar to what IMAX does today). Thus, of all the Disney movies, it will look the best on the new format. <a href="http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingtr3.htm" target="_blank">http://www.widescreenmuseum.co m/widescreen/wingtr3.htm</a> (The Black Cauldron was also shot in Technirama 70, but, um, yeah.)
Originally Posted By basil fan All films should be released in their actual, original aspect ratio. Nothing else makes sense than watching the entire picture as it was filmed. If you *must*, put 2 versions on the DVD, the real version and one for the sadly uninformed. FYI, I was once on of the latter, but I have seen the light. Kolchak: The Night Stalker Glitches <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/glitch/knglitch.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ glitch/knglitch.html</a>
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Saw DALMATIANS at the El Capitan. I remember thinking it looked 4:3 at the time. Might have been a little wider. I don't think it was 1.66, but it was about a month and a half ago, so...
Originally Posted By mawnck >>All films should be released in their actual, original aspect ratio. Nothing else makes sense than watching the entire picture as it was filmed.<< Sorry, but it ain't that simple with 60s, 70s and 80s animation. Robin Hood (just to name one) was *filmed* 4:3 but sent to theaters with instructions to *project* it 1.66:1. BOTH ratios are correct. It was designed to be shown either way. Thus they had 'em a widescreen movie that could be shown on television without the need for a pan-and-scan version. You get more picture with 4:3, and you get the original theatrical experience with 1.66:1, so I'd like it both ways, please. (Well, actually I wouldn't buy another copy of Robin Hood on any format, so I don't really care, but it's the principle of the thing.) Since it would require two expensive HD transfers instead of one, I'm not holding my breath. No, I definitely do not want pan-and-scan on anything, and I CERTAINLY don't want them thwacking off hunks of picture to imitate widescreen on movies that were intended only for 4:3. Like Pinocchio. Which was my point. As for Dalmatians, I remember seeing it shown 4:3 in a cheapo theater several years ago (which surprised me), and I believe the DVD that's coming out tomorrow is also 4:3. In fact, post 13 was originally going to be to correct you on that, BOT. But then I fired up my old VHS while I was typing, and it looked like the credits were titlesafe for 1.66:1. So I deleted that part and decided that I just didn't know. But it looks like the folks at Disney definitely think it oughta be 4:3.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Cameron shot TITANIC in Super35, with an aspect ratio of something like 1.25:1. It was done this way so they could screen it on TV without losing anything, but framed in such a way that widescreen would look great as well.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Mawnck, I did write that Dalmatians was 1.66, but thinking back to the screening at the El Cap, it sure seems like it was 4:3. Next time I'm in the Archives, I'll ask someone.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: So, is PINOCCHIO coming out only as a new Blu-ray thingie? Or is it gonna' be sold the regular way, too? Us Cauldron girls haven't upgraded our crystal balls to blu-ray, yet, and may NEVER do it!
