Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Search This Blog
Interviews
The Argument for Letterbox vs. Pan-and-Scan - and why you're nuts if you prefer the latter
The Trailer Park
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(80)
-
▼
January
(28)
- LOVE IS THE DEVIL: STUDY FOR A PORTRAIT OF FRANCIS...
- VAMPIRES IN HAVANA
- A TALE OF TWO SISTERS
- WAL-MART: THE HIGH COST OF LOW PRICE
- BLACK SHEEP
- DRAG ME TO HELL
- Letterbox vs. Pan-and-Scan
- MR. MOTO TAKES A CHANCE
- THE HURT LOCKER
- THE SKELETON KEY
- UP
- PENELOPE
- SHUTTER
- CORALINE
- THE ORPHANAGE
- THE HAUNTING OF MOLLY HARTLEY
- DON'T BOTHER TO KNOCK
- Trailer: THE BACK-UP PLAN
- Trailer: DESPICABLE ME
- Trailer: GREEN ZONE
- STAR TREK
- CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS
- BOLT
- PULSE
- BOY A
- Trailer: FURRY VENGEANCE
- LET THE RIGHT ONE IN
- Trailer: THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR. PARNASSUS
-
▼
January
(28)
last film I watched
Followers
some of my favorite actors and films ...
3 comments:
This was a great commentary and reminder why pan and scan isn't what the moviemaker intended his/her piece of art to be seen in. Thanks for this great clip!
Bob
Wow! Interesting! Not a topic I've given much thought to in the past. I could definitely see the point that cutting Ben Hur to the smaller size was essentially re-editing the film, as the smaller version lost a lot of atmosphere & the general scale of 'grandness' was diminished, as it was with Lawrence of Arabia where the wide-shots of the desert are essential to the whole mood of the movie.
Karen (UK).
I have hated pan and scan since the early 80's,when the wide screen od IT's A Mad Mad Mad World came out,and Leonard Maltin did a comparison,for instance in Pan,you only got TWO stooges,not all three! That hooked me!
Rick
Post a Comment