In his latest DVD column for The New York Times, the invaluable Dave Kehr details the recent output of Fox Cinema Archives, the one-year-old, manufactured-on-demand arm of 20th Century-Fox Home Entertainment, questioning (and with very good reason) why Fox, of all studios, would eschew letterboxing for most of its wide-screen films.
In this particular case, for this particular studio, it frankly makes no sense.
Per Dave: "...most galling of all, for the studio that fueled the wide-screen revolution of the 1950s with the introduction of CinemaScope, wide-screen films (are) presented in pan-and-scan versions reformatted to fit the televisions of the last century, with large parts of the image cropped out."
Yes, Fox was the driving force behind CinemaScope, the one studio that could be credited, without hyperbole, with introducing and nurturing wide-screen movies. Whoever is making decisions at 20th Century-Fox Home Entertainment these days clearly is ignorant of his/her studio's august history. Sad. But rather typical. Fox should confer with Warner Bros., whose Warner Archive Collection repeatedly get things right.
Generally speaking, I don't learn much from modern movie reviews. The days of great film journalism are gone. But Dave is an exception. I invariably come away from his essays enlightened about something. And this particular observation jumped out at me. Bravo, Dave!
I tried to see "Alien" at the local Cinemark theater two weeks ago (part of an ongoing program of classics), it was presented in the 1.85:1 aspect ratio with black bars at the top and bottom of the screen instead of the wide 2.35:1. I walked out and got my money back. You would think it would be exhibited correctly.
ReplyDeleteMost all the movies shown on HD cable, OnDemand, or any other streaming entity are cropping 2.35:1 movies to fit the new generation of widescreen televisions, sans black bars.
It's all idiocy if you ask me.
Dave Kehr understands what the studio hacks don't - that the directors who were experimenting with 'scope in the 1950s developed an appreciation for the long take and the wide to close and back take.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure all of Fox's movies from the recent past are letterboxed - that's becouse no one pans and scans anymore. Only its old movies are being penalized.
ReplyDeleteIt's a matter of laziness. Fox figures that it made up all these pan-and-scan prints for television in the 1950s and '60s, so why bother making new transfers. It's easier. It's also very short-sighted and stupid
ReplyDeleteWhat's also galling, to use Dave's word, is that the dustjackets for some of these old Fox titles, such as the Debbie Reynolds' comedy, "The Second-Time Around," has the word "CinemaScope" prominently featured on them.
ReplyDeleteAmen, Bill.
ReplyDeleteIf a book publisher put out a new edition of an old classic book with black strips down both sides of each page, blocking out half the print throughout the entire book, there would be a huge uproar, with outraged luminaries referencing everything from Hitler to "Fahrenheit 451." And that would be the right response. For some reason, though, when old movies get trashed, it never provokes the same reaction, even though it should. All I can do is vote with my wallet, by never buying anything that's not presented in its correct aspect ratio.
ReplyDeleteAny of the filmmakers attached to the Fox films who are still alive should come out, go on the record and repudiate what Fox is doing.
ReplyDelete