New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Good German

post #1 of 7
5/17/07 at 2:19pm
Thread Starter 
Being a pretty big fan of film noir, I picked this up, despite tepid reviews. I haven't seen the whole thing yet, but I have a question regarding the picture:
It says on the cover that it's presented in a format preserving the aspect ratio from the theatrical release, while on the disc it says "this film has been modified to fit your TV screen..." - It's in 1.33:1
The thing is that the image doesn't look cropped to me, and due to the nature of the film it's not at all inconcievable that 4:3 might be OAR. Does anyone know what the deal is?

Otherwise, the disc is completely devoid of extras, and might be completely uninteresting for others than Soderberg completists and/or film noir fans. I'm excited to see it though, it looks extremely cool to me.
Reply
post #2 of 7
5/17/07 at 2:36pm
I'm 99% sure the film was shot in 1:66:1 ratio because Soderbergh, for whatever technical reasons, couldn't shoot in 1:33:1. So this is a changed aspect ratio, yes, but it's the way Soderbergh intended it to look...

Okay, I was wrong, this is what IMDB has to say:

Quote:
So that the film could be in the 1.66:1 aspect ratio, which modern theaters are not equipped to handle, the prints are in 1.85:1, with black bars on the sides.
I suspect that this is a Soderbergh creative choice, though.
Reply
post #3 of 7
5/17/07 at 2:45pm
I wondered about this as well. So the theaters weren't equipped to handle the way he shot it, so it was altered for theaters? But fullscreen is how he intendd it, so even though the DVD is technically "modified to fit your screen" it's actually the way he wanted it? It is rather strange. The movie didn't seem cropped or P&S, and since he was going for the 40s vibe, I'm sure he wanted the fullscreen look. It's just odd since the packaging says "Standard Version" but the disc has the "modified" lead-in.

The movie still sucks regardless.
Reply
post #4 of 7
5/17/07 at 3:05pm
I feel like I just got a headache from trying to follow Stew's post.

Let's just accept the fact the movie sucks and that the book was okay.
Reply
post #5 of 7
5/17/07 at 3:26pm
You get to see golden boy Tobey Maguire punch Cate Blanchett right in the babymaker. What more could you want?
Reply
post #6 of 7
5/17/07 at 3:41pm
Thread Starter 
So it seems then that 4:3 is the intended format?
And I'm wondering the same thing as Stew, as the packaging and the lead-in seem to say two different things. If there were two versions of the DVD I'd assume it was a mis packaged disc, now it seems like it's a misprint on the cover or a misleading lead-in. I'm confused.

I have seen an hour, and so far I don't necessarily think it sucks. It's certainly not great, and it doesn't live up to what I feel is its potential, but it's not a complete waste of time either.
Reply
post #7 of 7
5/25/07 at 12:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Harvey Cobblepot
I have seen an hour, and so far I don't necessarily think it sucks. It's certainly not great, and it doesn't live up to what I feel is its potential, but it's not a complete waste of time either.
Eh, just watched it last night and it never quite lives up to the potential. It's not terrible, but it's not good either. Kind of boring and mediocre. Toby Maguire's the shit in it (but his part is way too small) but, strangely, its Clooney that seems out of his element. He's got the classic, old time movie star look, but he kind of sleepwalks through the movie. And it got repetitive, as every scene was Clooney going "What'd going on?" and then being told some kind of secret. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DVD General Discussion