Page 1 of MGM Widescreen controversy

Just saw this on Dark Horizon, and I just shake my head in disbelief.

[quote]A major legal controversy is swirling around MGM DVD copies with over 300 titles being affected by an aspect ratio problem. According to CHUD, claims have gone up that state MGM Home Video has been misleading about the films they`re marketing as widescreen, rather cutting the top and bottom off of pan and scan transfers and billing it as widescreen, as the aspect ratio is still correct.

Amongst the titles that may have been affected are "1984", "24 Hour Party People", "The Amityville Horror", "Annie Hall", "Barbershop", "The Birdcage", "City Slickers", "The Dark Half", "Dead Man Walking", "Desperately Seeking Susan", "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels", "Dr. No", "Four Weddings & A Funeral", "From Russia With Love", "Goldfinger", "Gorky Park", "Hannibal", "The Hound of the Baskervilles", "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", "The Island of Dr. Moreau", "Jeepers Creepers", "Mannequin", "Man in the Moon", "The Man with the Golden Gun", "Midnight Cowboy", "Mississippi Burning", "Mystic Pizza", "Phantasm", "Platoon", "Raging Bull", "Rain Man", "Scanners", "Shallow Grave", "Some Like it Hot", "Spaceballs", "The Terminator", "Wargames" and "Y Tu Mama Tambien".

floyd

And if you survive till 2005, I hope you`re exceedingly thin, For if you are stout you will have to breathe out, While the people around you breathe in.

DVD collection & WANTED list

Warner Bros have done it aswell. They certainly do it on the Babylon 5 sets, half the pictures are strangely "zoomed in" so half of people`s heads are missing.

V bizarre.

That`s not the actual wording of the Class Action suit. This is:

"The gravamen of Plaintiffs' Complaint is that certain representations on the label and package insert of MGM's widescreen DVDs are false and misleading because MGM's widescreen DVDs for films shot in the 1.85 to 1 aspect ratio have the same image width as MGM's standard screen format DVDs."

Now I`ve not read anything that states that the discs in question are actually pan and scan transfers marketed as widescreen. I own a couple of the titles and the framing doesn`t look like that at all. They look like they were shot open matte, which would easily explain why they full frame and widescreen versions have the same width. In fact, if they were taken from pan and scan transfers they wouldn`t have the same width as some information would have been cut off at either side. It sounds like a bunch of people with a poor understanding of aspect ratios trying to make a buck. Of course, I`m happy to consider evidence that disproves this.

You can read more here:

www.mgmdvdsettlement.com/index.php3

Update*

I`ve just checked one of the DVDs on their list, Ghost World with Thora Birch. Now as far as I can tell there`s no `full screen` DVD release of this, so they must be comparing it to the VHS. Well, here are two caps from the DVD. The first is from the original theatrical trailer, the second from the main feature:





As you can see, the trailer is framed at 1.85:1, while the main feature is 1.78:1. However, the main feature clearly shows more picture information on all sides. How then, is this taken from a pan and scan transfer? It must have been shot open matte and then reframed slightly for the DVD release. That in itself is another can of worms, but it`s certainly not the same thing as these people are claiming.

Here are more images from The Terminator, another disc on their list:







What you see above is a shot from the theatrical trailer, the main feature and a TV spot. Not a lot of support for their argument there.

This item was edited on Saturday, 29th January 2005, 21:12

This is crap.There hundreds of movies made over the years,and virtually everything today,where tv ratios are considered.While filming is done,the directors intended ratio of 1.85/2.35 or whatever is the real deal,but the tv safe area is also considered,resulting in lots of movies where the widescreen version is the directors intended cinema format,but extra,but unrequired top and bottom picture is included purely to prevent pan and scan.The Carry On movies were all 1.66:1 when at the cinema,so are we going to sue Carlton over their 1.85:1 dvd versions.That same problem occurs with Dr.No,From Russia With Love,Goldfinger and manyh many more.
And something like Jurassic Park where the main film is shot in 4:3 resulting in top and bottom missing on 1.85:1 version,but special effects sequences are shot in widescreen,so 4:3 versions have sides missing-what we do with those?
Hopefully,this ludicrous lawsuit will end up where it deserves

This item was edited on Saturday, 29th January 2005, 23:38

Quote:
It sounds like a bunch of people with a poor understanding of aspect ratios trying to make a buck.

Spot on, Chris. I`ve been following this fiasco over at the HTF, and of course they`re all arguing about what it means and missing the point. Now, I know you`re well versed in aspect ratios (I`ve read your excellent pieces on the subject). My personal suspicion is this so-called film buff has a chip on his shoulder with MGM (he`s described as a screenwriter - enough said). I haven`t many R1 MGM titles in my collection, but I suspect he and his legal team have either been comparing DVDs with open-matte VHS transfers or there are a number of double-siders out there with an open-matte transfer on one side and a non-anamorphic widescreen transfer on t`other. I`ve an R1 copy of Anchor Bay`s transfer of "Brenda Starr" and that`s done like that - an open-matte 1.33:1 version on one side and a masked-down non anamorphic 1.85:1 on the other side, and I felt ripped off.

The odd thing about the "MGM settlement" list is there are a number of full anamorphic titles and even 2.35:1 titles listed, not just stuff that fits the open-matte criteria. The case should have been laughed out of court.

J Mark Oates

---

No User Serviceable Parts Inside

What is odd is that MGM`s R1 releases of Fargo and The Fog are not on the list. Those are the only discs I own that contain both full frame and widescreen versions of a film. With the wording of the Class Action suit you`d have thought they would be high on the list.

The problem I have with MGM was the rotting, and the s***e DVD covers, I`ve never heard of this widescreen controversy, but judging by the pics, I couldn`t tell the difference, and if they are just slightly off, they`re not Back to the Future II and III bad.

floyd

And if you survive till 2005, I hope you`re exceedingly thin, For if you are stout you will have to breathe out, While the people around you breathe in.

DVD collection & WANTED list

I think the "rotting" MGM problem was on R2 only.
I have not seen Fargo,but I suspect The Fog is not on their list as its a proper 2.35:1 film,and no 4:3 version will carry the full width,so its not being accused of ripping people off

MGM will be settling this matter out of court. They aren`t contesting it because they admit they were wrong putting the widescreen explanation illustration in the packaging in the first place. That`s the bottom line of the whole case - that widescreen/standard illustration that you find in most MGM releases either on the reverse of the cover or in the insert. It implies that all widescreen images are wider than the equivalent standard 1.33:1 fullscreen image. They should, of course, have said that the widescreen image presents in its entirety the picture image the director wants the audience to see.

I`ve been cruising around various sites on the web looking at the reactions of webgoers to the news, which thanks to Dark Horizons among others has gone mainstream. The reaction is almost universally uninformed and semi-hysterical, with anyone who has the correct information shouted down. Bill Hunt over at the Digital Bits has had to put up an open-matte primer on his site for the benefit of wild-eyed DVD collectors hammering on the door of his website. Very few people seem to be able to get their heads round the whole open-matte debate, so what started as a farce is turning into a complete fiasco.

Thank goodness we have a smarter class of correspondent on this site :D

J Mark Oates

---

Then Tigger looked up at the ceiling, and closed his eyes,
and his tongue went round and round his chops, in case he had left any outside,
and a peaceful smile came over his face as he said, "So that`s what Tiggers like!"
Which explains why he always lived at Kanga`s house afterwards,
and had Extract of Malt for breakfast, dinner and tea.

I hate those posters who think that what they post is the gospel truth and no one is allowed to disprove them.

It`s like the Fortune Star and Hong Kong Legends debate. I have both labels in my collection and not being an picture and sound aficionado, and FS picture quality may be a bit sharper than HKL, but FS don`t digitally clean the prints, always have words that are spelt incorrectly or sentences that are grammatical incorrect, but try and tell that to these yanks and they snub your argument.

The 90s had the generation X, the 00s have the Fox generation, they like to think they have a fair and balanced opinion, but in actual fact they`re not really interested in what the oppostion has to say, as in their minds they`re all wrong.

floyd

And if you survive till 2005, I hope you`re exceedingly thin, For if you are stout you will have to breathe out, While the people around you breathe in.

DVD collection & WANTED list

This item was edited on Tuesday, 1st February 2005, 06:29