F For Fake DVD

[ChristopherBanks]

Looking at the screen captures on the F For Fake page was a breath of fresh air. Obviously, all the video releases of this are P&S...?

[jaime marzol]

chris:
i've only seen it in lbx, never seen it in pan & scan. i have the laser disc in lbx. the version i've seen on tv is also lbx.

[Jeff Wilson]

After comparing screenshots of the DVD and the LD, it would appear the LD is cropped somewhat, although I didn't think it grievously hurt the compositions. And since a portion of the footage wasn't even shot by Welles, it isn't something to get upset over too much.

[jaime marzol]

you mean the sides are actually wider on the dvd?

or the top and bottom of the frame was overmasked?

my friend who is a die-hard fan of THE SEARCHERS always complains of the overmasking in the ld.

[Jeff Wilson]

The sides are definitely wider on the DVD. I'll post my comparison in the next couple days. The difference between top and bottom is almost negligible (top, no real difference, bottom a slight bit more on the LD); The sides show a fair amount more.

[sergio]

The problem with the masking on The Searchers is mainly due to the fact that it was shot in VistaVision, a process that allows the picture to be framed a number of different ways. Technically the aspect ratio of VistaVision is 1.5:1 which therefore would allow for both the "European" ratio of 1.66:1 or the more traditional "US" ratio of 1.85:1.

Welles eems really to have preferred Academy, or 1.33 (as did Kubrick), but there are no commercial cinemas nowadays that have the proper lenses and masks to sho films in this way.

When I was preparing a lecture that I gave on Touch of Evil last year at the National Film Theatre in London I had the chance to compare the prints of the standard and re-release versions of TOUCH OF EVIL both on a Steenbeck and projected on the big screen. I found that the ratio really should be 1.66 and was infact indicated as such on the re-release print. The easiest way to confirm this was the simple fact that in the third shor of the film, the backward dolly shot in which Heston and Leigh run towards the explosion, if shown at 1.33 then the bottom of the dolly would be clearly visible, but was removed at 1.66 - the DVD says that it is masked at 1.85 but in fact it is masked at around 1.77 I think, so as to accomodate widescreen TVs, and I believe that this is still a little too tight, to be honest.

Which is to say that while masking on the top and bottom can be a bit of a bitch, it is absolutely crucial that at least the total width be presented.

I can't wait to see the F FOR FAKE comparisons Jeff - many thanks!

[jaime marzol]

on THE SEARCHERS:
many years ago, the first time i saw it, a friend and i had heard about it, and read about it in many books, finally found a tape of it. we watched it, and were surprised to see during the scene that the late mr fudderman tries to kill ethan and the nephew, in the b.g., clear as day was the end of the back drop and the key light. i could not beleive what i was seeing. in the restored lbx version on ld, during this scene, if you search you can find it was blocked out but not blended in very well.

i whisper:
on TOUCH OF EVIL framing, i don't know enough about the sizes to comment on, but i do know that i find the square screened version in the ld preferable to the lbx dvd. the compositions seem better framed. but this is just my opinion.

[mteal]

Sergio,
Looked at my 1.33 VHS of TOE today. Yeah, you're right- you can see part of the dolly in shot 3 for a second or two. To me, however, that's a minor flaw, since the picture in general just looks so much more compelling at 1.33 then on the 1.85 DVD. You just lose too much picture at 1.85. 1.66 might be OK, though.

Any conscientious art house should be set up to show classic films at a 1.33 ratio. If they're not, it's a rip-off. Back in 1992, when Beatrice's OTHELLO restoration was released, the theatre where I saw it showed it with a 1.85 scope on it, so that every visual composition in the film was ruined. When I complained to the projectionist that the picture looked like shit, his reply was "Oh, ALL old movies are supposed to be shown this way". This idiot was probably making $20 an hour.

[jaime marzol]

i agree with mteal. that dolly shadow in shot 3 doesn't really let us in on anything. look at the scene in the linnekar construction site, the men in the car. in the laser disc, after i zoom back to get rid of tv overscan, the scene is framed beautifuly, the framing goes right to the edge using every inch of screen. in the lbx dvd the framing is pretty shabby, and clipped.

also check out the framing in the lbx dvd when quinlan stumbles in the hotel room with grande and stands over the drugged out susan. in the ld you have good framing, in the lbx dvd again, pretty shabby, clipped composition, and most of susan is gone.

there are at least 40 other such moments in the lbx dvd.

but it's just a matter of opinion really. there are people tickled pink with the lbx dvd, and won't have it any other way. i'm into the framing, so for me the lbx dvd was worthless. after i purchased it and saw how awfull it looked, i sold it for $18 at half.com, and kept the laser disc.

the copy of the restored TOUCH OF EVIL i made when it aired on encore, has more image, and better composition that the restored lbx dvd.

regardless of what 'they' intended, it seems welles masked nothing when he framed the film, he framed full screen.

[Jeff Wilson]

Okay, here is my very brief comparison shot page on the DVD and LD of FfF.

DVD-LD Comparison

[sergio]

Thanks for the screen grabs Jeff - I must say, if it were me, I'd have to go with the DVD aspect ration.

As for TOE, of course, I didn't mean to suggest that just because you can see the dolly briefly in shot three that this proves anything.

As Rick Schmidlin pointed out in a nother thread, it was quite clear from the notes of the cinematographer (Metty) and the camera operator (Lathrop) that it was shot so as to be screened in America, at least, at 1.85.

However, the clips that I screened at my talk were shown at 1.66 and the images were just a little more dynamic.

I have also seen both versions of the restored version (it was shown in the UK by the BBC along with the Bouzereau documentary on the making of TOE that was weirdly made for the DVD release and then dropped at the last minute) and I do think that the version shown "fill frame) inevitably crops the image a bit to curt off the keystones (ie the rounded edges) - the widescreen DVD seems to have just added black bars rather than reframed it and so adding all the picture information at the sides.

As far as I can tell, if the picture were re-transferred properly and matted at 1.66 then one would get the entire width of the frame (which at present no version gives) and cut off a sliver off the top and bottom, which Welles and Metty expected.

Not to bring up old and sad news, but why exactly did Rick leave the list? I'm afraid that as a farely new member to the forum I am somewhat unaware of some of the didagreements that seem to have cropped up every know and then - I'm glad to say that there has been absolutely no evidence of this since I joined, a credit to Jeff and all the contributors.

Saluti!

Sergio

[jaime marzol]

sergio wrote:
As far as I can tell, if the picture were re-transferred properly and matted at 1.66 then one would get the entire width of the frame (which at present no version gives) and cut off a sliver off the top and bottom, which Welles and Metty expected.

i wrote:
i agree with this completely. you did not mean to mask differently what is on the dvd, you mean that the entire thing needs to be retransfered correctly, then masked at 1:66. yes, absolutely. i've been saying this all along, and have been attacked as a communist for saying so, by welles fans, TOUCH OF EVIL fans, and rick fans. the letterboxing was a rip-off.

i have focused on the ld framing not because it's right, but at the moment it's the best widely available framing.

[jaime marzol]

::::::::::::::

george amberson minafer has no money to pay the hospital bill and withn 2 days of arrival they deposit him on the sidewalk just outside the hospital entrance on a pair of crutches, casts on both his legs.

[ToddBaesen]

-

Interesting post Sergio. I agree that 1:66 would seem to make the most sense - maybe Universal will do another transfer with the extras that were left off sometime in the future.

I didn't realize that Rick wasn't posting here any more. I'd like to hear his views on the aspect ration question of TOUCH OF EVIL. He had nothing to do with the DVD release though, did he?

Maybe if those people who offended him got down on their knees and apologized to him he'd come back. After all wasn't his major complaint that people were posting false evidence - I mean stories.

[jaime marzol]

:::::::::::

poor george amberson minafer, casts on both his legs, hobbling on crutches down amberson blvd.

fred kinney roars by in an expensive automobile loaded with babes. george hollers for fred but fred's car radio is blasting, the babes are screaming and laughing, and fred doesn't hear george calling for help.

george watches fred's car roar out of sight. george continues hobbling on his crutches.