Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Symptoms coming to Blu-Ray
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Tom Clark View PostYeah if you're into films like Repulsion, Images and other films of the like then Symptoms will be right up your alley.
Hopefully that post from Pete will be the final word on the ratio question. Satan help us all if this turns into another Blood and Black Lace debacle.
The 2K-sourced transfer looks excellent and is presented in a 1.33:1 aspect ratio, which seems to be the most comfortable framing option. It may have been passable projected at 1.66:1 in theaters, but trying to zoom it to 1.78:1 on an HD monitor looks too cramped and often crops actors down to the eyebrows.
Comment
-
Nope, no sign of Symptoms LE here. Haven't got an e-mail yet either, so I presume they haven't started shipping.
Comment
-
I've just finished all the extras on the BFI version, this is a great disc. As someone who only knew Larraz from Vampyres and Black Candles, this is a revelation. Such beautiful photography. I didn't really think about the aspect ratio, I was too busy enjoying the film.I'm bitter, I'm twisted, James Joyce is fucking my sister.
Comment
-
Originally posted by agent999 View PostAs someone who only knew Larraz from Vampyres and Black Candles, this is a revelation. Such beautiful photography.
Comment
-
The producer of the BFI's Symptoms disc has issued an official statement about the aspect ratio and the claim that no cinemas in 1974 could screen it in Academy:
Most British cinemas would be able to screen Academy Ratio in the 1970s. 1.37:1 Academy Ratio was still adopted regularly in British Cinemas for archive feature films, 16mm features (Permissive for example), newsreels, Children's Film Foundation screenings and more... Projectionists were equipped with a variety of different aperture masks for different films: 1.37:1, 1.66:1 , 1.77:1, 1.85:1, 2.35:1 for Techniscope, and an anamorphic lens for 2.35:1 CinemaScope. Also, 1.37:1 was the dominant aspect ratio in Turkey and Greece, where Symptoms was sold. The film has been presented on our release in Academy Ratio with the approval of the film's editor Brian Smedley-Aston, who came in to the BFI to survey our master. Along with our partners on this release, Mondo Macabro, we also performed several tests with the film at different ratios. Even at 1.66:1, the film looked incorrectly framed at several points in the film.
Comment
-
everyone just enjoy the movie, many films after 1953 were shot in 1.33:1 aspect ration and meant to be seen that way, didn't Stanley Kubrick shoot his films to be shown preferably in 1.33:1? I mean lots of films were shot in that ratio, I know everyone wants their nice 16X9 TV to be filled up, but sometimes those damned filmmakers didn't do that for us lol
Comment
-
There has been some debate regarding Kubrick's prefered AR. The reason he insisted in releasing his films 1.33:1 for home video, was, like bgart said, his fear of pan & scan. The films, except his early noirs were clearly shot for widescreen exhibition though. In the early home video releases you can see the shadow of the helicopter in the beautiful aerial tracking shot that opens The Shining for example, which was obviously not intended. Also there is the note from Kubrick that was included with , I think, the film prints of Barry Lyndon, with detailed exhibition instructions. He was very anal about this stuff.
Comment
Comment