Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

28 Days Later Aspect Ratio?

551 views
Skip to first unread message

deathpile

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 3:00:54 PM10/20/03
to
Does anyone know if "28 Days Later" would be better to get on DVD
widescreen or full screen? In other words did they shoot it full
screen and crop it for the widesreeen version or visa versa.

I realize that the instinctive conclusion is that it was shot full
screen because it was shot on DV - but I'd like to know for sure.

It'd be nice to know that I have the least cropped version of the
film.

Thanks. -JPC

The dog from that film you saw

unread,
Oct 20, 2003, 3:19:57 PM10/20/03
to

"deathpile" <deat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:84d57c7d.03102...@posting.google.com...


it was exhibited 1.85:1 so that's the best way to see it - even if a
fullscreen shows you more.


--
Gareth
quote of the day
'nostradamus? -sounds like a rock group to me!'
see my ebay auctions at
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V68A23FF5


loucyphre

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 4:30:55 AM10/21/03
to
deat...@hotmail.com (deathpile) shat in
news:84d57c7d.03102...@posting.google.com:

WIDESCREEN! ALWAYS WIDESCREEN! The only time you get fullscreen if it is
shot in an open matte process like you seem to be saying in your opening
paragraph. Moreover though, it is not worth giving the companies one penny
more for these fullscreen DVDs.

DV allows you to shoot in various aspect ratios. My buddy Austin's first
film was shot in 1.85.

------

loucyphre -

Editor - www.horrorexpress.com
Contributing Writer - www.cultcuts.net
______________________

"I like it. It's a statement."
- (Linnea Quigley, "Return of the Living Dead")

"It's all these booze-addled British boys with their Viz-style
rough-and-tumble pub-style blabbering and bullshitting about fucking
sheep and 'getting pissed' and 'tits' and 'arse'. It used to be such a
polite, congenial place, did alt.horror."
- (Dr. Phibes, alt.horror, 12/16/01)

Jordan Garren

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 1:37:05 PM10/21/03
to

"deathpile" <deat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:84d57c7d.03102...@posting.google.com...

Always go widescreen man, you can't lose. However, I'm watching 28 Days
Later right now and I'm disappointed with the sound. It could've used Dolby
5.1 Surround......
- Jordan
--
The B-Movie Film Vault
http://www.geocities.com/jrgdawg/
Fighting the Good Fight For B-Movie Lovers Everywhere Since June 5th, 2000!

Also a Proud Member (and Founder) of The Rogue Reviewers:
http://www.roguereviewers.com


Andrew

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:27:28 PM10/21/03
to
loucyphre wrote:

> DV allows you to shoot in various aspect ratios. My buddy Austin's first
> film was shot in 1.85.

How does this work? Does the camera itself matte the video?
I do not recall if that is called hard matte or soft matte.

Andrew

The dog from that film you saw

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:29:03 PM10/21/03
to

"Andrew" <manowa...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:bn41b1$s8b4j$3...@ID-82477.news.uni-berlin.de...

I've seen camcorders out there with 16:9 CCD's that record true anamorphic.

Andrew

unread,
Oct 21, 2003, 3:30:20 PM10/21/03
to
Jordan Garren wrote:

> Always go widescreen man, you can't lose.

There are examples of films that are matted that probably
should not be. Dawn of the Dead Cannes cut springs to mind.
The original VHS release of DotD was not matted and more
information could be seen.

Andrew

Joachim Løvf

unread,
Oct 22, 2003, 2:15:37 AM10/22/03
to
In article <bn41gi$tde9l$1...@ID-82477.news.uni-berlin.de>,
manowa...@netscape.net says...

I wonder what Anchor Bay will do with their upcoming
DAWN release(s). Full screen, P&S, WS anamorphic or all three?

--
"I had no idea what happiness and little love could bring
Or what life had in store
But all things move toward their end"
jlovf ( at ) online (dot) no

loucyphre

unread,
Oct 22, 2003, 5:08:40 AM10/22/03
to
Andrew <manowa...@netscape.net> shat in news:bn41gi$tde9l$1@ID-
82477.news.uni-berlin.de:

Typical of many films. More information can almost always be seen on the
top and bottom of the screen when widescreen is not employed. Of course,
you miss stuff on the sides and often the stuff on the top and bottom was
never meant to be seen. GHOST STORY even has some nudity on cropped
versions that isn't presented in the widescreen.

Mark

unread,
Oct 22, 2003, 6:37:23 AM10/22/03
to
"Jordan Garren" <jord...@epix.net> wrote in message news:<59elb.5712$Bv6.1...@news1.epix.net>...

> However, I'm watching 28 Days
> Later right now and I'm disappointed with the sound.

The sound was one of the few things about '28 Days Later' I wasn't
disappointed by: lousy script full of plot holes and cliched
characters with no real development, intermittently bad acting (at
least by the teenage girl), crappy ending, and, for what is supposed
to be a zombie movie, a distinct lack of zombies through most of it.

Mark

Graeme

unread,
Oct 22, 2003, 5:00:31 PM10/22/03
to
>It could've used Dolby
>5.1 Surround......

according to my DVD it *Has* got 5.1 surround sound....
Graeme
-------------
'What happened? We were attacked by huge fuckin' howling things that's what!'
'I hope I give you the shits you fucking wimp' - Spoon, Dog Soldiers 2002

New URL!
www.tshirt-zone.com (Horror & Music)

Jordan Garren

unread,
Oct 23, 2003, 12:11:06 AM10/23/03
to
.... and, for what is supposed to be a zombie movie, a distinct lack of

zombies through most of it.

"28 Days Later" has been touted as a zombie film for some time (and that's
why I disliked the movie my first time viewing it) and it's not. The
"infected" are the film are just living human beings, overtaken by a Rage
virus. No shambling undead corpses here folks!

Jordan Garren

unread,
Oct 23, 2003, 12:13:16 AM10/23/03
to
> according to my DVD it *Has* got 5.1 surround sound....

Hmmm... well I only had a rental and didn't check the DVD specs beforehand.
Oh well. I'm still gonna buy it (along with some other films I've been
waiting for...).

0 new messages