Class action suit against MGM DVD over “Widescreen fraud”
A massive lawsuit is being compiled against MGM DVD for “widescreen fraud”. Apparetly, many if not most MGM DVDs are not actually widescreen, but a pan&scan version of the film with the top and bottom cut off. I have not noticed this while watching MGM DVDs but I will have to dust off my Bill and Teds Bogus Journey DVD and compare it to the VHS. You can view the full list of titles at the site, some including: 24 Hour Party People, Y Tu Mama Tambien, Silence of the Lambs, Man on the Moon, and Ghost World
Comments (14)
I just compared the Bogus Journey VHS (full screen) to the DVD (widescreen)
THE ALLEGATIONS ARE TRUE!!! The Widescreen version is a cut up fullscreen version! You couldn’t even have guessed, since to be honest, the cut up widescreen shots looked better than the fullscreen ones… the back of the DVD says “theatrical release presentation” on it…
HOWEVER:
did Bill and Ted exist widescreen, get cut up to be fullscreen, then cut up again for the DVD?
or… was it released widescreen, had parts ADDED to BECOME fullscreen (you know how movies are shot with more than the aspect ratio, then edited later) because of the VHS format, and is now returned to its original widescreen presentation?
Like I said, the cut up version of Bill & Ted I have looks more correct than the full screen VHS.
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005I am on the phone with MGM right now.
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005You forgot to mention that people who bought these DVDs may be entitled to a DVD swap or refund of $7.10!!
http://www.mgmdvdsettlement.com
Posted by Sean on January 27th, 2005The representative I spoke to said while he can’t comment on all DVDs as he doesn’t know for certain, he says my theory is correct. The VHS fullscreen versions these movies are being compared to were from a time when ‘more’ would be added to adhere to the VHS ‘full screen’ demanded format.. we had a good talk about how even when you see movies in the theatres the extra stuff is still there and its the projectionist that eliminates the other stuff. if they screw up like they did when the panda saw “jackie brown” you can see boom mics in the top of shots if they’re there. we also talked about how you dont hear any filmmakers crying about their movie being cut up, and they’d know more than anyone if their baby got messed around with.
I asked if that means that some new fullscreen dvds actually have ‘more’ than widescreen ones, and he said maybe in some cases, but probably not. no guess why there.
bottom line: he says the people making these allegations are making comparisions to VHS copies, not the original theatrical presentation.
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005the FilmTechForums geeks also believe the VHS copies are showing the original negative, and that these ‘chopped’ copies are the “director’s vision” theatrical release, despite having less.
this reminds me of the Elephant DVD though… how the original version is full screen but theres a widescreen ‘chopped’ version available too..
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005So MGM is saying that they haven’t done anything wrong then? I’m getting confused.
You said that they are using a “pan & scan” version of the film with the top and bottom cut off. Does that mean that some of these widescreen releases actually still have the panning and scanning in them (ie. reframing the picture to fit everything in)?
I do know that in some cases widescreen DVDs coming out nowadays are showing more than they should be. I guess this is because they are using a different aspect ratio from the original theatrical release? I don’t know why they would do this.
A good example is in Peewee’s Big Adventure. There’s a scene where Peewee is pulling a chain out of the basket on his bike and the gag is that it’s an endless chain that would never actually fit in the basket. On the DVD you can see that the basket has a hole in the bottom and the chain is being pulled through from underneath.
Posted by Sean on January 27th, 2005When I watched Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure on TV and VHS, you can see the extra chain being fed through under the basket but on my DVD they corrected this error. Tim Burton even mentions in the audio commentary that they corrected the framing issue for the DVD cut.
Posted by Nuno on January 27th, 2005Oh okay, for some reason I thought it was on the DVD but I must just remember him mentioning this in the commentary.
Posted by Sean on January 27th, 2005sorry to confuse about ‘pan and scan’. I use this term, standard, and fullscreen intermittently when I shouldnt.
the movie has not been ‘double cropped’. it wasnt wider, then cut to fullscreen or standardized, then cut again…
the MGM discs are standard versions (original negative) that have been cut for DVD back to their original theatrical presentations. IN my example, the VHS copy of Bill and Ted actually is showing MORE than the director intended, adding above and below the original theatrical cut, though the width of the feature is the same…
….this is hard to explain, if I had a pen and paper it would be easier.
hows this
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005theatrical cut: 1.85:1 ratio feature
vhs feature: keeps original theatrical cut width, adds to top and bottom, or doubles the bottom, or doubles the top, filling up the frame aka ‘formatting to fit the screen’ in a different way than we do today
the new dvds eliminate this extra stuff into the original 1.85:1 format, giving people the impression they lost something, even though the director never intended it to be there.
yeah, so by using the Pee Wee example, when they put stuff on VHS in the past they would sometimes add more than was in the theatrical cut, which is why you see the chain gag get ruined.
Now with new DVDs being released of older titles they are removing this stuff that has been put on VHS ‘formatted to fit your screen’ editions that were never intended to be shown. People unfortunately are noticing this extra stuff is missing and are thinking something has been taken from them that shouldn’t have been, when its just the opposite.
Lesson is: sometimes ‘formatted to fit your screen’ doesnt mean they cut stuff off the sides. Sometimes it means they added stuff to the top and bottom.
Posted by Goon on January 27th, 2005So basically Goon, through your research you’ve found that there is no need to send them back. That is, unless you have a bunch of titles on the list that you don’t want anymore, and you could then net yourself some extra cash (probably more than you would get from selling them to a used CD/DVD store).
Posted by Brad on January 30th, 2005yeah, I suppose if you really arent into your copy of “Privates on Parade” or you scratched up a vital copy of UHF this is an opportunity. Or if you’re an idiot who wants a standard version with stuff that isnt supposed to be there.
Posted by Goon on January 30th, 2005Thank you, Gents! Your discussion here is the first place I’ve found an intelligent description of the reality of this situation. I used my Princess Bride disc to experiment.
The best example I’ve found so far is:
Princess Bride: ’scene’ 3: A Royal Announcement
If you jump to the scene there are two telling shots…
First, as the camera shows trumpeters blowing fanfare for the prince… In widescreen (theatrical release) you see the line of trumpeters positioned up a staircase, nearly filling the frame from side to side, so, one would imagine trumpeters or their horns to be lost in the fullscreen version, yet, they are not. In fullscreen the trumpeters still fill the frame from side to side.
Second [this one is quite obvious], following the trumpeters fanfare, the prince walks out onto a balcony to speak to the people. In widescreen (theatrical release) the top of the prince’s head is almost even with the top of the frame, but in fullscreen there are two rows of castle masonry visible above his head.
So, the widesreen (theatrical release) on the DVD is like playing the fullscreen version and placing duct tape across the top and bottom of your screen.
Now, I can only assume that the widescreen version on the DVD is the same as the theatrical release because they say it is and I can’t remember back that far. The evidence seems to agree. If the film had been cropped twice we would be missing portions of the shots, which does NOT appear to be the case with The Princess Bride.
If I knew how to grab screenshots I’d be happy to illustrate. Someone able should do just that. MGM should do it, in their own defense. I see no wrongdoing here. I think I’ll check my Rain Man, Return of the Living Dead, Spaceballs, and Terminator DVDs, just the same.
Posted by Bonk on January 31st, 2005Problem is this is just plain FRAUD and us lil’ people go to prision for it
Posted by brian on February 1st, 2005Leave a Reply