Does the Zooming on the new FRIDAY THE 13TH disc bother you?

Discussion in 'Site Polls' started by rhett, Feb 3, 2009.

?

How do you feel about the zoomed in image on the new FRIDAY THE 13TH discs?

Poll closed Mar 5, 2009.
  1. Unacceptable. I will not be buying until it is fixed.

    67 vote(s)
    51.5%
  2. Unfortunate, but I can't hold off buying any longer.

    28 vote(s)
    21.5%
  3. I don't really care either way.

    11 vote(s)
    8.5%
  4. It's noticable, but not that significant.

    18 vote(s)
    13.8%
  5. I can't even tell the difference.

    6 vote(s)
    4.6%
  1. eric_angelus

    eric_angelus Testacular

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Framingham, MA
    The point you are missing is that this in fact is not new, it has been like this everywhere but here in the US for years. It is a very real chance that the old DVD was in fact the error release. It did after all feature the wrong versions of Annie's and Mrs. Voorhees' deaths...so why is it so hard to believe it also had the wrong framing? (I am talking about the original DVD release here, not the box set version BTW)
     
  2. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    There's a massive difference there. They would never re-frame a Hitchcock film because the way his movies have been released and the way his movies were filmed were THE WAY THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE SHOWN. There'd be no extra space in the image (except for his films made post-1954, because those were intentially matted for widescreen, at HITCHCOCK'S request.) Hitchcock was VERY VERY precise as to how he filmed his movies. He actually storyboarded every one of his films entirely. He knew exactly what he was doing. Same with Kubrick, which is why they've been dubbed "auteur filmmakers". You can't even compare Hitchcock's or Kubrick's (who also was very precise as to how he framed his films - remember, Kubrick was a photographer before he became a filmmaker) films to a movie like Friday the 13th.

    With a small low-budget film like Friday the 13th made by amateur filmmakers (yes, Cunningham was an amateur filmmaker at the time Friday was made), it's QUITE possible that he just shot scenes without thinking too much about cinematography. And if you look at the transfer, the framing is INTENTIONAL. It's not like it's misframed or panned and scanned. You're not getting heads cut off. The uncut R2 from Warner (which was a full uncut print, btw, no "splicing" in of cut footage) has this framing as well. It is quite possible, like other people said, that the R1 DVD has always shown too much, as we got a "hybrid" version of Friday the 13th when it was first issued on DVD in 1999. It's certainly possible (and I'm beginning to think this for sure now) that Cunningham himself (or him and his cinematographer, etc) framed the film that way themselves back in 1979/1980, and when the MPAA wanted the film cut, Paramount just got its own print and snipped out the footage. Personally, I think the print used for the 1999 release of Friday was probably an edited version that got refused by the MPAA, and Paramount had to make one more final cut to Annie's death before the MPAA approved what we know today as the 'R-rated' version. Trust me, the framing on this release (and the Warner UK DVD) seems QUITE intentional.

    ~Matt
     
  3. Mattapooh

    Mattapooh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    946
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    St. John's, NL, Canada
    I'm with eric and Matt on this one. The evidence seems to be pointing at this being the correct version and the earlier discs wrong.

    Improper framing would either result in heads and other important details being cut off (in cases of being matted and/or zoomed) or boom mics being shown along with too much headroom (in unmatted/full frame stuff). Neither one of these is the case with the Friday discs. You lose a little bit of unnecessary information (ie. tree branches) and the resulting compositions look NICER than the old discs. I've got NO problems with the framing after watching the movie and it's something that, like I said, nobody even picked up on until the review was posted here. If you're seriously holding off on buying this disc because you think a replacement's coming, you'll never get it. I was one of those people that reacted negatively on this issue, but after watching the disc and doing a little more reading I'm convinced that this is the preferred version. I certainly can't see any problems.

    Anyway, to anyone that's still on the fence, go grab it.
     
  4. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Exactly. I thought it was all screwed when I first read the review, but the compositions seemed strikingly similar to the R2 from Warner, so I checked it out, did a little investigating, and low and behold, it had the exact same framing. I never noticed it there (and I've had this disc for about 5 years now) and it looks fine. People are making it out to seem that the film was horribly misframed or something. "It looks horrible". Bullshit. Anybody with eyes would be able to tell you that it DOESN'T look horrible, it just looks different (and if anything, it looks slightly better). People are just being stubborn on the issue. Paramount has finally given us the definitive edition of Friday the 13th and yet there's still complaints.

    It's just like when Warner finally released The Shining in 1.78:1 widescreen back in 2007, the first time it had ever been shown in widescreen on home video. (Or really the first time it had been shown in widescreen PERIOD since its release in 1980.) Sure Kubrick's preferred ratio was open-matte 1.33:1, but matting it for 1.78 didn't hurt the film at all. It's one of those films that still looks good in both 1.33:1 and 1.78:1. It looked different sure, but it didn't hurt the film. Same thing here. This framing on Friday the 13th was definitely intentional. (And no it wasn't Paramount doing it "just to piss off fans" like someone said. That's the most bullshit thing I've ever heard.)

    ~Matt
     
  5. Mattapooh

    Mattapooh Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    946
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    St. John's, NL, Canada
    I agree, that's pretty much the sentiment I was arguing against. Some people made it sound like an utter travesty which I worried about until I actually watched the disc. I think some people are blowing this so out of proportion that it's become ridiculous and I'd like to be one of the people who can state the opposite.
     
  6. Mutilated Prey

    Mutilated Prey Soul Stealer

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    6,436
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Texarkana
    Yup. Mountains outta mole hills is an understandment on this so-called "issue". Those waiting for an unwarranted fix, or feel their viewing pleasure will be compromised are sadly screwing themself.

    MutleyHyde - close this thread. It's a farce! :)

    Rhett - redo your review. It's misleading! Still love ya though ya big lug :)
     
  7. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    No really. Rhett should add some screengrabs of the R2 (I know he owns it ;)) so that we can compare ALL the versions and people can see that the R2 is exactly the same way.

    ~Matt
     
  8. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,747
    Likes Received:
    635
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Kubrick's opinion be damned, The Shining is better in widescreen. For example, the helicopter blades and shadow are almost completely matted out in the opening credits, which is a plus in my book because I've always found them distracting.
     
  9. SaviniFan

    SaviniFan I Have A Fetish

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    On the cutting room floor.
    Like I stated earlier, this is a fantastic blu-ray release of Friday the 13th. Watching it was a treat. The image clarity was better than I expected it to be and THE FRAMING IS FINE! Buy it now damnit! :)
     
  10. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah I noticed that immediately. It was actually the first thing I looked for when I bought the blu-ray to see if they'd matted out the helicopter blades. That's the only thing that bugged me about the open-matte presentation.

    ~Matt
     
  11. Mutilated Prey

    Mutilated Prey Soul Stealer

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    6,436
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Texarkana
    Yeah, you tell 'em guy!
     
  12. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Kind of weird Paramount hasn't replied to any of this as it seems like it hss traveled across quite a few sites, and the fact that more then half the people on here said they won't buy the Blu Ray because of it... I don't know, just surprised they haven't come out and defended themselves if it was purposely done. They're losing sales so it would be nice if they explained themselves, unless maybe they are in the wrong.

    Either way I am going to hold out until the ultimate box set comes out, and whether this is explained or not, I'll still buy it I guess. I can always keep the old DVD if they admit that they f-ed up.
     
  13. SaviniFan

    SaviniFan I Have A Fetish

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    On the cutting room floor.
    I seriously doubt this was a fuck up in any way. There isn't any scenes that feel cramped or framed improperly. I realize why rhett pointed the differences out, but it doesn't amount to squat if you actually watch the blu-ray. If you ask me, it's getting way out of hand and I think Paramount owes nobody any apology. The least you doubters should do is rent it. I bet almost all of you will wonder why you were bitching once you do.
     
  14. spawningblue

    spawningblue Deadite

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,069
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    Well to be honest some of the shots look worse, aka. not framed properly. I'm sorry, but having hands and shoulders chopped isn't better framing. No one asked for an apology, but they should explain the situation, whether they are right or wrong, look at this poll, they are loosing sales because of it. Has nothing to do with doubting, like i said, I'm just waiting for the boxset as I don't want to triple dip on it. It just doesn't make sense to me if they are in the right why they haven't commented on all this and explain why it is framed like that. Come out and say this is how the film was originally meant to be seen, and then all these people that are "bitching" about it and not buying the DVD or Blu Ray will change their mind and purchase it. No matter what way you look at it, from a business point of view it's stupid to ignore it and lose sales, unless they are in the wrong, that's all I'm saying.

    :lol: "Doubters". Maybe we can just handle waiting a couple months for the ultimate set. Nice of them to mention they are coming out with a set a couple weeks after everyone already ran out and purchased their Blu Ray.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2009
  15. fceurich39

    fceurich39 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    480
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Ira's Toys store
    just finished watching it on the new dvd it didn't even bother me i didn't even notice as much as i did on the night of the living dead 40th anniversary dvd by dimension extreme
     
  16. infinite

    infinite Guest

    i love this film. I think that they zoomed in a bit because this film is terribly dark and many of the shots do seem to have been taken from too far off. I think it was just to make the movie look better, and it def. did. The movie has never looked this good. Who cares if theres a bit of the sides cut off to give it closer image, it looks amazing and it's a good movie. Didn't we still love it when it was full screen? I think the issue isn't really a big deal. I can't wait for 2 and 3 to hit blu ray, DVDs look crappy near blu ray now
     
  17. gore

    gore Guest


    Bleh, I went against saying I wouldnt get it and did. And now the mention of the box set in br?!!. The transfer definitely makes the gore more fake looking, but a beautiful transfer. I had never seen the film uncut so I couldnt resist, even though it really does hurt the Kevin Bacon death. All I had was the TCM br, so I needed more!
     
  18. Dave

    Dave Pimp

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1999
    Messages:
    7,178
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    It's funny but it seems like everyone is trying to convince themselves that the zooming is okay. Didn't Rhett say it cuts off portions of peoples' bodies in a few scenes?

    UNACCEPTABLE.

    Only way I'm buying in is if someone from the crew pipes up and gives it an okay.
     
  19. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    913
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    No they don't. It doesn't look worse, people are blowing this way out of proportion. The movie's framing is a little "tighter". Nothing looks "framed improperly" when you actually sit down and watch the movie in full. (It doesn't look misframed either way.) It is clear that this was done intentionally, because "misframed" movies wouldn't have such perfect framing as Friday the 13th does here.

    Well actually, yeah it is. That shot of all of the counselors when they're talking to the police actually looks better because you DON'T see their hands. It's dead space and their hands twiddling actually distracts from the main focus of the shot. What's the big deal about her hands being cropped out? And the shoulder shot in the hospital with Alice. The main focus is HER, I don't know why there's a shot of the policeman's hand on her shoulder. Cropping his hand out makes Alice look alienated, which makes sense, as she was the LONE survivor of part 1.

    Well does Paramount really need to say anything? If people would do some research before they quickly pass this off as "Paramount fucked up", they'd stop complaining. (I thought this too until I double-checked with my R2 and saw it had the exact same framing.) Paramount's not the one at fault here, they licensed the print from Warner, who had the uncut print all along. Paramount only ever owned rights to the cut version of the film. This makes sense because Warner has ALWAYS owned the uncut version of the film, as it was accidentally released uncut on VHS in the UK back in the early '80s before being recalled and replaced with the edited version. (There's also a Japanese VHS from Warner that is uncut as well). The more you look at it, the more it makes sense that it was probably the filmmakers themselves who went back and cropped the film.

    But really, if people haven't seen this version of the film, they're in absolutely no position to complain. You can't judge an entire transfer based off a few screencaps. People think it looks worse BY COMPARISON, but when you watch the film in its entirety, the framing looks spot on. It's like arguing about a movie you've never seen before. Watch the film, THEN comment on how it looks. And it doesn't look BAD, nothing vital was cut off and like Mattapooh and other people have said, it actually DOES look better. Comparing them, you can see there actually was a bit too much "dead space" in the frame. The framing on this release looks more "professional".

    ~Matt
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2009
  20. SaviniFan

    SaviniFan I Have A Fetish

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    On the cutting room floor.
    Well said Matt89. I'm betting if anyone here want's Paramount to "fix" this so called situation, then all they will get is the cut version. Not that it is necessarily a bad thing, but does anyone honestly think you can seamlessly branch the uncut footage when the matting is different?

    I myself have not seen the box set so I don't know if the framing of the uncut footage was different in the extras, but you can most likely bet you will never see Paramount go out of their way to correct what is essentially a non issue.
     

Share This Page