Evil Dead Ratio

Discussion in 'Site Polls' started by rhett, Oct 14, 2010.

?

What's your preferred aspect ratio for THE EVIL DEAD?

Poll closed Nov 13, 2010.
  1. Full Frame 1.33:1

    41 vote(s)
    40.2%
  2. Widescreen 1.85:1

    34 vote(s)
    33.3%
  3. Doesn't matter

    23 vote(s)
    22.5%
  4. Evil Dead? Haven't seen it.

    4 vote(s)
    3.9%
  1. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    The debate regarding THE EVIL DEAD has never been whether or not to watch the film, but instead what version of the film to watch. Some prefer the 1.33:1 open matte version, which represents the original 16mm shooting ratio and the ratio in which the film was first screened during the premiere in Michigan and then later on VHS where it built its following. Others prefer the theatrical 1.85:1 ratio that Raimi claims was always the intended aspect ratio of the film.

    There are screenshots aplenty in our Blu-ray review of the film...look 'em over and decide: What's your preferred aspect ratio for THE EVIL DEAD?
     
  2. Chunkblower

    Chunkblower Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    I have to give the edge to the 1.85 version. It gives it a more cinematic feel.

    Glad both versions are included on the DVD/Blu-ray, though.
     
  3. Hellbilly

    Hellbilly Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    14,183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What Chunkblower said.
     
  4. evildeadfan123

    evildeadfan123 Sam & Dean Winchester

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Missouri
    Hard to decide, but I'm such a huge fan of Evil Dead, that either version is fine with me. One viewing I might go with the Full Screen version, and the next viewing, I might want to go with the Widescreen version, but I am glad that it is available on the Ultimate Edition DVD.
     
  5. SaxCatz

    SaxCatz New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Dry Dry Desert, AZ
    I prefer 1.33:1. And that is surprising since I generally detest full frame presentations- even open matte ones.
    For one, the Blu certainly looks sharper in this aspect ratio as there isn't that much resolution available in the 16mm film and this ratio allow us to make the best use of all of the available resolution rather than cropping off 33% of the films resolution and the stretching it to an even larger size.
    Secondly, I don't believe that 1.85:1 was Raimi's intended aspect ratio. After seeing some of the odd cropping (tops of heads cut off, etc) in the original 1.85:1 transfer (admittedly, the new 1.85:1 transfer is superior), I believe that this is Raimi retroactively "Lucas"-ing his film.
     
  6. X-human

    X-human I ate my keys

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,920
    Likes Received:
    670
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Illinois
    1.33:1.

    It's easy to say perhaps their inexperience, budget and time constraints caused the framing to fall out of the intended 1.85:1 but the open matte frame is perhaps the best full screen framing I have seen in modern cinema. So I really can't explain why 1.33:1 is artistically better looking to me when that apparently wasn't their intention. Happy accident?

    All this reminded me about the press release for the Blu-ray which states, "two all-new 1080p anamorphic transfers in 1.85 and the original director-composed 1.33 aspect ratio, have been prepared and personally supervised by director/writer Raimi." While it's tricky wording it does infer that 1.33:1 was a conscious composition. While I won't claim to know what Raimi truly did, I'll say that he's not making it easy to tell.
     
  7. Nailwraps

    Nailwraps Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Messages:
    3,198
    Likes Received:
    430
    Trophy Points:
    83
    1.33:1, as it was shot and intended for.
     
  8. Anaestheus

    Anaestheus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,605
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I've always preferred the 1.33. Got me three reasons here:

    1. Overall, I think the framing for the 1.33 version looks better. Yes there are some shots that are composed more nicely in the 1.85 version, but I think there more succeed with the 1.33

    2. Since my first exposure to the film was via videotape, that is how I remember the film from my youth, so nostalgia has a bit of a pull. And, while I normally stick by theatrical release as definitive, I think I could make a strong argument that this particular film's life really began on VHS.

    3. A large part of ED's initial charm for me was seeing things like the crappy matte shots for the moon, the crew hiding behind the bushes, and the lighting rigs in the ceiling. So, to me, anything that diminishes those "rough spots" takes a bit of the charm of the film away.
     
  9. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    10,780
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Evil Dead was released simultaneously on video and to theaters, so BOTH ratios are correct.

    Honestly, I'm not all that vigilant about proper aspect ratios anymore. As long as it isn't a distraction while I'm watching the film (like cutting heads off or squeeze boxing) I'm okay with a little alteration. The Evil Dead may have a few instances of heads being cut in half in widescreen, but I don't believe I've ever noticed it. I think the reason may be because a lot of those shots were close-ups, and are thus more forgivable than, say, something like Horror of Dracula where almost the entire film is in medium shot, and yet the heads are cut off in every single frame. THAT is when it becomes inexcusable, imho.
     
  10. russweiss

    russweiss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    2,673
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Japanese lobby cards

    I'll take the film either way. I've seen the film twice in the theater but that was 27 years ago so I don't remember the framing. You certainly get more picture information on the full frame cut but that's not always a good thing. I enjoy the film enough that it really doesn't matter.
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Jason Reynolds

    Jason Reynolds New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tulsa, Ok.
    1.33 for me. That's the original way it was shown, regardless of if Raimi meant for it to be 1.85.

    I'm more curious about the 3 people that voted they'd never seen it. You're on a Horror film site and you haven't seen Evil Dead? For shame! :)
     
  12. othervoice1

    othervoice1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,444
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Indiana
    I like the widescreen - just my personal preference
     
  13. msw7

    msw7 Re-animated member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,699
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Brigid Fitch, USA
    Doesn't matter - I enjoy it both ways.
     
  14. Myron Breck

    Myron Breck BOO!!! Gotcha!

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,698
    Likes Received:
    270
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Atlanta
    It doesn't really matter to me, but I first saw it on VHS so Full Frame wins.
     
  15. BrokeNads

    BrokeNads New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I see first in full tv so I think is good and then I see in widescreen and I cant see the water in the puddle. I think this is WTF! So I think now is fix this in the new widescreen bluray to put the correct to see the frame and inside and if is true I vote widescreen.
    I come back to make posts because before I take away my time because I buy a house and I try to fix in up. I movie inside my new house halloween so is intrest for me. Good luck for me and a new house for me! Hello to the people if you remember me.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2010
  16. Katatonia

    Katatonia Hellbound Heart

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2003
    Messages:
    20,595
    Likes Received:
    1,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Missouri
    I prefer watching it in Full Frame, but the Widescreen presentation on the Blu-ray looks quite awesome too.
     
  17. msw7

    msw7 Re-animated member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,699
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Brigid Fitch, USA
    Congrats on your house!
     
  18. Cujo108

    Cujo108 Guest

    1.33:1

    That's how I've always watched it, and why I kept my Elite DVD when I bought the Book of the Dead version. I got the latter simply for the BOD packaging, like most people I'd assume.
     
  19. Mutilated Prey

    Mutilated Prey Soul Stealer

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    6,458
    Likes Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Texarkana
    I'm used to the 1:33:1 from old cable and VHS days, but if I can get 1:85:1 I will always take it as long as nothing much important is cropped.
     
  20. indiephantom

    indiephantom Horny Spirit

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2000
    Messages:
    4,014
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Ghost World
    In theatres I like the really wide 2.35:1 Scope stuff. But at home I prefer the 16:9 that fills the screen. It just looks amazing.
     

Share This Page