SCREEN-L Archives

May 2000, Week 2

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Darryl Wiggers <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 10 May 2000 11:42:43 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (11 lines)
| Following on from Darryl Wiggers' post on Kubrick and widescreen, would I
| be right in thinking that Hitchcock never made a film with a wider ratio
| than 1:1.85? I can think of several VistaVision titles, but none in 'scope.

If you assume, from my argument, that because Kubrick had a preference for the 1.33:1 ratio that ALL filmmakers of his era (and before) should have felt the same way -- of course not. And I think I made it clear that even Kubrick saw the advantages of the wide-screen when he made 2001 (2.20.1 ratio) and, hence, made an exception.
.

----
Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama: http://www.tcf.ua.edu

ATOM RSS1 RSS2