SCREEN-L Archives

March 2001, Week 5

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:
Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:45:00 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
Mike is right to be confused by my query. I was confused myself when I wrote
it. Indeed, aspect ratios make up a small fraction of these overall texts
and can easily be set aside to pursue other aspects. But I think its sad
that it is... I was prompted to ask the DTV question because, until now, I
had been pretty clueless about its introduction and, somehow, this thread
triggered thoughts about it. I wondered what prompted its introduction, and
what its impact would be. Could I still watch The Big Sleep without Bogie's
head being lopped off, or his gun disappearing? Will the circle of dancing
girls in overhead Busby Berkeley shots become half-circles?

Granted this thought process has little to do with a thread about a
particular film text, but my own understanding of this issue is mainly
credited to them. And it is a visual medium. The most astute filmmakers will
frame their shots in a manner that help illustrate the political, social and
cultural issues Mike highlights. That should be obvious. The texts deal with
this, so you can't avoid it completely. This is why letterboxing became such
an important issue. Carefully composed images were often rendered incoherent
when forced into 4:3 aspect ratio. And now, it seems, a reverse -- even
bigger -- problem may have been introduced. Can the wealth of more
squarely-framed films survive in the widescreen digital age?

It strikes me as a hugely important issue to discuss as we will all (at
least in North America) be forced to re-adjust the way we watch films, both
at home and perhaps the classroom as well. Will viewers resent seeing black
bars on the side when, in the future, they watch early Capra, Ford or Lang?
Will they switch to a widescreen alternatives because they can see more? I
also wondered about contemporary films like Eyes Wide Shut (sorry for
slipping in Kubrick again Mike) which was deliberately shot to fit a 4:3
frame. Will the widescreen purists, who complain that the DVD is not
letterboxed, finally get their way?

Does any of this matter? So far I get the impression most think it doesn't.
That it doesn't even warrant discussion in a classroom. Even though it
affects the majority of 20th century cinema. That makes me go "huh"

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2