Customer Discussions > 2001: A Space Odyssey [Blu-ray] forum

Something Got Chopped


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-13 of 13 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Sep 18, 2009 2:11:23 PM PDT
Gary says:
How is it that a movie, the theatrical release of which was in Cinerama/Super Panavision (an aspect ratio of 2.59:1) gets released in Blu Ray at 2.20:1? I have not purchased the movie yet; however, I was very disappointed to see the movie stats showing a 2.20:1 aspect ratio. I want to see this movie in the theatrical aspect ratio (Check out "Battle of the Bulge" on DVD and you'll know what I'm talking about). If 2001 is released in 2.20:1, then something got chopped!

Posted on Sep 18, 2009 7:37:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 29, 2009 3:42:57 AM PDT
Gary says:
Okay, "Battle of the Bulge" was not the proper example, since it was released in Ultra Panavision, which some web pages claim to have an aspect ratio of 2.76:1. Nevertheless, 2001 was presented in at least some theaters in single lens Cinerama, which is NOT 2.20:1 aspect ratio.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 5, 2009 12:17:44 PM PDT
Adam Austin says:
The movie was filmed in a 2.20:1 AR. Nothing is chopped from the BR disc.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 27, 2009 2:26:13 AM PST
E. Gregory says:
Adam is correct. The film in its 70mm format was always 2.20:1. If it appeared to be in a different ratio at a certain theater, it could have been due to various projection compromises. Days of Heaven was also in a 2.20:1 ratio in its 70mm format despite some people thinking that it was wider. See my comments in the posts section for that film for further details.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2010 6:57:45 AM PST
Gerry says:
In regards to the uneducated 2.35:1 zealot reviewer, as a Director of Photography, I can state unequivocally that 2001 is supposed to be in 2.20:1 aspect ratio. It was shot in 2.20:1. It was not shot in Cinemascope (or anamorphic Panavision), which is 2.35:1. It was shot with straight lenses in Super Panavision 70 (65mm negative, 70mm projection print with soundtrack). Super Panavision 70 is a 2.20:1 aspect ratio format. When you are watching a 70mm print in a theater you are watching 2.20:1, which was never as wide as the anamorphic formats. Learn your aspect ratios.

Not to mention the fact that Kubrick went to the extraordinary effort of exposing his special effects composite shots as successive passes on the original undeveloped 65mm negative (after it being held sometimes in refrigeration for up to a year or more waiting for the next pass) so that all the composite visual elements are first generation on the original camera negative, rather than the cheaper and more common optical composite dupe negative inserts. Amazing. That is why it looks as good as it does. No optical negative generations.

A Beautiful Film...and one of the best executions of the 70mm format ever.

A true Visual Masterpiece.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2010 6:58:04 AM PST
Gerry says:
In regards to the uneducated 2.35:1 zealot reviewer, as a Director of Photography, I can state unequivocally that 2001 is supposed to be in 2.20:1 aspect ratio. It was shot in 2.20:1. It was not shot in Cinemascope (or anamorphic Panavision), which is 2.35:1. It was shot with straight lenses in Super Panavision 70 (65mm negative, 70mm projection print with soundtrack). Super Panavision 70 is a 2.20:1 aspect ratio format. When you are watching a 70mm print in a theater you are watching 2.20:1, which was never as wide as the anamorphic formats. Learn your aspect ratios.

Not to mention the fact that Kubrick went to the extraordinary effort of exposing his special effects composite shots as successive passes on the original undeveloped 65mm negative (after it being held sometimes in refrigeration for up to a year or more waiting for the next pass) so that all the composite visual elements are first generation on the original camera negative, rather than the cheaper and more common optical composite dupe negative inserts. Amazing. That is why it looks as good as it does. No optical negative generations.

A Beautiful Film...and one of the best executions of the 70mm format ever.

A true Visual Masterpiece.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 26, 2013 5:12:19 PM PST
I saw it in first release at a Houston Cinerama theater. I DISTINCTLY remember the 'dialogue' (inquisition?) between Dr. Floyd & Dr. Smyslov in Earth-orbit as being without pan. One profile at far left of screen, the other at far right. One long shot...far from each other. This is not what I now see: panning back and forth. Thoughts?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 26, 2013 5:19:20 PM PST
I saw this in first release (Houston TX Cinerama Theater) and it WAS in Cinerama. I have left a note elsewhere about the Earth-orbit station 'interview' between Dr. Floyd and Dr. Smyslov, which originally was without pan: one profile at far left, the other at far right. Long shot, no cuts, no pans. That's not what you see now, sadly. Current versions now cruelly rely on squeezing shots (cockpit action pre Lunar landing). terrible.

Posted on Jul 11, 2013 12:46:23 AM PDT
Richard W. says:
If you follow the link here to IMDb for 2001 and click onto the Technical Specifications the Aspect Ratio is 2.20:1 in the 70 mm print and 2.35:1 in the 35 mm print. Also of note you are not buying the Premier Cut at 160 minutes but the 141 minute version so this may be why there are some questions here on scenes. And for those of you who want to buy the sequel 2010 the Aspect Ratio is 2.20:1 on the 70 mm print and 2.35:1 on the 35 mm print as stated at IMDb. The aspect ratio listed here on Amazon for 2010 lists the Aspect Ration as 2.40:1 but the running time is OK at 116 minutes.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2013 5:06:17 PM PDT
I saw it in Cinerama (!) first, in Houston. It was the best.
---jp

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 14, 2014 9:18:48 AM PST
BJC says:
Were you watching this on a 4:3 television? Because what you're describing is called "pan-and-scan," which is how widescreen movies are shown on the old TV format. They will move the frame viewable area from one side of the film frame to the other to show both without giving the appearance of a cutaway edit. Either that, or the display settings on your 16x9 TV are out of whack.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 14, 2014 10:15:35 AM PST
Gary says:
No, I have an HD projection system. The original issue that started this thread was the very conspicuous closing credit which stated "Presented by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer in Cinerama". There is no Cinerama aspect ratio of 2.20:1 (not even single-lens Cinerama). That's what led to my original comment that "something got chopped". To me, anytime I see the Cinerama logo, I expect to see an extremely wide aspect ratio (at least something close to 2.59:1). When I saw nothing even approaching the wide Cinerama aspect ratio, I became suspicious that something had to have been done to get it down to 2.20:1. What I realize now, is that it is quite possible that the Cinerama presentations may have used a matted frame to increase the aspect ratio. At least now I can enjoy one of my favorite movies without the fear that someone has arbitrarily chopped something out of the frame! Not uncommon in BD/DVD releases these days.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 14, 2014 11:23:47 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 14, 2014 11:27:44 AM PST
I am an OLD person, who saw the original release in CINERAMA; there were a few scenes Kubrick deliberately framed only for that aspect (for example the quizzing of Dr. Bowman on the earth station: Bowman was profile far left and Russian Dr. was far right - or vice versa - and the camera did NOT pan). I believe it was also released soon after in VistaVision with alternate shots.

"How the West Was Won" is available BD in original Cinerama format, so maybe 2001 will get the same treatment. Hope hope....
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  7
Total posts:  13
Initial post:  Sep 18, 2009
Latest post:  Feb 14, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
2001: A Space Odyssey [VHS]
2001: A Space Odyssey [VHS] by Keir Dullea (VHS Tape - 1993)
4.2 out of 5 stars   (1,618)