Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_4ff3f9cf0233692bf7ccc6154cf67ea40176fa9aecd1accb, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 New 'Cross Of Iron' version for US - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
Billy Kramer

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New 'Cross Of Iron' version for US

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    New 'Cross Of Iron' version for US

    Hi all for all us Americans no more pan and scan BS
    YES YES YES
    4/18/2006 The Wide Screen Version Will Be released In USA

    available everywhere, pre order now or buy it then-support this Peckinpah masterpiece
    Tags: None
    #2
    Originally posted by VonLuger
    Hi all for all us Americans no more pan and scan BS
    YES YES YES
    4/18/2006 The Wide Screen Version Will Be released In USA
    I'm not going to jump for joy yet. I bought the UK version last year that was supposedly "widescreen." It was from Studio Canal and the transfer was just as bad as the old Hens Tooth version. More annoying, the 1.78:1 ratio widescreen just looked like it cut the headroom!

    This new release is also going to be 1.78:1, which is technically widescreen but it is half way between the 4x3 and 16x9, so I don't know what to expect. I need to look up and see how this film was shot.

    What is interesting is that the Studio Canal version was 128 minutes and this "new" transfer is 132 minutes. We'll see I guess. But I'm managing my expectations this time. That UK region 2 version was a major disappointment.

    Comment

      #3
      Originally posted by Peter_Suciu
      I'm not going to jump for joy yet. I bought the UK version last year that was supposedly "widescreen." It was from Studio Canal and the transfer was just as bad as the old Hens Tooth version. More annoying, the 1.78:1 ratio widescreen just looked like it cut the headroom!

      This new release is also going to be 1.78:1, which is technically widescreen but it is half way between the 4x3 and 16x9, so I don't know what to expect. I need to look up and see how this film was shot.

      What is interesting is that the Studio Canal version was 128 minutes and this "new" transfer is 132 minutes. We'll see I guess. But I'm managing my expectations this time. That UK region 2 version was a major disappointment.
      Region-free, widescreen Korean version has been out a while:

      http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...&postcount=170

      Comment

        #4
        Originally posted by CurtD
        Region-free, widescreen Korean version has been out a while:

        http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...&postcount=170
        Right... but is the film really "widescreen?" That's been the issue. It wasn't filmed for widescreen release, so it may be 16x9 (and enhanced for 16x9 TVs) but it could be cropped from the top and bottom or merely stretched. I'm guessing it was cropped.

        Comment

          #5
          Originally posted by Peter_Suciu
          What is interesting is that the Studio Canal version was 128 minutes and this "new" transfer is 132 minutes.
          It's called Pal speed-up Peter, I'm pretty sure I have explained it to you before.

          Cheers,
          David.
          At Rathau on the Aller, the CO of 5th Royal Tanks advanced on foot to take a cautious look into the town before his tanks moved in. He encountered one of his own officers, a huge Welshman named John Gwilliam who later captained his country's rugby team, 'carrying a small German soldier by the scruff of his neck, not unlike a cat with a mouse.' The Colonel said: 'Why not shoot him?' Gwilliam replied in his mighty Welsh voice: 'Oh no, sir. Much too small.'

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by David C
            It's called Pal speed-up Peter, I'm pretty sure I have explained it to you before.

            Would the Studio Canal version lose six minutes in the process? With the added frames per seond I guess it is possible.

            Regardless, the Studio Canal version is still just a cropped 4x3 frame. You actually lose the top and bottom of the screen.

            Comment

              #7
              I recently purchased the South Korean version-delivered around $14.00 can't beat that...anyway with a scene by scene comparison the South Korean version is darker(color more true?) also as Peter says the top is cut(not much)-BUT there is soooo much more information on either side of screen that this 'is' a wider screen version then US henstooth..also it states 138 minutes though when played its around 132 minutes-the added footage is mainly battle scenes explosion and graphic war images...I think this version ROCKS and for the price(at amazon.com) you can't go wrong, it is like seeing the film for the first time again...

              Comment

                #8
                Ok, congregation, please take out your Cross of Iron and turn to chapter 11 and lets study the video.

                Here it is from the Korean version in 16x9 anamorphic. You can see that it does not quite fill the width. I estimate that the film was actually shot at a ratio of around 1.6.

                Someone please compare this to the P&S version.
                Attached Files

                Comment

                  #9
                  Originally posted by CurtD
                  Someone please compare this to the P&S version.
                  Again, I don't think there is a true "Pan & Scan" version. Pan & Scan is used when a movie is modified from widescreen (16x9 or wider) to the traditional 4x3 aspect ratio. Many movies are modified this way.

                  But in the case of Cross of Iron, the film wasn't shot widescreen so there isn't technically a P&S version. Any "full frame" or 4x3 version might be cropped on the sides slightly but that's not pan & scan.

                  According to IMDB, the aspect ratio was:1.66:1

                  So the Korean version might be as close as it gets. The 4x3 versions (1.33:1) actually cut less than 10% off each side. There would be no reason to P&S as nothing that crucial would be cut.

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Peter_Suciu
                    Again, I don't think there is a true "Pan & Scan" version. Pan & Scan is used when a movie is modified from widescreen (16x9 or wider) to the traditional 4x3 aspect ratio. Many movies are modified this way.

                    But in the case of Cross of Iron, the film wasn't shot widescreen so there isn't technically a P&S version. Any "full frame" or 4x3 version might be cropped on the sides slightly but that's not pan & scan.

                    According to IMDB, the aspect ratio was:1.66:1

                    So the Korean version might be as close as it gets. The 4x3 versions (1.33:1) actually cut less than 10% off each side. There would be no reason to P&S as nothing that crucial would be cut.
                    Yes, I believe you are correct. I did hear somewhere that the U.S. version (which I don't have) is not even P&S, it is just cropped right down the middle (which is the ULTRA lazy and cheap way to do it). But, it's not like you are cropping Cinemascope. Here's approx what it should look like in 4x3:
                    Attached Files

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by CurtD
                      I did hear somewhere that the U.S. version (which I don't have) is not even P&S, it is just cropped right down the middle (which is the ULTRA lazy and cheap way to do it). But, it's not like you are cropping Cinemascope. Here's approx what it should look like in 4x3:
                      Curt, that's my point. My friend who is a video editor confirms that you'd never bother doing a P&S for a 1.66:1 transfer to 1.33:1. It isn't that it is lazy, it just makes sense.

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Lt. Meyer

                        Hi who play's Lt. Meyer in the movie,i don't see any credit's for the actor or the character.Just curious.Thanks for any info. Brian

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next

                        Users Viewing this Thread

                        Collapse

                        There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.

                        Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                        Working...
                        X