Barbed Wire, DVD Matting, and Lying

My partner and I decided to snuggle on the couch with a hot dish (we're Midwestern bred), some sodas, and a classic movie last night to have a cozy Friday evening at home (we're also past the age of going out). The film we chose was the cinema verte neo noir gem, BARB WIRE, starring the very serious method actress Pamela Anderson. This 1996 erotic thriller was.....not good. In fact, we made it about 40 minutes in before I couldn't take any more and we threw in the towel.

As I was watching though, something struck me as very odd. This DVD was put out by Polygram USA Video in 1999, clearly before the company went through a series of mergers and became obsolete. That being said, me picking on them is the equivalent of picking on the fence outside my window, but I did want to point out why this DVD became a bee in my bonnet last night.

So in the menu, one gets a choice as many DVDs at the time offered-- standard or widescreen? Meaning, do you want to watch this 1.85:1 or 1.33:1?



Let's look at this picture for a second. The DVD menu is suggesting that if you watch the Widescreen version of the film, there is more image to the left and right than if you watch the Standard version of the film, which looks like it is pan and scanned here.

So we choose Widescreen and the titles start. During this wonderfully executed title sequence of boobs flying all over the place, I notice that in a few shots, the top of the frame seems like heads are missing.



My initial thought is "Hrm, a DP probably wouldn't have framed it like that when he was shooting....perhaps this was shot 1.37 and matted? But that doesn't make sense because the DVD said the fullscreen version was pan and scanned...." So, later that evening in a bout of indigestion I took a look at the fullscreen/standard version of the movie and look at what I found:



Aha! It was shot 1.37 and matted for widescreen!!! But this was just the title sequence, so maybe the rest of the DVD was pan and scanned from the 1.85 version. It's a possibility, right? I did a little more digging. Well.....






And....

So here's the deal. Clearly this isn't a pan and scan version of the movie, so why is the DVD menu saying that it is? AND the disclaimer before the film is warning the viewer on the fullscreen/standard version that it's been modified from its original version in that it's been formatted to fit their square TV screen? What bull dropped that on the barnyard floor? It hasn't been reformatted-- it's just been transferred without the mattes on the top and bottom of the frame. This is so misleading and gives people the wrong idea about how fullscreen and widescreen works. So, Polygram Home Video, RIP and thanks for playing, but you totally took your viewers for a ride with this one didn't you?

DVD Popularity, or Lack Thereof, in 1997

21 years ago, the technological life of consumers was changed forever: the birth of the DVD-Video. 


via GIPHY

Different sources list different titles as the first to be released on DVD. A Google search listed TWISTER in 1997 as the first commercial release, yet on this site the first releases are listed as on December 20, 1996: POINT OF NO RETURN, BLADE RUNNER, ERASER, and THE FUGITIVE. Over the years, we have seen the format grow to include our favorite films, heard controversies by critics on review sites like www.dvdbeaver.com, seen it grow into formats such as Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, and now, of course, seen it start to dwindle and fade away as streaming becomes more mainstream. 

People were instantly attracted to the number of special features that were once limited to laserdiscs, its compact nature which made it much cheaper than laserdisc, the clarity of image and sound compared to VHS, and as time went on these other formats were left behind. And yet, as hard as it is to believe, not everyone got on board the DVD Popularity Train when the format started making its way into stores and eventually consumer living rooms. Here were some early arguments people had with the format.


via GIPHY

1) "I DON'T WANT TO SEE BLACK!"

The plus side to DVD was that it was beginning to standardize presenting films in their intended aspect ratios as they would have been seen in theaters. Few people owned a 16x9 television set when DVD came out, so most would see these films in their letterbox formats on their square 4x3 tv sets. While today, a 2.35:1 aspect ratio film presents a thin black line on the top and bottom of a16x9 TV, when DVD first came out, two thirds of the screen (above and below the image of the film) would be black. While it is nice that DVD allowed for the entire film frame to be seen, on the average TV at the time the image would now appear quite small. Also, many people still hadn't grasped the concept of seeing a rectangle in a movie theater vs. a square when they were in their homes and thought that there was more magical image above the frame line that didn't exist. They didn't understand that the image was getting cropped to the left and right of what would fit on their TV.

Of course, if you read this blog's PORKY'S article, you would have learned about the open matte 1.85 films, which did have a 4x3 image that was now being matted for DVD. Here's another example-- the fullscreen vs. widescreen versions of GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER, available on Sony Home Entertainment:

Years later, people are still arguing about how their DVDs for CARRIE and PORKY'S are censored because their is less nudity than on their old VHS tapes, not understanding that the nudity was always cropped from the widescreen image. Thankfully, by the turn of the century, 16x9 TVs were becoming more commonplace, people were understanding how aspect ratios worked, and things calmed down.

2) "I CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS AND VHS"


via GIPHY

I get it, the first reaction I would have too is "Are you vision impaired?", but believe it or not, this was a legitimate argument for many consumers at that time. The average TV still operated with tube technology-- the image it produced was soft, yet bright, so that whether you were watching network TV, HBO, a laserdisc, or a VHS tape, the image was similar. Of course, with a VHS recorded in SLP mode or that was a dub of another tape, one would see anomalies, but if one was looking at a consumer VHS vs. a consumer DVD on the average 1990s TV, the difference in quality was only slightly different due to the technological limitations of the TV....and most certainly not worth repurchasing one's entire home video collection. A good sounding Hi-Fi track could suit the needs of the small speaker on a 1990s TV the same way that a DVD could. In fact, because the VHS tapes were mixed specifically for those TVs and DVDs tended to be mixed more for 5.1 surround systems, chances are the average consumer would have a better audio experience with the VHS than the DVD.

3) "TOO FRAGILE"

VHS was an incredibly durable format-- beyond the Hi-Fi track going, which we discussed earlier. If there was a section that was damaged by a machine, there would be a few seconds of bad video (still viewable in most cases), and the tape would chug through and get a better signal. Usually, it does not take more than a minute for VHS to clear itself from audiovisual issues, which tend to be no more than some green and white dropout lines scrolling over the screen and the audio fading in and out.


via GIPHY

Hence, people were a little rougher with VHS tapes. They didn't need to obsess keeping them in their sleeves, worry about dropping them, etc. DVDs on the other hand were much more fragile due to not just the technology, but the size. A smudge of a fingerprint could make a DVD freeze. A 1/2" scratch, if it is deep enough, could ruin an entire 20 minutes of program for the viewer permanently. And one couldn't simply sit through and still make out what was going on during this bad portion like they could with VHS dropout lines. Now, the entire disc would stop working and the consumer had to hope that turning the machine off and on again would resolve the problem, which would then result in them needing to start the program over and skip to where the problem existed and hopefully to where it resolved itself...which leads into our next problem people had with the format.

4) "I CAN'T START WHERE I LEFT OFF"


via GIPHY

Today, most DVD players can resume where one leaves off on a disc when they turn their players back on after powering it off, but this was a feature that was only on more expensive DVD players when the format was first introduced. This means that if someone watched half of a movie and wanted to return to it at a later time, they would have to find where this moment was, either by skipping through the chapters in the film or by using the menus, which were hard to navigate. This leads us to our last complaint.......

5) "HOW DO I WORK THIS DARN THING?"

via GIPHY

Today, we live in an age where technology is much more a part of our lives than it was back in 1997. At that time, only 36% of Americans had a computer in their home according to the US Census. VHS tapes were pretty self-explanatory in how they worked. By putting a commercial tape in a machine, it would start automatically. There were a handful of buttons one needed to operate a commercial tape-- Play, Fast Forward, Rewind, Stop, Pause, and Eject. Then came DVD with its FBI warnings that one couldn't skip, its menus that required a little bit of a technological background to get around, and the many different features of a disc (sound, subtitles, different versions) that required navigation-- all a bit much for a population that hadn't necessarily all been exposed to a home computer on a regular basis. For people who didn't want to "see black" and wanted to watch the film full screen (a 1.33 aspect ratio for 4x3 TVs), many times two sided discs were available, one with the full screen version, one with the widescreen. Whether side A or B had a specific version was never standardized, meaning the customer was obligated  to squint and look at the tiny writing on the disc to determine which side they wanted to see. This being said, if a film was longer, in the early days of DVD both sides of a disc were used to fit the entire program on it (i.e. ROBIN HOOD PRINCE OF THIEVES).


via GIPHY

It may seem puzzling for people today that there was a time when people thumbed their noses at the DVD format. After it took off it very quickly wiped out the VHS market and forced studios to go through a restoration and remastering process of their libraries to get the films ready for the new format. It standardized how the consumer watched movies until Bluray and streaming began taking over. As the days of DVDs wane and we begin to look at this format nostalgically, let us not forget to tip our hats to those who noticed the flaws and suffered through the early days...and hope that they have now embraced DVD as we all have.

2017 Annual Dusk Til Dawn Horrorthon

Fall is such an interesting time to be in Los Angeles. We don't get the autumnal changing of leaves, different varieties of  corn andapples don't blossom into our supermarkets like they do in the midwest, and flannel shirts don't run rampant due to the lack of weather changing. We do however, take our Halloween season very seriously. The repertory film circuit is the perfect example. Screenings of horror classics run regularly throughout the month of October, and two theaters, the New Beverly Cinema and the Aero Theater (part of the American Cinematheque) do their own all night horror film marathons! The Aero's Dusk Til Dawn Horrorthon, now celebrating its 12th year, has become a staple in the rep film circuit, and how could anyone resist?

Seven films are run, this year's lineup being An American Werewolf in London, Popcorn, The Tingler, Hack-O-Lantern, Shocker, Brainscan, and Death Bed: The Bed that Eats. All films were presented on beautiful 35mm prints, with the exception of Death Bed, where only a DCP was available. When I say beautiful, I mean every print had minor scratches, rich color, and rich sound to ensure audience members would be popping out of their seat at just the right moments as the filmmakers had intended. American Werewolf in London, the print that showed the most wear, was a Polydor print from its European release and there are better prints available from Universal Studios (such as the one shown at UCLA in 2013 as a double feature with the 30th anniversary of Thriller) but it would still fall in the Good condition as the scratches were limited to the first few minutes of the reels. The Tingler had some splices during dialogue in it, but it was still as enjoyable as the others with very few vertical lines and a sharp black and white contrast from when it was printed. The print of Shocker was so great that it could have been used as a DVD transfer-- not a single scratch on it and comparable to what one would see on a DCP of a new film.

This year, to avoid tickets selling out in less than 10 minutes as they have in the past, the theater did NOT announce when tickets were going on sale, giving more people time to purchase. As the theater filled around 7:15 (festivities begin promptly at 7:30 to ensure people are let out at a reasonable hour), people pulled out their blankets, pillows, libations, and candy, getting ready to snuggle with some horror classics. Each film began with Grant, the master of ceremonies, energizing his audience, throwing candy and DVDs into the crowds, and bringing out classic characters that were created especially for the event. Candy Randy runs throughout the audience throwing fun size packs of candy, and Corn Gorn is a man in a Gorn Star Trek costume who runs around with a giant corn on the cobb.

Then begins the filler entertainment, which can be silly and a bit repetitive but was well reigned in this year. Silly commercials, videos of Star Trek and TJ Hooker, and a bizarre music video by porn star turned disco star Dennis Parker, for example, will run for about 20 minutes to get the viewer engaged with the screen for the next horror film. As the films run, the audience might scream, cheer, boo, or even heckle the screen during silly parts of films, such as Hack-O-Lantern, which was so terrible it was entertainingly humorous, or Popcorn, an over-the-top film that was about a horror-thon that goes awry when people start getting murdered. In this film, for example, when an ugly college kid tries to disgustingly flirt with the protagonist, a guy near the front of the theater yelled "Swipe Left!", a reference to the dating app Tinder, which sent the audience into hysterics. Instead of chiding the audience for this when it could potentially get out of hand, by the time Shocker started, a head volunteer yelled "No heckling this one guys, this is Wes Craven," which was prompted by applause by the same audience as they agreed the mood was about to change.

The staff at the Aero were so generous to open their home to audience members at a price that they could afford but by no means gave the theater a profit: a mere $25 not only paid for my admission for seven films in a row, but also ample amounts of pizza, candy, coffee, and other snacks. During slower parts of the films, volunteers came through the aisles offering "Soylent Pizza", which was really just Little Caeser's pizza, to patrons. When an unfortunate flood hit the concession stand a few hours into the marathon, the staff managed to call a company to fix the problem, and reopened concessions within a reasonable time. Leaving the theater it looked like a war zone, with wrappers, popcorn, cups, and lids tossed all along the seats and aisles, but everyone seemed to have a wonderful time. Thank you again to the American Cinematheque for giving its community of Angelenos an evening that they will always remember.

You can check out more events by the Aero and its sister theater the Egyptian at www.americancinematheque.com.