PDA

View Full Version : Widescreen Enlightened People...listen at this idiot...



scruffziller
02-01-2003, 12:50 PM
Guy who thinks full screen is better......and that Widescreen is a sham... (http://members.aol.com/Savetele/) :rolleyes:

2-1B
02-01-2003, 01:15 PM
Good on him!
I hate it when they squash my TV picture. :frus:

I hate them black bars! :p

:crazed:

sith_killer_99
02-01-2003, 01:16 PM
Letterboxing is a form of "censorship"!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

Tooo funny.:D

scruffziller
02-01-2003, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
Good on him!
I hate it when they squash my TV picture. :frus:

I hate them black bars! :p

:crazed:


I assume you have seen the tutorial that JarJar has provided.
If you have then, then the true answer is for you to purchase a widescreen TV. And assuming you will say, I cannot afford it......
you only like seeing 66% of the movie even though it is bigger??.....



WOW THIS IS A BIG PICTURE!!!!!
I only see an EYEBROW, but at least it fits my screen.....:rolleyes:

Another problem I have had with FULL SCREEN dedicants is that we will argue about what was in a movie (like AOTC). He INSISTS that there was no similar Millenium Falcon ships on the Naboo landing. WELL OF COURSE!!!!!!!!! THE FULLSCREEN CUTS IT OFF!!!
THen I showed him my version and he was speechless....needless to say... I converted him. BUt whatever trips your trigger.

stillakid
02-01-2003, 01:32 PM
I don't even know where to start with this. To use the word "misinformation" would be a ridiculous understatement. Honestly, I can barely comprehend the "logic."

My brain hurts from just trying to understand how someone could be such a utter and complete moron. This is just another reason why I fully support culling the herd. There are just some really really really stupid and ignorant people out there.

Wait a minute, what was that line from Billy Madison?...
-Mr. Madison. What you've just said....is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

scruffziller
02-01-2003, 01:36 PM
In case noone has seen JarJar's Tutorial here it is.

Wider???? No question??? (http://www.ryanwright.com/ht/oar.shtml)

I sent this link to the guy, but he probably won't even reply. HIs website is like a couple years old before WIdescreen TVs were prominent. Maybe he is reformed now.:rolleyes:

Jedi_Master_Guyute
02-01-2003, 01:38 PM
Plus, it said that any e-mails from fans of WS wouldn't be replied to cause we present no good arguement. That article was too funny. I needed a good laugh on this dreary morning. I thank ye. :D

scruffziller
02-01-2003, 01:49 PM
You're Velcome!!:D

And actually if you think about it, FULL SCREENING does EXACTLY
to the movie what they are protesting. Except on the sides. No matter what happens, the tops and bottoms are not changed.

2-1B
02-01-2003, 01:55 PM
I agree JMG, it was pretty funny. That site was such an obvious goof - Scruff, you actually emailed the guy? Sucka ! :crazed:

I can't believe you were had by that guy. :D

scruffziller
02-01-2003, 02:20 PM
Well I didn't see what he said about not responding until after I e-mailed.....but he doesn't have to.... as long as he sees JarJar's Tutorial then my mission is accomplished!!:D

stillakid
02-01-2003, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
I agree JMG, it was pretty funny. That site was such an obvious goof - Scruff, you actually emailed the guy? Sucka ! :crazed:

I can't believe you were had by that guy. :D

I did occur to me afterwards that it was sooo over the top illogical, that it has to be a joke. Doesn't it? :confused:

scruffziller
02-01-2003, 02:25 PM
What is really funny is how he thinks that Full Screen is the original format.:D

2-1B
02-01-2003, 02:32 PM
What's even funnier is that you took it seriously, Scruff. :D

stillakid, when he had comments like "down with bars" and "letterschlocking", yeah it felt too 'over the top' for me. :crazed:

Beast
02-01-2003, 05:28 PM
Yeah, the site is a huge joke. This caused ripples over at the Home Theater Forum a few years ago. But the guy that made the site finally came forward and admitted that it was a huge goof. Some people have to much time on their hands. :rolleyes: :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
02-01-2003, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Some people have to much time on their hands. :rolleyes: :)


Now that you mention it, is there a log around here to tell me how much time I've spent at SSG? :crazed:

Beast
02-01-2003, 06:33 PM
God, I'm glad there isn't. I would be afraid to look. HTF.com actually keeps a clock of how long you have actually been on the site in your profile. I can imagine what mine and a few other people here's would look like. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

wedgeA
02-02-2003, 06:01 AM
JJB,

I never pegged you for a HTF member, you don't seem to be nearly as hard core as those guys! I usually go there to read the threads, but I have never joined. When people start complaining about EE on TPM or "noise", I get lost. I might be blind, but I just don't notice that stuff!

Still though, it's pretty informative there, truly a place for the film lover. Also, the intensity of the arguments about SW would put Stillakid to shame.

scruffziller
02-02-2003, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
What's even funnier is that you took it seriously, Scruff. :D

stillakid, when he had comments like "down with bars" and "letterschlocking", yeah it felt too 'over the top' for me. :crazed:

No it is sad.....because I REALLY WANTED TO PUT THE SMACKDOWN ON SOMEBODY!!!!!!!:mad:

I'm in full motion Caesar..........you got an issue we can debate...

BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:Pirate:

JediCole
02-02-2003, 11:13 AM
Well, I got to this thread a little too late, so now I am burdoned with the irony that this guy was just goofing around. I thought it was rather funny that he used the counter on the website to proclaim that all who viewed the site were opponents of widescreen! Nice way to build your own following by setting up a website and then using the counter to suggest that all who cross its path were of a like mind.

But though the statements were more than a little exagerated, the sentiments are unfortunatly true for many out there, JarJars tutorial not withstanding. I will preface my further comments by pointing out that I have been a proponent of widescreen since LONG before DVDs. I paid the very high price to own the first widescreen editions of the Star Wars Trilogy (the terribly expensive boxed set that is now my sole source of watching the trilogy as I saw it in the theatres the first time around, no screaming luke, no Honeycomb Cereal monster Yuzzum). But I do know some rather unsophisticated types who feel that widescreen somehow ruins a film.

But then can we really blame them. I remember the first VCR my parents ever bought. It was in the early days, a huge top-loader with gigantic buttons and knobs. The "remote" was little more than a wired stop/start button! And of course the earliest VHS tapes came in huge clamshell boxes for the most part, or gigantic cardboard ones. It took a while for the industry to reach the economical cardboard sleeve standard. And then of course we never realized that so much of the sceen was missing. I still have the first copy of Star Wars my family ever owned. It was in a plastic clamshell box that even had a serial number sticker on the outside! I think it was the release of The Empire Strikes Back on VHS that really tipped me off to what we were missing all of those years. I hated the fact that I was denied the untimely demise of one of Vader's commanders broadcast via holoprojector. THAT is when I knew something was terribly wrong.

Needless to say I was thrilled when, many years later, a great many top filmmakers came out in staunch support of the widescreen format. But it was slow to catch on in the VHS market. Misnomers about the "squashed screen" or "wasted space on the screen" threatened the economic viability of the format. And it took the advent of the DVD to bring it out full force, not in just limited edition print runs that cost more than the Pan and Scan versions.

So the thing we have to realize is that the average video/DVD watcher was raised on televison broadcasts of movies and on the old Pan and Scan VHS tapes. People's perception will not change overnight. And if the DVD market's trend toward releasing two versions of top films is any indication, they are caving to that crowd as much as they are addressing the needs of those of us who have always sought out widescreen. And yet there is a friend I work with who actually got mad when he found out that a movie he saw on DVD at my house had a Pan and Scan option on the DVD! I told him that if he sees a movie in MY house, on MY television and it is available in widescreen, that is what we will see.

One day I will be able to replace all of my old VHS tapes from the dreadful days of Pan and Scan only!

stillakid
02-02-2003, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by wedgeA
Still though, it's pretty informative there, truly a place for the film lover. Also, the intensity of the arguments about SW would put Stillakid to shame.
Am I really that bad? hmm...

wedgeA
02-03-2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
Am I really that bad? hmm...

Your reputation is legendary, good sir!!

scruffziller
02-03-2003, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by JediCole
Well, I got to this thread a little too late, so now I am burdoned with the irony that this guy was just goofing around. I thought it was rather funny that he used the counter on the website to proclaim that all who viewed the site were opponents of widescreen! Nice way to build your own following by setting up a website and then using the counter to suggest that all who cross its path were of a like mind.

But though the statements were more than a little exagerated, the sentiments are unfortunatly true for many out there, JarJars tutorial not withstanding. I will preface my further comments by pointing out that I have been a proponent of widescreen since LONG before DVDs. I paid the very high price to own the first widescreen editions of the Star Wars Trilogy (the terribly expensive boxed set that is now my sole source of watching the trilogy as I saw it in the theatres the first time around, no screaming luke, no Honeycomb Cereal monster Yuzzum). But I do know some rather unsophisticated types who feel that widescreen somehow ruins a film.

But then can we really blame them. I remember the first VCR my parents ever bought. It was in the early days, a huge top-loader with gigantic buttons and knobs. The "remote" was little more than a wired stop/start button! And of course the earliest VHS tapes came in huge clamshell boxes for the most part, or gigantic cardboard ones. It took a while for the industry to reach the economical cardboard sleeve standard. And then of course we never realized that so much of the sceen was missing. I still have the first copy of Star Wars my family ever owned. It was in a plastic clamshell box that even had a serial number sticker on the outside! I think it was the release of The Empire Strikes Back on VHS that really tipped me off to what we were missing all of those years. I hated the fact that I was denied the untimely demise of one of Vader's commanders broadcast via holoprojector. THAT is when I knew something was terribly wrong.

Needless to say I was thrilled when, many years later, a great many top filmmakers came out in staunch support of the widescreen format. But it was slow to catch on in the VHS market. Misnomers about the "squashed screen" or "wasted space on the screen" threatened the economic viability of the format. And it took the advent of the DVD to bring it out full force, not in just limited edition print runs that cost more than the Pan and Scan versions.

So the thing we have to realize is that the average video/DVD watcher was raised on televison broadcasts of movies and on the old Pan and Scan VHS tapes. People's perception will not change overnight. And if the DVD market's trend toward releasing two versions of top films is any indication, they are caving to that crowd as much as they are addressing the needs of those of us who have always sought out widescreen. And yet there is a friend I work with who actually got mad when he found out that a movie he saw on DVD at my house had a Pan and Scan option on the DVD! I told him that if he sees a movie in MY house, on MY television and it is available in widescreen, that is what we will see.

One day I will be able to replace all of my old VHS tapes from the dreadful days of Pan and Scan only!

With any luck WIDESCREEN HDTVs will be affordable standards in the future so the movie can be watched properly with ALL features there. Because with standard dimesion TVs you will always lose something no matter what version you have. FULL SCREEN, you have a full filled screen but the sides are cut off and WIDESCREEN, the whole picture is there but it's size leaves something to be desired. So with WIDESCREEN TVs you get the best of both worlds, complete picture and big picture!!!! So the enemy is not the media format versions, but the technology format they are being viewed on.

Deoxyribonucleic
04-04-2003, 12:16 AM
WHOA!

This person definitely has some issues that I believe run MUCH deeper than widescreen format!! ;)

scruffziller
04-04-2003, 02:51 PM
Read the entire thread you'll find out that the guy was joking.

Deoxyribonucleic
04-04-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by scruffziller
Read the entire thread you'll find out that the guy was joking.

Aye Matey, that's why me put the wink. ;)

Cursed text, it's so hard to tell what people really mean hehe :) Anyway though, that article was funny, reminded of the hoax website about the "two towers" and how they wanted the movie to be renamed due to 9/11

Exhaust Port
04-04-2003, 03:43 PM
This is my favorite line:


While no part of the original movie image is cut or blocked by lettershlocking/widescreen, the black bars do block a portion of the television screen.

What?

scruffziller
04-05-2003, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by Deoxyribonucleic
Aye Matey, that's why me put the wink. ;)




OH.... I stand corrected........:D