Looney Tunes Super Stars DVD's Are Widescreen

It's cartoon news worth reading! Read about the latest TV highlights, DVD releases, and much more!
User avatar
nickramer
Junior Member
Posts: 3912
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:47 pm
Location: columbus

Postby nickramer » Tue Aug 17, 2010 4:10 pm

raginggoodfella wrote:Internet? Cable Video On Demand Service? The odd showing of cartoon classic on TCM channel? Just don't give any more money to WB for lousy products. Does anybody know whether or not the Foghorn disc is screwed up like the Daffy + Bugs discs?

Still not convinced. And the Foghorn DVD isn't even released yet!

User avatar
Ragged_Clown
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 5:04 pm

Postby Ragged_Clown » Tue Aug 17, 2010 4:29 pm

Jack Theakston wrote:While I'm somewhat in agreement that not all of the post-widescreen era WB cartoons are blocked for 1.85-1 (although the titles most certainly are), I must point out that the facts do not jive with the above. In a survey that was taken in December, 1953 by BoxOffice magazine, it was shown that 58% of theaters in the U.S. were running widescreen in some form or another. By September, 1956, this number was estimated to be in the 90-95% range. Many, many industrial photos show interiors of theaters in even the smallest towns made a conversion during that era.


This is my understanding, as well. Widescreen became the dominant format very quickly (or, that is, Academy fell out of fashion quickly after the varying widescreen ratios were introduced), and it was rare for major studio films from the mid-50s onward to be composed for Academy. I don't know whether this holds true for cartoons of the period. Thad's screen grabs certainly do not suggest 1.85:1 was the intended ratio, but perhaps those frames were cherrypicked because the compositional problems were more pronounced and visible than elsewhere on the shorts?

User avatar
Jack Theakston
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:00 am

Postby Jack Theakston » Tue Aug 17, 2010 5:15 pm

By comparison, the two Paramount 3-D cartoons (BOO MOON and POPEYE, THE ACE OF SPACE) block perfectly at 1.66-1. Likewise, I've run many Tom & Jerrys from that era and they too block properly at 1.75-1.

User avatar
FleischerFan
Junior Member
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:32 pm
Location: Cape Coral, Florida

Postby FleischerFan » Tue Aug 17, 2010 5:32 pm

Just a general question:

Where did y'all find these discs?

A week after their release, I went to Target, Wal-Mart, & Best Buy stores and could not find these discs.

I have ordered them online, but I am really wondering...

If these were released by Warner's family division and that division can't get them into Wal-Mart, Target, or Best Buy - how in blue blazes do they think the "family audience" is going to find them to purchase them?
"To speak without thinking like shooting without aiming." - The Hon. Charles Chan, American Law Enforcement Figure & Philosopher

User avatar
Bugsy-Kun
Posts: 2414
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 8:19 pm
Contact:

Postby Bugsy-Kun » Tue Aug 17, 2010 5:38 pm

I start to have less faith to WHV materials these days. I think it started in... 2004 or 2006? Remember the ugly menus from the second volume? Or those Looney Tunes clip arts from Volume 4 or 5? They look like they want to made cheap for have more revenues to what we bought.

I always laugh now when i see a remastered release with a widescreen-cropped format instead of the beautiful full-frame originally made. That's this process who screw the 1980's Astro Boy TV series for run to DVD's last year. The two 1960's Asterix movies was also victim of this trend besides the Asterix and Cleopatra was heavily edited in the last release (The early-2000's print was faded and victim of DVNR). That's give me tastes to find the old good print Buena Vista printed of this features in the 1980's for VHS and then transacted for a small company in mid-1990's. It's i think the best print i ever find to those movies. And now, they ruin the crown jewels of animation by this? Not only i have almost all of this cartoons in collection properly but this is a real outrage for those who really grow with this characters both in theaters or TV. End of the line!

User avatar
Woody Woodpecker
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:00 am
Location: Akureyri, Iceland

Postby Woody Woodpecker » Tue Aug 17, 2010 5:53 pm

FleischerFan wrote:
If these were released by Warner's family division and that division can't get them into Wal-Mart, Target, or Best Buy - how in blue blazes do they think the "family audience" is going to find them to purchase them?


Yet a more reason why Warner should close down the family division altogether.
"Art consists of limitation. The most beautiful part of every picture is the frame." ~G.K. Chesterton

"I always like to do the unexpected, it takes people by surprise" ~ 1st Doctor (William Hartnell)

User avatar
LTS
Junior Member
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:28 am

Postby LTS » Tue Aug 17, 2010 6:05 pm

I'd hate to see what would happen if the Family Division were given the job of working on another DVD edition of The Exorcist. I hear the 40th year anniversary of the movie is coming up soon. A good chance for the company that produced the movie to bleed it dry.

User avatar
J. J. Hunsecker
Junior Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:23 am
Location: California, USA

Postby J. J. Hunsecker » Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:01 pm

Jack Theakston wrote:While I'm somewhat in agreement that not all of the post-widescreen era WB cartoons are blocked for 1.85-1 (although the titles most certainly are), I must point out that the facts do not jive with the above. In a survey that was taken in December, 1953 by BoxOffice magazine, it was shown that 58% of theaters in the U.S. were running widescreen in some form or another. By September, 1956, this number was estimated to be in the 90-95% range. Many, many industrial photos show interiors of theaters in even the smallest towns made a conversion during that era.

For what it's worth, I've run many original 35mm prints of the WB and other series to study this. While WB's practice is questionable, nearly every other studio was blocking their animation for either 1.66 (early Paramount WS cartoons), 1.75 (early MGM WS cartoons), or 1.85-1 (everything after about 1954).


Ragged_Clown wrote:This is my understanding, as well. Widescreen became the dominant format very quickly (or, that is, Academy fell out of fashion quickly after the varying widescreen ratios were introduced), and it was rare for major studio films from the mid-50s onward to be composed for Academy. I don't know whether this holds true for cartoons of the period. Thad's screen grabs certainly do not suggest 1.85:1 was the intended ratio, but perhaps those frames were cherrypicked because the compositional problems were more pronounced and visible than elsewhere on the shorts?

I'm guessing that if any of these post '54 shorts were meant to be matted in theaters, it would have been at 1.66:1, since they seem uncomfortably cramped at 1.85:1. (Actually, aren't widescreen HDTVs 1.78:1? If so, then the image is too cropped for any ratio other than 1.66:1.)
"I'd hate to take a bite outta you. You're a cookie full of arsenic."

User avatar
tristar
Junior Member
Posts: 1229
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 10:54 am
Location: Canada

Postby tristar » Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:22 am

Bugsy-Kun wrote:I start to have less faith to WHV materials these days. I think it started in... 2004 or 2006? Remember the ugly menus from the second volume? Or those Looney Tunes clip arts from Volume 4 or 5? They look like they want to made cheap for have more revenues to what we bought.
Yeah, but I don't really think that menus mattered much. I mean, for six years straight, we got 60 (sometimes more) cartoons per year, plus a hell of a lot of bonus features. Nice artwork would be a plus, but it's the cartoons I really care about.

I had faith in WHV up until I found out about the widescreen cropping on the Super Stars discs. At least, I understood their reasoning up until point.

User avatar
speedy fast
Junior Member
Posts: 2022
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 10:53 pm
Location: Indiana

Postby speedy fast » Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:35 am

Could it be possible that these were originally going to be produced by the entertainment division and then switched to family division before they were completed? It's weird how these are from the family diviison, yet both DVDs have one un-PC cartoon (and the original contents list had one extra un-PC toon per disc as well). It's also interesting how the Daffy Duck one is the only one to have a disclaimer, both on the package and before the menu starts, yet the Bugs Bunny one doesn't; I feel Bushy Hare is more un-PC than Wise Quackers.


Return to “GAC News and Reviews”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest