[Mike Groves]

Any indications/rumours on a BD release of The Abyss?

I bought the two disc version on SD DVD some time back & was a bit teed off with it - turned out to be 4:3 format with a small widescreen insert. Thought at first something wrong with my setup, but very close examination of the cover back revealed the dreaded 4:3 format.

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Mike Groves

turned out to be 4:3 format with a small widescreen insert. Thought at first something wrong with my setup, but very close examination of the cover back revealed the dreaded 4:3 format.

Do you mean it was non-anamorphic widescreen? That's why I never bothered buying it on DVD. I haven't heard anything yet. Not sure which version of the film is better btw. The extended version has a better climax I think, but the rest of the film is just dragged out TOO much, just like every other James Cameron film since Terminator.

[timus]

I have lost count of how many times i have watched this film, i love it will be eagerly awaiting a Blu Ray release.

[Mike Groves]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

Do you mean it was non-anamorphic widescreen? That's why I never bothered buying it on DVD. I haven't heard anything yet. Not sure which version of the film is better btw. The extended version has a better climax I think, but the rest of the film is just dragged out TOO much, just like every other James Cameron film since Terminator.

The introductory menus, etc were 16.9, but the films themselves, both extended and theatrical versions, were in 4:3, with the "widescreen" in the middle - i.e a small widescreen picture within the 4:3 frame. You see the same effect very often on some of the lesser Sky channels like Sci-Fi, which only transmit in 4:3, when they show a widescreen film. You can of course use the TV's zoom mode to fill more of the screen, but then the PQ suffers.

I liked the film, and it's high on my list for BD id it ever gets released.

[wastedyuthe]

Yes, this is what's called 'non-anamorphic' widescreen. Imagine your widescreen telly is a 4:3 image, but stretched to make it widescreen (this is how all widescreen pictures were before HD). An anamporphic widscreen image on a 4:3 ratio would look stretched vertically, allowing smaller (or non-existent) black borders top and bottom and more detail in the picture. But on a widescreen tv of course it won't look strecthed vertically as the tv is stretching it horizontally so it is the right aspect.
Non-anamorphic, as you say, displays a widescreen image on a 4:3 picture, but doesn't stretch it vertically, so it has less detail as the film picture is made up of less lines, and you have to stretch the picture vertically yourself, by putting the tv setting on 'zoom'.
Going back to The Abyss, I really don't see the reason for it being released in non-anamorphic- the same goes for the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy on DVD. Very silly. With HD disks typically being 1080p, I can see no reason why we should have to put up with this for the HD releases though. But I have not heard of any date for The Abyss for the moment, so we will just have to wait I'm afraid.

[Shaun666]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

Not sure which version of the film is better btw. The extended version has a better climax I think, but the rest of the film is just dragged out TOO much, just like every other James Cameron film since Terminator.

The extended version is the only one worth watching surely ? Without it's proper ending it just doesn't work.

[Mike Groves]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

Yes, this is what's called 'non-anamorphic' widescreen. Imagine your widescreen telly is a 4:3 image, but stretched to make it widescreen (this is how all widescreen pictures were before HD). An anamporphic widscreen image on a 4:3 ratio would look stretched vertically, allowing smaller (or non-existent) black borders top and bottom and more detail in the picture. But on a widescreen tv of course it won't look strecthed vertically as the tv is stretching it horizontally so it is the right aspect.
Non-anamorphic, as you say, displays a widescreen image on a 4:3 picture, but doesn't stretch it vertically, so it has less detail as the film picture is made up of less lines, and you have to stretch the picture vertically yourself, by putting the tv setting on 'zoom'.
Going back to The Abyss, I really don't see the reason for it being released in non-anamorphic- the same goes for the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy on DVD. Very silly. With HD disks typically being 1080p, I can see no reason why we should have to put up with this for the HD releases though. But I have not heard of any date for The Abyss for the moment, so we will just have to wait I'm afraid.

Thanks - at my age you'd think I'd know better. Yet another lesson in reading the small print on the back of the DVD cover! Never make assumptions

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Shaun666

The extended version is the only one worth watching surely ? Without it's proper ending it just doesn't work.

I am in two minds as to which I like. Of course the extended versions ending is better imo, but the other added scenes throughout the rest of the film drag it out too much. Ideally, I would like the TC up to the end, then the EC ending.

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Mike Groves

Thanks - at my age you'd think I'd know better. Yet another lesson in reading the small print on the back of the DVD cover! Never make assumptions

You're welcome, Mike. Quite often you will see the term 'anamorphic' or 'non-anamorphic' in DVD reviews, so you'll know if it says non, then you'll have the same problem as The Abyss. To be fair, most DVD's are anamorphic now, which makes it all the more surprising when you come upon one that isn't. Many people were unhappy when the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy were released on DVD in non, as there was no reason for them to be. Many thought it was Lucas purposely making them a lower quality than the updated versions, so people would prefer to watch the updated ones.

[Mike Groves]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

You're welcome, Mike. Quite often you will see the term 'anamorphic' or 'non-anamorphic' in DVD reviews, so you'll know if it says non, then you'll have the same problem as The Abyss. To be fair, most DVD's are anamorphic now, which makes it all the more surprising when you come upon one that isn't. Many people were unhappy when the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy were released on DVD in non, as there was no reason for them to be. Many thought it was Lucas purposely making them a lower quality than the updated versions, so people would prefer to watch the updated ones.

It would appear that what I have is a Windowbox version - see following quote from Wikipedia -

Windowboxing occurs when an image appears centered in a television screen, with blank space on all four sides of the image,[2][3], such as when a widescreen image that has been previously letterboxed to fit 1.33:1 is then pillarboxed to fit 16:9. It is also called "matchbox", "gutterbox", and "postage stamp" display.[4]. This occurs on the DVD editions of the Star Trek films on a 4:3 TV whenever the included widescreen documentaries show original television series footage. It is seen in The Crocodile Hunter: Collision Course, a film displaying widescreen pillarboxing with 1.85:1 scenes in a 2.40:1 frame that is subsequently letterboxed. It is common to see windowboxed commercials on HD television networks, since many commercials are shot 16:9 but distributed to networks in SD, letterboxed to fit 1.33:1.

I have an example image -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Windowboxed.jpg

- which is exactly the effect I get.

[Pecker]

James Cameron shot this on Super 35 and over saw both a 4:3 framed version for TV and a widescreen framed version for cinema.

He is said to much prefer the 4:3 version, which is why it got a 4:3 release on SD DVD.

Steve W

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Pecker

James Cameron shot this on Super 35 and over saw both a 4:3 framed version for TV and a widescreen framed version for cinema.

He is said to much prefer the 4:3 version, which is why it got a 4:3 release on SD DVD.

Steve W

But Mike has already said that it is widescreen with the black borders on the top and bottom, so although it is a 4:3 image it is NOT the 4:3 'tv' version shown on tv and available on VHS as part of the 4:3 image is made up of black borders top and bottom, with the widescreen image in between.

I remember seeing the 4:3 version and remember the special effects mistake on it that isn't present on the widescreen version- it's where the water is manipulated by the aliens and comes out of the pool. You can see on the 4:3 version where the water CG ends and the real water in the pool begins. On the widescreen version the CG water ends at the bottom of the picture, so there is no cock-up.

Mike, what you are saying about the windowboxing, from what I can see, is wrong- it's just you have your tv setup so that it shows 4:3 pictures with borders to the left and right of them instead of stretching the image to fit your widescreen tv. And since the 4:3 image of The Abyss includes black borders on the top and bottom, then this is why you have a border around each side. So basically, the borders at the top and bottom are part of the DVD image, and the borders on the sides are from your tv, so when you set your tv to Zoom, it gets rid of the borders on the sides and zooms into the picture allowing most of the black borders top and bottom to disappear.
I know you thanked me in words earlier, but a thanks via the button would be appreciated since Steve had one for his contribution but not me.

[Mike Groves]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

But Mike has already said that it is widescreen with the black borders on the top and bottom, so although it is a 4:3 image it is NOT the 4:3 'tv' version shown on tv and available on VHS as part of the 4:3 image is made up of black borders top and bottom, with the widescreen image in between.

I remember seeing the 4:3 version and remember the special effects mistake on it that isn't present on the widescreen version- it's where the water is manipulated by the aliens and comes out of the pool. You can see on the 4:3 version where the water CG ends and the real water in the pool begins. On the widescreen version the CG water ends at the bottom of the picture, so there is no cock-up.

Mike, what you are saying about the windowboxing, from what I can see, is wrong- it's just you have your tv setup so that it shows 4:3 pictures with borders to the left and right of them instead of stretching the image to fit your widescreen tv. And since the 4:3 image of The Abyss includes black borders on the top and bottom, then this is why you have a border around each side. So basically, the borders at the top and bottom are part of the DVD image, and the borders on the sides are from your tv, so when you set your tv to Zoom, it gets rid of the borders on the sides and zooms into the picture allowing most of the black borders top and bottom to disappear.
I know you thanked me in words earlier, but a thanks via the button would be appreciated since Steve had one for his contribution but not me.

I appreciate what you are saying, and my TV is deliberately set up to show 4:3 as 4:3. I hate so called stretchyvision. Being a Pioneer plasma what you get with 4:3, as you are aware, are grey side bars. When I play this DVD, the initial menu setup is displayed as I would expect, full widescreen. When the film starts, the grey bars appear indicating a 4:3 source. Implanted within the grey barred 4:3 display, the film then plays with black bars top and bottom to give a small widescreen image. You see this effect quite often on Sky with some of the lesser channels which only broadcast 4:3, but if they have a widescreen film to show, they fit it into the 4:3 box with top & bottom black bars, so I'm quite used to it. Either that or they crop either end to fit the 4:3 format.

It just came as a bit of a shock to find it on a DVD.

To be honest, I bought the disc some years ago, and at the time I had a back projection 4:3 TV. It played as expected on that, with the top and bottom bars of a widescreen film. In fairness to the disc it does have mention 4:3 on the back cover, though it's a bit misleading in that it says 2.35:1. Then a little to the right it says Widescreen Version & then below that it says 4:3. Talk about covering all the angles!! I probably bought it at the local ASDA who had got some old stock in.

Anyway, enough of this - I'll have to go out and look for a widescreen SD version to tide me over until the BD release. Being Fox, that release might take some time....

Thanks again wastedyuthe.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

But Mike has already said that it is widescreen with the black borders on the top and bottom, so although it is a 4:3 image it is NOT the 4:3 'tv' version shown on tv and available on VHS as part of the 4:3 image is made up of black borders top and bottom, with the widescreen image in between.

Aye, I was just throwing the little snippet of information into the mix.



Steve W

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Mike Groves

In fairness to the disc it does have mention 4:3 on the back cover, though it's a bit misleading in that it says 2.35:1. Then a little to the right it says Widescreen Version & then below that it says 4:3. Talk about covering all the angles!!.

You're right, it can be very misleading. But what they are actually saying is the film picture ratio is 2.35:1 on a 4:3 image (hence the black bars filling the rest of the 4:3 image). Normally, anamorphic films have the 16:9 ratio displayed on the back, which is the ratio for your typical widescreen tv, then they will also state the films ratio as 1.85:1, 2.35:1, or similar.
Unfortunately, I don't think there is an anamorphic widescreen version of The Abyss available to date, only the non-anamorphic version you already own.

Just have to wait for a BD release date

[Geoff_D]

Mike, do you not like using the zoom mode on your Pioneer (which is for exactly this sort of material)? It does lead to a drop in quality vs. a proper anamorphic widescreen presentation (although zooming does NOT stretch the image FYI), yet I'd rather have that than postage-stamp sized viewing. As a laserdisc fan I'm very used to this procedure.

And Shaun, I've always preferred the Extended Edition too BUT I watched it recently and it did drag on after a while. And the big ending (which Cameron says "fulfils the goals of the original script") is such a departure from the two-and-a-half-hours of claustrophobia that precedes it that it kinda takes me out of the movie.

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Geoff_D

And Shaun, I've always preferred the Extended Edition too BUT I watched it recently and it did drag on after a while. And the big ending (which Cameron says "fulfils the goals of the original script") is such a departure from the two-and-a-half-hours of claustrophobia that precedes it that it kinda takes me out of the movie.

You know, I agree about the ending. It is of course more spectacular, and gives more meaning to it all, but now you mention it, yes it does kind of take you out of the movie. In other words, we have followed the crew while they have been stuck under water for 2 hours, then all of a sudden we are taken to the surface to see the big wave and away from our characters. From memory, the TC didn't see above water until the crew were taken to the surface at the end, am I right?

[Mike Groves]

Originally Posted by Geoff_D

Mike, do you not like using the zoom mode on your Pioneer (which is for exactly this sort of material)? It does lead to a drop in quality vs. a proper anamorphic widescreen presentation (although zooming does NOT stretch the image FYI), yet I'd rather have that than postage-stamp sized viewing. As a laserdisc fan I'm very used to this procedure. ....

Geoff, I did try it, but to my mind the resultant drop in picture quality is so bad with this particular DVD that I've just ended up not watching it at all. Which is a pity, because I'm very fond of the movie.

I occasionally use zoom mode if I'm watching some of the 4:3 channels, like the Paramount comedy ones, for lengthy periods. Using a Pioneer panel, I'm always very concious of the image retention risk, however slight, posed by the grey sidebars. And I do find I watch quite a lot of the 4:3 channels - getting old, you see. I know that there is no image stretching involved - using it on these channels just chops a bit off the top & bottom, which I can live with.

[Geoff_D]

Fair enough Mike. You really should watch it though if the mood takes you. Not everything looks as spiffy as we might like, and for years we've put up with VHS and laserdisc so surely you can deal with a few more hours of grainy visuals? Cameron is nowhere near approving a new transfer for this one...

Originally Posted by wastedyuthe

From memory, the TC didn't see above water until the crew were taken to the surface at the end, am I right?

Kinda. While there are a few moments "topside" (on the support ship) in the theatrical cut, it's all very shut-in and contained, and there's nothing as grand as the wave sequence.

It's ironic that the 'extended edition' ending feels so out of place precisely because we've spent even longer in the company of these characters in their cramped submersible rig.

And don't forget that Cameron contractually had final cut on The Abyss, so while the theatrical version is missing much by comparison, it was the best version of the film that he felt he could deliver at the time. But, as is typical of Cameron, the extended edition seems to take a lot longer to deliver the same point.

[wastedyuthe]

Originally Posted by Geoff_D

But, as is typical of Cameron, the extended edition seems to take a lot longer to deliver the same point.

Agreed.

[Smurfin]

Personally I prefer the extended cut, it makes more sense to me. Really looking forward to a bluray release of this...

[domtheone]

Extended cut wipe the floor with the TC (imo).

So long as BR continues to grow, I fully expect to pick up a nice HD version when I go Blue in 2010 (or late 2009).

[Smurfin]

Originally Posted by domtheone

So long as BR continues to grow, I fully expect to pick up a nice HD version when I go Blue in 2010 (or late 2009).

Why so long?

[domtheone]

Originally Posted by Smurfin

Why so long?

You see that player in my signature

I've only just bought (well 6 months lol) into HD DVD. Don't want to spend a load more on hardware at the mo.

I've continued to buy cut price HD DVD discs.

My player does a fine job with SD material.

I'll make do with all that for a year or 2.

I want to get a bigger screen. My portable tv is fab with HD but I want 50" +++ next time to get a bigger benefit from HD material.

Once a year or 2 has passed by, they'll be a large back catalogue of BR discs that i'll be able to buy on the mega cheap.

My top of the range HD DVD player cost me £200. It'll probably be a year or 2before I can by a top of the range (i'm discounting the PS3 here) BR player.

That's about it off the top of my head.

[shoestring25]

any new news as to a release date?

[Todd Tomorrow]

Nope.

[mckee74]

Damn it, saw this thread title and I got excited. Boooo.

[KRW]

I nearly bought this on VHS today. It was in one of those oversize boxes and was part of a 5000 ltd edition hand numbered set. It looked great, but I decided I have enough clutter. Sorry Oxfam

[xit2050]

20th Century Fox/MGM - The Star Wars Saga (9/16), West Side Story (TBA late 2011), Patton (with updated transfer - TBA late 2011), more classic Bond (2012), more Rodgers & Hammerstein (2012), The Abyss (TBA 2012), True Lies (TBA 2012)

Initially they said late 2011 for The Abyss and True Lies... Cameron is probably too occupied with his Titanic crap.