kriegerg69 Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 Got this Oscar-winning film on TCM right now, and I'm very puzzled by something: TCM is apparently showing a panned-and-scanned print! The movie was filmed in the Todd-AO process in a 2.20:1 ratio, and I don't think the print/transfer TCM is running looks good. It's very, very contrasty (too much black areas), somewhat grainy, probably doesn't look as sharp as it should, and the colors don't look particularly vivid. Granted, this has obviously been panned-and-scanned, but I'm quite surprised TCM isn't showing a letterboxed version. Does anyone have any info as to whether this movie has ever had any sort of restoration (and I think it was out on laserdisc in widescreen years ago), or why TCM isn't showing it in widescreen? Inquiring minds want to know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 GOOD! TCM NEEDS TO SHOW MORE FILMS IN PAN-AND-SCAN INSTEAD OF LETTERBOX! AND THEY NEED TO SHOW LESS 80s and 90s **** SO WE WON'T END UP WITH ANOTHER AMC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffeedan1927 Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 TCM programming head Charlie Tarbesh addressed this issue a few months ago. Look under the "Failure to letterbox" discussion in the "Information, Please" folder, and you'll find his answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegerg69 Posted August 18, 2003 Author Share Posted August 18, 2003 > GOOD! TCM NEEDS TO SHOW MORE FILMS IN PAN-AND-SCAN > INSTEAD OF LETTERBOX! AND THEY NEED TO SHOW LESS 80s > and 90s **** SO WE WON'T END UP WITH ANOTHER AMC! Stop shouting! That was another obnoxious, trollish response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegerg69 Posted August 18, 2003 Author Share Posted August 18, 2003 > TCM programming head Charlie Tarbesh addressed this > issue a few months ago. Look under the "Failure to > letterbox" discussion in the "Information, Please" > folder, and you'll find his answer. Thanks, Dan....I'm off now to check Charlie's reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 18, 2003 Share Posted August 18, 2003 Again, I apologize for that comment. I was only being sarcastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegerg69 Posted August 18, 2003 Author Share Posted August 18, 2003 > Again, I apologize for that comment. I was only being > sarcastic. Rogan, you should simply stop posting comments like that, because I took it SERIOUSLY......and it wasn't funny to begin with. "Ohhh, behaaave!" :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 19, 2003 Share Posted August 19, 2003 Kriegerg69, you sound like Uncle Kracker, who makes all his music videos in colorless color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickdimeo Posted August 19, 2003 Share Posted August 19, 2003 I feel like I'm in on a really horrible bad joke between cjrogan2003 and kriegerg69. C'mon guys, us veterans of the TCM message boards are getting sick of this sarcastic banter between the two of you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegerg69 Posted August 19, 2003 Author Share Posted August 19, 2003 > Kriegerg69, you sound like Uncle Kracker, who makes > all his music videos in colorless color. Who is "Uncle Kracker"? Never heard of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriegerg69 Posted August 19, 2003 Author Share Posted August 19, 2003 > I feel like I'm in on a really horrible bad joke > between cjrogan2003 and kriegerg69. C'mon guys, us > veterans of the TCM message boards are getting sick > of this sarcastic banter between the two of you! Nick, I happen to have posted here before, but a long time ago. Haven't been here in awhile, and when I came back to post (at first) about AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS, I first see a subject line and message that didn't come across as humorous at all to me, and I took offense to it. I happen to be a serious lover of classic movies, and a fan of TCM since AMC went down the tubes (which is not just my opinion, but the same feeling that a lot of others have). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrodor1 Posted June 17, 2004 Share Posted June 17, 2004 As all can see in an earlier posting dated 20-Apr-2003 by the Head of Programming for TCM (Charlie Tabesh), the alleged reason that TCM has been airing the two versions of "Around the World in Eighty Days" (1956) was because TCM hasn't "been able to get a letterbox version of" it "that isn't significantly shorter than the theatrical version we played today." (The two versions TCM has played many times are the supposedly uncut Pan&Scan version, and the supposedly cut LBOX version.) BUT as the world now knows the DVD for this film [in an UNCUT and WIDESCREEN format] was released on 18-May-2004, almost one month ago to the day before TCM's broadcast of the film on 16-Jun-2004. BUT on Wednesday at 10pm EDT wonderful T.C.M. played the same old tired Pan&Scan version of the film ... even though the previous 'reason' for not showing the uncut widescreen version of the film is seemingly gone (and gone for a month now). And it appears that TCM plans to air the P&S version again this Saturday 19-Jun-2004 at 5pm EDT. CAN ANYONE TELL US *WHY* tcm staff would still air the Pan&Scan version after pay-tv subscribers have WAITED for sooooo lonnnng (and suffered through years or decades of broadcasts of the two lesser versions)?? PLEASE TCM STAFF ... either share with subscribers why you are not airing the UNCUT Widescreen version, or please ... air the version released on DVD this past May 2004! We would beg it of you... Are subscribers to infer that although the DVD was released by Warner Home Video ... TCM still cannot obtain a print of the uncut widescreen version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrtbsh Posted June 17, 2004 Share Posted June 17, 2004 we can't use Warner Home Video's new version until 6 months after it's been released on dvd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgeciff Posted June 17, 2004 Share Posted June 17, 2004 I remember this being the case at first with A STAR IS BORN, then finally TCM premiered the letterboxed version of the Garland classic for the first time. I thought TCM would eventually get around to premiering AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS letterboxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bggalaxy Posted June 17, 2004 Share Posted June 17, 2004 Thanks, tcmperson! Thats great to know. So, maybe around the holidays? No pressure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwtwbooklover Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 How about that bggalaxy- Around the world in 80 days for Christmas. How's that for a present. And they have six months to work it in to the scheledule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgeciff Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 If you can't wait you can always rent the DVD which just became available! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrtbsh Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 yes, we should be able to show it during the holidays; I hate to promise, because sometimes things go wrong, but there shouldn't be any reason we couldn't have that version from Warner Home Video by then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bggalaxy Posted June 18, 2004 Share Posted June 18, 2004 Thanks, that would be cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts