MovieChat Forums > Snoopy Come Home (1972) Discussion > Another butchered piece of art

Another butchered piece of art

posted 12 years ago by avortac
6 replies | jump to latest

Yes, they did it again. How great.

The artists created a wonderful movie with huge effort, and what do the corporations do?

They slice the top and bottom off, so it fits the 16:9 ratio. Oh, man! They would probably do the same to any Louvre painting, if they saw money in it. "Sorry, Mona Lisa, you just don't fit the 16:9 ratio, so you will have to be sliced".

It's so insulting and preposterous that this has become the NORM!

Look at "Pink Panther" - a funny TV cartoon show made a long time ago in 4:3 format. Can you find any DVD release with 4:3? They did the same to many other TV shows, and that sucks. I am glad they didn't do that to "A Charlie Brown Christmas" and some other classics, though. They are in full 4:3.

I wouldn't mind if there was some kind of OPTION, whether the viewer wants it cropped or not (anyone can do that anyway easily with modern player software), or if there were even two versions of all this.

But when you have to watch Charlie Brown and his friends with the bottom of their legs cut off, see only the lower parts of the posters on Charlie's wall with the texts cut off, you realize you are not seeing the full version - you are watching a butchered, cropped version that lost a lot of beautifully drawn data!

From now on, we can never again see the trees fully - only their lower portions.. and Charlie will seem claustrophobic, filling the whole height of your screen instead of the proper proportions with the full background included.

It's maddening, but no one seems to care.. "Yeah, destroy the data as much as you want, dear greedy corporations - we don't want to see how it was supposed to look like anyway. We love your "edited" versions better than that looks like the artists designed it to look like!" seems to be the prevailing attitude.

And who am I to speak against it, I suppose.. it just pisses me off for multiple reasons.

1) That they would even THINK to do this to art (movies are art)
2) That no one seems to care
3) That someone apparently thinks this is a good idea, or the "proper thing to do", because now most people have 16:9 monitors..

Just because I have a 16:9 monitor, doesn't mean I want 4:3 art FORCED to fit it! I can do that myself afterwards, if I want it - but at least give me the option to see the artwork the way it was supposed to be seen originally, dámn it!

If you are not willing to cut Mona Lisa to fit 16:9 ratio, then you dámn well shouldn't cut anything else either! I don't mind the option, but I do mind being force-fed this lunacy (not the only lunacy in this world though)!

People should get angry about this.. but they don't. Fúcking sheeple.

[–] ms-zanadu 11 years ago

I honestly don't know anything about ratio formats for movies or shows but I do agree with you on the overall here avortac . I actually just got through watching this movie awhile ago on the ABC FAMILY Channel . This channel is showing 4 Peanut Movies in a row tonight ( this one was the second being shown of the four ) . The way these movies are being shown is completely appalling . A big mistake on my part for thinking this was going to be the way it was ages ago . Instead of showing the entire ending with credits on it's own and then moving on after to the beginning of the next movie ( with audio ) like how a normal set of movies should be shown . Instead the ending of the movie from before is shown in " split screen " ( with the end movie still with audio on ) . Also along with a few minutes of the next movie on another separate screen next to it and with the audio muted . So I would most definitely NOT recommend watching these classic works on this channel any time soon . Also not entirely sure here either but most likely these movies could be edited as well ( showing way too many commercials too ? ) . Thanks avortac for your subject post .

[–] In_Correct 9 years ago

I honestly don't know anything about ratio formats for movies or shows but I do agree with you on the overall here avortac . I actually just got through watching this movie awhile ago on the ABC FAMILY Channel . This channel is showing 4 Peanut Movies in a row tonight ( this one was the second being shown of the four ) . The way these movies are being shown is completely appalling    . A big mistake on my part for thinking this was going to be the way it was ages ago  . Instead of showing the entire ending with credits on it's own and then moving on after to the beginning of the next movie ( with audio ) like how a normal set of movies should be shown . Instead the ending of the movie from before is shown in " split screen " ( with the end movie still with audio on ) . Also along with a few minutes of the next movie on another separate screen next to it and with the audio muted  . So I would most definitely NOT recommend watching these classic works on this channel any time soon . Also not entirely sure here either but most likely these movies could be edited as well ( showing way too many commercials too ? ) . Thanks avortac for your subject post  .

This has happened all the time. They have began with annoying voice over during the credits segments. And every since the 21st century, I too have not iced that they have done more butchering to the credits segments. They either fast forward the credits segments as fast as possibly, cutting out some of the songs, they smish the credits to the Lower Thirds of the screen, or they just completely replace it with a clip on one side with the credits neatly arranged on the other side. (The original version of Marathon animation Totally Spies! and Martin Mystery contain this format). I have admired the Rankin-Bass specials, especially the Stop Motion (MUCH better than CGI!) which have been on ABC Family. I have since erased my tapes of those specials, as they have ALL been edited for time (and commercials) purposes. It does not surprise me that they are merging the opening credits of the next movie into the end credits of the previous movie.

After I have discovered that the VHS tapes are dam aged now, and they all ways contained the TV version, edited, and never show all the episodes,
I have given up on Television. I have not had any Cable TV Satellite TV since 2007. I have not even missed it. I just buy extra laptops and connect Dumb Monitor to it or Dumb Projector to it, which now fills the "shoes" of a TV.
Instead of VHS, I now have everything is Digital Download or DVD or Blu Ray. The quality seems much better!
______
 = 
For More Information, Click On My Profile.
http://in-correct.blogspot.com/

[–] In_Correct 9 years ago

Yes, they did it again. How great.

The artists created a wonderful movie with huge effort, and what do the corporations do?

They slice the top and bottom off, so it fits the 16:9 ratio. Oh, man! They would probably do the same to any Louvre painting, if they saw money in it. "Sorry, Mona Lisa, you just don't fit the 16:9 ratio, so you will have to be sliced".

It's so insulting and preposterous that this has become the NORM!

Look at "Pink Panther" - a funny TV cartoon show made a long time ago in 4:3 format. Can you find any DVD release with 4:3? They did the same to many other TV shows, and that sucks. I am glad they didn't do that to "A Charlie Brown Christmas" and some other classics, though. They are in full 4:3.

I wouldn't mind if there was some kind of OPTION, whether the viewer wants it cropped or not (anyone can do that anyway easily with modern player software), or if there were even two versions of all this.

But when you have to watch Charlie Brown and his friends with the bottom of their legs cut off, see only the lower parts of the posters on Charlie's wall with the texts cut off, you realize you are not seeing the full version - you are watching a butchered, cropped version that lost a lot of beautifully drawn data!

From now on, we can never again see the trees fully - only their lower portions.. and Charlie will seem claustrophobic, filling the whole height of your screen instead of the proper proportions with the full background included.

It's maddening, but no one seems to care.. "Yeah, destroy the data as much as you want, dear greedy corporations - we don't want to see how it was supposed to look like anyway. We love your "edited" versions better than that looks like the artists designed it to look like!" seems to be the prevailing attitude.

And who am I to speak against it, I suppose.. it just pisses me off for multiple reasons.

1) That they would even THINK to do this to art (movies are art)
2) That no one seems to care
3) That someone apparently thinks this is a good idea, or the "proper thing to do", because now most people have 16:9 monitors..

Just because I have a 16:9 monitor, doesn't mean I want 4:3 art FORCED to fit it! I can do that myself afterwards, if I want it - but at least give me the option to see the artwork the way it was supposed to be seen originally, dámn it!

If you are not willing to cut Mona Lisa to fit 16:9 ratio, then you dámn well shouldn't cut anything else either! I don't mind the option, but I do mind being force-fed this lunacy (not the only lunacy in this world though)!

People should get angry about this.. but they don't. Fúcking sheeple.

Ummmmm am I missing something? I assumed that because Snoopy Come Home is a motion picture it would be closer to 16:9 as well as The Pink Panther were widescreen theatrical cartoons?!

_________________

For More Information, Click On My Profile.

http://in-correct.blogspot.com/

[–] ffnogoodnik 9 years ago

http://www.fivecentsplease.org/tv/review-abncb-sch-dvd.html#aspect-ratio

Some interesting information on this specific movie's aspect ration can be found at the bottom of this page.

[–] In_Correct 9 years ago

http://www.fivecentsplease.org/tv/review-abncb-sch-dvd.html#aspect-ratio

Some interesting information on this specific movie's aspect ration can be found at the bottom of this page.

I guess I learned some thing new.

I looked at IMDB and it was made in 1:37:1 which is a common TV format, slightly wider than expected.

Upon reading that article, I guess there are many theatrical films (or at least Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Peanuts) films that used this format and then cropped for movie theaters. This is the opposite of how I thought they usually do it: crop or otherwise "format" a film to fit a TV!

When I watched Snoopy Come Home I did not ice that the credits segments were narrower than the rest of the film. I thought it was unusual but now it makes sense. If they tried to resize it or crop it then the credits would be unreadable. But I still wonder how were they able to show the credits for a movie theater screen if Snoopy Come Home, etc. were originally made in a TV format?

______
 = 
For More Information, Click On My Profile.
http://in-correct.blogspot.com/

[–] ms-zanadu 9 years ago

I guess I learned some thing new.

I also have as well thanks so much In_Correct for all your information on this subject here .  