Re: Why would I do that?

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Lucifer Lyndon Razoodock at on April 26, 2000 at 11:53:50:

In Reply to: Why would I do that? posted by Neil on April 25, 2000 at 19:57:03:

It's funny now to think that digruntled grumbles were the knee-jerk reaction to the release of a DVideoD containing naught but two differently-matted transfers of "Dogma," (circa 125 minutes)...

I offer two reasons why this DVD presents its own, toroughly satisfying experience with the director's cut of the film...:

--Much as I love the "special editions," with each of the previous ViewAskew efforts on LD (and especially with "...rat's" on DVD), but I've become aware in rewatching each of the previous VA flicks that the "special editions" have all-but-distorted my opinions/view of the final "director's cut" of the films (especially with "...Amy," the ViewAskew flick whose bootleg-script/final-cut contrast led me to let "Dogma" alone till it premiered . . . personally, I love "Chasing Amy" as a film -- in a personal way -- but it bothers me to do the whole LD and have the flick cozied-up next to deleted moments which I wish hadn't been cut...)

Now, on the "bare bones" DVD, the "final cut" of "Dogma" stands alone, nothing but what it is...and, personally, before the lot of us are steam-rolled in ecstacy by a fucking butt-load of cool-ass celluloid-souvenirs from ViewAskew's "Dogma"-experience, I think it would do each and everyone of we non-red viewers well to rewatch and consider/DIGEST the flick as it IS...
After all, The Bard & his Team has never tired of insinuating that there was a reason that "Dogma"'s excess fat was pared-away. Short answer: They made it a better-flick...

The film presented here is a leanmean&goodforyoutoo meditation of faith&ideas which traverses its own ideas sonata-smoothly, and is paced at the speed-of-thought (...the true sign of inspiration, I believe...)

--...the second reason that the "Dogma" DVD stands proud is what (for me, at least) is the technical-revelation of "open-matting"
Personally, I'd be so stoked if Mr. Yeoman would ever grace the board to rap a bit with the lesser of us about the decisions made in framing "Dogma" in open-matte Super-35 (, that's right, isn't it?...please clarify, those in the know...) with intent to shave it for 2.4:1 ratioed presentation...

Reason I mention this is that once I got over the thrill of watching the Askew-'niverse's narrative blast into the Heavens within an 'scopic frame...I couldn't help noticing how almost-distractingly over-matted many scenes seem to achieve this framing.
I remember Vincent's post from awhile back on open-matting, and like a guilty thing, I started over to the flips-side to check out how "Dogma"'s full-frame transfer measured-up...
Dude, it's astounding...! It was a serious fuckin'-eye-opener for my personal letter-box vs. full-frame inner-throwdown...It also blows, wide-fuckin'-open, the limits of how a film may be shown in theatres and translate to video screens... here, I have a question:

The proper aspect-ratio for "Dogma" is 1.85:1, is it not?

Now, that we've all swayed whilst "Dogma" sprawled across some of the nation's widest screens (...including Century Theatre's dope "Big Dome" auditoriums...)

Now, while the 2.35:1, widescreen transfer of "Dogma" looks just fine on high-def. television, I still say that it seems too tightly-overmatted. Though I usually enjoy Cinemascope films on HD, I personally prefer "Dogma" full-frame. Personally, I think it does greater justice to Mr. Yeoman's compositions...

...however, the original-matting for "Dogma," if I now understand correctly should be 1.85:1...which would make for a more-optimal 16:9 transfer, would it not?

Is there any chance that there will be a third-matting for "Dogma" at some preserve the compositions AND the HDTV-viewing experience...?


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]