Robin Hood (animated): R1 Original vs. R1 Special edition

[captainjoe]

Robin Hood





Top: R1 Original Gold Collection(1.33:1)
Bottom: R1 Special Edition (1.75:1)







Bit Rates:


Original Gold Collection:




New Special Edition:







Interactive Menus:








Image Comparisons:




















This following shot is tilting down so the widescreen framing is not as badly framed as it appears



















More Widescreen Captures:














This re-release DVD has been under much discussion for its widescreen framing. The original 1.33:1 DVD said it was the original theatrical
framing and this new DVD does not say otherwise. However it is unlikely theaters showed the open matte version of the film.
UltimateDisney.com has done a review that describes most of this. Here's a quote:
"Clearly, Disney animators took the time to animate Robin Hood for the full 1.33ish:1 frame; whether they did this to achieve the ratio of
most of the studio's past cartoon features or to ensure that television broadcasts would not require cropping is unclear. But matting the
film does result in a loss of about 25% of artwork, which is no unsubstantial amount. We cry foul when movies are cropped to fill the standard
television dimensions; now that 16x9 televisions are becoming more common, is matting a film like Robin Hood tantamount to the dreaded pan-and-scan
procedure? It's tough to say and the DVD is little help; the issue is not addressed anymore than it was for Fox and the Hound's recent still-fullscreen
reissue. The package doesn't even define 1.75:1 as the movie's original, intended, or theatrical aspect ratio. IMDb claims that Robin Hood's intended ratio
is 1.75:1, but you or I could submit a change just for kicks and giggles. The one person who could probably put an end to speculation -- director Wolfgang
Reitherman -- has been dead for over twenty years, so I know he didn't tell IMDb the intended ratio."


I believe the film works better with 1.33:1 as many times the framing seems way too tight. Perhaps it would have been best to use a 1.66:1 ratio
like other Disney films have used. Also, there is no reason as to why the full frame version wasn't included either. "Secret of Nimh" Special edition did this.
Also the soundtrack is now presented in 5.1 Dolby digital and the original mono track has been discarded. Obviously if one wants a more impressive
experience for their home theater then the new widescreen DVD is the way to go but if you want the original experience then the Gold Collection disc
is the one to own.

[tom2681]

I agree with you.
1.66:1 is probably the best ratio for this film.
1.33 shows too much vertical information, and 1.75 crops too much.

Will not upgrade. I like my old 1.33:1 DVD.

[Lourdes]

There isn't too much of a debate when it comes to the matting of animation. If you don't want the full frame then you don't animate it because it's costly and time consuming to do so. It's not like live action where you use a matte whilst filming. From what I understand the films were displayed in matted ratios because of a lack of cinemas equipped to display them otherwise so this may have affected the compositioning of shots. However, if Disney didn't want the full thing to be seen then they would not have animated it.

So what are the DVD's you're comparing: NTSC? PAL? R1? R2?

[captainjoe]

Those are the R1 DVDs.
I agree with your statements. What really should have been done here is to provide both versions to avoid controversy much like what is done with MGM and the Don Bluth films like The Secret of Nimh.

[FinnurE]

Ugh, 1.75:1 is definitely off, the film always felt comfortably framed at 1.33:1 and I see no reason to change that!

The old disc also appears to be sharper, and brighter, and the colours seem like the way I remember them on the old, whereas the dark and muddy new edition doesn't.