MovieChat Forums > Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) Discussion > Fucked up aspect ratio?

Fucked up aspect ratio?

posted 3 years ago by Alex (1495)
79 replies | jump to latest

WTF is up with the square box ratio straight outta 90s DEAR LORD

reply

[–] Pete314 (2522) 3 years ago

Isn't it cool? You can crop it by yourself, just the way you like it...

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

You mean cut out 20-30% of the footage from top or bottom? Nice.

reply

[–] Pete314 (2522) 3 years ago

Got a friend who cuts out really every movie to get this stupid 16:9 ratio. I bet he even did this with Ben Hur and Lawrence of Arabia :-(

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

Its not stupid for anything made in this century outside of super art-housy stuff like "The Lighthouse".
I'd rather not experience unnecessary black bars on my TV or PC screen.

Obviously, if I had an expensive projector with surround sound system, it'd be a different story.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

When black bars are on the screen, it means NOTHING'S been cut.

reply

[–] xhonzi (133) 3 years ago

Well... That's not remotely close to true.
I know what you mean... But black bars can mean just about anything.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Black bars simply mean that the aspect ratios don't match, it's perfectly normal.

What isn't normal is people like Alex who insist on every pixel of their TVs being filled.

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

You're just coming up with excuses for Hack's "vision".
Stop huffing up his farts and please rejoin reality.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

I couldn't care less about this particularly stupid movie, I'm talking about movies in general.

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

It is stupid to think that 16:9 is a standard we should approve of.

reply

[–] blue1981 (6986) 3 years ago

It's the frame as if it were shown to fit the full screen in an Imax theater.

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

$70 million budget and you'd think they cut it for wide screen TVs since its being released on HBO Max? NOPE!

reply

[–] Mcboogerballs (118) 3 years ago

Different for the sake of being different

reply

[–] SpikeMike (470) 3 years ago

He wanted to show a vertical picture rather than a horizontal. It's no different than a 2.35 movie having black bars on the top and bottom of the screen.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

There are no black bars when I watch a 2.35 movie, pop the anamorphic lens on the projector, pull the curtains back a little more and it's a perfect fit no black bars... Now if some fucking imax ratio I supposed I could pull out the old Runco projector for some crap like that, but why the fuck would I go that much trouble for a 4 hour movie featuring Ben Afleck and the bed shitter. It just ain't worth the time.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 3 years ago

But then you have all the time to discuss this very movie in MovieChat's message board. Ok.

reply

[–] fedrulez (19) 3 years ago

None for me either, 4 way masking CIH is silly

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

But why would they cut it for the inferior format?

reply

[–] mitzibishi (1646) 3 years ago

But it was completed for TV and he didn't film it in that aspect ratio.

It's so strange, I wonder if any of the original footage is sliced on each side, like watching a VHS release back in the day before they had wide screen versions.

reply

[–] Nate Adams SA23 (900) 3 years ago

I dont get it either, just when it seems people are willing to give you the benefit of the doubt you throw in a spanner like this. Dammit Zack. Otherwise, good movie. (some shoddy CGI here and there)

reply

[–] Marty1968 (303) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Nate Adams SA23 (900) 3 years ago

Come on dude WTF

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

He really went there, jesus.

reply

[–] MarkDaniels (310) 3 years ago

I'm not really a Snyder fan and I dont like what he did with the aspect ratio in this film but seriously, was that necessary to even go there? You should feel embarrassed.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Imax screens are still in that ratio. It makes sense if you are looking at a five-story tall screen in a true Imax theater. But most of us don't have a screen that big at home.

reply

[–] Satan2016 (23977) 3 years ago

IMAX is 1.43:1. 35mm is 1.375:1. SD TV is 1.33:1.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (6857) 3 years ago

Snyder shot this in the classic "Academy Ratio" that was the standard for years. The retro aspect ratio fits nicely with his old-fashioned take on the characters, and the way the film generally harkens back to a kindler, gentler past. Leave the modern widescreen format to the directors like Nolan, who insist on giving superhero films a dark, gritty, modern edge.

reply

[–] Goliard (1413) 3 years ago

. . .um. Sorry; it sounded like you said this film "harkens back to a kinder, gentler past."

Roflcopter, for sure.

That said, the complaints about the aspect ratio are hilarious. SO much confused rage and snark from clueless people.

reply

[–] wrlord (1106) 3 years ago

Stop watching movies on your phone.

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

Snydertard detected!

reply

[–] mcqueen (1150) 3 years ago

RED ALERT!

reply

[–] brodee (467) 3 years ago

You do realize that to get 2.35:1 you're really just cropping the top and bottom right? Light exiting the lens is circular, meaning a square is the best fit. So "widescreen" is really "shortscreen" and shows significantly less than fullscreen. I do find the whole making screens shorter to be funny, we have ultrashort screen now, which is even shorter than a normal widescreen and costs more as a result.

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

HBO Max is a streaming service designed with home viewing in mind, they spend 70 million dollars and not even bother try and figure out a way for widescreen release without losing footage?
Idgaf if Hack Snyderp filmed the whole thing on Imax cameras, there had to be a plan for regular cinemas too

reply

[–] brodee (467) 3 years ago

The point is widescreen is prehistoric technology, fullscreen shows the parts of the image that were cropped out in order to make a "widescreen" version.

reply

[–] Alex (1495) 3 years ago

ok

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

Widescreen was created in the 60s hollywood specifically because they wanted to be special snowflakes and look different than TV which was getting popular at the time.

reply

[–] xhonzi (133) 3 years ago

You do realize that your two eye balls see more to the left and right than they do up and down, right?

reply

[–] brodee (467) 3 years ago

You do realize a camera has one "eye ball" and your analogy doesn't apply to the real world? Besides, the corners are crap, your focus is on the center of what you're viewing not the corners.

reply

[–] Tomiggo (181) 3 years ago

Undoubtedly, it is more restful to look at a wide picture than a narrow.

reply

[–] brodee (467) 3 years ago

Explain books then... which have historically been narrow not wide.

reply

[–] Pete314 (2522) 3 years ago

Ehm...with a few exceptions opened books are rather wide than narrow.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 3 years ago

Opened books are wide, usually around the same aspect ratio as this movie. It's not like this movie is vertical or something. 4:3 is still wide. 16:9 is just wider.

reply

[–] Tomiggo (181) 3 years ago

Are you comparing a film with a book?

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

It is not. Thats a lie hollywood sold you.

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

This is incorrect. Your eyeballs see in an oval forms that overlap and the closest format to our actual vision is 4:3. NASA has actually measured this very precisely when they made equipment for the manned spaceflights.

reply

[–] bond998 (1206) 3 years ago

Zack Snyder is supposedly a genius director. But he hasn't figured out there such a thing as a 16:9 HDTV and most people have them.

reply

[–] mcqueen (1150) 3 years ago

he wanted it taller, not wider

reply

[–] old3eyes (300) 3 years ago

Taller not wider went out in 1952 when wide-screen movies hit the world. 4x3 is plain boring

reply

[–] mcqueen (1150) 3 years ago

Tell that to IMAX

reply

[–] old3eyes (300) 3 years ago

Which is most likely the reason that there are not many real Imax theaters around these days.

reply

[–] mcqueen (1150) 3 years ago

lol

reply

[–] old3eyes (300) 3 years ago

Though in saying the above I loved the Imax system especially 3D Imax

reply

[–] Strazdas (2328) 3 years ago

The worst decision cinema ever did.

reply

[–] billbrown7071 (3193) 3 years ago

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/why-zack-snyder-justice-league-030612722.html

^^^

heres an article on it

reply

[–] thingmakersback (1269) 3 years ago

I see the point... I can live with it.

reply

1
2
3