Rumor: Trek filming in bizarre aspect ratio

[Matt]

Can anyone confirm or deny this? Star Trek shooting in a strange aspect ratio, wider than anamorphic, possibly as wide as cinerama aspect ratio, with Abrams and Dan Mindel setting up shots that actually use the extreme width, like one character on the far left, and another on the far right, instead of "Shooting for the center safe regions" like most films do...

In other words, no "Standard Screen" edition of the Bluray and HD-DVD because the pan and scan would be so extreme.

Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Gepard]

Have no idea. But it would be "awsome" if it were true.

 

[number6]

It will also be transcribed onto kinescope and broadcast on the newly reformed DuMont-HD network.

JJ's DP has been staying at my house and because of the strike, a few of the crew have been staying here and having a couple of meetings in the dining room. There are some shots, they've designed that will be an homage to The Wild Bunch..(hence some location shooting in the desert) and the Iceland sequences will be shot in HD and then rephotographed as projected on a screen in Paramount's backlot..to make it look slightly "retro," an homage to the TOS episode The Naked Time..I can't really say, but there is one cruical scene that has a reference to a certain something that happened in the episode as part of Spock's journey into the past. Some of the guys are part of the B Unit and C Unit and none of them have been allowed to see the whole script. They just have pages on the scene's they're specifically being asked to do and told that the dialog will be shot in closeup later, so they have no idea about the story. I tried to get something out of them.. I've been asked not to hang around the house anymore when JJ comes by, especially with Harlan Ellison's legal team showing up every other afternoon.

 

[Mordock]

Where'd you find this rumor? I know, and am myself guilty, of the practice of phrasing rumors on message boards as if they just sort of appeared out of the ether to my privileged gaze, but who's saying this?

 

[number6]

I've said too much.

 

[Matt]

Information has a way of flowing from one ear to another in the right circles.

This is a serious thread. It is not a joke.

 

[number6]

Of course I am serious.

 

[Dale]

Intriguing if true... could this be a new approach to filmmaking for the 21st century, completely disregarding any thought of eventual broadcast/playback over the classic television format in favor of the wider HD aspect ratio? I suppose it has to happen sometime.

 

[number6]

There have been several different kinds of aspect ratios since the advent of widescreen. Cinemascope, Panavision, and so forth.. There's no rule that one aspect ratio has to be the only way something is shot.

TMP has a different aspect ratio than TVH or NEM for that matter.

 

[Dale]

True, but most filmmakers have always at least considered the classic television format. Some always disregarded it and insisted on letterboxing for the video releases, but most tended to center the action with a TV screen at least vaguely in mind. Soon, that aspect ratio will be a thing of the past and they can concentrate on filling a different kind of TV screen, much more similar to a motion picture screen.

I'm not saying TV screens should be a primary consideration for people who make motion pictures, but with movies turning around to DVD so quickly these days it's something they likely have in mind. Now it won't limit them as much as it may have used to do.

 

[number6]

I would think that since the conventional TV aspect ratio willo be a thing in the past in a few short years (I heard that HD will be the format by 2014 and that regular TVs will no longer be made sometime after 2009), that making a film with those considerations is no longer a necessary concession to make for modern film making.

 

[Mordock]

Matt said:
Information has a way of flowing from one ear to another in the right circles.

This is a serious thread. It is not a joke.

No, no mockery implied, I was just curious about the provenance of the rumor (and, for that matter, the details; is the film being shot digitally, or is this an IMAX production? Details, man!).

 

[zenophite]

Cinerama? that would be pretty neat.

 

[Maxwell Everett]

Number6 said:
TMP has a different aspect ratio than TVH or NEM for that matter.

Not true. All anamorphically photographed feature films since 1970 have an aspect ratio of 2.39:1 per SMPTE guidelines, commonly referred to as "two-four-oh." It is sometimes mistakingly referred to as "two-three-five." The reduced height of the film frame (2.35:1 before 1970) was to better hide film splices at the theater. (Standard SMPTE 195 recognizes 2.39:1, 1.85:1, 1.66:1 and 1.37:1 as current 35mm aspect ratios for theatrical exhibition.)

The only odd man out Trek film is TUC, which was shot in the Super35 format with spherical (not anamorphic) lenses. In the theaters it had an aspect ratio of 2.39:1, but on DVD they opened up the frame on the top and bottom making it 2:1.

 

[number6]

I stand corrected, but my initial point is still valid as you pointed out by citing four different aspect ratios that are considered as accepted standards.

 

[Cyrus]

The movie's aspect ratio will not be wider than anamorphic/cinemascope. It wouldn't make any sense to do that.

 

[Maxwell Everett]

Number6 said:
I stand corrected, but my initial point is still valid as you pointed out by citing four different aspect ratios that are considered as accepted standards.

I was only correcting you on that single point. In fact, there have been several "scope" aspect ratios since the anamorphic lens was introduced in American cinema:

1953-1954: 2.66:1
1954-1957: 2.55:1
1957-1970: 2.35:1
1970-present: 2.39:1

Cinerama was 2.76:1. So was MGM Camera 65 (Ben-Hur). But I doubt Abrams is using this aspect ratio because modern theaters aren't equipped to handle it. It would only be shown correctly at the Cinerama Dome.

 

[Matt]

Cyrus said:
The movie's aspect ratio will not be wider than anamorphic/cinemascope. It wouldn't make any sense to do that.

REGARDLESS, my information says otherwise.

 

[Dale]

Matt said:

Cyrus said:
The movie's aspect ratio will not be wider than anamorphic/cinemascope. It wouldn't make any sense to do that.

REGARDLESS, my information says otherwise.

You might seem more credible and be doubted less if you'd source your information once in a while instead of simply pretending to be "InsiderMan." You might also annoy fewer people if your posts were a little less terse.

 

[Matt]

Why don't you _ _ _ _ off? If I stated my sources, people could be fired. Simple as that. Now get out of my thread if you don't have anything that will confirm or deny this.