Originally posted by: Doctor M
First I disagree, Imdb lists Azkaban being Super35 as well: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0304141/technical
So yes, the original frame was probably closer to 4x3, but the 16x9 version is a bit better (than the full screen version).
Here is Chamber of Secrets for an examle:
Full and Wide Screens (overlayed)
HD
As you can see on the whole only a bit of information is lost from the left and right.
Sure this probably isn't what the Director intended, but the composition doesn't seem to get as far off as a full frame version.
First I disagree, Imdb lists Azkaban being Super35 as well: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0304141/technical
So yes, the original frame was probably closer to 4x3, but the 16x9 version is a bit better (than the full screen version).
Here is Chamber of Secrets for an examle:
Full and Wide Screens (overlayed)
HD
As you can see on the whole only a bit of information is lost from the left and right.
Sure this probably isn't what the Director intended, but the composition doesn't seem to get as far off as a full frame version.
The film was said to be Super35, but the film was way over-cropped for the Fullscreen DVD. The film was even cropped on the top and bottom. I present you evidence of that here:POA Widescreen vs. Fullscreen