I just sent a donation $10 to help with the shipping costs and other needed efforts for this project. The few frames shared look great, and I’m looking forward to seeing the finished results of this project! 😃
Wow, this print looks amazing! Looking forward to seeing the finished scan.
Every Fantasia project seems to die hope this one come to fruition.
Patience is the key.
THANK. YOU.
So many people do not realize how long some of these restoration projects take, especially for one like this. Tony wants this to be as ambitious as he can make it. I’d rather this take a little extra time for a more loving effort than less time to see a half-assed effort.
Trailers for 1.85 films were sometimes formatted to match the aspect ratio of the 2.35 films they were intended to be attached to. When they weren’t, a projectionist had to manually switch lenses on the projector before the main feature or else the image would be distorted. I would often see the lens switchover if the projectionist wasn’t fast enough. Digital projection and automatically controlled adjustable height screens has done away will all of this of course.
Since Spongebob was animated digitally, it’s possible they went back to the original files to make the trailer, the same way Pixar made a 1.33 version of A Bug’s Life. Some shots may have also been redone after the trailer was made. Note the slight background differences here.
Does the Hasslehoff live action shot have more picture info?
That particular SpongeBob and Patrick scene happens to be the one that inspired this discussion! The Hasselhoff scene is cropped from what’s in the movie.
I grew up seeing “A Bug’s Life” on VHS until I got a Blu-Ray about 8 years ago. I figured that because it was standard in the late '90s/early 2000s for movies to be released on video and disc in both widescreen and full-screen presentations, Pixar intentionally made it with both ratios in mind. I also own in my film collection 35mm scope trailers for Toy Story (1995) and Cats Don’t Dance (1997). The Toy Story one is letterboxed, so it keeps the original 1.85:1 ratio, with black bars on the left and right to fit the scope screen. Cats is cropped. I kept these in mind while thinking about this post. But in the case of SpongeBob, I just didn’t find sense in them using so many Cinemascope-formatted shots in the trailer and not for the whole movie. But you and SpacemanDoug do have solid points.
Hello, people of Original Trilogy! Long time forum viewer, first-time discussion starter.
This past week, I added something really amazing to my collection- a 35mm scope trailer for “The SpongeBob Squarepants Movie” (2004). After going over it, checking out the gorgeous colors, and looking for any possible splices (there’s one in the green MPAA screen and one at the very end), I took a few pictures of it to see the proper scope presentation. And as I was stretching the film in Photoshop, I made an interesting discovery- some shots in the trailer have extra picture that is not seen in the final film.
Was “The SpongeBob Squarepants Movie” possibly prepared for a Cinemascope release?
The film was released in a traditional 1.85:1 aspect ratio for theatrical presentation, then in 1.78:1 for the DVD and Blu-Ray releases. But I’m puzzled about the studios’ decision based on some of the scenes in this trailer. A lot of scenes are cropped from the way we see it them the movie, yet some indeed show extra picture information on the left and right sides of the screen. The screen size has to be chosen in pre-production so the storyboard artists, animators, and background artists know how to properly stage their work. Why would Paramount and Nickelodeon spend the extra time, money, and labor into making all of that extra background art just to not be used in the final product? Animation is extremely expensive and time-consuming, so I don’t think they would’ve made a poor decision like that. I’m wondering if there is a Cinemascope version that was made but never released. I’ve attached 12 frames from my trailer shot under my Canon Rebel T5 DSLR with a macro lens, and 4 frames from my Blu-Ray.
35mm Trailer Frames:
Blu-Ray Frames:
What do you folks think about this?
I wanna talk a little bit more about the 1942 RKO 81-minute cut mentioned above.
The late Roy E. Disney was quoted in the DVD commentary talking about it- “Very shortly after that first round of releases in 1940, it came back again in 1942 with almost an hour cut out of it, in monaural sound so that any theater could play it. And apparently, although I never saw that version, apparently, they cut out virtually all of the interstitial Deems Taylor material, and played it simply as ‘Make Mine Music’ or ‘Melody Time’, in the format that those were in.” And his assumptions could have made sense.
Well, I saw eBay listings last year for a whole bunch of Disney animation shooting scripts/continuity drafts, and one of them was this infamous version of “Fantasia”. I bought myself one when I saw prices drop.
The only segment of the film that was not tampered with was “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice”. The entire “Tocotta and Fugue” was cut out. The “Arabian Dance” in the “Nutcracker” segment was cut, as well as the space sequence in “Rite of Spring”, the middle section of “Pastoral” and the 3rd movement in “Dance of the Hours” were all cut. “Night on Bald Mountain” lost some brilliant animation, and even “Ave Maria” was somehow cut in half. And as you can see from the above-linked post, they did indeed keep Taylor in the film, more than I personally expected there to be, and even “Meet the Soundtrack” was mostly left in.
Walt Disney himself had no involvement with this version, and he was right to not be involved. It’s a very interesting find, as it’s in a way a lost piece of Disney history, but overall, this version of the film has no right to exist. It’s such a travesty to this masterpiece of a film.
The only thing about worth preserving is indeed that extra Deems Taylor material if it surfaces somehow somewhere. I think an 8mm print of that cut actually sold on eBay a few years back. Us dedicated fans of “Fantasia” here on OT would really love to hear that stuff preserved!
I was fortunate to attend that 35mm screening in NYC where Drymon spoke afterwards. The film was in… interesting condition. Reel 1 seemed to be a bit more saturated and with some slightly stronger contrast. The rest of the film looked more like the DVD/Blu-Ray versions.
The screening was amazing. The audience was extremely enthusiastic and everyone was applauding and laughing all the way through.