When I worked at Blockbuster Video ten or so years ago, people would often return letterboxed rentals demanding their money back because the movie "was cut off at the top and bottom" and they "weren't getting the whole picture." No amount of explanation could get these people to change their minds. Also, unrelated, a man once returned a subtitled VHS copy of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon because, as he said, "I ain't readin' no movie!"

It's interesting to note that Facets Multimedia (one of the specialty rental services mentioned at the end of the show) still seems to be in business, and they're even still at the same mailing address:

http://www.facets.org/

Ebert: The depth of their inventory is awesome. If they don't have it, you might as well give up.

You guys were on the cutting edge with pan and scan vs. widescreen. I remember these wars - we take 16:9 anamorphic for granted now, but there was a time when you really had to explain to people why "those black bars" were on the screen. Remember the Divx (PPV DVDs not the codec) vs. DVD wars? Divx was largely pan & scan. Thank you for providing cover for movie purists at the beginning of the home video revolution!

This was fun to see. There was a bit of "adventure" to renting in the '80s and early '90s. I loved the little store in Manhattan Beach called "Video Archives" that stocked so many offbeat films not found elsewhere -- and I remember the very vibrant clerk there who so often had such lively discussions going about highly obscure films, Mr. Tarantino, who went on to become a filmmaker himself. That's probably the best example of why it was good to diversify -- and also why it's good to have clerks who love film.

But, I had friends who ran their own little mom and pop place in the early '90s, and I watched their store for them for two weeks when they went on vacation. They had me assess the catalogue and make a few purchase decisions, as each week's new releases could be so vital. And the companies usually charged upwards of a hundred dollars (maybe most often $89.99) for those tapes -- so it really made little sense for those little stores to purchase too many of those, if they were only going to be lightly rented for $2.50 per night. You might never make back your investment.

Thankfully things have gotten much better for the film-loving consumer these days, and you can buy most anything for $20 or less or rent it (or download it, or pay-per-view it) for a dollar. But, we've lost that charming little cottage business of the mom and pop video store along the way, which is too bad -- it gave you a reason to go out, and even to compare notes with fellow shoppers and the clerks, and still make that movie viewing experience somehow "value added."

And, thankfully those early cries of folks like Siskel & Ebert and the more purist filmmakers expanded the edges of that home video screen, too, so there's not much to miss!

Well, you won the letterboxing war, but I suspect that was because widescreen TVs became popular. Did you guys discuss colorization? I don't see it here, but I had to scan some of it.

As a side comment, seeing this footage of you and Gene made me wonder if you ever thought of yourselves as sort of the Lennon-McCartney or Simon and Garfunkel of reviewers. As much as I love reading your reviews and blog and tweets, somehow you just gel when you're together. Like PB&J.; Or chocolate and peanut butter.

What's kind of amazing now is that most television shows are shot in widescreen as well. Even on square sets shows that are normally 4:3 are now shown in widescreen. This is a good thing.

Seems that you led the charge FOR letterboxing and against "pan-and-scan".

You and Gene were exactly right to do so, of course. From my earliest days of buying videos, I avoided the 4:3 "full screen" format whenever possible.

Ebert: Corrected!

We still have this problem with Mexican DVD distributors. All the classic mexican films have been cut at the sides. Great films like Animas Trujano with Toshiro Mifune has scenes where you can only see an empty background since the characters are in the corner of the shot.

When I was a kid I used to hate widescreen because I didn't like the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen. Then I learned the difference between widescreen and fullscreen from the little diagrams they were putting on the back of DVDs for a while and I've hated fullscreen ever since.

Thanks for leading the charge, Roger! I don't think I could ever go back to the dark days of 80s VHS. The good folks at the Criterion Collection certainly deserve a lot of the credit for promoting letterboxing and quality home video presentations in general.

Released in the mid-eighties, "Innerspace" was the first home video I ever saw where the filmmakers insisted on letterbox, complete with a demonstration before the film of how much picture got cropped in a pan-and-scan presentation. I really liked the look of that movie (as well as the novelty of having a theatrical experience at home), and I was already primed to agree with you and Gene by the time this aired (which I do remember well).

All of this discussion really made a big impact on me, and I'm sure it helped to spread the word, as even "Widescreen" VHS cassettes became pretty common on store shelves by the mid-nineties, you'll recall.

As always, thanks for caring about the pictures!

I'm happy that letterbox has become standard, but I think video is going to another form of nuisance, which is information overload. If pan-and-scan omitted information that the filmmaker intended to have in the film, the new DVDs and Blu-Rays are providing information that the filmmaker never wanted up on the screen.

Deleted scenes are generally deleted for a reason, and when re-introduced into a film as a "extended cut' we're getting away from the original vision of the director and the editor. There are exceptions, where Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner" was significantly improved as a director's cut, but in his case he removed information that was added on by the studio, mainly Decker's voiceover.

The biggest offense of having deleted scenes available was Criterion Collection's issue of Wong Kar-Wai's "In the Mood For Love." The film's ending was beautifully ambiguous, as we never knew the standing of the lead couple. It was a beautiful mystery that pulled at the heart as Tony Leung confessed his soul secretly at an ancient temple.

But if one watches the deleted scenes, we're given information about the relationship that was intended to be left on the cutting floor. While beautifully filmed and acted, one scene in particular literally shows us the status of the relationship, and the ambiguity of the ending is forever lost.

Blu-Ray devices now allow us to access information about the film on the fly while the film is playing, which is the home video equivalent of someone texting during a movie in the theater. There are so many bells-and-whistles surrounding the film that the film risks getting lost.

That said, I love commentary tracks that give insight into the film's production and story notes. One of my favorite DVDs is Tim Roth's "The War Zone," whose anamorphic lensing by Seamus McGarvey is preserved in a beautiful letterbox, and whose commentary track by Roth does not intrude on the power of the film, in fact it adds to it when viewed after an initial screening.

I don't know if there is a solution for this, and I'm not sure if one is necessary. I'm happy that I can see foreign films streaming on my computer at a moment's instance, which is a vast improvement of when I was in high school and I had to wait foe weeks for Facets to send me movies by mail. If anything, the anticipation of a film is gone, replaced by hyperpowered instant gratification. I fight the urge to switch a movie off in mid-screening because it uploaded it in a heartbeat. Back in the day I would give a film a chance to develop because it took so long for me to get my hands on it.

But maybe I protest too much.

Great post!

I also remember a lot of complaining and back lash against letterboxing. What gets me is that people will watch a movie on a smart phone, but will complain about letterboxing on a DVD on most standard and/or widescreen TVs. Go figure... Bob in San Francisco (12-6-10)

I remember seeing this episode when I was a teenager! I vividly remember thinking the Kurosawa clips bizarre at the time, but the larger points you made using them sold me. It would be a few years before I saw Ran & Rashomon, and thanks to the traveling centennial tour of his films in 35mm, by the end of 2010 I'll have seen all but seven of his films, most of them in San Francisco Bay Area cinemas.

I'm sure I can trace my widescreen-snobbery to your convincing arguments, though I must admit I've tempered my own views on the subject in recent years (not in obvious cases like Silk Stockings and the Graduate of course...)

It's funny how the emphasis on widescreen eventually became such the mainstream position that we now have many people watching academy-ratio films in the improper aspect ratios on their widescreen televisions, and a transitional-period classic like Touch of Evil only available in widescreen DVD versions when the evidence that it was composed as an academy-ratio film is pretty strong.

I was surprised to see you promoting two rent by mail video companies. I had no idea such rental companies existed prior to Netflix. How well were they able to keep up their business prior to the internet?

Ebert: Facets still thrives, and also runs Chicago's Facets Cinematheque. I review lots of their films. Try searching for "facets cinematheque" on my site.

If you need an example for the young'uns why letterboxing is essential, just let them watch the Harry Potter films as they've been shown on ABC Family the last couple of weeks. In a 2-shot, the characters were often only half visible, standing at the edges of the full-frame presentation. In a larger group shot, a speaker might be entirely off-screen.

I miss the mom-and-pop video rental outlets too. Many of ours in Northbrook did enough business, they could expand into full-service home entertainment sales and repair outfits. You got good work done by people who stayed in the neighborhood to stand behind it. We sure get better prices through today's big-box model, but we've paid for it in service...

Nice video. I worked on the 1997 horror film The Relic as an extra. I open the mayor's limo door. You can see me very well in the wide screen version, can't hardly see me in the full screen version. So I'm a letterboxed person for sure. cheers from the guy who saw a bunch of films with you and Gene in 1994 - 1995.

Roger,
I very distinctly remember seeing this segment way back in 1988 as an impressionable youth. I must thank you for being the first to tell me that a movie frame was carefully composed, and could be something sacred. The analogy to paintings was powerful; it gave me permission to think of my beloved old movies as art! I swear, I do not exaggerate if I say it was the very first step in a life-long study and love affair.

Thanks for the education, and for the trip down memory lane.

And, of course, huge thanks for helping to end the atrocities of frame chopping and pan-and-scan!

Much love and respect!