---

by Incandenza
You know widescreen is better, I know widescreen is better, but as you rightly point out, Sky clearly feel their audience will not appreciate black bars on the top and bottom of the screen.

Now, when it comes to what makes entertainment popular (to quote William Goldman) "nobody knows anything". However pandering to the majority is as good a way as any to ensure the biggest audience. To put it another way, nobody ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the british public.

As far as preparing a non-widescreen master is concerned, it really needn't cost very much (certainly not relative to the per episode budget). Joss and Co are of course entirely within their rights to say we're making a widescreen product and that's that but they then create a dilemma for broadcasters.

---

The US is both more adverse to widescreen (the only widescreen sets are High Definition TV models, and from what I've seen, prohibitively expensive) and the TV networks more in thrall to the dictates of ratings than we are, yet their major series -- ER, The West Wing, Boomtown, Enterprise, The Sopranos -- are still moving over to widescreen. Sky's reasoning doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you consider than not only are over half of British TVs sold new widescreen models, but the terrestrial channels broadcast almost all new programmes in one sort of widescreen ratio or another. (Depending on whether you have digital or analogue.)

So why would British viewers be put off watching a series in widescreen when their American cousons aren't? Given that Angel is being broadcast in widescreen in the land of Joe Six Pack, I wouldn't imagine Joss would have any reason to think a country where widescreen products are much more prodigious would have a problem!

If Sky have some research that shows serious numbers of people would be put off by widescreen programmes, fair play to them, but making the simple extrapolation they seem to have done strikes me as overreaction and sloppiness. Of course, SkyOne could broadcast in digital widescreen and solve the problem (making it optional whether you see "the black bars" or not), but typically with Murdoch’s channels, the effort to provide a top product isn't there.

---

It was more of a sweeping question really and you are perfectly at liberty to answer 'No.'

---

It seemed pretty rhetorical, but anyhow ...

---

As for the rest... I fail to see an alternative. Terrestrial channels alone broadcast over one hundred hours of material a day. At best I can spend around 2 or 3 hours watching television (usually far less than that). It may well be that Eastenders will from time to time deliver a moment of dramatic brilliance that would have bettered my life had I experienced it... but the investment of time is not commensurate to the reward. Season 4 was poor by the standards set by previous series, season 5 more so, and season 6 was frequently bad by pretty much any standards you could wish to apply. Trust is hard won and sometimes easily lost but I have more faith that The Sopranos, The West Wing, 24 or The Shield will justify that hour of my time than that Buffy will.

---

Nowt wrong there: the series I watch I tend to give absolute loyalty to (as I watch so few), so once I've driven to giving up on them, it takes a lot to make me go back. I was close to giving up on Buffy until the final arc in season 6 got me interested again.

But then once I've given up on something, I don't comment on it unless I'm asked why I don't watch it. No need to burn more time discussing something I'm not watching anymore, especially with a lot of its loyal fans!

---

The episodes I have seen from Season 7 have done nothing to convince me that that judgement (guesswork if you like) is incorrect. It probably doesn't help that even if people now concede a lack of quality in previous seasons, at the time they defended the show as vehemently as they are now, an inverted crying of 'Wolf!' if you like.

---

You're right, it's natural to a lot of people to not want to see any flaws in something they enjoy and support, especially if it was once great but then declined; they don't like to admit the decline, and fair dos, it's hard to accept something that was once so good has gone so far downhill.

Personally, I'm always ready to criticise the flaws of something I love; nothing's perfect, and to pretend otherwise just builds up unrealistic and unfair expectations. Criticism is one of the best ways to improve, after all.

But it's all subjective, so lots of people genuinely aren't crying "Wolf!"

Season 7 really needs to be seen as a whole, as it's a lot more arc based, but if you want to see some exceptional (relatively) standalone episodes, eps 17 and 18, "Lies My Parents Told Me" and "Dirty Girls" should fit the bill nicely.

(Edited by Byron 24/04/2003 14:39)

---

by Incandenza
(quotes)
As far as preparing a non-widescreen master is concerned, it really needn't cost very much (certainly not relative to the per episode budget). Joss and Co are of course entirely within their rights to say we're making a widescreen product and that's that but they then create a dilemma for broadcasters.

---

Its intresting to see that Season 4 of Buffy is being released in the US in 4:3 and from what ive seen qouted from Joss that it wasnt filmed in widescreen so they cant release it in widescreen, even though the Region 2 dvds and BBC broadcasts were. To be honest episodes like hush ect look like they were framed for widescreen.

---

by JtB
Its intresting to see that Season 4 of Buffy is being released in the US in 4:3 and from what ive seen qouted from Joss that it wasnt filmed in widescreen so they cant release it in widescreen, even though the Region 2 dvds and BBC broadcasts were. To be honest episodes like hush ect look like they were framed for widescreen.

---

Joss didn't say it wasn't filmed in widescreen -- as you rightly point out, it clearly was -- he said it wasn't framed for widescreen. Ie, the space round the edge of the picture wasn't meant to be seen. So it's being released in full frame in America thorugh Joss's choice, not nessesity.

This is all rather confusing, because the special effects shots have all been rendered for a widescreen picture, and Fox were happy to sell the BBC a widescreen version then release it on the DVDs. It begs the question exactly what Joss does and doesn't have creative control over, though it may be a question of demand. Buffy has never been seen in widescreen in the states, whereas it's been broadcast free by the Beeb in the UK. Understandably, many people would feel ripped off if an "inferior" version then appeared on the DVD sets! So Fox may well have got themselves into a corner here, but I for one have no complaints (I think the widescreen versions look far better).

---

by Byron
But then once I've given up on something, I don't comment on it unless I'm asked why I don't watch it. No need to burn more time discussing something I'm not watching anymore, especially with a lot of its loyal fans!

---

Spoil my fun...

---

by Incandenza
Spoil my fun...

---

---

by Byron
(quotes)
Buffy has never been seen in widescreen in the states, whereas it's been broadcast free by the Beeb in the UK. Understandably, many people would feel ripped off if an "inferior" version then appeared on the DVD sets! So Fox may well have got themselves into a corner here, but I for one have no complaints (I think the widescreen versions look far better).

---

I think you have hit the nail on the head there, I also think in the US its a desicion made on that a high percentage of the viewing audience dont own widescreen sets its a fact they dont sell anything like the same percentages here for new widescreen tvs and look at the amount of dvds that are released compared to here that the release in Fullscreen(i hate calling it that as it aint) and Widescreen. They are probably less willing (or so the dvd producers think) to accept the dvds in a different format to what they have been watching on tv channels.