# Is Disney lying?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [January 27, 2003, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210 "2003-01-27T10:13:53Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Fern\_Forest](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fern_Forest)
#### Post date: [January 27, 2003, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/1 "2003-01-27T10:13:53Z")
Exhibit “A” - At the [IMDb](http://us.imdb.com/Technical?0070608) the techinical specs for “Robin Hood” (1973) give the aspect ratio for the film as 1.75 : 1
Exhibit “B” - At the [IMDb](http://us.imdb.com/DVD?0070608) the DVD details for “Robin Hood” (1973) gives the aspect ratio as 1.33 : 1: and calls it “Pan & Scan.”
Exhibit “C” - At [Amazon.com](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/dvd/B00004R99Q/tech-info/102-5142045-9547306) the aspect ratio is given as 1.33:1 and it is called "Full Screen (Standard).
Exhibit “D” -
> [@](#):
>
> _found on the back of the “Robin Hood” (1973) DVD_
> ROBIN HOOD is presented in its original theatrical aspect ratio, approximately 1.33:1."
* * *
So people of the jury, is the quote in Exhibit “D” a flasehood?
* * *
Incidently I came upon this while investigating “The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh” which has a 1.33:1 aspect ration on their 25th Anniversary Edition but no claim to be presented in its original theatrical aspect ratio which has a 1.75:1 aspect ratio in it’s IMDb techinical specs. Now “The Aristocats”, that has the exact same claim and problem as well. However the IMDb says that “101 Dalmations” had a 1.75:1 intended aspect ratio. Alright I’m done investigating. What’s the straight dope?
---
### Author:  [@Speaker\_for\_the\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speaker_for_the_Dead)
#### Post date: [January 27, 2003, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/2 "2003-01-27T14:43:44Z")
Wow, a 1973 _Robin Hood_ **DVD**? That’s gotta be worth something! 😉
---
### Author:  [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)
#### Post date: [January 27, 2003, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/3 "2003-01-27T16:58:26Z")
I’ll have to take your word on the packaging, but once might be seen as a boneheaded mistake, more than once hints at a deliberate misrepresentation.
---
### Author:  [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)
#### Post date: [January 27, 2003, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/4 "2003-01-27T17:38:02Z")
The IMDB has a lot of mistakes on it.
I would check other places on the Internet to confirm the data in this case.
---
### Author:  [@Fern\_Forest](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fern_Forest)
#### Post date: [January 27, 2003, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/5 "2003-01-27T22:02:33Z")
Well [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com) does call it full screen which seems to typically mean pan & scan yet they also deal with IMDb quite a lot. So now more research.
One of the [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com) reviews stated
> [@](#):
>
> Just wanted to let people know that the 1.33:1 full screen aspect ratio _is_ the original theatrical aspect ratio (even though it is from 1973), so you should buy this now & don’t hold out for an anamorphic widescreen presentation–it’ll never happen!
Oh.
[Well ok, I should have searched around a little more](http://www.angelfire.com/mi2/HomeImprovement/oar.htm) but dang nabbit, I was fired up.
> [@](#):
>
> It’s been confirmed from actual cels that Robin Hood (1973) was animated in the 1.37:1 Academy Ratio, and thus the fullscreen DVD presentation is correct.
So now I only have to choke on my own bile for 3 movies. And “Saludos Amigos” is really nothing.
Thanks all.
---
### Author:  [@Kaitlyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kaitlyn)
#### Post date: [January 28, 2003, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-disney-lying/151210/6 "2003-01-28T00:51:42Z")
Many of Disney’s movies from that era were deliberately framed for both tv and theatrical presentation. They’d be filmed or animated at 1.37:1, hard matted to about 1.75 for theatrical presentation, then shown, very quickly thereafter, on “The Wonderful World of Disney” at 1.33:1.
So the answer is that both 1.33 and 1.75 are correct. The 1.33:1 is full screen, but isn’t pan ‘n’ scan. The correct term is “open matte”, which usually refers to showing material at the top and bottom of a 35mm frame not intended to be seen by the audience in the theater. In this case, the material revealed by removing the mattes was intended to be seen by the tv audience, having been produced with tv’s in mind in the first place.