The aspect ratio of a film is the ratio of its width to its height.
In layman’s terms, it defines the size of the black bars you see on the screen when watching a film. It may seem like a technicality, but it remains one of cinema’s most powerful storytelling tools. Directors and their cinematographers select the right frame for the aesthetic they want to create and use it to guide audience attention, heighten emotion, or convey scale.
However, in today’s film landscape, the aspect ratio that audiences see in cinemas is often not what they see when viewing the film at home. This inconsistency raises questions about how faithfully streaming platforms preserve the director’s vision, and whether recent examples like Sinners offer a roadmap for the future.
Why aspect ratios matter
Simply put, different aspect ratios evoke different moods. A wide 2.39:1 frame can better immerse us in vast landscapes or intricate sets. This format features an image that is 2.39 times wider than it is tall and is common in mainstream cinematic releases. Meanwhile, a boxier 1.33:1 ratio can intensify intimacy, trapping characters within the tight confines of the screen. Directors and cinematographers can use these ratios or many others to achieve the perfect look and feel.
Some films change the aspect ratio mid-way through the story to amplify changes in the narrative. In The Grand Budapest Hotel, the change in ratios represents each different time period. In Disney’s Brother Bear, the switch happens when the protagonist undergoes a key change, representing a new perspective. These are crucial moments, as important to the story as the music or performances.
Sinners: preserving the ratio across formats
A more recent example is Sinners, a landmark film not only for its large format cinematography, but also for how its aspect ratios have been preserved beyond the cinema. Shot using Ultra Panavision 70 (2.76:1) and IMAX 15-perf (1.43:1), the frame’s expansion throughout the story is used as a dramatic storytelling device. The image grows vertically in climactic scenes, immersing the audience in dramatic life-or-death moments.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataCrucially, these changes were not lost on the home release. Whether purchased on physical media or streamed, Sinners retains its shifting aspect ratios. The film expands and contracts, exactly as it did in the cinema, making Sinners one of the rare films where viewers do not lose access to the filmmaker’s original intended vision.
The Dune: Part Two problem
Contrast this recent release with Denis Villeneuve’s Dune: Part Two from 2024. Like Sinners, it was shot with IMAX cameras and, in the cinema, audiences were treated to dramatic expansions into 1.43:1 to better represent large-scale battles, fantastic planets, and sweeping desert panoramas.
However, when Dune: Part Two arrived on streaming and home media, the IMAX ratio was gone. Viewers were left with the cropped 2:39:1 version. While still incredibly impressive, it arguably flattens the filmmaker’s vision and spectacle, reducing monumental moments into something comparatively ordinary. For many fans who saw the film in its original IMAX release, the absence of this footage represents a serious compromise of the director’s vision.
What is the solution?
Part of the issue is technical, part of it is simply commercial. Many streaming services default to 16:9 (1.78:1) because it fills most screens without letterboxing. Multiple aspect ratios may also introduce complications for playback and compression. Most likely, however, studios worry that consumers will complain about “black bars” or shifting frames, even though these are intentional, artistic decisions.
The solution lies in treating the aspect ratio with the same respect as resolution or sound mixing. One option is multi-format releases. Just as physical discs often include different versions of a film (director’s cuts, for example), they could also include a version with the original theatrical aspect ratio. Some streaming platforms already do this. Disney+, for example, often allows its subscribers to choose between a standard version of the latest Marvel film or the “IMAX Enhanced” version with the aspect ratio changes left intact.
On top of this, clear labelling would help viewers understand what version of the film they are watching. A note explaining that one version “Includes IMAX Expanded Scenes” would tell viewers that the changes are intentional, and they can choose to watch another version if they wish. With more education, viewers would hopefully see aspect ratios not as a quirk, but as a key aspect of the cinematic language. Ultimately, aspect ratios are not just cosmetic flourishes. They can be fundamental to how filmmakers tell a story. When streaming services crop or standardise frames, they risk erasing the original vision and intent.
