Search results

Absolutely. Kino isn't some poor helpless pawn in all of this. They're a company that decided, purely for commercial reasons (i.e. to make money) to release a compromised transfer of a movie, then cover it up with all manner of lies (sorry, "PR spin"). They could have done what Twilight Time...

If you read their Facebook statement, it deliberately and deceptively implies via several references (such as "preferred aspect ratio of the studio", "the ratio at which AMPAAS screens their print", and "the original negative of this film is 1.33:1") that the correct AR is 1.33:1. It is...

Or3) Release the film in 4:3 but openly admit it's a compromised transfer as the reason for doing so, not lie about the film's correct AR being 1.33:1, not attack Bob Furmanek for stating documented fact that the OAR is 1.85:1, not reference Jeffrey Wells in support of their argument, and not...

So basically it's fine to take a stand against an unprofessional company, as long as it doesn't involve any real self-sacrifice - gotcha :) Just kidding, I know what you mean, but I figure against a small company like Kino we have far more likelihood of getting them to notice our position if we...

You see, for me the daft thing would be not to boycott a company if they refute documented facts and compound it by purposely insulting their customers. Otherwise it's ridiculous to expect said company to change their behavior and improve the quality of their releases if we give them our money...

Isn't Jeffrey Wells celebrating victory one of the Seven Signs of the Apocalypse? Look, if Kino is absolutely determined not to get my money, then I'm willing to give in and let them have their way. I think it's great that Frank Tarzi is going to determine aspect ratios for his releases based...

Does anyone know what the chances are that Marty will be licensed overseas and released properly?

Instead of using finicky aspect ratios, may I suggest that we follow Kino and Jeffrey Wells' lead and just use terms like "beautifully boxy" or "the full image" for 1.33/1.37:1, and "Cropped", "sliced-down" or "only part of the image" for all of the widescreen ratios.

I'm not sure if there's any need to read too much into the intrigue here. It seems fairly simple to see that Kino is following the Olive route of quantity over quality. I shuddered every time a favorite movie of mine fell into the hands of Olive, and I'm pretty much getting the same feeling with...