I wonder why both versions are not being included.
It's a 2 hour film (almost to the minute). Bonnie & Clyde is almost two hours long and only takes up around 17gb. It looks great, too! I would have thought that you could fit a great-looking Shane on to a 50gb Blu-ray Disc twice.
Steve W
David, I think your comments about the re-framing of most films for video release are both interesting and refreshing.
I don't find it helpful to regularly allude to JW's 'boxy us beautiful' mantra (either in agreement or disagreement) - surely all aspect ratios can be beautiful - and I don't...
I think he said he'd be happy with both, so was in agreement with the poll.
It certainly appears that JW's efforts managed to garner support from both Woody Allen and Martin Scorsese, and this may well have been at least part of the reason for the change of heart.
I don't agree with all of...
I suppose it really doesn't matter, but I can't agree that the directors original vision should be seen as playing second fiddle to the studio's marketting department.
But for me, this reminds me a little of the CoF release, where at least one person thought the 1.66:1 version was correct but...
I might be wrong, but My guess is that he was saying the DVDs will have been zoomboxed and 1.33:1, whilst the new Blu-ray Disc will be the complete frame area and 1.37:1.
My apologies to everyone if I have that wrong.
Steve W
Bob, thanks for the excellent information on those two words.
Importantly for anyone here reading this, even if they don't raise the dialogue back to where it was, we will hear the words loud and clear. In a way you've fixed for all of us just by telling us.
I don't mind it being delayed as...