It wasn't a 65mm source, it was shot Super Technirama 70, that is a 35mm 8 perf format which is then optically enlarged to 70mm, they used the 35mm as the basis for the blu ray release, that is why it is presented 2.35:1 and not 2.20:1 on the disc.ROclockCK said:In absolute terms, my left brain tells me the UK Blu-ray could have - and should have - looked even better, especially from a 65mm source, but my right brain wasn't complaining. Overall, what was done with it for that Blu-ray wasn't anywhere near as hideous as a vocal fringe still seems to believe. I've seen much, much worse.
For the record, although i am sick to death of having to repeat myself, i NEVER go up to my screen and look for things, they either stand out from my seating position or they don't, waxy looking faces devoid of fine detail ( no it isn't the makeup since the problem is on every part of the frame ) and edge enhancement stick out, so yes the Zulu UK release is poor.