Home Theater Forum  ›  Forums  ›  Hi-Definition  ›  HT Software - High Definition  ›  The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread

The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

#211
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 3:24am
  • Joined: August 2000
  • Location: BritCol. North of a Black Hole and West of The Centre of the...
  • Post Count: 3,818

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cees Alons
Basically, I agree.

But of course you need to make the distinction between legal rights and moral (cultural) rights.

The Parisian and French governments have the legal right to take down the Eiffel Tower, or paint it pink. But in my opinion, many happy visitors of that city, both from France or outside, and lovers of the French culture should have a say in that.

Likewise, once a work of art has been "published" and people were allowed to be touched by it, possibly even making a change to their essence, then even the creator(s) no longer own the moral and/or cultural right to damage (change) it. Let alone destroy it.

The creator can create a new version, but the one you and I may have started to love and cherish, or to despise and hate, or anything in between, should always be left intact and accessible.

In my opinion.

Cees

Your post more elegantly states what I was trying to get at when I said "public ownership". I was not trying to say that we as the public have a literal ownership once a work has been published for consumption. It was meant to be figurative. Thanks.

It is pretty obvious to me that I'm not effectively arguing my side of this and it looks like I'm pretty well alone on this. I guess if Warner's doesn't want the thirty five bucks that this disc will cost then they don't want it. C'est la vie.

When you have to shoot...shoot. Don't talk!

Export to Wiki
#212
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 3:33am
  • Joined: December 1998
  • Location: Michigan
  • Post Count: 17,105

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Your post more elegantly states what I was trying to get at when I said "public ownership". I was not trying to say that we as the public have a literal ownership once a work has been published for consumption. It was meant to be figurative. Thanks.

It is pretty obvious to me that I'm not effectively arguing my side of this and it looks like I'm pretty well alone on this. I guess if Warner's doesn't want the thirty five bucks that this disc will cost then they don't want it. C'est la vie.
I understood your POV totally, I just don't agree with it and feel that the owners of any artwork have the right to restrict the viewing of any artwork that was viewed by the public. When the public views any artwork, it's a privilege granted by the owners and is not a right of any kind attached to the public.




Crawdaddy
G.W. McLintock: Camille, you're on your own.
Export to Wiki
#213
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 4:43am
  • Joined: April 2002
  • Post Count: 630

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Your post more elegantly states what I was trying to get at when I said "public ownership". I was not trying to say that we as the public have a literal ownership once a work has been published for consumption. It was meant to be figurative. Thanks.

It is pretty obvious to me that I'm not effectively arguing my side of this and it looks like I'm pretty well alone on this. I guess if Warner's doesn't want the thirty five bucks that this disc will cost then they don't want it. C'est la vie.

Your $35 will not make or break Warner, sorry to dissapoint you. This BR is going to break all kinds of sales records and that is a fact If you like or love this movie it is silly to pass up on this just for the reason you mention. This is a killer experience on blu.
Export to Wiki
#214
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:22am
  • Joined: February 2004
  • Location: St. Hubert, Quebec
  • Post Count: 2,072

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I understood your POV totally, I just don't agree with it and feel that the owners of any artwork have the right to restrict the viewing of any artwork that was viewed by the public. When the public views any artwork, it's a privilege granted by the owners and is not a right of any kind attached to the public.




Crawdaddy
This point bears EMPHATIC repeating. While I understand the "moral" argument--in the sense that people have a right to be disappointed or upset if something they cherished is no longer available or significantly altered, unless the artwork in question (film or otherwise) was paid for by public money, it remains the owner's discretion as to how it will be (if at all) presented in subsequent showings/performances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
In some cases, for instance in the case of George Lucas and Star Wars, it is his personal property, and he can do with it what he wants.

In the case of Batman it is the property of DC and Warner. At the moment Nolan has enough clout that he can tell Warner what he wants and that's what he will get.

Most films are the property of a corporation. They are NOT the property of the public, at least for 100 years, and likely beyond that, and the public has nothing whatever to say about it. Beyond of course talking with your pocket book.

I'm sorry to say, but the public no right to demand anything, other than to buy or not to buy. I suspect that the number of people that this is going to effect, and who will be concerned about it is so small that it won't even be a blip on Warner's radar.

Personally the film its self doesn't interest me. I hadn't planned to buy it regardless, as its not a film that I would watch more than once or twice. I don't particularly like the idea of shifting aspect ratios because frankly, I find it to be gimmicky and it pulls me out of the story. However this is Nolan, and Warner's choice to make. I find the sense of entitlement on the part of film fans to be kind of ridiculous.

Doug
You should check out some Star Trek sites--the sense of entitlement there "goes to eleven".

Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

Export to Wiki
#215
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:31am
  • Joined: July 2003
  • Location: Lacombe, AB
  • Post Count: 2,550

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulDA
This point bears EMPHATIC repeating. While I understand the "moral" argument--in the sense that people have a right to be disappointed or upset if something they cherished is no longer available or significantly altered, unless the artwork in question (film or otherwise) was paid for by public money, it remains the owner's discretion as to how it will be (if at all) presented in subsequent showings/performances.
Even if it was paid for by the public, unless the artist specifically waives his moral rights, he will still have some say on how the art is presented or altered. This has been upheld in the courts. I don't have the case name right now, but may post it later.

\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert

Export to Wiki
#216
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:33am
  • Joined: February 2004
  • Location: St. Hubert, Quebec
  • Post Count: 2,072

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H
Even if it was paid for by the public, unless the artist specifically waives his moral rights, he will still have some say on how the art is presented or altered. This has been upheld in the courts. I don't have the case name right now, but may post it later.
I should have been clearer. I meant when the public owns the rights, not just if they provided funding.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

Export to Wiki
#217
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:42am
  • Joined: July 1999
  • Post Count: 2,045

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cameron Yee
Peter, did you go to an IMAX theater like Nicholas Martin went to in Toronto or was your's like the one I went to?

We have both types of IMAX theaters in town. The traditional one with an immense screen, where I saw TDK five times, and the type you refer to which opened at a different theater in September, on which I watched "Eagle Eye."

I can attest that the effect of TDK's IMAX shots would have been unequivocally lost on the smaller sized IMAX screen. There would have been no impact, which was half the fun. The size of that opening shot over Gotham drew gasps from the audience every time in full IMAX. You would not have gotten that same exasperation on the IMAX lite screen. The audio system is generally the same, though.
Export to Wiki
#218
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 7:45am
  • Joined: March 2003
  • Post Count: 2,361

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad R
The size of that opening shot over Gotham drew gasps from the audience every time in full IMAX. You would not have gotten that same exasperation on the IMAX lite screen. The audio system is generally the same, though.

My favorite of those cityscape shots was of Hong Kong, as Lucius arrives on the helipad. Even in the back row top I was amazed by Wayne's standing atop that building putting his mask on.

I heard that the audio mix was different for IMAX, and I don't know if it's because of where I sat but it was the first time I could understand all the dialogue clearly without the music drowning it out, specifically Gordon's epilogue.

To simulate that experience even in the smallest possible way would be something to see.

Damn December 9th is taking too long....
Export to Wiki
#219
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 9:04am
  • Joined: May 2002
  • Post Count: 6,896

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
We have both types of IMAX theaters in town. The traditional one with an immense screen, where I saw TDK five times, and the type you refer to which opened at a different theater in September, on which I watched "Eagle Eye."

I can attest that the effect of TDK's IMAX shots would have been unequivocally lost on the smaller sized IMAX screen. There would have been no impact, which was half the fun. The size of that opening shot over Gotham drew gasps from the audience every time in full IMAX. You would not have gotten that same exasperation on the IMAX lite screen. The audio system is generally the same, though.
This has been helpful. When the January re-release comes around I'll have to make a point of seeing whether it is shown at the other IMAX theaters. In the Portland area there is the IMAX lite I went to, an IMAX dome at the science museum and the standard IMAX.

He was one of those people who would be neither a follower nor a leader, but only an aspiring heart, impatient in the failing body which imprisoned it. -- T. H. White, "The Once and Future King"

Export to Wiki
#220
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 9:44am
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,700

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
I find the sense of entitlement on the part of film fans to be kind of ridiculous.
Yeah, it seems to have gotten out of hand, IMO.
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 527, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 223
Export to Wiki
#221
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 9:48am
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,700

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick McCart
99% of theaters can't show Academy Ratio films. 35mm prints of The Good German were actually hard-matted 1.66:1, with image reduction so that the 1.66:1 image rested within the 1.85:1 framing area. A compromise within the constraints of the format. When it came out on DVD, it wasn't an issue to present it 4x3.
Yeah, hard-matted to 1.66 in a 1.85 film frame. I was trying to simplify my point that it wasn't 1.33:1.
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 527, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 223
Export to Wiki
#222
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 12:21pm
  • Joined: August 2000
  • Post Count: 4,818

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cameron Yee
This might put things in perspective for those who have not been to an "IMAX Experience" theatrical film presentation. I'm also curious whether others had a similar experience.

The Dark Knight was the first feature film I'd seen in IMAX. It was not what I was expecting.

I was expecting the five-story tall, extreme pitch stadium seating I was used to seeing at science museums across the country. But the "IMAX Experience" theater was nothing like that. It looked pretty much like your standard stadium style seating theater. There was even the useless, flat seating "wasteland" in the very front, made all the more useless because of the film's changing aspect ratio. The best seat to see everything was actually the second row from the bottom of the stadium section, which was high enough to see over the heads of those sitting in the wasteland as well as the safety railing of the stadium section.

The screen looked a little larger than normal, but not by much.

So ultimately the "IMAX Experience" for the Dark Knight was not the same as my other IMAX experiences with roller coaster, race car and charging bear films. There was no overwhelming image size and manipulation of one's peripheral vision. I could seen an increase in resolution with the IMAX footage, but nothing that blew me away. Maybe it would have if I'd been sitting closer, but then my view would have been obstructed by people's heads.

So ultimately I was a little underwhelmed by the visual component and was kind of scratching my head over what was really IMAX about the experience. The audio system of the theater actually left a bigger impression on me.

So those who are saying the IMAX effect is lost on BD...well, I would say there was not much of one to begin with, at least based on what many associate as "IMAX."

IMAX theaters definitely differ. The IMAX I went to had seating which you were expecting and had a screen which was six stories high and eight stories wide. The difference in Dark Knight IMAX vs "regular" footage was astonishing. The IMAX shots blew me away and made me feel I was really up there at times (and I hate heights!).

About IMAX
Export to Wiki
#223
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 2:17pm
  • Joined: July 2002
  • Location: London, Engerland
  • Post Count: 760

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

While I respect the rights of the artiste to do whatever they like with their work, that doesn't mean I can't be royally pissed off with their decisions. I still curse Storaro and Coppola for their outdated insistence on presenting Apocalypse Now cropped at 2:1.

I'd like to see Dark Knight in HD in the constant 2.35 aspect that I saw in the cinema. That's not an unreasonable ask, surely? It's certainly not an artistically invalid one.

We eventually got the later Kubrick flicks in theatrically correct (or near as damn it) ratios at the umpteenth time of asking, and if I have to wait that long for TDK then so be it. In the meantime - as with Kubrick's much debated works - I've got to own TDK despite my misgivings because awesomeness like this simply has to sit on my shelf.
Export to Wiki
#224
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 2:28pm
  • Joined: August 2000
  • Location: BritCol. North of a Black Hole and West of The Centre of the...
  • Post Count: 3,818

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_D
I'd like to see Dark Knight in HD in the constant 2.35 aspect that I saw in the cinema. That's not an unreasonable ask, surely? It's certainly not an artistically invalid one.

Yes, actually. According to a lot of people in this thread.....it is.

When you have to shoot...shoot. Don't talk!

Export to Wiki
#225
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 3:32pm
  • Joined: November 2006
  • Location: Phoenix, Arizona
  • Post Count: 3,814

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Yes, actually. According to a lot of people in this thread.....it is.


I don't think it is artistically invalid as the film was released in at least 2 different formats theatrically. It seems it is simply not the way Nolan wants the film released on blu-ray. Though I don't see what harm having both versions on the disc could do.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
Export to Wiki
#226
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 3:36pm
  • Joined: March 2003
  • Post Count: 2,361

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
Though I don't see what harm having both versions on the disc could do.

Doug

Eat up the bitrate?
Export to Wiki
#227
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 4:28pm
  • Joined: December 1998
  • Location: Michigan
  • Post Count: 17,105

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
I don't think it is artistically invalid as the film was released in at least 2 different formats theatrically. It seems it is simply not the way Nolan wants the film released on blu-ray. Though I don't see what harm having both versions on the disc could do.

Doug
I agree, they should have released both versions which would have satisfied all consumers.





Crawdaddy
G.W. McLintock: Camille, you're on your own.
Export to Wiki
#228
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 5:53pm
  • Joined: August 2001
  • Location: New York City Area
  • Post Count: 3,476

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Eat up the bitrate?

I doubt that since there really weren't quite *that* many minutes spent in IMAX mode, IIRC -- unless maybe they've also overloaded the disc w/ tons of PiP-type stuff too to make even a BD50 scarce for space.


I agree w/ those that they *should* have included both versions on the BD because the scope version *is* an equally valid version even if Nolan may prefer the compromised IMAX version himself. It really is total nonsense for a few to argue that the scope version is incorrect/invalid. Argue what you personally *prefer* for your own viewing, but not that Nolan's other theatrically released version shown to 98% of people is invalid/incorrect (as though it was pan&scammed) and therefore should not be included. Heck, argue even that Nolan/Warner has a right to exclude it (whether legal or moral/cultural), but that's different from calling the scope version not worthy of inclusion. Yes, there's a fine line there of course, but it's not quite the same thing.


Anyway, at this point, I guess those who *must* have the scope version on BD will just have to wait for the likely inevitable double-dip. I'll probably buy this version and see for myself whether I like the change (or find it acceptable enough). If not, guess I'll just sell it or something and look forward to the double-dip. I certainly will not expect anything remotely like the actual IMAX experience I had (no matter what Todd claims about 80-85% while tripping on his weed high ) -- yes, I saw it w/ the totally immersive experience (and a bit too much of it in some moments, IMHO ).

_Man_

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

Export to Wiki
#229
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:07pm
  • Joined: April 2000
  • Location: Dallas TX
  • Post Count: 2,481

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
I find the sense of entitlement on the part of film fans to be kind of ridiculous.
Yeah, it seems to have gotten out of hand, IMO.

This seems to be more and more of a common phenomenon too...

DVD & Blu-ray - It's all about the movies!
Export to Wiki
#230
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 6:16pm
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,700

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

For those waiting for the "inevitable" double dip, good luck. Warner rarely does it. And even when they do, the film itself rarely has a new transfer.
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 527, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 223
Export to Wiki
#231
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 7:02pm
  • Joined: January 2004
  • Post Count: 2,357

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
For those waiting for the "inevitable" double dip, good luck. Warner rarely does it. And even when they do, the film itself rarely has a new transfer.

At earliest.. we might see a double dip in 2011 with the estimated release of the third film.
Export to Wiki
#232
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 7:34pm
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,700

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

At earliest. But They didn't change the transfer source for Batman Begins this past July.
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 527, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 223
Export to Wiki
#233
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 10:55pm
  • Joined: July 2000
  • Location: Surf City, USA
  • Post Count: 5,295

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Eat up the bitrate?
Seemless branching would have worked perfectly and would have not eaten up much, if any.

Releasing two versions of the film on disc (and also in the theaters) really makes me question "the director's perfered version" with this release, I just don't buy it. He gave the theater going public a choice, he should have done the same with the Blu-ray release. But, because Warner is involved here it's no surprise. Add this to a list of fubar Blu-ray releases from Warner.

Sometime's you reach what's real by making believe.

Export to Wiki
#234
Rating: 0
11/28/08 at 11:54pm
  • Joined: April 2002
  • Post Count: 630

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron-P
Seemless branching would have worked perfectly and would have not eaten up much, if any.

Releasing two versions of the film on disc (and also in the theaters) really makes me question "the director's perfered version" with this release, I just don't buy it. He gave the theater going public a choice, he should have done the same with the Blu-ray release. But, because Warner is involved here it's no surprise. Add this to a list of fubar Blu-ray releases from Warner.


I think its pretty obvious what Nolans prefered version is by what is on the BR disc which is the definitive medium. By NOT including both versions, I think that this shows just how much he prefered the variable AR version. You dont realy think Warner is at fault here and Nolan had no say do you?
Export to Wiki
#235
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 12:09am
  • Joined: October 2003
  • Post Count: 427

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff_D
While I respect the rights of the artiste to do whatever they like with their work, that doesn't mean I can't be royally pissed off with their decisions. I still curse Storaro and Coppola for their outdated insistence on presenting Apocalypse Now cropped at 2:1.

don't get me started on this one. i absolutely dislike the film in that format. it was originally intended and created for cinemascope and then all over sudden it's not the right thing? BULLSHIT!!!

my 2 cent on this subject which is the same for the last emperor on the criterion edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas Martin
Eat up the bitrate?


nonsense!

the br is about 39gb which means a seamless branched version could've been done without sacrificing quality. that's the whole selling point of blu-ray over hd-dvd: more space. so why not use it?
my HD DVD, Blu-ray & DVD collection - movie-list.com
Export to Wiki
#236
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 9:03am
  • Joined: August 2000
  • Post Count: 4,818

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd smith
I think its pretty obvious what Nolans prefered version is by what is on the BR disc which is the definitive medium.

I find it ironic some always state they want director's intent until it's something they don't prefer.
Export to Wiki
#237
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 10:13am
  • Joined: October 1997
  • Location: Here
  • Post Count: 7,939

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
For those waiting for the "inevitable" double dip, good luck. Warner rarely does it. And even when they do, the film itself rarely has a new transfer.
Warner rarely does BD double dips because it's such a niche format right now that hardly anyone does double dips.

In the DVD world, Warner did plenty of double dips. So I agree with the others that say we'll get a double dip when the third film is released ***or*** when BD truly becomes mass market and it's profitable for them to release a double dip, whichever comes first.
Export to Wiki
#238
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 10:16am
  • Joined: April 2002
  • Post Count: 630

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave H
I find it ironic some always state they want director's intent until it's something they don't prefer.

That has been my whole point in this thread
Export to Wiki
#239
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 10:17am
  • Joined: April 2002
  • Post Count: 630

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlo Medina
Warner rarely does BD double dips because it's such a niche format right now that hardly anyone does double dips.

In the DVD world, Warner did plenty of double dips. So I agree with the others that say we'll get a double dip when the third film is released ***or*** when BD truly becomes mass market and it's profitable for them to release a double dip, whichever comes first.

Even if we do get a double dip, chances are it will be the same exact transfer with the same exact AR changing.
Export to Wiki
#240
Rating: 0
11/29/08 at 10:42am
  • Joined: September 2002
  • Post Count: 3,700

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlo Medina
Warner rarely does BD double dips because it's such a niche format right now that hardly anyone does double dips.

In the DVD world, Warner did plenty of double dips. So I agree with the others that say we'll get a double dip when the third film is released ***or*** when BD truly becomes mass market and it's profitable for them to release a double dip, whichever comes first.
In the DVD world, Warner does double dips for new transfers in order to replace first gen DVDs with poor transfers. Otherwise, at best, a double dip consists of new extras and "paper goodies".

Other than Amadeus' directors cut (which was a decision by Saul Zaentz' company with Warner distributing) and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves' director's cut (a decision by Morgan Creek), I'm hard pressed to recall an instance of Warner double dipping for an alternate version of the film. And both those instances were actually different cuts, not just different AR presentations, and they were both made to replace old non-anamorphic releases ported from laserdisc.
My DVD/BD Collection
Criterion DVD/BDs Owned: 55, Total DVDs Owned: 527, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 223
Export to Wiki
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread