This will not be done here, hence it's a triumph for the Pan&Scan brigade. The people who prefer movies not to be seen in their Theatrical Aspect Ratio.
That the original intended ratio is the one we're going to get it irrelevant. It's still not the original Theatrical Aspect Ratio.
Since Pan & Scan compromises the aspect ratio that the film was composed in, your argument could easily fall back on yourself, and IMO, would be more accurate. Pan & Scan has nothing to do with anyone not wanting to see a film in its theatrical ratio, but instead has to do with people not wanting to see black bars and/or not being happy with a picture that's smaller than their TV screen. And it has nothing to do with people wanting to see square or "boxy" images. The "Pan & Scan brigade" that you refer to are the same ones who want a 1.78:1 aspect ration on their widescreen TVs, regardless of the ratio that a film was composed in--yes, they want a wide picture instead of a square. Those of us who support the 1.37:1 ratio that Shane was composed in are fighting against compromising that composition. Period. The same reason we fight against Pan & Scan and what you call the "Pan & Scan brigade".
It's the Pan & Scan brigade who prefer the 1.66:1 because it will fill up more of their widescreen TV screen. The people I know who used to like Pan & Scan on their old TVs, now stretch the image on their new widescreen TVs. That's why AMC is stretching the image on their broadcast. As the NY Post article stated: Stevens hopes the 1:66 version will at least used to replace the widescreen version of "Shane'' he says is currently being shown on AMC. "Instead of cropping the top and the bottom, they've stretched the picture the picture so it looks like Jack Palace's horse is 12 feet long,'' he says. "I know my father would prefer my 1:66 version to that.''
Read more: George Stevens Jr. speaks out on the 'Shane' controversy http://www.nypost.co...N#ixzz2RfSokl8E
Look, I know you don't like Pan & Scan, but, really, your recent arguments go too far.
One can argue that the final, theatrical ratio was intended in the end. By the director himself. Here, we have protection of an early intent.
It's a bit like championing the Star Wars SE versions over the theatrical (only it's not about the format for SW, but content). George (I mean Lucas) do says the final versions are what he always "intended".
Does their only availability makes him right?
In essence, my feeling is that if the widescreen version does not appear on Blu, we have transformed George Stevens into George Lucas. Lucas does protect his early intent with his changes, but that doesn't make them being the only versions available right.
I believe George Stevens Jr. was earlier going for the widescreen version, because that would be the main presentation his father would have chosen today, with the academy being the second choice, for buffs.
You can argue it, but I don't buy it.
Edited by WadeM, April 27 2013 - 05:14 AM.