I work at a large electronics chain in Canada (that shall remain nameless) and on the 26th when Two Towers was released, it was my sole responsibility to stand by the DVD display and explain what widescreen was to customers. Things went fairly well (85% of the population is just uneducated, not stupid) and I only encountered a few of the "cinematically bankrupt" who "paid to fill their screens". Eventually I encountered a man who grabbed the euphamistically titled "Full Screen" and started to turn away. I immediately asked him if he knew the difference between the Widescreen version and the Full Screen version. What happened next was utterly hilarious. He raised his voice slightly and explained very firmly that he DESPISED the black bars, no matter how big or small and would not watch anything else. He said he grew up with TV and will not watch anything else. He said that if the director wanted him to see "everything", than the director could buy him a widescreen TV. I smugly explained that even with a 16:9 set, movies in 2.35:1 and above will still have a small set of black spaces, to which he replied that he wouldn't get or watch one of those TVs. I decided to pull out the "I guess you are not a big film fan" expecting him to say sure and walk away. Instead he said that at one point he was a film critic! Trying to ram his foot farther down his throat, he elaborated on how Pulp Fiction is better in Pan and Scan because when Samuel L. Jackson's character shoots up the apartment in the opening scene, Tarantino zooms in on the gun! WOW! Does this make sense to any of you? Does a book critic ignore a few chapters or a music critic only listen to a 10 second clip of a piece of music? WTF are people so childish about this issue???