My apologies that this is not strictly dvd related, but the OAR enthusiasts, such as myself, look here more than the tv programming forum. On the BBCi website, BBC4 forum, a representative from the broadcaster replied to a query about the standard practice of zooming 2.35 films to fit a 16:9 ratio: "Thanks for the comments - We (both the BBC and Programme Acquisition) take enormous care in preparing our films for transmission, and these matters are never approached without a great deal of thought about all issues arising. 16:9 is a perfectly valid format for showing widescreen film on television - it is an industry-standard, approved for television by film distributors and directors alike, and we feel that the viewer is presented with the best possible format for viewing films on television. People will never wholly agree on the issue of 2.35:1 vs 1.88:1, but I sincerely believe that - in 99% of cases - television presentation of a film is more enjoyable and rewarding in 1.88. I watched Victor/Victoria last night on Turner, and the full 2.35:1 presentation was so narrow and off-putting that the slight increase in picture at the extreme edges of the frame in no way made up for the tiny strip of actual picture on screen - even on a relatively big full-frame TV." *Please note I have removed a paragraph where he deals with the specific charge of a decline in BBC standards since the switch to digital, as it was not relevant* So there you go. Most of us agree that chopping the edges off is the way to go apparently. I did point out to the chap that if he thought like that he should be fired, director's vision etc., but he has yet to reply. A less incensed contributor asked him if The Wild Bunch, which was run last Saturday, was "more enjoyable and rewarding" with dialogue coming from nowhere because the actors were at the extreme edges of the frame? No reply as yet.