I realize that I am a few days early, but could someone provide an objective review of the video quality on Cameron's Titanic DVD once they have seen it.

I realize that the DVD is not anamorphic, but how does it really look on a large 16x9 display? Can anyone compare it to another "good" non-enhanced DVD like A Bug's Life?

I have a large 16x9 HT (110" 16x9 screen, Sony D50Q front projector and a line doubler) so I realize that I am in the minority where anamorphic is really important. On the other hand, some non-enhanced DVD's look good enough to own, especially if I like the movie. (I did like Titanic)

Wow, 110" screen! You may have to wait for The Big Picture to weigh in on this DVD.

I really mean no disrespect in saying this, and I'm just talking in general, but it just cracks me up when owners of all this expensive A/V gear get all bent out of shape over a $15 DVD. But let's face it, non-16x9 version of Titanic will look great on 95-99% of the TV out there on the 4:3 TV sets, and that's their market (for now, though Paramount is coming around to 16x9 DVD output). If a 16x9 version comes out in the future, buy that one and ebay off the first one, or give it to one of us unfortunate non-16x9 souls. If you can afford the expensive A/V gear, the relatively inexpensive DVD software shouldn't really pose a problem for those with the deep A/V pockets, should it?

With some of these great non-16x9 DVDs on the horizon, the decision to buy or not buy is such:

1. Buy and enjoy the DVD. I don't think the low price and non-16x9 should be a deterrent in the enjoying of the film. And it's still better than VHS, and most likely LD. Why deny yourself over a few bucks. I mean, if you can afford the $5k projectors, these DVDs are really cheap software...

2. Don't buy and wait and wait and wait... until maybe a 16x9 version shows up.

Frankly, I will just crap in my britches if George Lucas decides to release his Star Wars movies in non-16x9 enhanced format, that will just drive everyone with 16x9 TV sets just over the edge.

Of course all the 16x9ers are pissed that they may have to re-buy all their favorite DVDs that are non-16x9, but believe me, Ebay is just a click away and you can find a new home for the non-16x9 DVDs very easily since there's still a huge amount of people with 4:3 sets and non-16x9 DVDs are just fine with them. It's a win-win for all, folks.

Thanks for the opinions guys. I think I will buy it based upon some reviews and feedback I got on dvdresource.
Patman, no offense taken. I am glad that I do not fit into your generalization of "deep pocket" high end HT owners.
Yes, I spend a lot of cash on my theater, (I have my reasons why) but I really like to get the most out of my money. For example, my HT lists at over $28k, but by installing it myself, buying over the net and investing a couple of years of research, I have it installed for under $16k. (By the way, this didn't leave much left for software.)
I love my theater and it looks great even with my kids' VHS cartoons and regular old cable TV. It looks great with any DVD and wonderful with a good anamorphic one.
I admit that I am spoiled, hey, I spent $16 grand on a freaking TV. This was not intended to be a "poor me, its not anamorphic and I am gonna whine" post.
I am also not one of those "give me anamorphic or give me death" kind of guys, I am just looking to buy things that look as good as they can.

Geiso, all I ask for is a sense of proportion, and you have plenty of it. http://www.dvdtalk.com/ubb/smile.gif
I'm all for highest quality at the lowest cost (not necessarily the cheapest cost). I just see the software as so cheap relative to the hardware, it's not worth getting all bunched up in the pants if you know what I mean. Glad you're letting quality content find a place in your HT setup. Sometimes I wonder if hi-end HT folks just buy stuff that shows off the HT gear without enjoying the content of what's being played on their hardware.