I doubt he was 'uncomfortable' about saying the word. His mood shifts dramatically as the scene progresses. So it's all probably in character reaction in specific ways that he is doing. And has nothing to do with personally being 'uncomfortable' about using the word/hearing it.

I just noticed that DVDActive has the cover art for Eyes Wide Shut and Full Metal Jacket.

Link

Hmm. I wouldn't mind more consistency between them. Eyes Wide Shut is in a different looking case with "Two-Disc Special Edition" across the top while the others read "2-Disc Special Edition. And Full Metal Jacket looks a little too simple. Shouldn't it have a "Deluxe Edition" banner that approximates the look of the others (like the DEs of Superman III & IV matched the artwork of the others SEs). The spines are all over the place.

I wonder why they used that font for the FMJ cover, it looks out of place. By the way I prefer the second half of FMJ to the first. Although really it should be broken into three parts.

Does anyone know if the cases in the boxset are the regular size or if they are thinpacks?

How odd that it's "Kubrick's" EWS, when all of the other films are "Stanley Kubrick's" {xxx}. That whole disc is the odd man out.

Warner's online store is now showing newly updated artwork for Full Metal Jacket:

http://whvcmt.warnerbros.com/WHV_MAR...ssetID=1725417

much better

First DVDBeaver comparison up (2001):

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReview/2001.htm

Oh man, I cannot begin to tell you how jazzed I am about these reissues. I can't wait to replace my old versions of 2001, Clockwork, Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut (have no interest in owning The Shining).

the title on the cover is "Clockwork Orange"...
isnt the proper title "A Clockwork Orange"??

Don't notice that giant "A" Alex is inside?

Judging by the looks of the box dimensions, regular size would be my best guess. Maybe a thinpack for the Life in Pictures DVD.

Though oddly enough, the spine just says "Clockwork Orange"

oops;) i had both threads open in different windows and was typing in the wrong one :D

Oops, looks like someone posted in the wrong thread!

Has Warner EVER used thinpacks? Based off of the Superman and Matrix sets and their TV releases, they seem to use digipacks or the hard plastic "page turning" type cases.

They used thinpacks for the Exorcist collection.

Tuesday 10/23 is THE biggest release day of the year for me. I have the Kubrick box pre-ordered and it's my #1 most anticipated release of the year. I have the last remastered edition of 2001, but I have to have this for the extras...over 3 1/2 hours worth (not counting commentary). Truly incredible treatement for what is currently my #2 favorite film of all time.

Oh yeah, and Criterion is releasing a movie by some guy named Malick the same day. Have that one pre-ordered too.

Does it get any sweeter? :banana:

WB used thin packs for a bunch of stuff for a while: one of their Noir sets, the Gary Cooper set, the Robert Michum set, a Bogart set, the Astair/Rogers set. There's even more. But it seems like recently they've gone back to regular cases. I prefer thin-packs myself, if only the outer box is sturdier than the typical paper box.

DVDBeaver Comparison for The Shining is up.

So they're finally releasing this in anamorphic...Does anyone know if it will be the same for ews and fmj? I'm also curious about the artwork for lolita and barry lyndon...they're not included with the set but are being released the same date as solo's. Not sure why?? If anyone has the artwork for the new sets of those two post up the link! Everywhere i've looked, it looks like the artwork hasn't changed.

Yes, the new editions of Eyes Wide Shut and Fetal Jacket are going to be anamorphic widescreen. No real word on Barry Lyndon or Lolita. They'll probably be just repackaging of the old discs.

I like how the 1.78:1 framing on The Shining doesn't really compromise the image much. Top is cropped slightly, but seems like there was extra headroom anyway. Bottom is less cropped. And there is more info on the left and right sides! From those dvdbeaver grabs, only the bloody elevator seems to suffer a bit from the image loss.

Very lame - was hoping for commentaries/docs on these two, Lolita especially.

Ya that's a shame as far as Lolita and BL go. I'm excited about the new anamorphic transfers though! Tuesday is going to be a great dvd buying day.

Of course it doesn't compromise, Kubrick shot for 1.85:1, so it fits together naturally. This at least shows that the "open matte" framing still cropped a lot off the sides. Maybe that'll put an end to the myth.

I disagree. I think it looks fine both ways, but from different compositional preferences.

I personally love the way the full-frame image looks. If that was medium-format photography, I could look at it for hours. Just look at the comparison on dvdbeaver - the shot with Danny on the floor in the hallway looks so much better 4:3 than the 16:9 frame. But to each their own, I guess.

I would have loved to see a screenshot of the two girls, since there was alot of headroom in that shot.

I was hoping they'd show either the "helicopter shadow" shot or the "helicopter rotors" shot from early in the movie to see if the matting erases those errors or not. Oh well, I'll find out Tueday...

I've said it before (probably even in this thread) but The Shining has PHENOMENAL vertical photography. I'm usually not the guy to sit there and analyze shots or compositions but every time I watch that movie the imagery mesmerizes me. I'm ordering this set on HD-DVD, maybe by finally having some discs, it'll get me off my ass to finally grab a player.

Wait a second.. is there no HD boxset? Only individual discs? :(

I ordered the set on HD DVD as well. I hope WHV gets their act together and ships them to me sometime this year. I'm really looking forward to this, especially The Shining and 2001.

A Clockwork Orange: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDRev...dvd_review.htm

Yeah, that's the first thing I noticed. We were never seeing the full camera negative, not even with the 1.33:1 version!

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcom...g/5.04-new.jpg
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...20PDVD_005.jpg

However, you sang a very different tune in the past:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...2&postcount=62

Boy that Clockwork Orange still comparison concerns me. The new 2-disc seems a lot less sharp than the previous version. You guys see a big difference too right? The review says "slightly softer" but I find it to be extremely softer.

Now, I'm planning on getting these in Blu-Ray so I'm hoping it will hopefully be at least as sharp as the previous DVD, but this may be a transfer problem rather than a delivery issue.

What do you guys think?

Extra head-space aside, I think I prefer the 4:3 framing for Shining.

Ya those shots definitely didn't sell me. Much softer in the new disc, but it looks like there also might be less noise in the image than before, so I don't know. I looked at the comparisons for 2001: ASO and it's the same deal.

At this point I'm going to pre-order:
A Life in Pictures (never owned it)
Barry Lyndon (if it's anamorphic)
2001 (HD DVD)

And after I see reviews maybe Shining, FMJ, EWS, Clockwork Orange all HD DVD to check them out, but hanging onto my current DVDs for the framing issue.

I noticed too, I think they tried to get rid of grain, but that seems like a bad idea.

As much as I want these extras on these discs, I own most of those films, I think I'll wait until I switch to HD.

Yeah, it's a post I made almost five years ago on another forum.