I wasn't using "ignorant" in the pejorative, like the way you just used "penis", but in the sense that you did not know that film is a higher resolution than HD, which you just admitted not knowing. If that's not being ignorant, well, then I'm a penis...

And I never said you're ignorant FOR working at BB, just that my experience with most BB staff has revealed a great deal of ignorance on their part, which you only confirmed.

Such a true statement.

I know Kubrick is a polarizing director, but I'm surprised by how many people like some of his films but not others. I may prefer some films, but I love everyone I've seen. The only ones I haven't are Killer's Kiss, Spartacus, and Lolita, but I imagine I'll love those too.

I guess I just find it funny people will extoll some of his films but call the others overrated (which really that word needs to go, it doesn't mean anything). To me they all have that Kubrick feel, and they tend to deal with similar themes, so to like one means to like another. Guess not.

Well sorry for lashing out but the above quote of yours I took as snobbish and rude in tone.

Excuse me for not knowing the difference between 70mm resolution vs HD, and judging by your reaction to it, the difference must be glaringly obvious.

Got this from Familyvideo on my order:

"Warner Home Video Director's Series: Stanley Kubrick Collection has a listed release date of 10/23/07. We have gotten word from Warner Brothers has pushed back release dates on many of their titles, and this is one of those titles. The title should be shipping out as soon as we receive it in our warehouse."

Hm. I was looking at two copies of the Kubrick Collection at Best Buy with the discounted price sign under it, as well as plenty of the individual editions prominently displayed on the New Releases shelves with the labeled discount signs for them also. This sounds like a damage control statement as the release date for this set has obviously NOT been pushed back. It is in the stores.

What do the reportedly beautiful slipcovers look like for the individual discs?

Only in certain stores (Best Buy, BJ's wholesale Club) it is/was available, it appears no online retailers got their orders in which is insane in my opinion. Why send to some stores and not others?

Went yesterday to 3 stores and couldn't find the boxset. Went to Target today, and found 1 left.

Mine had the ugly covers for all of them, but mine had the Jack face for Shining rather than the redrum door. Oh well! Just glad to have it! I also bought Barry Lyndon and Lolita new editions at Barnes & Nobles. Basically the same, except they don't have the "Stanley Kubrick collection" font like on the snapper cases anywhere. They look kinda plain lookin' without it, too much white.

I checked Best Buy's web site, and there's a store not far from my job that supposedly has it in stock. I ordered one for pickup and I'm awaiting the confirmation that they actually have it. If so, I will cancel my amazon order and pick it up after work tomorrow.

Can you check / have you checked to see if either are anamorphic? I think you're the first person in this thread to post that they picked up Barry Lyndon and Lolita... I'm sure I'm not alone in looking for confirmation one way or the other on those two. It has been generally assumed that they are not new transfers...

I called my local Best Buy and they said that they had five copies left in stock, and that they would hold one for me. After I arrived and purchased the set, out of curiosity I went out to the dvd racks and asked if they had any more. A BB employee with his little "bluetooth" told me that they had one more left. They had sold three in the matter of about twenty minutes.

Don't know about Lolita, but Barry Lyndon is definitely not anamorphic. Heck, it's practically 4:3, with only a sliver of a black bar at the bottom. The back of the packaging that states "preserving the aspect ratio of it's original camera negative" is absolutely correct. There may be a little extra head-space in some shots, but making it 1:85 would kill a lot of the compositions - more than most other Kubrick films. For that reason, I don't think BL should ever even be anything wider than this dvd.

A post at another board has said that they received only the rated R version of EWS in their box. Has anyone else experienced this? I would assume they would have already posted about it all pissed off if they had.

How would you guys rate the commentary on fmj? Is it interesting? what do they mostly talk about?

I'm cool with the AR on the BL disc, but it sucks that it's not anamorphic.

Essentially this new release is just the same exact disc (files dates 2001) in a keep case with art that now says 2007.

I would have just found a cheap used copy if I knew it was exactly the same.

but the Life in Pictures documentary also comes with the old boxset from back in the day. so what's the point of double dipping if we already own the old dvd set?

I actually really really like these covers. But I am kind of a minimalist when it comes to cover art. I absolutely hate covers that have busy collage type designs.

Uh...more special features and an anamorphic presentation?

So in the box set do they come with slipcovers of the covers of the non box set artwork.

Or are they just those cases with the eyes and whatnot on them.

Would somebody be kind to post pictures of the box set

See post 629.

I hope FMJ gets released someday. Its the only film I would watch over and over again.

Anyone watch their copy of The Shining yet from the boxset? I watched it today, and the screen goes black with no picture from 2:17-2:28 minutes into the movie. Anyone else experience this?

I know it's only ten seconds, but it's Stanley Kubrick! He damands perfection!!

Sounds like you got a defective disc... I just checked my copy and didn't experience this problem.

Your screen goes black in the middle of the opening credits? Mine certainly doesn't.