Yes, but I go easy on films that have fuzzy aspect ratio issues.

For example, some claim that Dial M For Murder looks better in 1.78:1 (which is what the R2 DVD is) than R1's 1.33:1 DVD. While you see some more information on the sides on the R2 DVD, there's no way of knowing if the framing is correct. In fact, while some shots look OK cropped to 16x9, most of the film is cramped in a matted ratio.

Help! is also unmatted, but the guy who did MPI's video transfer said they exposed the whole frame for the DVD. 1.66:1 matting looks splendid, though.

I still haven't bought "Party Girl" because it isn't OAR.

OAR only. I own a few, but only because I bought them used in bulk groupings, or they were gifts.

Some of my Laserdisc are FS, and I would say maybe 5 of my DVD are. I will not purchase anything at the store not OAR (usually WS).

Well, we ended up with a F/S for my son. My sister bought him the Harry Potter set for Christmas. She called me from the store to ask if it matteres F/S or W/S. I told her yes get the W/S. The 1st movie in the set, The Sorcerer's Stone, is F/S and the other 2 are W/S. We just discovered this over the weekend. I am not sure if we are going to buy a 1st movie that is W/S or what. Hubby and I both searched the box set, and it lists W/S on the box, but on the individual disk sleeves, only the 2nd two say W/S.

Other than that, there is only one other F/S on the shelf that I can think of and it was the 1st DVD I ever purchased and did not know any better. Hubby quickly filled me in on the difference that same day.

I picked up "Natty Gann" from region 2 on E-Bay. The picture is a little grainy but it's nice to be able to see the entire frame. The movie came out in 1985 and I can't believe after having VHS, Laserdisc and DVD, it has taken me 20 years to see this movie again in widescreen.

Some Warner titles that I've passed up:

Running on Empty
Fearless
Clean & Sober
Great Santini, The
Star 80
Postman always Rings Twice, The
Candidate, The

i passed on bright lights big city due to the incorrect AR.

OAR ONLY.

People who buy Fullscreen/Full Frame should only get Dolby 2.0 as well. Why give them 5.1 ??? Most likely they don't have a surround system as well and listening to 5.1 through the tv's speakers results in turning up the volume more than normal. And even if they did, why give them the added benefit of better sound when they don't care about the director's vision ?

I recently returned a Austin Powers 3-DVD set to Costco as they were all widescreen except for the one, Goldmember. I tried telling the lady at cust. service, who obviously wasn't a fan, that maybe the other packages might have all widescreen as even the scan on the outside of the box clearly showed the Goldmember case with widescreen on it. But she didn't seem to care, it was a great deal too, $18.99 for the "trilogy".

Could it be that some are confusing "widescreen" with "OAR"?

I've got plenty of full-screen movies, probably about 35-40% of my entire collection, and they're all supposed to be that way. Likewise, many film soundtracks are two-channel stereo (or two-channel mono, though I prefer single channel mono if I can get it), and again that's the way they're supposed to be.

If I went to purchase "The Magnificent Ambersons" (drool drool I wish) and it was only available in widescreen with a DTS-ES soundtrack, I'd leave it on the shelf.

hmmm, well I'm 25 so I'm talking about modern movies, to me, the last 10-15 years or so. Oldest movies I've watched are Citizen Kane, Samurai Seven, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, other than that, movies from the 80s and on, stuff that I grew up on. Of course if it was originally filmed in 4:3 format, stereo or even mono soundtrack, black and white, thats perfectly fine. As long as its original format. From what I've read starting in the 50s-60s they started using the wider formats (Academy Flat 1.85, Cinemascope 2.35, etc.). So other than television shows, low budget / independant films, most anything thats gotten a theatrical release in the last 40 years or so shouldn't be in the 4:3 / 1.33:1 format.

If fullscreen is the OAR, then I'm getting a fullscreen DVD. However, if it's one of those "Modified to fit you screen" hack jobs, then, that's a no-sale for me...even if it's something I really, really want.

It's OAR or nothing for me, as well. If 1.33:1 (full screen) is OAR, fine. Otherwise forget it.

I almost gave in and bought Artisan's crappy P&S version of Extreme Prejudice because it's one of my Top 10 favorite movies but I've managed to resist even that one.

Only when people stop "settling" for P&S will these video companies start releasing everything in the proper format. Hitting 'em in the pocketbook is the only thing that will get there attention!

OAR

I agree, but don't always be dissuaded when you see that quote on a DVD case. I have several DVDs of older films, from major distributors too, that say "Modified (or re-formatted) to fit your screen", even though they're obviously supposed to be shown 4:3. Either it's a lazy error by the companies who slap that disclaimer on every FS DVD regardless of its OAR, or it's a misleading technicality, since there is a very very slight adjustment from the Academy Ratio of 1.37:1 to 1.33:1.

In any case, seeing that doesn't always mean the DVD is non-OAR. So it's best to know the film's OAR, and go from there.

If it is not OAR I will avoid buying it even if I really like it. I will make exceptions, but never pay more that a couple of bucks used. I may rent a full screen so I can see it without buying it. I also tend to seek out WS or OAR Laserdisc if they are available and the DVD is FS.

If it was only FS, and I really wanted it, I would still buy it (for now). I dont have a really expensive big screen WS TV, so it doesnt make much of a difference..

I am kind of in this dilemma.. Trees Lounge is only available through retailers in FS (they OOP the WS for a reason that will never be understood in the history of mankind, yes Trees Lounge DVD will be that important) and I refuse to buy that. I will hunt down the WS until it is mine.

Remo Williams was the last full screen I got. I was tempted to buy Colossus the Forbin Project but I'm holding out hope they make a WS version soon. I'm done double dipping. I've made the double dip mistake too many times. Granted some were a few years between the FS and the WS press but now that I have a WS TV, I can't live with the FS pressings any more.

I'm not against them making FS versions since there are people who may be watching movies on their 25" TV for another 10 years. I do have an issue with them not making a WS version available at the same time. I can't think of a major movie that was released in the past few years that wasn't available when the DVD came out in both formats almost right away. Can you imagine if LOTR was available on FS first and wasn't released in WS for another 9 months? I think torches and pitch forks would have been gathered. It just seems odd to me that the sort of people who push technology (such as ourselves) are getting the shaft on the double dipping.

Warner Bros. already did that with their "Budget Line". Most of those titles are still wallowing in that cesspool.

Isn't Postman in OAR?

Absolutely not. Why do I want to see only part of what the director intended me to see? Just to have the movie? I don't think so. OAR or none for me.

I have no interest in seeing half of the picture.

OAR only.