IAR.. intended aspect ratio.

I would like both versions. A+B

(I choose A, btw)

I recently started reassessing my assumptions on aspect ratios, and re-bought a 4:3 TV (on clearance at Target) on which I find it more satisfying to watch my old German Expressionist DVDs; and any other old films shot prior to the advent of widescreen.

What really made me consciously reassess my thoughts was when I thought to give Blair Witch another shot after 10 years, but had a cringe reaction to seeing that the DVD was 4:3. Then I became consciously aware of my cringe reaction & found it illogical in light of the fact that that's the aspect ratio it was filmed in. As with Evil Dead, Aguirre, The Wrath of God & some Kubrick films like The Shining and Full Metal Jacket.

I agree that the intended aspect ratio is what matters. If a filmmaker or cinematographer puts artistic effort into a 4:3 shot composition only to have letterbox bars plopped over it, this is as much a violation of artistic vision as those oft-mentioned 4:3 Lions Gate DVDs of films with a widescreen IAR (though whether one chooses to watch Repossessed for its shot composition is another debate entirely).

I also found it funny hearing (from a Val Guest audio commentary) that a common criticism during the advent of Cinemascope was "It's only useful for filming snakes and coffins."

I always go with the original aspect ratio, so based on the example, I'd pick A.

The intended aspect ratio, always. If the director approves a new transfer with an aspect ratio modified from the original-- Austin Powers and Star Trek VI are examples of that-- I will deem it acceptable, though I will still prefer the original.

--THX