I'm pretty sure MUNICH is first and foremost Dreamworks property.

[*EDIT: I don't know who owns what anymore!*]

I clarified later that I was wrong and that it is a Universal/Dreamworks release.

FWIW, I initially thought it was Paramount too. I associate Dreamworks primarily with Paramount.

And I must retract my previous post. I checked the NBC Universal webshop & they're selling the Munich DVD, so Munich is first and foremost Universal property after all.

(It's confusing, I've been seeing a lot of Dreamworks titles sold in the WB Shop. I don't know half of who owns what anymore!)

Digital Bits asked Uni about Munich and they said the nature and tone of the film didn't fit with the set as well as Schindlers List exclusion. Sounds like it might come out next year.

It's probably stacked with the Jurassic Park movies due to the new one coming out soon.

Twilight Zone, The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun shouldn't be lumped on with all those Paramount titles. Paramount kept their Spielberg films in that list. Even the recently-released Amistad and The Terminal discs were straight from Paramount even after Warner took over most of their catalog.

And it's no mystery why Schindler's List and Munich aren't in this set. Without them it's more or less family-friendly across the board. Does anyone really expect them to include a movie featuring Eric Bana lovelessly penetrating his wife while he has a post-traumatic flashback with acts of extreme violence and sex cut together in the same box set as ET? Plus Schindler's List kinda exists on it's own island. You gotta handle a film like that with kid gloves lest you be accused of something insensitive.

My prediction: Munich debuts alongside the 4 individual titles when they're released later.

I can't rationalize this set. I own every currently-available Spielberg film on Blu but this would not only entail me re-buying 4 films it would be my 3rd time on Blu for JP and TLW (went from the box set to the individual releases with the 3D version of the first film) AND still keeping my 3D JP on top of everything. It might take 2 years but they'll be out eventually, and even with these four titles his filmography is still 1 film away from completion.

Duel

Widescreen or old TV Screen?

Wasn't Duel shot for TV in 1.33?

Maybe but i've read that it played over seas in theaters at a wide ratio.

I'd prefer it to be OAR, I don't think it's ever had a home video release at any other ratio, I guess it was screened theatrically at 1.85. According to Josh Z, who's forgotten way more information about aspect ratios than I will ever know, 1.85 films were projected by masking the top and bottom of the frame with the projector, so maybe that's how it was done. What is Spielberg's preferred ratio, I wonder? Of course, if it doesn't get a damn individual release, it's academic, since I really don't want to pay full price not only for films I already own, but which will probably not have any new features. I suppose that ideally they could include both ratios, though for the "fill the screen" folks, they might just do it at 1.78 to split the difference. Though the fact that Spielberg accomplished that film when he was younger than I was kind of sucks my will to live .

Duel should be released in 1.33:1 as it was originally seen on TV screens 43 years ago. It should not be cropped to 1.78, you'll be losing 30% of the picture that way! OAR is OAR.

I'll wait until the four new catalog titles are released individually since I own the other four titles already. The only way I'll double dip on the already owned titles is if somehow the set gets marked down to $60. Hell will probably freeze over before that happens.

Count me in for this one for the $70 Amazon Deal of the Day

I vaguely recall (possibly from Duel's DVD special features?) that the "international version" was actually wider and not cropped. In certain cases, you could even see hints of Spielberg or the camera shooting in the back seat. And I'm not sure if it's related or not, but new scenes were actually shot at the last minute to pad Duel's running time closer to 90 minutes, such as the scene where Mann is speaking to his wife on the phone in the laundromat.

Back in the Laserdisc days, Duel was initially announced to be released letterboxed to 1.66:1. However, the eventual disc was actually 4:3.

This was a made-for-TV movie and would have been composed for 4:3, or at least primarily composed for that ratio. It played theatrically in Europe, probably matted down to 1.75:1 or 1.66:1. It's possible that Spielberg anticipated this and protected his shots for the matting. Nevertheless, I still think the "OAR" should be considered 4:3.

Universal's blu-ray transfer of Duel is nothing short of amazing.

http://www.mubis.es/titulos/el-diabl...pturas-blu-ray

God dammit, I don't want to buy the whole set for one film! Release it individually! Was Duel even shot on 35mm? It was a TV movie, but I don't think videotape was around back then.

Yes, videotape was certainly around in the 1970s. However, Duel was shot on 35mm film.

I thought it might've been 16mm. I didn't know if video was in any common use, I didn't think VHS came into commercial use until the late 1980s, didn't know if video was in much use before, though it'd make sense for it to be used in TV. Either way, I want an individual release.

Duel was definitely shot on 35mm...it should look great in HD, assuming they didn't screw up the transfer.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a stand-alone release, or at least a Black Friday sale on this set.

So, according to those screenshots for DUEL, the Blu has been cropped to 1.85:1? Those captures look great, but why was this cropped from the OAR of 4:3?

Probably because they want it to accommodate everyone's HDTV. I was at a friend's recently, and he was complaining because the scope movie we were watching didn't fit his HDTV. Since Spielberg is actually marketable, they may have had the mainstream in mind. That said, I think it was presented at 1.85 for some theatrical screenings (Or maybe 1.66 in Europe?). What is Spielberg's stance on the issue? Does he have a preferred ratio? I still thinking presenting both ratios and both versions wouldn't be too troublesome, though maybe having multiple ratios on a disc would be difficult. Maybe the master they got was a theatrical 1.85 print?

I suppose that by a fingernail of detail, the 1.78 is closer to the 1.33 than the 1.85 would be though .

Have any specs for 1941 been announced? Which version of the film will be included?

Both cuts.

The films included in this set not previously available on Blu-ray have each been announced for individual release available 5/5/15.