Full Screen or Widescreen?

[blackpredator5]

Wide Screen nothing else compares and has to be blu ray

[alienfan95610]

Wide screen...end of story. Pan and scan (fullscreen) can most times entirely change what the director intended you to see.

[stw1984]

Widescreen all the way.  I work at a retail store and I use to have people yell at me about why Full Screen is better (they actually argued that Widescreen cut off the picture).

[SM]

Wide screen...end of story. Pan and scan (fullscreen) can most times entirely change what the director intended you to see.

Predator being a prime example where you clearly and laughbly see Carl Weathers' arm after it's just been supposedly shot off.

[BANE]

Wide screen...end of story. Pan and scan (fullscreen) can most times entirely change what the director intended you to see.

Predator being a prime example where you clearly and laughbly see Carl Weathers' arm after it's just been supposedly shot off.

Except in the Ultimate Hunter Edition Blu Ray...

[Feral_PRED]

My favorite is always widescreen.

-alienhunter14

[SM]

Wide screen...end of story. Pan and scan (fullscreen) can most times entirely change what the director intended you to see.

Predator being a prime example where you clearly and laughbly see Carl Weathers' arm after it's just been supposedly shot off.

Except in the Ultimate Hunter Edition Blu Ray...

Don't think you can see it on any DVD version.  Only the old Full Screen VHS/ TV versions

[Cellien]

The question for me has always been about aspect ratio.  Like 1:85:1 or 2:39:1.  At home, I always wanted 1:85:1 or 1:78:1 because that is  very close to HDTVs.  2:39:1 was somewhat annoying because now you have this widescreen TV but it's even wider causing black bars again.  Overall, yes I'd rather see in original aspect, just the black bars would be a bit annoying.

Now that I have a projector, I really don't care at all.  The only thing that still annoys me is when you have movies like the Abyss where they call it widescreen, but its actually 4:3 (non-anamorphic) with black bars at the top and bottom... and worst of all its STRETCHED!  You have to manually adjust for the stretching which means a seriously ugly picture.

[SM]

They'd have to fix that for a BR release.

[Sharp Sticks]

We're plains animals. We evolved looking out on panoramas. Anything less is an insult to our scary-leopard-spotting peripheral vision.

[SiL]

Widescreen if I have the choice (Movies made prior to the 1950s were almost always shot 4x3).

[DrGediman]

My copy of Metropolis (the 1926 version) is 4:3 and there are no black bars at the sides, and I have a standard widescreen hdtv.

[Uncanny Antman]

Anything other than original aspect ratio is not worth my time or money.

4x3, 1:85:1 and 2:35:1 are all fine and dandy, so long as that is the ratio they were shot in.

Pan & Scan is an abomination.  Same with WB's recent practice of cropping their Looney Tunes to 1:85:1.   New aspect ration?  No sale.

My copy of Metropolis (the 1926 version) is 4:3 and there are no black bars at the sides, and I have a standard widescreen hdtv.

That means your settings are wrong.  The picture is either getting cropped or squashed.

[TJ Doc]

More likely it's just stretched.

[DrGediman]

It doesn't bother me, I don't mind full screen as long as it's not pan and scan.