Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Regarding the review cited as the "most helpful critical review," in which the main criticism is that the aspect-ratio of this DVD is 1.66 throughout instead of "variable" (some shots 1.33, some 1.66), I'd like to put to rest the unfortunate idea that Kubrick ever intended this film to be seen with a "variable aspect ratio." Yes, the film was photographed that way; but no, it was not meant to be seen that way. Let me explain: "Variable aspect-ratio" seems to be a term invented to market an early DVD release of "Dr. Strangelove." The term has no meaning in the film industry because no film has ever been released that way (except for that misguided "Strangelove" DVD -- a mistake which has now been corrected). Most of "Dr. Stangelove" was photographed with no matte in the camera, thus exposing the entire 1.33 film frame. Many shots, however, were filmed with a 1.66 matte, reflecting Kubrick's intention to release the film to theaters in 1.66. Therefore, if you transfer this movie to tape using an unmatted film element, and you take the whole 1.33 frame for every shot, the aspect ratio will vary between 1.33 (shots filmed with no matte in the camera) and 1.66 (shots filmed with a 1.66 matte). But it seems self-evident that this is not the way any movie was ever intended to be seen, with the shape of the frame randomly bouncing around from shot to shot for no reason. So why shoot it that way? Because Kubrick (and his cameraman) knew that one of two methods would be employed to ensure the aspect ratio of the theatrical presentation: either the theatrical printing negative, and therefore every release print sent to theaters, would have the 1.66 matte printed-in from start to finish, or each print would be shipped with written instructions for the projectionist to put a 1.66 matte in the projector gate. Either method would result in a consistent 1.66 aspect ratio from start to finish, and both methods were commonly used in the days when theaters projected 35mm film prints, before digital projection. Is it possible Kubrick shot it "variable" so that the eventual 1.33 DVD release could have a meandering frame-line? I know Kubrick was smart, but it's unlikely he was thinking of the DVD release in 1964. In those days, movies were made for theaters; televised movies were mainly 16mm prints, edited for time and sold in syndication. The TV market as it existed in 1964 did not influence any film director's compositions. The theatrical release was all that mattered; and the theatrical release of "Dr. Strangelove" was 1.66. All of it. Therefore, if one wants to see this film the way Kubrick meant it to be seen (and a new, matted 35mm print is not available), the film-to-tape transfer must recreate the matted 1.66 theatrical aspect-ratio throughout -- which is what the "40th Anniversary" DVD and of course the BluRay do (thank you, Sony Home Video). I oversaw film restorations for a major Hollywood film studio for more than a decade, so I know the subject of aspect ratios pretty well. Hope this info is helpful.