I haven't seen any reviews yet -- love the movie, Don Siegel, and its great cast -- but it's listed as a 1.33:1 release and I'm wondering if it's an open matte presentation or P&S.

According to Dave Kehr in his DVD news column in the New York Times last week:

But then in the same article he failed to mention about the closed-captioned subtitle problem on GHOST IN THE SHELL 2: INNOCENCE, so one can't really be sure that this is an open-matte transfer. :unsure:

Either way, I'll be steering clear of this release. What a huge disappointment.

"that bungles the aspect ratio (the film is presented full frame instead of its proper 1.85, a foolish oversight that owners of widescreen televisions can correct by pushing the "zoom" button)"

Is this correct? Wouldn't you be framing an already cropped picture, that has probably been subjected to panning and scanning? Like Dave Cheung, I question whether this is an open matte transfer, partially based on memories of viewing this film back in the day on television and videotape.

I wrote to Universal about the botched presentation of CHARLEY VARRICK and COLOSSUS: THE FORBIN PROJECT. imho, both of these films are more important than CASTLE KEEP, but we'll see if Universal is as responsive as Columbia.

This airs on cable in a nice 1.85 widescreen print. You'd think Universal could have just slapped that on a bare bones disc and kept buyers happy ( and given the film a smidgeon of respect.

Especially since it was released that way on laserdisc, as half of a double feature with MADIGAN. It's confounding how Universal can botch titles like CHARLEY VARRICK and COLOSSUS: THE FORBIN PROJECT, yet still manage to release insanely great values in attractive packaging like the various "Franchise Collection" sets.

Dave

The question of whether or not it's an open-matte or pan&scan transfer still has yet to be answered; if it's open-matte, at least that's better than pan&scan IMO.

In the UK the BBC2 screened CHARLEY VARRICK a few years ago at 1:85:1. At the time (I can't say for now since I cannot receive the station anymore) the BBC had gone letterboxed crazy, masking many films to that ratio. I say 'crazy' because they also slapped 1:85:1 on P&S transfers of scope films THE UNDERNEATH and IN THE MOUTH OF MADNESS! Many open matte transfers, one of them being I'm sure CHARLEY VARRICK, looked fine, though, so at least if that's that's what has been released on DVD it should look fine zoomed on a widescreen TV.

I haven't seen the DVD, but I've compared various transfers of this film over the years, and can assure you that it was shot open matte at 1.85, which means that a 1.33 transfer should look just fine, containing all the left/right visual information while adding slivers at top and bottom.

I just watched the CHARLEY VARRICK DVD in zoom-mode on my 16X9 TV. Basically it is an open matte transfer but every other shot looks framed too tight. A few hairlines are cut off and at least one reel change mark is too high. So a few shots are definitely cropped on all sides.

However at least the movie is watchable in 16x9 zoom mode. Better than if it had been a pan & scan transfer anyway.