Signature DVD now out

Yeah, Michael... but if you read further into the reviews, there's something very disturbing:

**************************************************************
"First let me start by saying this is one of the finest movies I have ever seen. I can watch it over and over again. I like this series so much that even though I bought and own the first DVD set, I just had to buy the signature series. The reason I bought the signature series was because it says it is in 16:9 aspect ratio unlike the first set which is conventional 4:3. I thought to myself 'they must have filmed it in 16:9.'
When I played the first disc it looked strange. So when I compared the two sets, I saw that the way they got the 16:9 was by zooming into the 4:3 video which essentially lops off some of the top and bottom of the picture. This has disappointed me. When you buy or rent a movie that has been converted from 16:9 there is a message that says, 'This film has been modified from the original to fit your television.' Well it would have been nice if this set said, 'This film has been modified to fit your 16:9 television.'
I am a victim of clever marketing. I am disappointed that Tom Hanks would let something like this happen with one of his products. He has a fantastic reputation. I am disappointed."
**************************************************************

If there's any truth to this... then yes, that *WOULD* be very disappointing, indeed! It sounds to me like these folks might've wanted to capitalize on the (forced?) march towards widescreen television, and quickly threw something together.

While both audio and video are critical to a high-quality home theatre experience... I think I'll err on the side of the visual element, and keep my eyes peeled for an original release set. If the series was originally shot in the standard 4:3 television aspect ratio, that's the way it should always be. Cropping the top and bottom would just be a major ripoff, IMHO.

[deleted]