Originally Posted by mhafner
6. Anamorphic enhancement for DVD was resisted a long time.
7. Windowboxing was added on some titles to 'compensate' for overscan.
8. Prices were/are very high.
(Criterion deserves praise and criticism. Some of their output/decisions is/are questionable.)
I think is is a very fine post - Criterion certainly has done some wacky stuff in the past, making it "questionable", but very rarely have they done something to arbitrarily ruin the film (say, excessive DNR). Even 6 and 7 were done for very specific reasons that had to do with preservation of quality/entire image on the base television that was their benchmark. While I do wish they would have embraced anamorphic far earlier, and dropped windowboxing to overcome overscan issues far earlier, I do understand and respect why those decisions were made.
That said, I'd be downright shocked if their benchmark for BD releases wasn't a 1080p, full pixel, 24p capable set, thus negating the need for compensations such as windowing that SD releases resorted to.
Mon ami Meriadec, I do wish you well with your copy and hope it's treated well... I kinda hated it, finding almost as plodding as On The Road (the English language Ur-Cinema, for those not in the know...). While certainly the vast majority of excellent Canadian cinema is from PQ, I find this more of historical interest than being a joy to watch.
Additionally, I misspoke earlier - of course, a crapload of Cronenberg has been out on Criterion (awesome alliteration!), and, damn it, he's from here too!