Some screens:
https://www.youthincinema.com/movie.php ... tures-1994

https://www.rarefilmfinder.com/movie.php?id=1096
https://sensitivecontent.info/movie.php?id=1096


Here: https://ulozto.net/file/5SzvCq610aNR/he ... IMEGR2AD==
On the subject of open matting 2.35:1 Titanic in the cinema and on some releases is 2.35:1. But Cameron approved a open matte 1.78:1 version about 5 years ago. There's a shot comparison featuring the grand stairwell and they look better in the open-matte version. Special fx are often rendered to the original format ratio though so not sure if they've been cropped in on films like this. There's one or two WETA fx shots in this film so maybe they're cropped at the sides, or rendered at 1.78:1. IMHO I don't like the black bars on a TV on 2.35:1, but does look nice in the cinema when the screen gets wider.Night457 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2023 6:14 amHere: https://ulozto.net/file/5SzvCq610aNR/he ... IMEGR2AD==
Or here: https://ulozto.net/file/8T9cINwYrdgL/he ... VhH2SyMN==
These are free downloads. Ulozto is region-blocked in some countries, like Germany, but a VPN gets around it. I have not downloaded these files, but they are labeled UNCUT and have the UNCUT runtime. They are labeled 720p in the filename but they are actually both 1080p, specifically 1920x1080. This makes them Open-Matte 1.78 instead of theatrical 2.39, so they SHOULD be what you want. I don't know this movie well enough to guarantee it, however.
For comparison, check out this version which is UNCUT also, but 2.35, so it is NOT what you want:
https://ulozto.net/file/RJbNq16zLBOd/he ... 1dqmD0Zj==
"Cropped" is probably the wrong description, more like "zoomed in". The issue isn't about 2.35:1 vs 1.78:1 (which are both zoomed in at that scene even though the OM provides more frame), it's about that one scene (or maybe two) being censored since maybe the first ever DVD (and every release after).