I don’t really have anything to add to this discussion, but I have to love the fact that cinephiles are up in arms over the the new Universal edition of Touch of Evil, which has three different cuts of the film (the 1958 studio-cut theatrical version, a pre-studio-interference preview version, and the 1998 restored version), but fails to display any of them in the originally shot 1.37:1 aspect ratio, instead using the 1.85:1 widescreen ratio. Dave Kehr has a post with video clips showing the difference and his post has garnered some 350 comments arguing for one aspect ratio or another (I didn’t read them all, I admit). There’s also a ton of discussion, with screencaps, going on at Criterion Forum. Glenn Kenny joins in with a bit more info on the history of the multiple ratios.

I’m so used to arguing for widescreen over pan-and-scan when going from 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 theatrical formats to 1.33:1 televisions that it seems strange to hear arguments for fullscreen over widescreen. But sure enough, looking at the clips Kehr posted, there’s definitely a more claustrophobic feel to the widescreen one. On the other hand, several of the shots did look better framed to me in widescreen. According to Kenny, it seems likely that Welles intended to shoot 1.37:1, not taking into account that the film would be matted to 1.85:1 for release. Frankly, it’s a fantastic film in any form, but now I’m curious to see the whole thing in both ratios.

So apparently after two DVD releases of Touch of Evil, there’s still room for one more. :) I’ll be on the lookout for the 4-version edition.