Well I think anamorphic is ALWAYS better since it can also be viewed normally on a 4:3 tv (don't say it looks vertically stretched, just "tell" your dvd player you have a 4:3 tv) and fullscreen can't be viewed normally on a 16:9 tv (unless you zoom or something). Besides you either can't see the difference or it looks better. Some people seem to think it has something to do with the picture being letterboxed, well it doesn't (although a 2.35:1 / 4:3 image is "more" letterboxed then a 2.35 / 16:9 image) see below!

THESE ARE NO IMAGES FROM THE X0 CAPTURE! (offcourse I don't need to tell you because the difference is clearly vissible).

4:3 Image

http://img173.echo.cx/img173/1429/436jj.jpg

16:9 Image

http://img124.echo.cx/img124/2040/1693jn.jpg

16:9 Anamorphic Image (=16:9 image stretched vertically to 4:3)

http://img124.echo.cx/img124/4966/169anamorphic5sp.jpg

Also, an 800 x 600 movie looks better on a 1024 x 876 projector than on a 800 x 600 projector.

Am I off topic???