Not sure about the aspect ratio to be honest (doesnt look superwide)… but the runtime seems to be 94min. However, music starts over black screen, like an overture…
It shouldn’t look extremely wide since 2.20:1 is not as wide as your average 2.35:1 flick (very common aspect ratio and usually the widest things go). However, there should still be clearly noticeable black-bars top and bottom:
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=21007&position=1
The first two images in my post 28 are in the correct aspect ratio of 2,2:1. According to the Al!ve website, the film is presented on BD in an aspect ratio of 16:9 (1,78:1).
Thanks. Will check again tonight and report. Just to make it clear: i think it looks amazing all things considered. The only weakness of the release seems to be lack of extras.
16:9 means mostly only that it is anamorph enhanced. Could be here still the original 2,2:1, or an adjusted 1,85:1 or 1,78:1.
I’m sure it will be the original 2,2:1 aspect ratio.
The T.V print I have with full english audio for a running time of 1hour and 50 mins starts off in 2,.35: 1 ratio and then drops down to 2,.2: 1 ratio:
Image looks horizontally stretched. 2,20:1 should be the original aspect ratio, not 2,35:1
Those pictures are definitely stretched. But they are in 2.20:1 … If you resize them to 1.85:1 they look ok, so my guess is the tv-print is a stretched 1.85:1 print.
Maybe these screens our better 
Just checked again this prints starts in 2.35 .1 then drops down to 2.2.1
Yep, they look as they shall I gatther but the aspect ratio is 1.77:1 not 2.20 ?
Thats probably due to my computer not liking VLC at the moment keeps crashing.
2.2.1 on my dvd player.
Yes, 1,77:1 or 16:9.
So the back cover says 2,35:1. The picture on my screen is 120x52cm, which translates to just about that.
I am gonna do a proper review as well, but just for now…
Here are some pictures, just as an impression. Took them with my cell phone, nothing fancy.
For 35 mm prints the aspect ratio was 2,35:1, see full technical specs on IMDb.
Submitted to Italian censorship in August 1966 as El Cjorro, verified film length 3016 meters (equivalent to 110 minutes).
Hmm, are we sure this isn’t a 70mm blow-up (i.e. from 35mm) rather than an original 70mm film?
In that case they wouldnt make such a big deal out of it? http://in70mm.com/news/2016/pampas/index.htm
Any chance the aspect ratio will be “more correct” on the 4K Ultra HD BluRay release?
Actually I’m referring to the “blow-ups” done back in the day to show 35mm films in 70mm versions:
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/35-70mm.htm
I’m just wondering if maybe the 70mm print they are working with is actually an old 70mm “blow-up” of a 35mm print? Are we sure the film was originally shot on 70mm?
Yes, they keep talking about an original 65mm camera negative… "SAVAGE PAMPAS" will get a 4k digital restoration
Interesting reading !