I love this film, and bought the bluray thinking it would be a restored release, but sadly enough that can't be the case. It looks like they worked on an old master and made an upscale from it, although I don't know enough of the technical stuff to be absolutely sure. It does look like it, though.
IMDB says the film was shot on 35mm, and the photographer was very skilled. So why do this? I want warning signs on all these cheap attempts on releasing substandard blurays to make some quick bucks. I feel it's getting worse all the time, but if the film business feel threatened by piracy, why not do the job right, so that we who actually buy a lot of films, and don't download any illegally, get what we pay for?
(PS! Rating is for film. I don't like to give a great film a bad rating just because a certain release is substandard.)