I've only gone to one IMAX screen (to see Cloverfield and Watchmen) and it seemed underwhelming compared to they hype I'd heard for years about stunning IMAX imagery. Maybe this is just a small example of the technology. According to their website, the screen is 50-foot high and 30-foot wide, but in person it seems small compared to the big theaters I would routinely see movies in in my younger days.
@Pinkhamster: two things could be the case here....
1 - it was a smaller IMAX theater: [www.slashfilm.com]
2 - neither of those film was shot in IMAX, so what you are seeing is just an enlarged version of the 35mm
@goldfarb: Thank you for the tip and informative link! We do have a much larger IMAX screen in town at a museum but they only show nature/travelogue documentaries and have never shown any of the IMAX versions of Hollywood films. Maybe it has to do with their tax status.
"giving us just over a year to prepare for the experience"
it shouldn't take that long to kill off a sufficiency of brain cells. yarm sucks, no matter how big the screen, no matter how violent the epilepsy inducing flashes. i can't wait to sit through the months of endless posts about how awesome teh lightcycles am ohmigawd squee!!!
punctuated of course by a few dozen threads hating on megan fox and a few daft polls to keep charlie's byline alive. yes, yes... i'm having a bitter morning.
Sounds good. But doesnt Hollywood realise that not everyone has an IMAX cinema just sitting on their doorstep and not everyone can get to one. It beggars belief that this and Avatar are being done on such a scale, but will (unfortunatly) alienate so many viewers. Sure i'll catch them both on the local cinema, and im sure they'll rock. But im also sure they would rock just that little bit more on IMAX!! Like Spinal Tap once said..it goes up to eleven and im sure the films would too!!!
Edited by CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) at 09/18/09 9:12 AM
CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) was starred
CoffinDodger (If the typos crap. Blame my keyboard) was unstarred
@Garrison Dean: R.O.A.C.H.: Yes... for me, this means at least 45 minutes in travel, between driving to the metro and taking it into the city, or (suckier still) needing to drive across the city to the other IMAX.
But I'll do it. Tron is one of the few movies that's actually worth it.
@Lassus: IT'S AWFUL! I don't know how I can go on. But, I'm a trooper, I persevere and put up with less than optimal viewing conditions.
Like at home... I have to settle for the sound that comes out of my 52" Flat panel TV for my Blu-Ray Movies because I can't afford a new sound system yet thanks to a shitty economy. I should just walk off a bridge... but I carry on.
@redqueenmeg: fortunately in washington we have real imax downtown in the smithsoniams but irritatingly they're not listed on most movie ticketing sites that do list the fake imax in the suburbs.
@tetracycloide: We used to have real IMAX; I saw the first X-Men movie on the IMAX here, but they shut it down, and I am not driving to freaking Tampa.
I would have liked to have seen the posters perhaps showing the film's images of some of the more memorable frames from the novel.
That said, is it true they have changed the ending? If they have, I'm guessing they made it a political killing: someone was displeased the Comedian was smoking Cubans in the alternate 85 political climate.
@Hotscot: there are a couple of different techniques...
but the method I've hear of the most is one where they seperate elements of the original plate then build proxy geometry and then project the original image onto it, then render that with two cameras resulting in the right amount of parallax.
09/18/09
09/18/09
09/18/09
09/18/09
1 - it was a smaller IMAX theater:
[www.slashfilm.com]
2 - neither of those film was shot in IMAX, so what you are seeing is just an enlarged version of the 35mm
09/18/09
09/18/09
09/18/09
eg - [www.imdb.com]
09/18/09
if not then it's just an upres like Harry Potter etc...
09/18/09
it shouldn't take that long to kill off a sufficiency of brain cells. yarm sucks, no matter how big the screen, no matter how violent the epilepsy inducing flashes. i can't wait to sit through the months of endless posts about how awesome teh lightcycles am ohmigawd squee!!!
punctuated of course by a few dozen threads hating on megan fox and a few daft polls to keep charlie's byline alive. yes, yes... i'm having a bitter morning.
09/18/09
09/18/09
09/18/09
09/18/09
You know, when something is touted as the "Future of ***" they usually bother to build a bunch of them.
TDK sure did look amazing though.
09/18/09
But I'll do it. Tron is one of the few movies that's actually worth it.
09/18/09
09/18/09
Like at home... I have to settle for the sound that comes out of my 52" Flat panel TV for my Blu-Ray Movies because I can't afford a new sound system yet thanks to a shitty economy. I should just walk off a bridge... but I carry on.
08/28/09
08/28/09
08/28/09
Therefore, I boycott. I will likely see this film, but I am not paying extra to see it in pretend IMAX.
08/28/09
08/28/09
06/08/09
My head would asplode as if it were a vehicle in a Bay movie, instead.
There's my $20 saved.
06/08/09
06/08/09
06/08/09
Yes, her boobs transform.
02/03/09
That said, is it true they have changed the ending? If they have, I'm guessing they made it a political killing: someone was displeased the Comedian was smoking Cubans in the alternate 85 political climate.
02/03/09
01/19/09
01/19/09
(I am a techie but just too lazy to do my own research this morning.)
01/19/09
but the method I've hear of the most is one where they seperate elements of the original plate then build proxy geometry and then project the original image onto it, then render that with two cameras resulting in the right amount of parallax.