Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by dcowboy7

But isnt a plus for imax is that the imax scenes look even better than the non imax scenes on a bluray.

Do they? If you watched "The Dark Knight" on Blu-ray and didn't know there were IMAX scenes, do you think you'd notice anything? I don't think so.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

A big "meh" from me.


There are so few "real" IMAX venues out there. I don't find digital IMAX ("liemax" as some call it) very impressive, especially since a lot of them turn the volume up to painfully distorted levels.


You won't get 7.1 or Atmos in IMAX.


Then the Blu-ray...will it get a switching AR release? Will we have to buy multiple versions like Star Trek: Into Darkness?


Sigh.

While I agree that I'd rather see a film in Atmos than in LieMax, I saw Gravity at the Loews Lincoln Square in NYC thinking it was going to be in real IMAX (since it's so equipped) and it wasn't - it was in LieMax, but I have to admit that it was still a great presentation. Would it have been even better in 70mm IMAX? I don't know.

I tried to peer into the booth to see if the 70mm IMAX projector was still there, but I couldn't tell.

[Silo5]

IMAX is overrated. 2.35:1 or nothing.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by Silo5

IMAX is overrated. 2.35:1 or nothing.

Imax is practically the same ratio, just with more picture on top and bottom, and on 16:9 tv there's no black bars! Don't get me wrong, I love widescreen and would never want pan and scan back, but I hate black bars!

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Imax is practically the same ratio, just with more picture on top and bottom, and on 16:9 tv there's no black bars! Don't get me wrong, I love widescreen and would never want pan and scan back, but I hate black bars!

Have you seen an actual 15/70mm IMAX film? 1570 has an approx ratio of 1.44. And that allows a very tall screen, giving you that sense of awe.
Digital IMAX (or known also as 'Liemax') and its approx. 1.9 aspect ratio doesn't offer the kind of Grand scale that 1570 does.

Hollywood features are typically 1.85 and 2.39 ratios. So the 1.9 digital IMAX ratio means we don't lose much visual information and no pan & scan is necessary.

If Star Wars Episode VII is going to be like Star Trek Into Darkness and crop the frame down to about 1.6, then it's quite pointless.

What we really and truly miss out are the IMAX documentaries that have always embraced the 1570 format. Cropping it to Digital IMAX weakens the impact. Unfortunately.

[Falaskan]

That sucks!

[mrr1]

Blah blah blah aspect blah blah blah Imax blah blah blah letterboxed blah.

As long as the movie is good and re-elevates the Star Wars franchise to the great cinematic heights it deserves, I don't give a crap about the type of film that's used or the aspect ratios.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's why I said "essentially" he's been created by the Sith, because if it wasn't for Anakin being created out of the ether then Luke certainly wouldn't exist, no matter that his momma's all natural.

As for Leia, she isn't the same person as Luke, so why would she react in the exact same way? While she would undoubtedly be disturbed by it, as anyone would, it's not intrinsically linked to her 'faith', unlike Luke. Even if Leia's taken up using the Force in the intervening years, I doubt she's become a 'saber wielding badass in the meantime, so you won't have to worry about a Luke vs Leia faceoff.

And of course this is all just guessing! It's the internet man, it's what it's there for.

Valid enough points. I am sure there is some line in Star Wars about perspective and point of view that makes both of our views valid. And you are right, this is exactly what the internet was made for. this and porn

I think that IMAX is just turning into another gimmick like 3D. If you are watching it in an actual IMAX theatre, then there are benefits but not every theatre is IMAX so it is more a gimmick than anything else now. Does kind of make you scratch your head though - trying to use more practical effects and not cg to keep it in the spirit of the original films yet filming in IMAX format (and probably 3D) which none of the original 6 films were done in. I guess you can pick and choose what you like and what you want to ignore or change when you are in charge.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by mrr1

As long as the movie is good and re-elevates the Star Wars franchise to the great cinematic heights it deserves, I don't give a crap about the type of film that's used or the aspect ratios.

pretty big wishes there!

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Imax is practically the same ratio, just with more picture on top and bottom, and on 16:9 tv there's no black bars! Don't get me wrong, I love widescreen and would never want pan and scan back, but I hate black bars!

Black bars came into my backyard, knocked over the trash cans, broke all the pottery, and ate my dachshund.

[camper]

Originally Posted by mrr1

Blah blah blah aspect blah blah blah Imax blah blah blah letterboxed blah.

As long as the movie is good and re-elevates the Star Wars franchise to the great cinematic heights it deserves, I don't give a crap about the type of film that's used or the aspect ratios.

Seeing Star Wars on TNT (or whatever it was) when letterboxed movies--on VHS--was rare is what got me into buying films in widescreen format. Which led to DVD player, which led to a widesscreen TV, which led to Blu Ray...

So for me, aspect ratio is critical.

A compelling story is expected.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Imax is practically the same ratio, just with more picture on top and bottom, and on 16:9 tv there's no black bars! Don't get me wrong, I love widescreen and would never want pan and scan back, but I hate black bars!

John Goodman is practically the same size as Christian Bale, he just has "more" top, bottom and everything else.

If 1.85 is not 2.39, neither is IMAX's 1.9 (or 1.4, if shooting with the IMAX film camera).

You can't have it both ways. If a TV's screen is 1.78:1 and the image is 2.39:1, the only way to display the entire image is to have black bars. The only way around that is to give up widescreen when making movies and if that's what you want, you can zoom your TV's picture.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by mrr1

Blah blah blah aspect blah blah blah Imax blah blah blah letterboxed blah.

As long as the movie is good and re-elevates the Star Wars franchise to the great cinematic heights it deserves, I don't give a crap about the type of film that's used or the aspect ratios.

Aspect ratio is as much a creative decision as the choice of a screenwriter, actor, set design or lens. If you think Lawrence of Arabia or Star Wars would have been the same film shot at 1.33 or 1.85, then you understand nothing about movie making, but I'm glad you'll enjoy the films as much watching them on a pan-and-scan VHS and an old 1.33:1 CRT.

Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m1-p...ature=youtu.be

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

John Goodman is practically the same size as Christian Bale, he just has "more" top, bottom and everything else.



If 1.85 is not 2.39, neither is IMAX's 1.9 (or 1.4, if shooting with the IMAX film camera).



You can't have it both ways. If a TV's screen is 1.78:1 and the image is 2.39:1, the only way to display the entire image is to have black bars. The only way around that is to give up widescreen when making movies and if that's what you want, you can zoom your TV's picture.

Or you could do something radical, probably no one on a forum like this has heard of this, but you could, get a widescreen tv, maybe.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Black bars came into my backyard, knocked over the trash cans, broke all the pottery, and ate my dachshund.

Did you kill one when you were only 3?

[dcowboy7]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Or you could do something radical, probably no one on a forum like this has heard of this, but you could, get a widescreen tv, maybe.

But then watching 16x9 regular shows the black bars are on the side.

I wish everything was 1.78....avatar & avengers which are 2 of the top 3 $$ movies of all time were that so doesnt seem to hurt $$.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by dcowboy7

But then watching 16x9 regular shows the black bars are on the side.



I wish everything was 1.78....avatar & avengers which are 2 of the top 3 $$ movies of all time were that so doesnt seem to hurt $$.

i guess that doesn't bother me since I don't normally watch tv anyway

[mrr1]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I'm glad you'll enjoy the films as much watching them on a pan-and-scan VHS and an old 1.33:1 CRT.

Yes, because that's clearly what I meant.

Shoosh.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

A big "meh" from me.


There are so few "real" IMAX venues out there. I don't find digital IMAX ("liemax" as some call it) very impressive, especially since a lot of them turn the volume up to painfully distorted levels.


You won't get 7.1 or Atmos in IMAX.


Then the Blu-ray...will it get a switching AR release? Will we have to buy multiple versions like Star Trek: Into Darkness?


Sigh.

Were you the one who said IMAX sound feels like 5.0 in one of the Transformers threads?

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

I think that IMAX is just turning into another gimmick like 3D.

Quite true.
When Christopher Nolan first started the ball rolling with The Dark Knight, he framed it with 1.44 in mind. He truly wanted to embrace the quality of 1570 IMAX with great impact.

Unfortunately, our studios sees it as another channel to artificially inflate ticket prices. Just like how you could convert 3D with 2K digital, go through the IMAX DMR process and then project it on a digital Liemax cinema. And jack the price up.

Even Dolby Atmos is dangerously close to being gimmicky with some films. Captain America - The Winter Soldier was one of the worst offenders of the format. The only time I felt the Atmos format was put to use was when the underground SHIELD bunker was being bombed and you could hear debris from the overhead speakers. Other than that, it sounds just like a 7.1 movie.

[zafisher94]

Fans hoping to catch footage from Star Wars: Episode VII or autographs from its casts will have to wait. Director J.J. Abrams and the Episode VII cast, who are knee-deep in production over at Pinewood Studios in London, will not heading to San Diego’s Comic-Con this month sources close to the production and at Comic-Con told Deadline. Instead, Star Wars fans at Comic-Con can elbow their way into the Disney Channel’s panel for its animated Star Wars Rebels series on Thursday, July 24 from 6-7 PM in Room 6BCF. Executive producers Dave Filoni and Simon Kinberg along with actors Freddie Prinze Jr. (Kanan), Steve Blum (Zeb), Taylor Gray (Ezra), Tiya Sircar (Sabine) and Vanessa Marshall (Hera) will be on hand showing exclusive content.

This is the second no-show for Episode VII since Disney’s D23 last August, when fans were expecting any type of announcement (final cast was announced back in April). Most of the buzz for Episode VII has been mounted online with TMZ posting photos from the Tatooine set in June as well as Abrams’ @bad_robot Twitter feed. Yesterday a photo was tweeted out (see below) of the new IMAX cameras being used to shoot the film … the photo gave a sneak peak of the camera shooting footage over the Tatooine dunes.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/07/star...n-wont-appear/