Large Format/"Premium" Theaters (IMAX 15/70, Digital IMAX, XD, ETX, RPX, etc.)

[ITDEFX101]

You know...sometimes I wish that Pearl Harbor was filmed in IMAX....... I remembered the trailers with the pull back of the Japanese fleet and thinking WHOA. Yeah I know it would have been too expensive.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by ITDEFX101

You know...sometimes I wish that Pearl Harbor was filmed in IMAX....... I remembered the trailers with the pull back of the Japanese fleet and thinking WHOA. Yeah I know it would have been too expensive.

It was timing, had the film been made a decade later, I'm sure it would've been released in IMAX DMR if nothing else.

I actually saw the film on an IMAX screen. Back before there was Hollywood DMRs and more constant IMAX content, Lincoln Square would play 35mm prints of the big releases at evening shows on the IMAX screen and I saw Pearl Harbor that way (along with Apocalypse Now Redux, and I think Jurassic Park 3 and Fellowship of the Ring). Obviously there was a downgrade from 15/70, and didn't fill the screen (though too long ago to remember exactly, but may have been similar size to the IMAX Digital there were running on their from Fall 2013- Fall 2016), but still was a pretty cool way to see a movie.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

It was timing, had the film been made a decade later, I'm sure it would've been released in IMAX DMR if nothing else.

I actually saw the film on an IMAX screen. Back before there was Hollywood DMRs and more constant IMAX content, Lincoln Square would play 35mm prints of the big releases at evening shows on the IMAX screen and I saw Pearl Harbor that way (along with Apocalypse Now Redux, and I think Jurassic Park 3 and Fellowship of the Ring). Obviously there was a downgrade from 15/70, and didn't fill the screen (though too long ago to remember exactly, but may have been similar size to the IMAX Digital there were running on their from Fall 2013- Fall 2016), but still was a pretty cool way to see a movie.

I remember seeing 'Final Destination 3' on King of Prussia's IMAX screen - it was an utter blast (my friend on the other hand was less impressed - LOL)

Air & Space (Lockheed) years ago showed a 35mm print of "Empire Strikes Back" (not the special edition) that was a treat

[chad_1138]

So happy that I live an hour and a half from INDY! Saw Interstellar, The Force Awakens, and Rogue One at the State Museum IMAX. Will be purchasing tickets on Wednesday.

[ITDEFX101]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

It was timing, had the film been made a decade later, I'm sure it would've been released in IMAX DMR if nothing else.

Seriously? A movie like that would benefit from being shot in true IMAX. Just the scope of that entire attack along with the audio was amazing. It's a Bay film!

[Visionist]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

There's a serious difference between what we can see at home even with "expanded" ratio and the real deal.

Bring back square TVs. IMAX branded.

[ITDEFX101]

Originally Posted by Visionist

There's a serious difference between what we can see at home even with "expanded" ratio and the real deal.

Bring back square TVs. IMAX branded.

See the problem is that with that frame all the important information is already in the safe area. That background sky is meh and the water background is meh. I am not feeling anything breathtaking when I see a shot like this in IMAX.

[Visionist]

It all depends how close you are to the screen, and how much of the image is only in your peripheral vision but not your focus. The framing here definitely favours the 2:35

I sit super close to my display, can't find a decent setup for my tastes anywhere else I visit except an IMAX.

[Geoff D]

Nolan frames up his IMAX stuff in a very safe way re: the 2.40 extraction, so much so that the 1.44 shots in TDK and TDKR looked faintly ridiculous to me when viewed on a decent-sized TV owing to the huge amounts of empty space top and bottom. But when actually watching it on a giant IMAX screen the viewer is basically doing their own reframing of the image with their eyes, so all that space rarely seems quite so obvious owing to the sheer size and scale of the image.

IMO the 1.78 framing is the perfect compromise for the home IMAX versions, retaining the notion of the IMAX embiggening whilst not being as headroom-happy as the proper version. I mean look at this 5/70mm extraction from the Dunkirk prologue, it seems perfectly framed to me but the 1.44 IMAX version would have lots more canopy and lots more cockpit. Again: it looks amazing in actual IMAX (the prologue in 15/70 was IMMENSELY epic, Tom Hardy's noggin seemed to fill the screen) but on a home screen it'd make Tom Hardy look like he's engulfed by that cockpit, and he's not the biggest fella to begin with!

[ITDEFX101]

I still think there is no reason why you need to film a close up of an actor in IMAX.

How close do you want to sit to the actual IMAX screen? I think in order to get that full immersion is to actually go to one of those cinemas that have 3 screens (like what they did for Star Trek Beyond) or even a dome IMAX screen.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by ITDEFX101

I still think there is no reason why you need to film a close up of an actor in IMAX.

How close do you want to sit to the actual IMAX screen? I think in order to get that full immersion is to actually go to one of those cinemas that have 3 screens (like what they did for Star Trek Beyond) or even a dome IMAX screen.

For the same reason you use close up shots in any movie. Especially on IMAX, the detail and sense of immersion is through the roof. It's quite literally​ using a medium format camera for a feature film.

If you go to a real 15/70 IMAX screen I suggest the back 2 or 3 rows. The screen is enormous.

[Geoff D]

Exactly what I do, sit right near the back, and even then the sense of scale is so huge that it just doesn't have that 'dead space' factor going on.

[Visionist]

I never sit further than halfway back, closer for DMR 3D

[Geoff D]

That's far too close for me at the BFI IMAX, at that sort of distance it all becomes a bewildering blur.

[GLaDOS]

Originally Posted by ITDEFX101

I still think there is no reason why you need to film a close up of an actor in IMAX.

How close do you want to sit to the actual IMAX screen? I think in order to get that full immersion is to actually go to one of those cinemas that have 3 screens (like what they did for Star Trek Beyond) or even a dome IMAX screen.

The close-up shots in IMAX, especially when it's shot on IMAX film, is breathtaking to look at. Just the immense detail you get from the image makes shooting with the equipment all the more worth it.

I usually sit round 2/3 or 3/4 at the back of the theater so I can witness the screen in its entirety without it completely taking over my field of vision.

BTW, that 5/70 Dunkirk print is GORGEOUS. Makes me really want to go back in time and see The Master and The Hateful Eight in 70mm.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Visionist

I never sit further than halfway back, closer for DMR 3D

I sit close to three fourth of the way from the screen, too far back and you won't hear the ceiling sourced sound

[ITDEFX101]

Originally Posted by GLaDOS

The close-up shots in IMAX, especially when it's shot on IMAX film, is breathtaking to look at. Just the immense detail you get from the image makes shooting with the equipment all the more worth it.

I usually sit round 2/3 or 3/4 at the back of the theater so I can witness the screen in its entirety without it completely taking over my field of vision.

BTW, that 5/70 Dunkirk print is GORGEOUS. Makes me really want to go back in time and see The Master and The Hateful Eight in 70mm.

Ok Ok..... riddle me this............ (not to start a war here)....... then why did such a well known director such as Nolan who has properly used the IMAX camera to it's potential film scenes in TDKR that did not show off what the camera can capture. For example I believe that the day after Batman returns and chased Bane's group when they attacked the stock market, I have a good recollection of the scene going full frame when Bruce was talking to Alfred in the mason. I just was like when it went full frame as there was nothing really to capture in detail besides the actors. No active backgrounds, no crowds, nothing. Just two people talking.

If he's gonna film the movie in IMAX, do it for the right scenes, not just to film it.

[Visionist]

It's not just for detail. It ironically gives a more intimate feel to dialogue scenes, as the actors are right up in your face. Nolan also probably likes the framing he gets with 1:44 and uses the cameras for interesting shots like the staircase in Wayne Manor. The quality of lighting is richer too, which can affect a scene.

[ITDEFX101]

I need to sit down and rewatch the movie again on BR (Haven't done that in 5 years since I started using VUDU). Maybe another viewing in that form will help change my mind? :|

[GLaDOS]

Originally Posted by ITDEFX101

I need to sit down and rewatch the movie again on BR (Haven't done that in 5 years since I started using VUDU). Maybe another viewing in that form will help change my mind? :|

Go for it. Say what you want about the movie as a whole, but bask yourself in it as a nice home theater experience. The plane heist sequence is still bonkers to behold, especially on a home theater.