What is Digg?104 Comments
- stucktildekey, on 07/15/2008, -7/+37I wonder if it'll make a difference on the CAM release...
- acevoncash, on 07/15/2008, -2/+28yeah but what about the sequences shot on 35 milimeter blown up on that huge ass screen? I remember special effects shots from star wars episode two looking like ass on the imax.
- pell, on 07/14/2008, -1/+24I'd love to see this in IMAX as well but it will have to wait as it is already sold out for a few days straight.
- kalv, on 07/15/2008, -0/+13i hate watching mega blockbuster films on the first day it's way too packed.
- inactive, on 07/14/2008, -3/+13Interesting discussion on IMAX camera usage.
- inactive, on 07/14/2008, -1/+10Definitely seeing this in IMAX.
- theaverageidiot, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9Why are you getting dugg down? I lol'ed.
- sonicularulus, on 07/15/2008, -0/+9you havent seen dark knight at all if it hasnt come out yet.
- mrhedges, on 07/15/2008, -7/+16God Bless Canada.
- mlvassallo, on 07/15/2008, -1/+8So that means you only watch documentaries, band films and the occasional major release... right?
- Maria0305, on 07/15/2008, -0/+5Bought my ticket weeks ago. Cannot ***** wait.
- artfiend77, on 07/15/2008, -4/+9IMAX?? *****, if I have to watch this movie on a ***** 13 inch black and white tv I'm sure I'll still love it!
- Krystof82, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5Imax is great, but after seeing Beowulf 3d that's the future! And a realistic approach to bringing it to the living room of ordinary people.
- Walker2323, on 07/15/2008, -1/+5It's funny that the screen shot comparison looks like the opposite of what HD has been showing off for the past few years, ie 4:3 vs. 16:9. I get it, but it still seems counter intuitive to what has been drilled into our heads
- tjmb9, on 07/15/2008, -0/+4I remember seeing the matrix 1 and 2 at an imax theatre, and it was incredible. The fact that 20 minutes are actually shot with an imax camera is going to make it look so damn good.
- markperia, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3the imax theatres in DC wont be showing TDK though. The one in VA will.
- jordanlgta, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3The IMAX theater in Memphis, Tennessee sucks. It is located inside a museum that only shows educational films. Pink Palace Museum...go rot in a corner and die please. I hate you. I'm not driving three hours to Nashville to see the film on an IMAX screen. Man I hate the Pink Palace Museum.
ATTENTION IMAX EXECUTIVES: Memphis needs a real IMAX theater. You put the one and only IMAX theater for Memphis in a building called PINK PALACE. Are you kidding me? I feel like shoving needles through my eye sockets and throwing myself out a window into oncoming traffic with the cars having front bumpers with flaming spinning blades of fury. - sark666, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3None. This is a first. No traditional flim has ever shot imax sequences. Your previous imax experiences was just traditonal film 'digitally remastered' to imax format.
- megaton, on 07/15/2008, -0/+3The HD format uses a 16:9 aspect ratio. However, several films use wider ratios, like 1.85:1 or 2.39:1, which would leave bars at the top and bottom of the screen.
- xrisnothing, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4Just fyi, not all movies are 16:9
- inactive, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4I'm probably going to end up watching this movie at least 10 times so I'm bound to go to an IMAX screening
- imbob, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4METREON HERE I COME!!!!!!!
- shauncullen, on 07/15/2008, -1/+4IRRRRRRRRELAVANT! Spider-man 3 was the ***** movie this side of the Schumacher Batmans.
- hagfish70, on 07/15/2008, -3/+5Oh really? So I haven't seen hundreds of critically acclaimed or celebrated films in non imax format? *****, must of been all dreams.
- PATSCRU, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2same thing i'm wondering...There is perhaps 2 hours of the film not shot in Imax, and i've heard that standard 35mm stuff shown on imax looks flat. Additionally, Nolan says that 70mm Imax reels downrezzed to standard 35mm looks amazing. Looks like a standard movie theatre for me.
- MewTwo, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Hopefully they spread the IMAX release so I can go to a closer one.
- megaton, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2Uhm, no. The IMAX aspect ratio is 1.43:1 versus film's 1.85:1 or 2.39:1. Compare that to the 4:3 ratio (1.33:1 vs 1.43:1)
IMAX is EXTREMELY close to the old broadcast TV 4:3 ratio, and nowhere near the most common feature film ratios. (You might OCCASIONALLY see a film presented in 1.5:1, but that's very rare, and usually only seen in kitschy family movies.) - exomni, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I, for one, hate IMAX for most films. Films should not be presented that way: you can't see the whole screen, so the aesthetic effect of traditional cinematics (like the kind used in The Dark Knight), is completely trashed.
I will be seeing The Dark Knight in the giant THX theatre at my local multiplex on midnight, I may see it in the IMAX (also located in the same local multiplex) later. - KaiUno, on 07/15/2008, -1/+3I was like that when I was 10. Now my max is about once every 3 or 4 years if it's really good.
Hm... might end up watching it 10 times as well then before I die. - SimonTB, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I can't understand why people do it. You see the exact same thing later, and with less people, therefore less chance of douchebags ***** it up with cell phones, and you can get the seats you want.
- yohnstoppable, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2I don't get the hype over 15% of the movie being made for the imax. What about the other 85%?
- dd240sx, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2to bad the whole movie was not shot in 70mm IMAX format
- specialK16, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2So basically IMAX is movies in full screen instead of widescreen?
(massive bury expected from jerks who are not willing to explain what IMAX is all about anyways) - SuperJimmyJimbo, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2so do I go see the 35mm sized DLP projection with 20 minutes of downrezzed 70mm footage, or go see the IMAX version with 110 minutes of uprezzed 35mm print?
- goodbyegalaxy, on 07/15/2008, -0/+2You realize that when you see a normal movie in an IMAX theater it is still usually shot in 35mm, right? This article is talking about how The Dark Knight had some scenes actually shot in IMAX and how much better THAT is.
- ViktorVaughn, on 07/15/2008, -0/+170mm (really 65mm, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0468569/technical) has almost 4 times the resolution of 35mm, which makes for a crisper picture that can also be projected on a much bigger screen. Also, 35mm filmstock is actually closer to a full screen aspect ratio, they crop the top and bottom to achieve a letterbox aspect ratio.
They used to do this with films in the 60s and 70s. Once you've seen Lawrence of Arabia or 2001 on the original 70mm film prints, you'll understand why this is such a cool thing. - shauncullen, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Haha, im in Alberta, Canada and we have TWO in my city alone. Which state are you in?
- sovietninja, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1not if its cropped....
- squarepegs, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I'm definitely not-- at least this weekend. Thanks in part to digg's popularity in my area, my local IMAX theater is sold out all weekend.
It's too bad because the article's format comparison makes me really eager to see the quality difference. - Gimjee, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1I'm pretty mad because there aren't any Imax theaters in my state. >:[
- squarepegs, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It looks like our neighbors to the north have just a bit more screens per person showing the movie than here in the US, so you might have better luck up there.
85 US screens / 304 million people = about 0.28 screens per million
10 Canada screens / 33 million people = about 0.30 screens per million - Capta1nA, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Already have tickets at a regular theater (though it maybe have digital projectors?), oh well.
- exomni, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Okay, let's clarify: I am NOT WITH SKUNKS ON THIS ONE. skunks is obviously entirely ignorant of IMAX aspect ratio, and how they never pan and scan, but instead simply put black bars at the top and bottom of their screens during 35mm scenes. Please ignore him.
- okinau, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Too bad there aren't any IMAX theaters within 100 miles of me...
- inactive, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1They can say whatever they want, if the movie is good it will be good in any theater.
- Shugii, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1That's like winning the lottery and saying you'll spend it later. You want to watch it as soon as it comes out because you've been waiting for like months for it to release and it is so good (hopefully). But then again who would watch it on the first day. I'll wait at least 3 max, it's going to be good. I'm not sure how it is in the states but we can reserve seats here for like less than a buck, good seats, good movie, don't give a ***** about people around me, how can you go wrong?
- skunks, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1Ok, fair point. I should clarify. During scenes shot in IMAX, the aspect ratio is different from 35 mm. You can see for yourself in the comparison of the frames in the article. This is because, like TV, IMAX is 4:3. Widescreen is 1.85:1. And there IS a difference.
- MScrip, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1So... they shoot it in square IMAX format then chop off the top and bottom for the regular widescreen theaters? That's what it looks like in the article examples. Then the IMAX scenes will look good in an IMAX theater... but the regular widescreen scenes will look bad in IMAX, but good in a normal theater and at home. Where is this film supposed to be seen?
- jordanlgta, on 07/15/2008, -1/+2I wouldn't. I'd feel disappointed.
- jordanlgta, on 07/15/2008, -0/+1It's sad that so many didn't have a chance to see that in REAL D. It was great.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 104 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is