My thoughts on, "Interstellar"

Page 3 of 8<123456>Last »
November 10th, 2014 at 12:57:51 PM permalink
Ayecarumba
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 89
Posts: 1744
Quote: Pacomartin
Carmike has begun offering Big D format which is a a screen 79 feet wide...


The photo appears to be a custom spec IMAX digital projector set up. Note the steep angle of stadium seats in an attempt to get as many folks close to the screen as possible. The idea of the big curved screen is that the image fills your peripheral vision, and delivers a different sensory experience compared to "standard" theatres. However, I don't think the resolution and color saturation of the digital projectors has been able to do as good a job as film on these large screens, and it should be noted that most films are shot on regular 35mm film and "digitally re-mastered" for presentation on IMAX, or only have some sections shot on IMAX 70mm film while the bulk of the movie is shot on 35mm.

The width to height ratio is very different between 35 and 70. This is the reason why movies have to be processed for presentation on the IMAX screens. Unfortunatley, there is a loss of picture quality during that process.
November 10th, 2014 at 1:04:42 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
The last movie I saw on IMAX was Fantasia 2000, at a local museum with a theater thus equipped.

The movie contained the original segment with Mickey Mouse and the piece "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," which had not been filmed on IMAX to begin with. It had been adapted somehow. It was very good, but set against the modern pieces filmed with the larger negative, the difference was palpable.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
November 10th, 2014 at 6:11:44 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Ayecarumba
The photo appears to be a custom spec IMAX digital projector set up.


I think Big-D is just a regular movie shown on a giant screen. The surcharge is much lower on entry price than for IMAX (same company) which makes me think it's going to be a big fuzzy picture.

$2.00 Big-D Surcharge All Movies:(rural location)
$3.00 Additional 3D Surcharge:(rural location)
$4.00 Additional 3D Surcharge:(urban location)
$5.00 Additional IMAX Surcharge:
$9.00 3D IMAX Surcharge:

Base Price
Super Bargain (4-5:30pm):$5.75
Matinee, Adult:$7.25
Matinee (Fri-Sat):$7.50
Evening, Adult:$9.75
Adult (Fri-Sat):$10.00


Quote: Ayecarumba
However, I don't think the resolution and color saturation of the digital projectors hasn't been able to do as good a job as film on these large screens, and it should be noted that most films are shot on regular 35mm film and "digitally re-mastered" for presentation on IMAX, or only have some sections shot on IMAX 70mm film while the bulk of the movie is shot on 35mm.

The width to height ratio is very different between 35 and 70. This is the reason why movies have to be processed for presentation on the IMAX screens. Unfortunatley, there is a loss of picture quality during that process.


I remember seeing "Batman Begins" and you could tell right away when he shot certain scenes with the IMAX camera.

With the exception of Avatar (which I was afraid I would be missing out if I didn't see it on the best screen), normally I don't run around looking for different formats. I am not sure what I am getting.
November 10th, 2014 at 8:06:35 PM permalink
zippyboy
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 2
Posts: 665
Kinda off topic, but in light of everyone discussing different formats, I thought I'd chime in. I saw Far and Away in the theater back in 1992, which was hyped for it's 70mm cinematography. There were a few scenes that were darn impressive for fitting so much scenery onto the standard screen of the time. I've never seen an IMAX film because it's waaaay too far a drive for me. I saw Gravity and Avatar in 3D, and enjoyed that. But seeking out all these theater choices for Interstellar is beyond me. I'll wait for HBO, especially for a three-hour film.
November 18th, 2014 at 12:32:15 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: zippyboy
But seeking out all these theater choices for Interstellar is beyond me. I'll wait for HBO, especially for a three-hour film.


The three hours seems to be hurting this film.

North American boxoffice is $97m after 12 days compared to $155m for Inception after 12 days.
Inception made $533m in foreign, and Interstellar has returned $225.8m so far. But it looks like it should do fantastically by the end.
November 18th, 2014 at 4:36:44 AM permalink
Wizard
Administrator
Member since: Oct 23, 2012
Threads: 239
Posts: 6095
I saw Interstellar last Sunday.

Wow, what an epic. I was reluctant to because I think Inception is one of the most overrated movies of all time. However, I truly left happy. This is the kind of movie I will have to watch a few times to really appreciate.

A warning that this movie is like Lost in that if you miss just one minute you may be lost when you return. Every single scene is essential to the story line and the viewer must work hard to stay engaged. Don't drink a lot because a bathroom visit will cost you. This movie could have been broken down into several movies and still gone fast.

I applaud the movie for being scientifically rigorous for a movie that involves time travel. When I was in college I recall my astronomy teacher saying that it would be possible to communicate with anybody in other dimensions via gravity waves if we could figure out how to send them, which is a major theme to this movie.

Still, the movie left me with even more questions than Promethius did, which is a movie I'm still trying to understand.
I hate to say it, but think Interstallar still suffers from the paradox of somebody going forward in time to learn technology about time travel, which he would send back to himself to teach him how to go forward in the first place.
The movie tries hard to make it seem plausible but I'm still scratching my head two days later. Some other things too don't make sense to me, but won't list them at this time.

In conclusion, I think Interstellar is a movie not to be missed. Like 2001, it just will not be the same on a small screen. To see it, you have to see it on a big screen. I'd also like to applaud the movie for dealing with the hugest questions in astronomy/physics without just teasing us, scratching the surface like in 2001 or Contact, but really taking us there.
Knowledge is Good -- Emil Faber
November 18th, 2014 at 8:07:37 AM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 73
Posts: 11791
Quote: Wizard
I saw Interstellar last Sunday.

Wow, what an epic. I was reluctant to because I think Inception is one of the most overrated movies of all time. However, I truly left happy. This is the kind of movie I will have to watch a few times to really appreciate.

A warning that this movie is like Lost in that if you miss just one minute you may be lost when you return. Every single scene is essential to the story line and the viewer must work hard to stay engaged. Don't drink a lot because a bathroom visit will cost you. This movie could have been broken down into several movies and still gone fast.

I applaud the movie for being scientifically rigorous for a movie that involves time travel. When I was in college I recall my astronomy teacher saying that it would be possible to communicate with anybody in other dimensions via gravity waves if we could figure out how to send them, which is a major theme to this movie.

Still, the movie left me with even more questions than Promethius did, which is a movie I'm still trying to understand.
I hate to say it, but think Interstallar still suffers from the paradox of somebody going forward in time to learn technology about time travel, which he would send back to himself to teach him how to go forward in the first place.
The movie tries hard to make it seem plausible but I'm still scratching my head two days later. Some other things too don't make sense to me, but won't list them at this time.

In conclusion, I think Interstellar is a movie not to be missed. Like 2001, it just will not be the same on a small screen. To see it, you have to see it on a big screen. I'd also like to applaud the movie for dealing with the hugest questions in astronomy/physics without just teasing us, scratching the surface like in 2001 or Contact, but really taking us there.


Great review.
You sold me on it.
No Intermission? At my age, going to the bathroom more often and dont want to miss anything.
Got thur and Fri off. We have an IMAX dome at MOSI (Museum of Science and Industry) and its showing there.
Think I will check this out Thursday :-)
Good timng, chilly in Tampa, was looking for something fun to do inside. weather not warming up till the weekend.
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
November 18th, 2014 at 8:07:54 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Wizard
I saw Interstellar last Sunday. Wow, what an epic. I was reluctant to because I think Inception is one of the most overrated movies of all time. However, I truly left happy. This is the kind of movie I will have to watch a few times to really appreciate.


Very enthusiastic review. I want to see it now.
November 18th, 2014 at 12:35:12 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18761
Dang it Wizard, I may have to go spend 15, 25, what is it, $100 for two tickets and popcorn these days before it leaves the theater.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
November 18th, 2014 at 12:54:26 PM permalink
Ayecarumba
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 89
Posts: 1744
Quote: terapined
... We have an IMAX dome at MOSI (Museum of Science and Industry) and its showing there...
I am very interested in the report of your experience terapined. The movie has more than one sequence of things rotating on screen that I could not watch without getting vertigo; and this was on a regular sized screen. I am curious what your experience will be with a true IMAX presentation.
Page 3 of 8<123456>Last »