The Most Boring Movie You Have Ever Seen - Page 19 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 10:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Soul embrace and sb1 . . .

So I can see TDK at home on a 20" SDTV with mono sound, using a pan and scan fullscreen DVD and according you guys - I saw TDK, and I fully understand the movie - enough to be able to discuss it intelligently and review it.

Is that right?

don't know about watching a pan and scan full screen never saw a P&S Full screen movie cause i always bought wide screen even when i had a 27" and 32" tv. if i saw it on a 27"tv with mono sound then i would say i did see TDK and i would fully understand the movie - enough to be able to discuss it intelligently when it comes to the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie but not sound wise or how good it looked in HD. i wouldn't have seen it in it's glory of what it was meant to be. either way i still saw the same content but the experience is totally different. if i'm going to talk about the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie then it doesn't matter what size the tv is or how you heard it or if it's in SD or HD. now if i'm going to talk about how it sounded and looked then what you watch it on and hear it on is a huge difference. if i heard it listening to it on a mono tv then yea i have no right to say it sounded bad, that's where seeing it a theater or at someone's house that had a great home theater comes in to play

seeing a movie on a huge screen doesn't change change the plot, story, dialogue or the action. it's does how ever change the experience of seeing it. which i've said many of times that i agree that it changes the experience of seeing it, but it don't change the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie. i don't know what else to say other than the size of the screen doesn't change the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie, but it does change the experience of seeing the movie.

so i saw TDK and Avatar in a regular theater and according to you i saw a totally different movies and can't discuss the movie since i didn't see TDK or Avatar in a real IMAX or IMAX 3D (btw i don't think i have a real IMAX theater, unless the one at the space and rocket center in huntsville, Al is a real IMAX theater, within a 4 hour drive from me. by what you are saying then Christopher Nolan and WB and also james cameron and 20th century fox cheated me out of the movie that was meant to be seen since the IMAX version has different content than the regular theater version and it is their (CN, WB, JC and 20th century fox) fault and not mine since i don't think i have a real IMAX theater close to me.) and didn't see Avatar in 3D i totally saw a different movie content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) and i shouldn't be able to talk about either two since the IMAX since i saw a different movie.

so what you are saying is that the people that didn't see TDK in a real IMAX theater (even those that doesn't have a real IMAX theater within reasonable driving distance) has no right to discuss TDK and doesn't even know what TDK was even about.

Is that right?

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 11:41 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

don't know about watching a pan and scan full screen never saw a P&S Full screen movie cause i always bought wide screen even when i had a 27" and 32" tv. if i saw it on a 27"tv with mono sound then i would say i did see TDK and i would fully understand the movie - enough to be able to discuss it intelligently when it comes to the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie but not sound wise or how good it looked in HD. i wouldn't have seen it in it's glory of what it was meant to be. either way i still saw the same content but the experience is totally different. if i'm going to talk about the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie then it doesn't matter what size the tv is or how you heard it or if it's in SD or HD. now if i'm going to talk about how it sounded and looked then what you watch it on and hear it on is a huge difference. if i heard it listening to it on a mono tv then yea i have no right to say it sounded bad, that's where seeing it a theater or at someone's house that had a great home theater comes in to play

seeing a movie on a huge screen doesn't change change the plot, story, dialogue or the action. it's does how ever change the experience of seeing it. which i've said many of times that i agree that it changes the experience of seeing it, but it don't change the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie. i don't know what else to say other than the size of the screen doesn't change the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the movie, but it does change the experience of seeing the movie.

so i saw TDK and Avatar in a regular theater and according to you i saw a totally different movies and can't discuss the movie since i didn't see TDK or Avatar in a real IMAX or IMAX 3D (btw i don't think i have a real IMAX theater, unless the one at the space and rocket center in huntsville, Al is a real IMAX theater, within a 4 hour drive from me. by what you are saying then Christopher Nolan and WB and also james cameron and 20th century fox cheated me out of the movie that was meant to be seen since the IMAX version has different content than the regular theater version and it is their (CN, WB, JC and 20th century fox) fault and not mine since i don't think i have a real IMAX theater close to me.) and didn't see Avatar in 3D i totally saw a different movie content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) and i shouldn't be able to talk about either two since the IMAX since i saw a different movie.

so what you are saying is that the people that didn't see TDK in a real IMAX theater (even those that doesn't have a real IMAX theater within reasonable driving distance) has no right to discuss TDK and doesn't even know what TDK was even about.

Is that right?

No - there will be two discussions:

1. Those that saw TDK

2. Those that saw TDK in an IMAX theater.

And those two discussions will differ. Just like those that saw Avatar in a 2D theater versus a 3D theater.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #543 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 11:47 AM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

No - there will be two discussions:

1. Those that saw TDK

2. Those that saw TDK in an IMAX theater.

And those two discussions will differ. Just like those that saw Avatar in a 2D theater versus a 3D theater.

The difference between Imax footage inserted for action scenes and a whole "groundbreaking" 3D experience that runs the entire film are not even in the same ballpark.

Not to mention that the home BD of TDK has the Imax footage inserted which does look remarkably better than the rest of the 35mm footage.

So no, you are really stretching it with this one...TDK is a fine film and it stands on its own. And even in the theater with the 35mm print the Imax scenes looked much better and more engrossing.

And I also wouldn't call some nicely choreographed action scenes shot in Imax and inserted into a film groundbreaking.

You use that word too often.
Blood Pie is offline  
post #544 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 11:58 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Pie View Post

The difference between Imax footage inserted for action scenes and a whole "groundbreaking" 3D experience that runs the entire film are not even in the same ballpark.

IMAX had never been used in a Hollywood movie previous to TDK. There have been tons of 3D movies - not just at the level of Avatar.

Quote:


Not to mention that the home BD of TDK has the Imax footage inserted which does look remarkably better than the rest of the 35mm footage.

That is your opinion. The resolution difference is 1920x1080 for the IMAX footage and 1920x800 (approx) for the 35mm Panavision footage. The hort. resolution of the two different footages is the same. It sure isn't the difference we saw at the IMAX theater of 12,000x8000 then switched to 3,000x2,000, let alone the AR.

The BD is just a poor imitation of what was shown at an IMAX theater.

Quote:


So no, you are really stretching it with this one...TDK is a fine film and it stands on its own. And even in the theater with the 35mm print the Imax scenes looked much better and more engrossing.

If you saw it at a standard theater - you saw a 2.39 constant AR. The IMAX scenes were severly cropped - about 50%.

Quote:


And I also wouldn't call some nicely choreographed action scenes shot in Imax and inserted into a film groundbreaking.

You use that word too often.

Groundbreaking = first time in use - never been done before - first of it's kind.

You play it down too much.

Did you see TDK at an IMAX theater?
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #545 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 11:59 AM
sb1
AVS Special Member
 
sb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

No - there will be two discussions:

1. Those that saw TDK

2. Those that saw TDK in an IMAX theater.

And those two discussions will differ. Just like those that saw Avatar in a 2D theater versus a 3D theater.

If you think TDK was a "different" movie based on the inclusion of the IMAX footage, then you have absolutely no appreciation for what films are all about.

I wouldn't have spent all the years and money on my home theater if I didn't realize that a good technical presentation was important, but you're simply missing the important things that really make a movie worth seeing with this belief that a few minutes of IMAX footage represents a completely different movie than the non-IMAX version.

Stephen.

Chances are very good that I was drinking when I posted the above.

sb1 is offline  
post #546 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:04 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post

If you think TDK was a "different" movie based on the inclusion of the IMAX footage, then you have absolutely no appreciation for what films are all about.

LOL - and if you didn't see TDK in IMAX - you have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote:


I wouldn't have spent all the years and money on my home theater if I didn't realize that a good technical presentation was important, but you're simply missing the important things that really make a movie worth seeing with this belief that a few minutes of IMAX footage represents a completely different movie than the non-IMAX version.

LOL again! A few minutes? That was TF2. TDK had almost 30 minutes of IMAX footage.

And like I have said a number of times - we differ as to our appreciation of technology used in commerical theaters. You like to watch movies at home. That is your first choice, as far as the place to watch a movie. Which is the opposite of me.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #547 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

LOL - and if you didn't see TDK in IMAX - you have no idea what you are talking about.



LOL again! A few minutes? That was TF2. TDK had almost 30 minutes of IMAX footage.

And like I have said a number of times - we differ as to our appreciation of technology used in commerical theaters. You like to watch movies at home. That is your first choice, as far as the place to watch a movie. Which is the opposite of me.

You like tech, not films...they are just a unavoidable evil to justify stupid tech.

BTW, my post is groundbreaking because no has posted it yet.
Blood Pie is offline  
post #548 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:11 PM
sb1
AVS Special Member
 
sb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

LOL - and if you didn't see TDK in IMAX - you have no idea what you are talking about.



LOL again! A few minutes? That was TF2. TDK had almost 30 minutes of IMAX footage.

And like I have said a number of times - we differ as to our appreciation of technology used in commerical theaters. You like to watch movies at home. That is your first choice, as far as the place to watch a movie. Which is the opposite of me.

No, I did not see TDK in an IMAX. However, I can say with absolutely no amount of uncertainty that it wouldn't have made me like or dislike the movie anymore than I did. I may have liked the presentation more, but not the movie. Those are two vastly different things.

You're completely wrong about my preference to watch movies at home. I posted as much in another thread recently. I watch movies and spend time and money on my home setup simply because the local theaters aren't worth going to. I have a huge appreciation for the technical aspects of film making and the way movies are presented. In my case, I can simply do that better at home than my local theaters can.

In no way am I knocking technology's importance in film presentation. I'm simply stating that it shouldn't be a factor when determining whether or not a film is good.

Stephen.

Chances are very good that I was drinking when I posted the above.

sb1 is offline  
post #549 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:14 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Pie View Post

You like tech, not films...they are just a unavoidable evil to justify stupid tech.

No - I like tech that enhances the film. It creates a better story telling medium. I always appreciate a new tech that "knocks my socks off." From 65/70mm to Multichannel sound, to 3D, to digital sound. I have seen them all (with the exception of Cinerama - too young).

Quote:


BTW, my post is groundbreaking because no has posted it yet.

LOL. No it's not, it's just your opinion. You are mistaking original with groundbreaking.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #550 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

LOL - and if you didn't see TDK in IMAX - you have no idea what you are talking about.

after all this time you still refuse to tell us what is different content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) is in the IMAX version that those that didn't/couldn't see TDK in IMAX didn't see besides the ratio opening up and a high resolution.

when talking about the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the film it doesn't matter which version you saw because it's the same the story, dialogue and action etc. i will say this one more time yes the experience of seeing the movie in a IMAX theater will differ but not the movie.

but since i see we are going around in circles on this i'm going to end my discussion there.

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
post #551 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:26 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1 View Post

No, I did not see TDK in an IMAX. However, I can say with absolutely no amount of uncertainty that it wouldn't have made me like or dislike the movie anymore than I did. I may have liked the presentation more, but not the movie. Those are two vastly different things.

How in the world can you address this issue if you haven't seen TDK in IMAX? You don't have a frame of reference to compare against. Just a formulated opinion about what you think you would like.

That's like looking at a food dish you never tasted and saying you wouldn't like it cause it doesn't look good.

Quote:


You're completely wrong about my preference to watch movies at home. I posted as much in another thread recently. I watch movies and spend time and money on my home setup simply because the local theaters aren't worth going to. I have a huge appreciation for the technical aspects of film making and the way movies are presented. In my case, I can simply do that better at home than my local theaters can.

I used to walk to the train station (Lynbrook, L.I.) - board a train to go to the city (New York City), then take a subway to my choosen theater. Took about 60 to 90 minutes each way - just to make sure I was going to the best possible theater - either the Ziegfield or the Sony IMAX complex.

And I had a killer HT = 144" microperf Stewart 16x9 fixed screen, Zenith Pro 900X PJ, 6.1 Dolby Digital sound system with about 4000 watts including (4) 12" Velodyne powered subs and transducers (4) in the floor - with stadium seating and very comfortable leather recliners. Content was LD, DVD and HDTV.

You getting the picture here?

Quote:


In no way am I knocking technology's importance in film presentation. I'm simply stating that it shouldn't be a factor when determining whether or not a film is good.

And that is your opinion and it works for you and anyone who thinks like you. And it doesn't work for me or anyone who thinks like me.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #552 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
LAKE4742's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 902
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKE4742 View Post

The preferred version? The story and dialogue are the same in both, right? How does a bigger screen and loud speakers help what they were babbling about, through that awfully continuous, overly dramatic music score? Again, the action in TDK was lackluster as well as the dialouge and story.

With all due respect, pay close attention to the portion in bold type:

[quote=Nowucmenowudont;17804769]The IMAX version of TDK is the filmmaker's preferred version...it is the superior version. If you didn't see the IMAX version, then you saw the substitute/secondary version.

What does any of this have to do with Rotten Tomatoes? We have no idea how many of those offering reviews actually saw the preferred version.[/QUOTE]

Furthermore, about TDK, it was annoyingly way too serious for a Batman flick. It'a almost like Batman was Jesus Christ, or something. Maybe they should've called it Passion of the Batman. ZING!

"Talk to me Goose."
LAKE4742 is offline  
post #553 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:30 PM
Member
 
zieglchr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A new world. Any movie that has some Indian chick running around in a field for 45 minutes gets my vote for most boring movie ever.
zieglchr is offline  
post #554 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

How in the world can you address this issue if you haven't seen TDK in IMAX? You don't have a frame of reference to compare against. Just a formulated opinion about what you think you would like.

maybe because content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) it's the same movie??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

That's like looking at a food dish you never tasted and saying you wouldn't like it cause it doesn't look good.

if something doesn't look right or smell right more than likely i'm not going to put it in my mouth.

ok that's my last response to this cause we are just going in circles, you think the tech (IMAX, 3D) of the movie changes the story if we didn't see it in the theaters in IMAX and 3D that we have no right talking about the movie and that there is two different versions story, dialogue and action etc. wise. by the way an awful movie is still awful in 3D or in the IMAX theater, but a great movie is a great movie no matter where you saw it.

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
post #555 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:39 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

after all this time you still refuse to tell us what is different content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) is in the IMAX version that those that didn't/couldn't see TDK in IMAX didn't see besides the ratio opening up and a high resolution.

when talking about the content (the story, dialogue and action etc) of the film it doesn't matter which version you saw because it's the same the story, dialogue and action etc. i will say this one more time yes the experience of seeing the movie in a IMAX theater will differ but not the movie.

but since i see we are going around in circles on this i'm going to end my discussion there.

In the widescreen/fullscreen thread, you said that stretching a 4:3 image changes the image in a negative way.

But cropping an image 50% is OK?

When it comes to movies - IMO - presentation is everything. And do you know how I know I am right? Because people on this thread have upgraded their equipment from SDTV to HDTV.

According to you, it doesn't change the plot, or who is in the movie or the dialog or the score.

So if that is all that is important? Why upgrade?

Lee Stewart is offline  
post #556 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 12:44 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

maybe because content wise (the story, dialogue and action etc) it's the same movie??

How can it be the same movie if you didn't see it as the director intended?

And please address my above post about upgrading your equipment.

Quote:


if something doesn't look right or smell right more than likely i'm not going to put it in my mouth.

And that is called a preconcieved opinion. You can't speak from experience because you never ate it. It's called; judging a book by it's cover.

Quote:


ok that's my last response to this cause we are just going in circles, you think the tech (IMAX, 3D) of the movie changes the story if we didn't see it in the theaters in IMAX and 3D that we have no right talking about the movie and that there is two different versions story, dialogue and action etc. wise. by the way an awful movie is still awful in 3D or in the IMAX theater, but a great movie is a great movie no matter where you saw it.

You have a bad habit - trying to put words in my mouth that I didn't say. You really should correct that.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #557 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

In the widescreen/fullscreen thread, you said that stretching a 4:3 image changes the image in a negative way.

But cropping an image 50% is OK?

When it comes to movies - IMO - presentation is everything. And do you know how I know I am right? Because people on this thread have upgraded their equipment from SDTV to HDTV.

According to you, it doesn't change the plot, or who is in the movie or the dialog or the score.

So if that is all that is important? Why upgrade?


It is important to us. Its just the most important to you.

And TDK in Imax wasn't groundbreaking.
Blood Pie is offline  
post #558 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ballen420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: South of Boston
Posts: 3,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 29
So what happens if I see that IMAX presentation in the first row? Is there a certain seat that the director intends too?

I can't be bothered to look back to where this intiated, but if you're saying that those of us who didn't see TDK in IMAX can't comment on the content of the movie, then that is ridiculous.

The experience may be different, but the content is the same.

XBL & PSN - Harpua77
ballen420 is offline  
post #559 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

In the widescreen/fullscreen thread, you said that stretching a 4:3 image changes the image in a negative way.

But cropping an image 50% is OK?

that's two totally different things, stretching the picture to fit a 4:3 is not the way the movie was meant to be seen. sometimes when stretching it takes some of the people out of the picture. the difference between the IMAX version of TDK and the blu ray version i have is the higher resolution and the bigger screen. i'm not missing anything that christopher nolan wanted me to see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

When it comes to movies - IMO - presentation is everything. And do you know how I know I am right? Because people on this thread have upgraded their equipment from SDTV to HDTV.

so are you saying presentation is better than the story itself? and are you saying that if the movie you find to be awful has a great presentation then the movie itself is good?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

And do you know how I know I am right? Because people on this thread have upgraded their equipment from SDTV to HDTV.

people upgraded from HDTV to SDTV to get the best picture available yes but it doesn't change the movie itself, but it does make the experience of watching the movie better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

According to you, it doesn't change the plot, or who is in the movie or the dialog or the score.

So if that is all that is important? Why upgrade?

for the better picture and now it's your turn how does the upgrade change the dialog, who is in the movie or plot?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

How can it be the same movie if you didn't see it as the director intended?

in the case of TDK it's because the plot, dialog, action etc is the same and that's what i been saying all along. the only thing different in TDK in IMAX is higher resolution and a bigger screen. the movie plot, dialog, action etc is the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

And that is called a preconcieved opinion. You can't speak from experience because you never ate it. It's called; judging a book by it's cover

and since i'm the one eating it and i'm the director s to say it is my preference not to eat it. if they wanted me to eat it they should have made it smell better and look better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

You have a bad habit - trying to put words in my mouth that I didn't say. You really should correct that.

your response to a couple of things sb1 and blood pie has said about TDK is
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Did you see TDK at an IMAX theater?

as in it's a different movie you saw in the IMAX theater than the version that was shown at the regular theater the story, dialogue and action etc. but you won't tell us what it is.

You have a bad habit - dodging questions and only responding to what you want to. You really should correct that

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
post #560 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:19 PM
 
Nowucmenowudont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Pie View Post

And TDK in Imax wasn't groundbreaking.

Oh really? When else was the format used in such a way?
Nowucmenowudont is offline  
post #561 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
soul embrace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: decatur, alabama
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballen420 View Post

So what happens if I see that IMAX presentation in the first row? Is there a certain seat that the director intends too?

if you couldn't see the whole picture then you didn't see it the way the director intended you to see it so you didn't see the real version of TDK

"I believe, that whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you....Stranger" - Joker
soul embrace is offline  
post #562 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

if you couldn't see the whole picture then you didn't see it the way the director intended you to see it so you didn't see the real version of TDK

If it wasn't in Imax it was just another super hero movie...
Blood Pie is offline  
post #563 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:49 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Pie View Post

It is important to us. Its just the most important to you.

Quote:


I've said it before, and 'll say it again - You haven't seen The Dark Knight, unless you've seen it in IMAX. OVer 20 minutes of the film was shot with 70mm IMAX cameras, and the result is a cinematic experience like you've never seen before. But how did this all come together?

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/07/14/...ght-went-imax/

Quote:


And TDK in Imax wasn't groundbreaking.

Quote:


The Dark Knight marks the first time a director used IMAX cameras to film parts of a traditional theatrical release

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4274081.html

You got anything other than your opinion? No? I thought so.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #564 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:52 PM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/07/14/...ght-went-imax/





http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4274081.html

You got anything other than your opinion? No? I thought so.

For someone so opinionated himself you have a hard time explaining yourself...when you do at least...which is minimal.

I still fail to see how its groundbreaking. It didnt change the industry or create new tech that will become the norm....
Blood Pie is offline  
post #565 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:53 PM
 
Nowucmenowudont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The film was intended to have the shifting aspect ratio between the 35mm and IMAX shots. If you didn't see that version, you merely saw the secondary version. If you did not see the preferred version of the film, then your perception of film itself may have been altered. The arguments coming from those who either didn't like the film or only saw the 35mm version of are rather humorous.
Nowucmenowudont is offline  
post #566 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:54 PM
 
Nowucmenowudont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Pie View Post

I still fail to see how its groundbreaking. It didnt change the industry or create new tech that will become the norm....

It's a little late to catch you up on a story from July of 2008.
Nowucmenowudont is offline  
post #567 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:59 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by soul embrace View Post

that's two totally different things, stretching the picture to fit a 4:3 is not the way the movie was meant to be seen. sometimes when stretching it takes some of the people out of the picture. the difference between the IMAX version of TDK and the blu ray version i have is the higher resolution and the bigger screen. i'm not missing anything that christopher nolan wanted me to see.

Stretching, Zooming, Cropping - ALL alter the image that was on the camera negative.

You are just being selective to prop up your argument

Quote:


so are you saying presentation is better than the story itself? and are you saying that if the movie you find to be awful has a great presentation then the movie itself is good?

A bad movie is a bad movie. A good movie can become a great movie due to presentation.

Quote:


people upgraded from HDTV to SDTV to get the best picture available yes but it doesn't change the movie itself, but it does make the experience of watching the movie better.

Which IMO is part of the movie going experience. You can't isolate the story from the presentation.

Quote:


for the better picture and now it's your turn how does the upgrade change the dialog, who is in the movie or plot?

It doesn't - but that is not enough of a qualifier IMO.

Quote:


in the case of TDK it's because the plot, dialog, action etc is the same and that's what i been saying all along. the only thing different in TDK in IMAX is higher resolution and a bigger screen. the movie plot, dialog, action etc is the same.

So we can say the same thing about watching a P & S version of a 2.39 movie? Because that is exactly what you are saying when you seperate the presentation from the "meat and potatoes" of a movie.

Quote:


and since i'm the one eating it and i'm the director s to say it is my preference not to eat it. if they wanted me to eat it they should have made it smell better and look better.

Your opinion and nothing more. Some would call that close minded.

Quote:


your response to a couple of things sb1 and blood pie has said about TDK is as in it's a different movie you saw in the IMAX theater than the version that was shown at the regular theater the story, dialogue and action etc. but you won't tell us what it is.

See my link above - I am not the only one that has said it.

Quote:


You have a bad habit - dodging questions and only responding to what you want to. You really should correct that

Oh - you mean like you ignoring my responses because you don't agree with them?
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #568 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 01:59 PM
Member
 
zieglchr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Isn't this a most boring movie you have ever seen thread? Is it just me or do every thread that Blood Pie and Lee Stewart post in get off track and become an argument?
zieglchr is offline  
post #569 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 02:01 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowucmenowudont View Post

Oh really? When else was the format used in such a way?

It wasn't. He probably thinks ground breaking means the first shovel full of dirt to dig a foundation for a structure.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #570 of 973 Old 12-29-2009, 02:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
Blood Pie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the cut.
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglchr View Post

Isn't this a most boring movie you have ever seen thread? Is it just me or do every thread that Blood Pie and Lee Stewart post in get off track and become an argument?

Don't forget SB1.
Blood Pie is offline  
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off