The Dark Knight Rises - Blu-Ray Aspect Ratio

It wouldn't be much spectacular to have a 16x9 screen going to 1.43, it would even be silly. As they did for TDK, I'm sure WB will go for a 1.78/2.39 shifting AR this time again. This is the closest solution to the idea of the image getting "bigger" for certain scenes, and the most fitting for a home-viewing (and non CIH of course) situation.

I dont want the ratios switching back & forth like TDK its so annoying....give me the most used ratio in the movie & just stick with that.

Like the Oprah joke:
"Shes fat shes thin, shes fat shes thin....pick a body size & go with it."

The switch between aspect ratios is a pain in the butt when using a masking system. In particular because mine is not automated.

As long as it is not an inconsistent DMR EE baked mess, like the last one was on disc!
At the end of the day Nolan will pick and that will be that, also 4 ratios on a disc?
Edited by dvdmike007 - 8/18/12 at 10:27am

No. The purpose of OAR is to see movies in OAR. TDKR and TDK have constant aspect ratio everywhere except IMAX. While the IMAX stuff looks impressive I think the aspect ratio switching is an annoying distraction and it'd be nice to have a version without it. Really I think Nolan should've shot the non-imax stuff in a squarish format, like Vistavision or full aperture Super35, and spared everyone this goofiness.
Putting both on one disc could be easily done done using seamless branching but that's too much work for the WB folks.

No, there are two. Whatever intermediate formats were used, the final masters do not reflect their native AR and are not meant to.

But only 2 AR's in IMAX showings and one for the digital showings, it was matted for and filmed 2.39:1 safe.
Are you saying since all super 35 films are cropped that you want the missing picture info?
Edited by dvdmike007 - 8/18/12 at 10:57am

There are only two aspect ratios shown in IMAX, which makes the dubious pandora box speculation of an "All Ratios Presented Edition" moot.

Unlike TDK all the 35mm footage did not appear sharpened so the BR should not look as bad as the TDK does due to the DMR process.

The folks who have constant height setups are not hypocrites for wanting a 2.35:1 version of the film on disc, it is a legitimate concern although limited to a subset of the HT community. The film was shot with that ratio composition in mind for the majority showings; that does not mean the best composition will always be found in the center of the IMAX frame which is a problem for the CH folks.

Best Regards
KvE

There is a difference, most films are composed for a particular ratio; whereas TDK and TDKR were both shot with a 2.35/39:1 crop for general theatrical exhibition in mind.

Providing a scope ratio is appropriate though limited in its appeal, because the filmmaker intended there to be a scope version to be made. Since an IMAX frame has more height latitude the optimal pertinent visual information to be extracted for the 2.39:1 ratio may not necessarily lie in middle of the frame.

There in is the problem for CH setups, they can not simply crop or mask out the IMAX scenes because they will miss the optimal framing for that ratio.

Though what you are deriding by comparing it to P&S of old is not wholly accurate or relevant to this particular release due the fact the director kept that ratio in mind.

Now the opposite happened with MI4, the IMAX scenes were left cropped for scope on the BR. Personally I would have preferred a changing ratio but the director decided not to do that.

Best Regards
KvE

The shape of the stock and the aspect ratio are far from the same thing

Well, if it makes you feel any better, Vistavision was used for a handful of aerial shots in the intro and it has almost the same AR as IMAX, and 70mm/5perf isn't mentioned at all in the ASC writeup on the film so IMDB may just have some bogus info up there.

The American Society of Cinematographers publishes a journal where the filmmakers discuss how films are shot. TDKR has a long article in the August issue.

Word.

Heh. The little bit of footage from TDK used at the beginning of TDKR had thick edge halos when I saw the new flick at the BFI IMAX (on 15/70). If the filmmakers can't even source a forcefield-free version, then I think we've just got to accept how the TDK Blu-ray looks and move on. The anamorphic stuff in TDKR had still clearly been sharpened, but it's nowhere near as aggressive as it was on TDK.

As for the TDKR Blu-ray, an alternating 1.78/2.35 version will do me just fine. Talk of a multi-multi aspect edition is nonsense. Plenty of special effects scenes have been shot using processes with different aspect ratios to the main feature, that doesn't mean that I want to see some bastardised version with the ratio hopping about like a frog on a hotplate for the sake of it. What matters is the final intent; we're seeing this alternating IMAX version because Mr Nolan wants us to, and asking for anything more is just onanistic wish fulfilment.

That is D M R and nothing more if Warner uses two sources there is no issue

Wonder how it looked in DCP projection? Inception looked completely silky and analog, though the Blu-ray has a small bit of visible sharpening in comparison.

Either way, since they wouldn't have to color grade everything due to Nolan's analog fetish it'd be pretty simple to just re-scan the IP.

He should be praised for it.

I think it's an increasingly unreasonable and counterproductive position to take these days.
Okay, the analog IMAX stuff looks lovely, if you're near a theater than can show 70mm/15perf. Almost everyone else saw a DCP, which is of slightly lower quality than usual due to being struck from an IP (which certainly didn't do the IMAX blowups any favors either). Can you even see TDKR in 35mm in America anymore? The only theaters in my vicinity that still run 35mm are arthouse joints that didn't show it.

Why is it odd? Whether it's 2.35, 2.39 or 2.4 is useless trivia to everyone except whoever makes the cameras and projector plates. The difference is completely negligible.

So people in2012 would rather see a film like t2 in 4:3? Huh
Again, format AR is not intended AR!!!!!! Many great directors agree...

Agreed. I did not mind it on TDK at all and hope that the same is done with the DKR disc