The next Batman flick could be all-IMAX
By Richard Lawler 
posted Aug 26th 2009 1:09PM
posted Aug 26th 2009 1:09PM
[Via Splash Page]
posted Aug 26th 2009 1:09PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Yes, yes, yes.. Now I can use all of the 52 inches of my TV on not just 42 inches.
Damn black bars and the people who love them. Damn you all...
Please don't tell me you'd rather watch a movie in an incorrect aspect ratio than put up with the black bars. If so, you may as well just leave this site and never come back. Your kind isn't wanted here.
It's not an 'incorrect' aspect ratio if it's filmed that way.
I live in Colorado Springs and there's only 1 IMAX Theater with 10 screens for about in a city of about 500,000. I like the idea of an all IMAX movie but when it comes down to it majority of theaters don't have a IMAX section and the IMAX section half the time sits less people then the regular theater. Since films are about making money I can say it can be filmed in IMAX but it won't be exclusive to IMAX...
There are 10 screens over on Powers? I think it is more like 3 but I get your point. Tiny audience, huge prices, not many screens. Sounds stupid.
Don't know if this was better or worse, but in the Boston area, there were 2 theaters showing the previous Batman in IMAX, both at Jordan's Furniture (yes, a furniture store chain has IMAX theaters as part of their "sales gimmick"). Both theaters are huge (like about 500 people) and were sold out for quite a few weeks. I don't know of any other IMAX theaters in the area which have non "science" movies (the other IMAX theaters are in Museum of Science and aquarium).
No thanks. Its not worth the additional cost for the IMAX theater tickets.
@Platinum_Skeet, scyber, and any others this may concern:
The implication here is not that the movie would be exclusive to IMAX, but that it would be filmed in IMAX, much like the entire opening of The Dark Knight was. This would then be converted to 35mm for all the non-IMAX screens to show it. There are nowhere near enough IMAX screens for this to forgo 35mm.
Don't know why people don't get that.
Oh, I know it will be available in regular theaters. But since i have no intention of seeing it in an IMAX theater, I'd prefer the film to be shot with a more traditional aspect ratio in mind.
@scyber
When it gets converted to 35mm, it'll likely be converted to a more traditional aspect ratio, just like the IMAX scenes in The Dark Knight were.
Oh, I know it will most likely be converted. I'd just prefer to see the movie the way the director intended it, but (as I mentioned earlier but is now modded down) I don't think the additional cost of IMAX is worth the benefits. And I certainly don't have a IMAX display at home. So I'd prefer the film to shot in a more traditional aspect ratio to preserve the directors vision when watching it in a traditional theater and/or at home.
I'm sure my opinion is the minority since most people seem to be raving about IMAX, but I have certainly not been impressed by it. At least not at nearly double the cost of a traditional movie.
I understand the concern for the director's intent, but directors can film with more than one aspect ratio in mind. TV shows do it all the time, and it has been done in movies too. One example that comes to mind is Air Force One. From what I read, the director filmed it so that it would look fine in either 4:3 or 16:9, which was more important then because not many people had 16:9 TVs when the movie first came out. Granted, this often makes it so things outside certain areas of the screen are reserved for unimportant portions of the image, but the point is that nothing important is ever cut off or anything like that. Nolan likely has this in mind (if this rumor is indeed true), so people who don't want to spring for IMAX tickets will see it in a form that looks fine, the IMAX fans will get something special, and the Blu-Ray version will look amazing (the IMAX scenes on the Blu of TDK look FAR clearer than the others).
@scyber: The way the director envisioned it? Well thats how he is envisioning it, is in IMAX! Christopher Nolan is the director of the Movie and loves IMAX. So your theory of seeing it how the director envisions it makes little to no sense to me. IMAX film is a way higher resolution and quality then tradition filming methods, your not losing any picture, your actually gaining more pixels and quality because you don't have the black bars.
Im all for it being shot in IMAX, so i can finally have full aspect ratio on my hdtv.
@Nick: I know directors can target mulitple aspect ratios, but I feel that doing that is almost a waste of the "larger" AR. Afterall, if nothing important/relevant appears outside the "smaller" AR, then in essence, the director is targetting the "smaller" AR. But ultimately the director makes one picture the way he really wants (in Nolan's case IMAX AR since he seems to be a huge fan), and then has to decide what to cut out in order to fit the more traditional AR. I'd prefer the version of the movie the director really wants to be the version I am most likely to see.
And I actually wasn't all that impressed by the bluray IMAX scenes for TDK. Certainly nice, but nothing that great to me. I'm sure many people will vehemently disagree with me.
@Brad: That is kinda my point. I know Nolan is envisioning the movie as an IMAX film. I would prefer that he envisioned it as a more traditional AR film b/c that is the way I will most likely view it. Oh and btw, full aspect ratio on your HDTV = Cropped IMAX. So you are losing picture.
Oh, you mean LieMax? We've one of those smaller fake Imax screens at Tulsa's Cinemark. I'm sorry Mr. engadgetHD story writer, it's really hard to get excited about this.
No, No, No.... IMAX is basically a 4x3 format I do not want a pillarboxed movie on my widescreen tv, and I do not want a pan and scanned 1.78 version either.
The aspect ration for IMAX was partially chosen to help with immersion.
You can tell the difference between films shot by professional IMAX crews and those shot by (IMAX) amateurs playing with the format.
IMAX features tend to have the point of focus in the center of the screen, traditional films tend to use the same 1/3, 2/3s points of focus used in still photography.
On a normal theater screen this is fine, on an IMAX screen it makes watching the movie like watching a tennis match.
I'm confident Nolan will still focus on a 1.78 AR even if he shoots the whole thing in IMAX.
That is to say, I think he will use the 1/3, 2/3, and keep the PoF centered vertically, so we should see a BD xfer to 1.78 with very little pan and scan simply by cropping the top and bottom of the frames, just like he did in TDK.
This sounds great. I just hope they pick an aspect ratio (i don't care which) and stick with it the whole movie. The switching is just too distracting.
I have a 2.35 screen, so for most of the TDK I have black bars on all four sides of the image.
70mm frame is very very pretty.
Sorry, IMAX ticket prices are already ~ $15 in the DC area, and an exclusive IMAX-only film will likely drive the price towards the DVD purchase price ! This will be the point at which people just stop going to the theater.
I just hope the movie doesn't get made, period. Christian Bale, an otherwise good actor, is pretty bad as Bruce Wayne/Batman. (Of course, so far the role has been miscast with every film). And Heath Ledger's Joker just reminded me of an Andy Dick impression. When I heard the rumor that Cher was being considered for Catwoman, I thought to myself, Enough already! Let's put this vision of the Caped Crusader to bed.
People like you shouldn't even be allowed to HAVE opinions. Bale is better by far than any other batman to date, and ledger's portrayal of the joker will go down in history as one of the greatest performances of all time.
Sorry, Nick but Bale is definitely not the best Batman. Perhaps you didn't hear his Batman voice?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2yv8aT0UFc
Umm, yes. This is extremely exciting!
I think i prefer to read the comics than those crappy badman movies…
This isn't a blog about shoddy printing on cheap paper.
I don't understand why anyone was complaining about the AR switching in TDK. I rather enjoyed it. Don't get me wrong, I love 2.39 but watching the action scenes in good ol 16:9 is good at home.
It's been a while since I watched TDK; are the imax scenes shot with the PoF in the center or with the usual 1/3 and 2/3 PoF?
Also, Tzedekh, Ledger played the part amazingly and anyone who says otherwise without good cause is just being a troll.
Film view Services are creators of motion graphics, video production and interactive visuals that engage, entertain and intrigue your audience. Specialists in film, broadcast & event content for screens, we have over 10 years of experience.
No, 2.4:1 all the way for me
Film view Services are creators of motion graphics, video production and interactive visuals that engage, entertain and intrigue your audience. Specialists in film, broadcast & event content for screens, we have over 10 years of experience.
I don't know about IMAX for feature films. The last two movies I saw on IMAX I felt I could not enjoy them since the screen was simply too big for the amount of action going on. I felt like I missed part of the movie because I could not watch the whole screen at once.
It works for some genres but not for others. I myself don't think I will spend the extra money again.