Slashdot Mirror
Matrix Revolutions To Be Released On Imax
captain igor writes "IMAX.com is reporting that Matrix Revolutions is going to be released at select IMAX theatres on November 5th, with a wider range of theatres picking the movie up shortly thereafter. (Link includes list of IMAX theatres that will premier the movie.)" We mentioned earlier this year that the Matrix sequels would be Imax-sized.
I can only imagine how big Larry Fishburne's gut will look on an Imax screen. I never knew there was a Crispy Creme in Zion.
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
Neo: I seem to recall this being posted on slashdot before!
Trinity: Deja Vu, its a glitch in the Matrix. Is it a different article? Or the same article twice?
As much as I would like to be against big ass theatres and corporate mega-complexes, the metreon in SF is actually a great theatre. I will definitely be seeing this there...
Oh, I really hope someone can get a digital rip of that... better than DVD quality screener!
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
It has been out on the Sony Metrion IMAX theatre in San Francisco for some time now. It is truley a different movie when seen on the big big screen. The action scenes are emersive and you really feel like part of the movie.
Probably does not translate as well to IMAX as some other films with more picturesque fly-by shots of detailed landscapes like say... LOTR, but still worth a second (or Nth) view
One thing will keep me from seeing this at my local IMAX.
Popcorn!
They don't allow food and beverages in the IMAX here. What's a movie without a $10 bucket of popcorn and a 7.50 keg of cherry coke!?!
How long before everything is IMAX since we can approximate the current movie setups with our wide screens and dvds?
Davak
Thats Great, I would love to see on an IMAX screen, too bad that movies for IMAX can't be longer then 120 minutes or so.. So it will have to be cut down from the regular version, as Reloaded was. Not to mention that it costs 12$ here in NYC.
As per usual, we 'Down Under' miss out :(
I find it strange since the movie was produced in Sydney.
(...and yes we do have Imax)
Oh wells.
I think we can all tell i'm not being serious, but my point is that when a good movie comes out, we will all pay to see it. if the movie industry tries to shovel some crap out the door and call it a movie, dont be surprised if we download that shit instead of paying for it.
Since the link from the original slashdot post is gone... here's the information on the conversion process.
-----------
IMAX(R) DMR
From traveling back in time to the pre-historic age of the dinosaurs, to looking into the future on board the International Space Station, the unparalleled image and sound quality of the The IMAX ExperienceO transports audiences to places far beyond the reach of most people. Now, through the magic of IMAX(R) DMR(TM) (Digital Re-Mastering), movie-goers can also experience the larger than life adventure, drama and emotion of their favorite Hollywood films, such as "Apollo 13," which won two Academy AwardsO in 1995, and Star Wars: Episode II Attack of the Clones. Coming to IMAX theatres this Spring and Fall will be The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions, the second and third chapters in the Wachowski Brothers' revolutionary film trilogy. The release of The Matrix Revolutions on November 5, 2003 will mark the first time ever that a Hollywood live action event film is released concurrently in 35mm and in IMAX's format.
IMAX motion picture systems, invented and developed by IMAX Corporation (IMAX), are the most technically advanced motion picture systems in the world. Images of unsurpassed size, clarity and impact, enhanced by a superb specially-designed six-channel, multi-speaker sound system, are projected onto giant rectangular screens, up to eight stories high and 120 feet wide in IMAX(R) theatres, and in IMAX(R) Dome theatres, onto domes as large as 27m (88'-5") in diameter.
The film format used by IMAX (15/70) image is ten times larger than a conventional 35mm film and three times bigger than a standard 70mm film. The sheer size of a 15/70 film frame, combined with the unique IMAX projection technology, is the key to the extraordinary sharpness and clarity of films exhibited in IMAX theatres.
IMAX(R) DMR(TM)
IMAX Corporation has developed a total system to re-master 35mm live-action films into 15/70 film format for exhibition in IMAX theatres. Known as IMAX DMR this proprietary, patent pending technology digitally enhances the image quality of 35mm motion pictures for projection onto screens up to eight stories high and up to 120 feet wide. The resulting images are every bit as big, sharp and beautiful as those of the classic, visually stunning films originally produced in the 15/70 format.
The core of the IMAX DMR process is based on our in-depth knowledge and understanding of the 15/70 format and the projection environment in IMAX theatres.
There are no other systems available that can provide this degree of image enhancement. IMAX DMR is much more than just a software tool. It is a complete, purpose-built, end-to-end system designed to accommodate the high demands of day-and-date releases.
The Process
IMAX DMR starts by scanning, at the highest resolution possible, each individual frame of the 35mm film and converting them into digital images.
Next, proprietary image enhancement tools, developed and refined over many years, optimizes each image for printing onto 70mm film. The useful information contained within the small area of the 35mm format is analyzed. Some of the techniques used to enhance the digital image include sharpening, color correction, grain removal, and eliminating unsteadiness.
The enhanced digital signal is then recorded onto 15/70 film resulting in a visual presentation which, when projected on IMAX's state-of-the-art rolling loop projection system, is bright, crisp, steady and absolutely stunning.
The highly automated IMAX DMR system allows the process to meet rigorous film production schedules.
Sound
For IMAX DMR releases, the original soundtrack of the 35mm film will be re-mastered for IMAX's six-channel loudspeaker system. Unlike conventional theatre sound systems, IMAX sound systems are uncompressed, full fidelity and use proprietary l
I saw Apollo 13 on IMAX when it was the brave new world of 35mm blowups, and I was underwhelmed. It was exciting, sure, but it didn't add a lot to the movie.
... you get the idea.
For one, the movie's length exceeded the capacity of the reels for the projector, so they had to cut something like a half hour from it. Knowing the movie really well (it really outfoxes other space movies), it was irritating, but to my friend who had never seen it before, it was downright confusing. "Day 4" led to "Day 6"; not only did they cut some needed exposition, but a lot of the smaller moments that make the movie rich. Disclaimer: I think they've solved this issue and Revolutions will not be similarly cut. Which is why I'm presenting these criticism in increasing order of importance.
More severe is the clipping of the sides. An IMAX screen is proportioned to 1.66:1, which is closer to the 1.33:1 of TV than the 2:35:1 of movies like Apollo 13. The solution is to cut off the sides, like in the rightfully derided pan-and-scan telecine methods for TV. So for all the progress we've made in getting the mainstream public to embrace letterboxing with DVDs, this is a leap backward.
The print just didn't look good. I mean, whether you show it on a 80-foot screen or 800-foot screen, you only shot it with so much grain in the negative, and you can only get so much detail on the way out. It looked incredibly fuzzy and indistinct next to movies that were shot natively in the jumbo IMAX format. When you watch Everest and other IMAX-shot movies, they look like they have as much detail as a regular movie, but the screen extends far in every direction. Whereas blowing up 35mm 8 stories high produces roughly the same effect as sitting 3 feet away from a normal screen. They had to pipe the movie through all sorts of algorithms to reduce what would have been enormus "grain flicker," but instead, it looked awfully posterized and compressed.
Which leads me to the biggest point -- it was just overwhelming. For "epic" sequences like the liftoff, sensory overload is a good thing. But a lot of the latter part of Apollo 13 is played in close-ups -- scene after scene of Tom Hanks's face, 8 stories high. The face is so huge, it takes extra work for the eye to scan and recognize it. You have to turn your head, not just your eye, to get a bearing of where a scene is taking place. It's like watching a regular movie through a paper towel roll.
The director shot the movie with the assumption that you would be able to scan the whole frame relatively quickly. You can shoot close-up and your brain will understand that the scene goes beyond the edges of the frame. Directors who shoot for IMAX or other large-frame formats know to keep everything really, really wide, so you don't get disoriented. The purpose is to immerse you in a certain place, to eliminate the constant reminder in your peripheral vision that you are looking at a "finite" image. When you shoot it wide and project it big, the focal length ends up back in the league of normal movies, and that's what happens. But when you shoot it close and project it big
In short, IMHO, IMAX is a great format for certain types of movies, but keep 35mm prints on the normal screen where they belong.
I am worried that the matrix series is going to end with "not a bang but a wimper."
Releasing the movie on IMAX and the regular theater at the same time doesn't make sense (cents?) otherwise.
The last matrix flick did it correctly. Fans will go to the regular theater to see it on release day... and then spend the extra dollars to see it larger than life later.
For the third flick, die hards will see it on IMAX and then just purchase the DVD later... leaving the theaters out of the action. Are they afraid that after people see it in the theater that there will not be enough excitement to pay off the IMAX investment?
Is it going to be that big of a dud? Gawd, I hope now.
I guess alternatively this could just be IMAX's way of trying to position itself as a theater alternative...
Davak
1. A really blatant and horrible edit mistake during the big dance scene in Zion. For some reason, Trinity and Neo had sex, then met at the dance. Everything else was the same, and there were no other (noticable) edit problems.
2. Due to the high level of detail, I could fairly easily notice when CG was being used. This was most problematical during the big 100 Smiths battle.
What was good about it?
Totally immersive! The superbike sequence was awesome, much better than the small screen. It's true that some of the fight sequences were more difficult to digest visually, but that was more than made up for by the awesome display of enormous images.
As for your critiques:
1. or one, the movie's length exceeded the capacity of the reels for the projector
As you mentioned, this is no longer a problem.
2. More severe is the clipping of the sides.
As far as I could tell, there was no clipping. The film was shown in it's normal proportions, which meant that it did not take up the full height of the screen. Still, it was twice as large as the normal screen (4x the area).
3. The print just didn't look good.
I know what you mean by posterized. Yes, it was pretty obvious that some post production had taken place. But I wouldn't characterize it as not looking good. It was more than satisfactory.
4. Which leads me to the biggest point -- it was just overwhelming.
Yea, that's the idea. I like walking out of the theatre with my eyes moving in different directions!
I am definitely going to see the next installments of the Matrix and LOTRs on IMAX. I'm not even going to think about going to the regular theatre. Big, flashy, epic films look great on big, flashy, epic screens.
It's Krispy Kreme you insensitive clod!
The hot light is always on... In my pants
...I recently saw Reloaded at the IMAX theater in the Luxor in Vegas. It rawked. I had an almost perfect seat, halfway up and halfway across. Very immersive, in some cases (e.g. the outdoor scenes) almost vertigo-inducingly so.
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
>However I don't reckon that we have IMAX cinemas over here in the good ol' U of K.
There are IMAX cinemas in London, Bristol, Bournemouth, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and Glasgow.
For some reason, they seem to be unusually heavily concentrated in cities beginning with B. Coincidence? I think not!
The only way I want to view the matrix movies from now on is with a kanji-fied aalib...
I'm not that much of a Linux geek, am I?
You missed the even more obvious Mac joke. Imagine an iMac hooked up to Frank's 2000" TV.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Okay, guess I'll skip seeing that "Empire Strikes Back" flick, then. Thanks for the warning. I'll stay home and read "The Fellowship of the Ring" instead, or maybe watch a couple episodes of "24."
I saw Matrix Reloaded at the local IMAX. It was obvious the movie had not been shot for and IMAX screen. The aspect ratio seemed wrong. The resolution and focus also weren't that great in this movie, as there were a lot of scenes where the director wants you to look at a particular character so more focus is on them and not their surroundings. This is fine for the 16:9 cinema screen but when you are looking at a 3 story IMAX screen, your eyes want to wander and look at all the details. This, I thought, was a little disappointing. The smoother flowing scenes, such as scenes of Zion looked incredible.
You'll also be able to see Trinity's blond nose hairs a number of times. The fact that the prop cars on the freeway action scenes have no motors in them becomes very apparent. I could go on for an hour about the visual flaws with the Matrix series on IMAX, but I'll stop my complaining there. Oh okay, one more: the oracle's skin. EWWWWWWWW. Get that lady some scar cream, stat!
I'd say to go see the new one on IMAX, but not for the visual difference (it's just bigger, blurrier, and choppier looking), go for the audio. IMAX theaters tend to have very strong, very clear, sound systems that really add to action sequences. The can really feel the music when the fighting breaks out.
It also would have helped a lot if the movie had been shot at ~60 fps. I've seen movies shot for IMAX and they didn't appear to have such jagged motion when panning and, overall, more focus and attention to visual details. The focus seems clearer for a whole scene in an IMAX native film, too.