The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Well Enrico....I respect your opinion on the matter of changing aspect ratios.....everyone has their particular preference. However, I watched the IMAX experience (it was the only version that I was going to watch since it was Nolan's vision for the film) so I welcome this version being released.

I can't wait to purchase this on release date.....the only question that remains for me is whether to get the steelbook being released by Future Shop (In Canada), the Batpod version.....or both.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I'm with you. I use mattes to crop out the black bars, they will be useless with this movie. I cannot understand why they could not give us both versions like with "How the West Was Won" ...we got the letterbox and smilebox versions.

Maybe I'll rent it and hope for a 2.35:1 version later.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Yes, I rather have the IMAX version too.






Crawdaddy

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

So other people's art should be reformatted to fit your particular preference? Since it's Mr. Nolan's movie and not yours, I'd say respecting his vision is of paramount importance, and Warner absolutely did the right thing.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

WTF?! Respectfully, this thread feels like a joke...

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Yeah, I find it kinda odd but it is the proper presentation for the movie nonetheless.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I'm getting both DVD and BD steelbooks from there. Best of both worlds, I say.

I have a toy Batpod with a Batman attached to it, so getting a statue version doesn't matter to me.


I fully embrace the 2.35:1 / 1.78:1 shifting Blu-ray, and will enjoy the theatrical DVD as well.

Here's a Blu-ray review:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...ht_blu-ray.htm

One thing that I am curious about though, is what AR will the IMAX scenes be on the DVD version, because the DVD has them separately on disc 2 of the set. Will it be 1.78 or the original 1.44?

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Until of course George Lucas changes something in Star Wars (to meet his vision) or another director changes something that is in an important film and magically the directors vision doesn't matter.

The double standard some (not saying you directly but no doubt there are many who feel that way but trash Lucas for the star wars changes) have is funny to me.

I have yet to see this dark night blu-ray and I am pretty certain I won't care about the changing aspect ratio thing but it does sound like it bothers many so I fail to see why warner couldn't have thrown both versions on the disc.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

1.78, IIRC - they're not going to make the picture narrower during those scenes.

I must admit, I wouldn't have had much of an issue if WB had left the whole thing at 2.35:1 - as much as I liked having the screen get bigger for the extended sequences at the IMAX theater, it was a bit jarring when it would open up just for an establishing shot.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Funny, the aspect ratio change should be much less here than in the iMax screen (1.44->2.35 vs. 1.78->2.35), so hopefully the effect should be less dramatic.

That said, I saw it in iMax (for my 3rd viewing) and I was not bothered at all by the change in AR. The friend I was with, she didn't even notice it at all.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

The director's vision? Don't be silly.

The "director's vision" was to have a more or less standard widescreen theatrical image switch to a 52-foot-high 1.44:1 image; not to switch from 2.35 to 1.78 on a 60-inch LCD screen.

Home theater is a different medium, kids.

And, frankly, the way the IMAX footage was used in the film, it felt more like a business arrangement between Warner and IMAX than an aesthetic decision. For example, the second-unit aerial shots were cool in IMAX--the resolution was remarkable--but didn't add one damned thing to the film.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Shifting aspect ratios won't keep me from purchasing this disc; however how many times exactly does the ratio switch? I was under the impression that only the Joker's introduction was filmed in IMAX, which would mean only one shift. Is that not the case?

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Actually, Paul, the aspect ratio switched MANY times in the IMAX theatrical print. Sometimes for just a few seconds of an establishing shot.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Approximately 20 minutes of the film was shot in IMAX, which I believe is about 6 scenes, some extended, some as short as an establishing shot.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Mr. Nolan didn't seem to have any problem with it being reformatted for display on tens of thousands of non-Imax movie theater screens around the country. There's more then enough room on the Blu-ray disc to include both versions. Why not satisfy everyone?

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

This switches from 2.35:1 to 1.78:1? I thought the shots in IMAX would switch to 1.44:1, therefore requiring pillarboxing. If it switches to 1.78:1 wouldn't this be a third version that was never theatrically shown? In other words, none of the theatrically shown versions are being released on BD.

People can go on and on about director's vision, but this film was released in a 2.35:1 format for non-IMAX presentation and Nolan wasn't complaining about it, so why isn't it being included on the BD release? I only saw the 2.35:1 version and was fine with it. Why are they releasing this movie with a reformatting that is neither Nolan's "vision" nor the proper 2.35:1 non-IMAX theatrical release?

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Aspect ratio change or not, some of the Beaver shots show annoying sharpening halos. Especially this one:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews43/the dark knight blu-ray bale ledger/large1/dark knight blu-ray3.jpg

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Guys, you do realize the Blu-ray's formatting was specifically at Nolan's request, right? He may have "settled" for 2.35:1-in-total for most theaters but what he "wants" is shifting aspect ratios. In fact, he fell so in love with the IMAX process, he's hoping to film his future creations fully in that format, cost allowing...

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

It's getting an IMAX re-release in January, which is the only way to see this properly. Part of the IMAX experience is the complete immersion in the image. This is impossible on even the best HD systems.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Except we're not getting the IMAX process with this director approved version. So what you are telling me is that Nolan has now approved a third reframing of his "vision". We are getting neither the original IMAX presentation nor the standard theatrical version, but a version that the director has approved because he likes shifting aspect ratios. So much for director's vision. His vision is whatever is expedient.

If he wanted shifting aspect ratios then he should have made sure that what was presented in IMAX is presented on BD. If people had to put up with pillarboxing then too bad. The BD should also have the standard theatrical version for people who don't want to watch the IMAX version. Regardless of the director's approval, what the BD shouldn't have, as the only option, is some half-assed non-theatrical version where the horizontal black bars disappear at times.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I'd say to those who haven't actually seen this disc, stop bitching until you do. Then if you don't like what you see complain then, but until that time there isn't much point. You are assuming you won't like it but it may surprise you, just as those who do want to see it this way (like myself) may end up NOT liking the shifting AR.

Long story short, just wait and see.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I guess it's all good until we get a director whose "vision" is to give the focus puller the day off and let his 3-year-old play with yanking the lens back and forth while he's shooting. Unless it's in a parody or otherwise having fun with the medium in an less-than-serious setting I don't have much patience with directors calling attention to their movie-making technology as an end to itself.

Maybe Mr. Nolan is trying to one-up Storaro in taking the mickey with aspect-ratio shenanigans.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I would really caution people about assuming all "halos" are the product of edge enhancement. I saw this movie three times in three different theaters (Mann Village, well known/respected, a new multiplex in Century City, and in iMax at The Bridge in Culver City) and saw halos in all versions. Sometimes halos are an artifact resulting in how the film was shot, and can vary scene by scene.

In fact, I clearly remember my thought when I saw it was "wonder how long it will take before charges of EE creep up in the BD/DVD transfer of this film." And I made a mental note to remind myself to post this as soon as one crept up that I noticed.

I know we all have our standard whipping boys (EE/DNR/Grain removal) but I would caution simply badmouthing a transfer based on halos seen on a screengrab or two because I can tell you as a fact that I observed them in the theatrical prints (and all three were film, not DLP projections).

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

This I can respect as not everyone has the same tastes. It doesn't make this version of the film any less valid even though it may not be the one you prefer. And that's fine. But if you ever get a chance to check out the IMAX version I highly recommend doing so. It might just change your mind.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

There's a difference between critiquing picture quality and gnashing one's teeth over every mistake regardless of size. Some can handle it, some can't.

The funny thing, is he already knows all this, since he's been posting about it (and studiously ignoring anybody who mentions the IMAX problem) at AVS. What's worse, is that the reviewer he's following at one point says nobody can be trusted to review this (then why should we trust him?) and then turns around and tells the many, many people who mentioned the IMAX haloes that he didn't see them. Yeah, that'll earn our trust...
Until we get the "OMG Look at that SCREENSHOT" mentality out, we're going to have to deal with this, as you can see. Sadly, it's getting more and more difficult to convince people who have dug their heels in and put fingers in their ears that they actually have to wait until seeing the film in motion before they start spamming the threads with how horrible these films must look.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Thanks, Bob, I was not aware of that. I should like to see the IMAX version of this movie, so perhaps I will get a chance when it is re-released in January.

That said, I am more than willing to give this disc the benefit of the doubt, but it seems ridiculous that the IMAX scenes aren't even in their proper aspect ratios. It certainly does dilute the 'artistic integrity' angle being used to defend the changing aspect ratio decision.

Also, I find it odd that DVD Beaver wouldn't have included at least one screen grab from an IMAX scene.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

All that matters to me is that Nolan approved the Blu-ray release. And I know he did.

Re: The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

I'm a member of both forums, but this is exactly why I read my software/movie reviews here and not there. The signal to noise ratio is much better at HTF, and we have respected industry folks who know film (like RAH) who participate here and not there, for good reason. I go to AVS for hardware reviews, and even then I have to dig through 50 posts of in-fighting for every 1 of good, solid information.

EDIT: One of the things I can't stand about AVS's BD reviews are the absolute ratings on audio/video quality. For example, The Godfather BDs got an audio rating of 78 and a video rating of 84. I assume that's because it didn't look and sound like Transformers.

Here's a clue: it's not supposed to.

My belief is that a BD should represent the look and sound of the original film, and since the film was restored and transfered meticulously I don't see how this could have merited anything less than a low-to-mid 90s score.
Unfortunately it goes even beyond seeing the film in motion because if the halos are there as a result of the filmmaking process, then it will still be visible in motion (as I saw in the Dark Knight showings I went to) and so should be there in the BD transfer. But people will see it and jump to the conclusion that edge-enhancement has been performed.

Generally if EE has been used, it will permeate the entire transfer and not just a few scenes (see original Stargate DVD transfer). If it's only in a few, select scenes one really has to be familiar with the source material and 99% of the time I (as with most people) only see the movie in the theater once and that doesn't qualify. I just happened to enjoy TDK enough to see it 3 times to become this familiar with it.