1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

The Dark Knight changing Aspect Ratio feels like a Joke

Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by EnricoE, Nov 24, 2008.

  1. EnricoE

    EnricoE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    5
    today i was able sneak peek the br of the dark knight. audio and video quality are top notch. but that wasn't my concern in the first place. my concern was the changing aspect ratio in the movie. every time the aspect ratio changes, i got a bit moved out of the movie. the imax scene do like pretty nice but they wont make much of a difference in the home theater. the film was shown in full 2.35:1 in it's theatrical run but warner opmits this version by only including the imax experience. i find this as a bad move. we don't even get an option to choose which version we wanna see and i would've preferred the full widescreen experience over the imax release version.
    i know it is mr. nolan's vision but it doesn't mean it's the better one. sorry warner, no purchase from me on this. maybe if it's in a bargain bin or the full widescreen version is released on blu-ray. till then i give the br back to my friend who lent it to me for watching the film.
     
  2. Joseph J.D

    Joseph J.D Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    2,695
    Likes Received:
    5
    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. [​IMG]
     
  3. Ric Easton

    Ric Easton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2001
    Messages:
    2,817
    Likes Received:
    76
     
  4. Robert Crawford

    Robert Crawford Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 1998
    Messages:
    28,135
    Likes Received:
    3,851
    Location:
    Michigan
    Real Name:
    Robert
    Yes, I rather have the IMAX version too.
    Crawdaddy
     
  5. Craig Beam

    Craig Beam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Messages:
    1,777
    Likes Received:
    150
    Location:
    Gresham, OR
    Real Name:
    Craig Beam
    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.
     
  6. Travis Brashear

    Travis Brashear Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 1999
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    WTF?! Respectfully, this thread feels like a joke...
     
  7. TravisR

    TravisR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    Messages:
    24,935
    Likes Received:
    2,766
    Location:
    The basement of the FBI building
    Yeah, I find it kinda odd but it is the proper presentation for the movie nonetheless.
     
  8. Nicholas Martin

    Nicholas Martin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    1
    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?
     
  9. Loregnum

    Loregnum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  10. Jason Seaver

    Jason Seaver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    9,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  11. Carlo Medina

    Carlo Medina Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 1997
    Messages:
    10,337
    Likes Received:
    562
    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.
     
  12. Bob_L

    Bob_L Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
  13. Paul Arnette

    Paul Arnette Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Messages:
    2,616
    Likes Received:
    0
    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?
     
  14. Bob_L

    Bob_L Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    1
    Actually, Paul, the aspect ratio switched MANY times in the IMAX theatrical print. Sometimes for just a few seconds of an establishing shot.
     
  15. Mike Williams

    Mike Williams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    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.
     
  16. cafink

    cafink Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    3,045
    Likes Received:
    36
    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?
     
  17. Edwin-S

    Edwin-S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2000
    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    273
    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?
     
  18. Michel_Hafner

    Michel_Hafner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    102
  19. Travis Brashear

    Travis Brashear Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 1999
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    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...
     
  20. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,512
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    Alpharetta, GA, USA
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    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.
     

Share This Page