Dark Knight: To IMAX or not? (1 Viewer)

[derek]

I know some sequences in 'Dark Knight' were filmed with IMAX cameras. Due to nature/depth of the film for a first viewing would you recommend seeing it on a big spectacle IMAX screen or a typical sized multiplex theater where it might be a slightly more intimate viewing?

 

[Patrick Sun]

I saw the theatrical verson first (midnight showing last Friday) because I wanted to watch it for the plot mainly, and then saw it on IMAX last Saturday, and was able to appreciate more details from the larger (everything) from the film, and not also be trying to keep up with the plot of the film. It worked out for me, though others have seen it on IMAX first, and then saw it on the smaller, more conventional theater screens.

 

[Brent M]

If you can, definitely see it in IMAX. I was absolutely blown away by the experience.

 

[Brian D H]

Do not miss it in IMAX! It's completely immersive with a real sense of motion and I never noticed the changes in aspect ratio. In fact, I had to consciously check a few times to notice what the aspect ratio was; the transitions were that smooth.

That having been said, I'm not sure your FIRST viewing should be IMAX. Mine was, and I had a little trouble following all the action during the fight scenes because I had to turn my head slightly to see the entire screen. If your first viewing is in IMAX I'd recommend sitting far enough back so you can take in the entire screen without moving your eyes or head too much.

 

[teapot2001]

The IMAX version didn't do much for me. There were gorgeous views of the cities but that was pretty much it. It didn't benefit the action, and at times, it was distracting. I suppose that if the regular theaters near you don't offer the best presentation, you might want to watch it in IMAX just for the better picture quality and sound.

~T

 

[Chuck Mayer]

My first viewing was IMAX, and I wouldn't trade it for anything. The joy of the cinema is contained not only in the story, but the presentation, and the IMAX scenes are completely encompassing. It was a marvel and a great theatrical experience.

My second viewing was a standard cinema, and it was excellent as well.

I will take in a third viewing in a few weeks, and will choose the IMAX format for that one. It's the first theatrical film to really use the format, so I think it's well worth seeing there, even at the added cost and possible inconvenience.

 

[Matt Butler]

I had to see it in regular cinema for first viewing. Sacramento IMAX doesnt get the DK print untill Aug 29th. :frowning:

Cant wait

 

[Johnny Angell]

I've read something about that before. I saw the last Superman movie in Imax. It was not shot for Imax? What did they do to get it into Imax format?

 

[Jonesy]

I think Christopher Nolan would want you to see it in IMAX. Who are we to argue with him?

You'll get a better picture and better sound.

Jonesy
The Dark Knight in IMAX

 

[Sean Laughter]

I'm not sure I'd really say that. The very first "commercial" film I remember seeing in IMAX was Fantasia 2000 (and I think the IMAX version was actually shot on IMAX film rather than getting the DMR-process treatment most of the commercial films get today - with the exception of the IMAX-native segments of TDK). Disney knew it was going to be exclusively IMAX for a while (at least I think it was), but I can't remember if I read they did any special formatting or anything knowing it was going to be in IMAX. It was letterboxed if I rememeber correctly, and from what I'm hearing the IMAX shots in TDK open up to fill the whole IMAX screen (seems like that would be a bit distracting).

I certainly felt the "Pines of Rome" and "Firebird Suite" sequences in Fantasia gained alot from being on the IMAX screen versus my one viewing of it in a conventional theater.

 

[Chris Will]

If Fantasia 2000 was letterboxed on an IMAX screen then it wasn't true IMAX (it would have filled the screen if it was). The ratio changes were not distracting at all during TDK and after awhile I didn't even notice them. The IMAX presentation of TDK blew the 35mm presentation I saw away IMO. The audio in IMAX was unbelievable!

 

[TheBat]

I also live in the sacramento area. I traveled 2 hours to watch it at the dublin theatre.. since the sac was not getting until august 29th.

Jacob

 

[Bejoy]

Even though some action scenes was shot in IMAX, it don't have the full resolution....

http://www.studiodaily.com/filmandvi...ssue/9703.html

Still worth it...

 

[Nick Martin]

The first IMAX DMR film was Apollo 13, and that was the last time I'd seen a film in an IMAX theater - that was in 2002.

It. Was. Spectacular.

 

[Mark Kalzer]

Superman was not shot in IMAX. It was shot conventionally (in digital I believe) and 3D scenes were converted, but since it was not shot 3D on set they had to do the 3D work entirely in post. The result was an extremely fake looking 'cardboard cutout' appearance which looked exactly like what it was... certain elements of the frame cut apart by virtual scissors and placed farther away or closer on the 3D plane, but with none of the depth you'd expect from 3D. It was more a distraction then anything.

 

[Brent M]

Nolan is the first person to ever shoot a conventional motion picture with IMAX cameras so even though practically any film "could" be shown in IMAX, The Dark Knight is the only one to have portions of it shot in the format.

 

[cafink]

What is "DMR"?

 

[Patrick Sun]

It's the process of taking the regular 35mm film reels and blowing them up for IMAX presentation (to be feed through the IMAX projectors).

 

[Nick Martin]

And at the time, the size of the IMAX film reels limited the runtime to 2 hours, which is why if you see the 10th Anniversary Apollo 13 DVD, the IMAX version included is shorter than the original theatrical version.

 

[cafink]

Does it stand for anything or is it just another random collection of letters?