Marvel's The Inhumans (IMAX & ABC) (1 Viewer)

[Aaron Silverman]

I am STILL steaming that The Walk only ran for a week and I didn't get a chance to see it in IMAX 3D. (I eventually saw it at home, and that only made me MORE upset because I really liked it.)

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I am STILL steaming that The Walk only ran for a week and I didn't get a chance to see it in IMAX 3D. (I eventually saw it at home, and that only made me MORE upset because I really liked it.)

I'm very disappointed that the movie didn't get a chance to find its audience. I saw it in IMAX 3D and it was the single most astonishing 3D film experience of my life. I have a little bit of a fear of heights and there were times when I had to turn away from the screen, and other moments when I was literally clutching the armrest for safety. My brain was completely convinced that I was there, on that wire, looking down from the Twin Towers. I really wish the movie had found its audience; I wish it had played longer; and I wish the museums in NY were showing it permanently on their large screens.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The IMAX framing was exclusive to their theaters. I think the idea is that the largest conventional screen size is supposed to be 2.35:1, and that the IMAX 1.90:1 is supposed to appear taller/larger. On conventional screens, 1.90:1 would be smaller than 2.35:1.

That kind of depends on the theater, though. Near me we have a multiplex built by Hoyts before they withdrew from the American market that has common height screens (screen expands out to the sides for scope films) and a multiplex at the other mall built by Regal that has common width screens (matting closes in from the top and bottom for scope films).

Eastwood must prefer the 2.35:1 framing for smaller screens, since that's what the BD has been announced as being.

You're probably right. In an interview with Sully DP Tom Stern, he said they framed the movie for 2.39:1 and steered clear of the bottom of the frame -- protecting it but keeping it free of important information.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That kind of depends on the theater, though. Near me we have a multiplex built by Hoyts before they withdrew from the American market that has common height screens (screen expands out to the sides for scope films) and a multiplex at the other mall built by Regal that has common width screens (matting closes in from the top and bottom for scope films).

Unfortunately the Regal setup with common width screens has become the new reality in a lot of places, but technically speaking, that's incorrect - 2.35:1 is supposed to be wider/larger than conventional 1.85:1.
When "Avatar" came out theatrically, Cameron had both 2.35:1 and 1.85:1 versions, and instructed theaters to use whichever version took up the most real estate on whichever screen was being used.

You're probably right. In an interview with Sully DP Tom Stern, he said they framed the movie for 2.39:1 and steered clear of the bottom of the frame -- protecting it but keeping it free of important information.

That's generally the IMAX shooting idea - I remember learning a lot of about the format when I briefly worked at an IMAX museum theater about 10 (15?) years ago, and then reading a lot about the format as they started first blowing up Hollywood films for those screens and then, with Christopher Nolan, shooting Hollywood films on the format. If you happen to have access to a version of The Dark Knight that includes the full aperture IMAX scenes at 1.44:1 (they're available as a bonus feature on the 2 disc DVD version, in the deluxe trilogy BD set, and ironically, on the pan & scan DVD), you can see that there's just a ton of dead space at the top and bottom of the frame. Nolan is primarily composing within the 2.35:1 frame, and everything else outside of that area is meant to fill your field of vision, but isn't necessarily "active" space. But the point is that everything you see when you look towards the screen is movie; the geometry of IMAX theaters is supposed to be such that you're not seeing walls and ceiling, you're just supposed to be seeing the movie, and having the extra room at the top and bottom of the frame can enhance that perspective. I think if you saw Sully in a conventional 1.85:1 screen where they showed the IMAX version, it would look sloppy - the seating angle isn't right, and you'd be looking at the entire frame and not seeing a lot of carefully composed shots. When I saw it in IMAX, the 2.35:1 portion filled my frame of view, and the extra height was just kind of there almost outside my vision - it just made the movie seem bigger and more immersive, but my eyes were mostly locked in on the 2.35:1 area, if that makes sense.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Roel Reiné to Direct First Two Episodes of "Marvel's The Inhumans"

From what I can tell, the bulk of the Dutch filmmaker's English language credits are direct-to-video sequels to big screen movies. His Dutch language works are apparently better regarded.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Casting news:

• Anson Mount (“Hell on Wheels”) as Black Bolt, the enigmatic, commanding King of the Inhumans, with a voice so powerful that the slightest whisper can destroy a city. (via Marvel)
  
  
• Serinda Swan (“Smallville,” “Graceland”) as Medusa, the Queen of the Inhumans and a fiercely resilient warrior who has the ability to move and control her hair the way most people use their hands and fingers. (via Marvel)
  
  
• Iwan Rheon (“Misfits,” “Game of Thrones”) as Maximus, a clever and charming Inhuman that is fiercely devoted to the people of Attilan, especially his brother, the King – although he harbors an intense desire to wear the crown himself. (via Marvel)

Eliana Jones is rumored to be playing Crystal, the queen's younger sister, who has the ability to manipulate the four elements.

 

[Sam Favate]

The cast sounds great. I wonder if we'll at least get a reference to Daisy from SHIELD.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Marvel has announced the rest of the "Inhumans" cast:

• Ken Leung (“Lost,” “The Night Shift”) as Karnak, Black Bolt's cousin and closest advisor. His gift is an ability to see the fault in all things – people, plans, structures, everything. He’s Black Bolt’s most ardent supporter and strategist and is often seen as the royal family’s planner and philosopher.
  
  
• Eme Ikwuakor (“Extant”) as Gorgon, also a cousin of Black Bolt, member of the Royal family, and leader of Attilan’s military. With super strong legs, complete with hooves, he can generate destructive seismic waves with a single stomp.
  
  
• Isabelle Cornish (“Home and Away,” “Puberty Blues”) as Crystal, the sister of Medusa and the youngest member of the royal family. She has the ability to control the elements. Impetuous and independent she is also deeply devoted to her family.
  
  
• Mike Moh (“Empire,” “Street Fighter: Assassin's Fist”) as Triton, another cousin of Black Bolt who is calm under pressure and supremely athletic. His gift is his fish-like ability to live underwater.
  
  
• Sonya Balmores (“Beyond the Break,” Soul Surfer) as Auran, a capable and no-nonsense woman who leads the Royal Guards on Attilan. She is fiercely loyal to the King of Attilan.
  
  
• Ellen Woglom (“Californication” “Outlaw”) as a mysterious character who is smart, intense, and focused—so focused that oftentimes, social skills take a back seat. Her job at a private aerospace company is her life, second only to her passion for all things space and lunar. She’s primed to be swept up in an adventure.

 

[Josh Dial]

Awesome casting of Ken Leung as Karnak, as Karnak is one of the more interesting Inhumans.

 

[dana martin]

to be extremely honest, the first photos are starting to show up online, the cast is set, and i am ok with the choices, but i have less desire to see this now,

this is going to be a holy hell rant, so here goes, Marvel Studios and Marvel TV connected; but not with all the money that Disney is throwing around for these properties would have expected more follow up, no i dont expect the "A" lister showing up on S.H.I.E.L.D. and don't see the Netflix gang making the jump to the film franchises, but hell an honorable mention wouldn't kill them. Come on Fisk (Kingpin = at least a Spiderman mention). And wile they are at it Loeb & Feige need to get on the same page or at least a little closer, if the TV landscape can be viewed as the expanded MCU then treat it as such.

Disney needs to treat it as such as well, release the damn series stateside, AOS s3, and AC S2, and the missing Netflix series, what does the overseas market offer in the way of blu ray releases that the us consumer doesnt? honestly those programs are the only thing worth watching on ABC anymore.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

It will be a massive missed opportunity if they don't do a Spider-Man movie with D'Onofrio. It made sense why they couldn't do it before, when Fox had the rights to Kingpin as part of the Daredevil stable of characters and Sony had the rights to Spider-Man. But now that Marvel has the rights back for the Daredevil characters and they're working collaboratively with Sony on Spider-Man, there's no reason not to do it. They don't even need to get into the backstory with what happened on the Netflix shows, as long as they don't contradict it.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think, unfortunately, that when they reorganized the Marvel corporate structure a couple years ago, Kevin Feige (of the films) changed to reporting directly to Disney studio head Robert Iger, but the TV shows go through the Marvel comics hierchy headed by the guy Feige didn't get along with. So I think the chances of real crossovers and tie-ins between the shows and movies has gone down, not up, which is a shame.

 

[Sam Favate]

First cast photo:

EW article: http://ew.com/tv/2017/05/04/marvel-inhumans-photo-abc/

 

[Nigel P]

I hope they look better in motion.

 

[Nigel P]

Teaser

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The above teaser is also currently attached to Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 - I saw it before my screening last night.

 

[Sam Favate]

The show is going to air Fridays at 9 pm.

Keep in mind when NBC wanted to kill Star Trek, it put its third season on Fridays at 10 pm.

http://mcuexchange.com/inhumans-air-friday-nights-no-s-h-e-l-d-fall/

This passage was disturbing:

To debut a new show on Fridays is not a good look. Some on the internet are connecting Inhumans at this point with a recent rumor about a network show so terrible the network wanted to sell it to anyone for “pennies on the dollar.”

New details about the show:
http://ew.com/tv/2017/05/16/inhumans-logline-abc/

“Marvel’s Inhumans explores the never-before-told epic adventure of the royal family including Black Bolt, the enigmatic, commanding King of the Inhumans, with a voice so powerful that the slightest whisper can destroy a city. After the Royal Family of Inhumans is splintered by a military coup, they barely escape to Hawaii where their surprising interactions with the lush world and humanity around them may prove to not only save them, but Earth itself.”

 

[Greg_S_H]

The Inhumans has become something of a wrecking ball at Marvel. The print side put a lot of eggs in that basket, but they could never figure out how to get the audience to go along (they are still trying, with a Black Bolt solo book coming that no one can seriously believe will be a hit). The movie got downgraded to this series, and it's hard to see how this has anything in common with the Inhumans as established on Agents of SHIELD. From people with dormant alien DNA to a royal family? It just doesn't seem like it can work (and I'm aware the royal family came first in print).

It's a common belief that the Inhumans were being positioned as Marvel's controllable answer to the X-Men, controlled by Fox. Sorry, but you just can't force this into an interesting property. Also sorry that for me, personally, there are several Jack Kirby concepts that are just not interesting to me. The Inhumans and the New Gods are similar in that regard. For me, anyway.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think it's television spinoff has to do with the poor working relationship between Kevin Feige (producer of the Marvel movies) and Ike Perlmutter, who is the CEO of Marvel and now controls the print and television divisions. Initially, Feige reported to Perlmutter (who at the time also controlled the film division), and the two did not get along. It was believed that Inhumans being added to the film schedule was done at Perlmutter's behest; it wasn't really a film that Feige wanted, which is probably why it was way at the end of the slate. At a certain point after Disney bought Marvel, Disney was so thrilled with how the movies were coming out (and the money they were making) that they agreed to make Feige a direct report to Alan Horn, who's the chairman of the Disney studios. With Feige no longer having to report to Perlmutter, the Inhumans disappeared off the film slate. But with Perlmutter still controlling Marvel's TV output, that's where it was able to land.

(I think this is also why there are now less crossovers on SHIELD to the film world than their used to be; with Feige and Perlmutter now running separate operations, it either became more difficult to do or there was less of a desire to do so.)

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

My biggest skepticism with this show is that you're pairing one of the least successful storylines from the episodes of "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." I watched (the Inhumans) with the least successful showrunner of the Marvel/Netflix series (Scott Buck).

Maybe it'll surprise me, but those aren't great ingredients to be starting from.