|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Die Hard 5
|
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 02-17-2013 05:52 PM
quote:
(Why in the world is it flat?!)
I guess because of the Digital IMAX release, combined with the lack of sophistication to create a version for both aspect ratios.
The movie is what you can expect from a Die Hard sequel. Almost non-stop over-the-top action (impossible car chases, explosions, helicopters, more explosions, more helicopters, etc.), some more or less funny references to the past ones and a simple story. Good enough for popcorn...
I personally liked this one a bit more than the last one, probably because it didn't have that much of that hacker-bullshit in it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connor Wilson
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 190
From: Sterling, VA, USA
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 02-17-2013 08:29 PM
CINEMA: AMC Tyson's Corner 16, McLean, VA
AUDITORIUM: 11
PRESENTATION: ETX, Dolby Atmos
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: A hell load of them. More on that below.
RATING: 1 (out of 10)
What happened? The ETX auditorium was okay back in 2011. The IMAX auditorium was crappy in early 2012, and got much better in late 2012. Now just recently, and I think in coincidence with the installation of Dolby Atmos in the auditorium, the ETX auditorium is crappy. Just because you installed the latest in sound technology doesn't make it sound better. It can still sound like poop without the correct tuning. This is the only Atmos auditorium in the D.C. area, and it sucks.
Now I haven't seen The Hobbit in Atmos, but let me tell you the Atmos trailer before Die Hard was cool. And it's followed by the movie, and the first thing I hear is the Fox fanfare seconds early before the logo began. This was fixed right away.
The movie was so shrill and loud that people were covering their ears. As for my first Atmos flick, I was supposed to hear sounds coming at me from all over the room, but instead I thought I was hearing mono. This was bar none, the worst presentation of a movie I've ever seen. Picture was fine, albeit grainy due to the use of film stock and 2K resolution. If there was one thing wrong with the picture, was that I was sitting to close to the screen, and the screen itself has this weird vertical line (that was always there in this auditorium) that possibly has to do with the screen itself, and not the projectors.
And as for the film being flat, what's wrong about that? Aliens was the only film in the Alien franchise to be in flat, as opposed to scope, and it was a very successful film, and that was pre-IMAX. Yes, it was possible the reason it was shot in flat was for fixed flat screens in premium auditoriums like ETX, RPX, XD, and IMAX. One premium auditorium I can think of with a fixed scope screen is Bow-Tie's BTX in Reston Town Center. That screen ran flat films before, and the only film I saw there was Skyfall, which was in scope, so I don't know how Bow-Tie compensates for flat films on their BTX screen.
Until they do a thorough EQ on the ETX screen, I won't be coming back to AMC Tyson's Corner 16.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 02-17-2013 08:30 PM
quote: Brad Miller
IMAX needs to go away. They are nothing special anymore and if that theory is correct, they are now fucking up movies by trying to get people to shoot flat. They play the same DCPs and the whole thing is a scam anyway. Just like how THX got to be in the end, they'll put their name on anything for a buck.
Off course, it might still be a "creative decision", although I highly doubt that.
I've noticed this on some other recent releases too. For example: The Avengers, Wrath of the Titans, MIB 3, Journey 2: The Mysterious Island. Those are all movies that you would've expected to be in scope and not in flat (or an aspect ratio close to flat). Just a handful of high profile releases were released in multiple aspect ratios (e.g. Prometheus and The Hobbit).
Regarding their DCPs; It doesn't really matter in most cases, but they do not use the same DCPs, at least not always. That's quite easy to prove: The Dark Knight Rises for example, switches between aspect ratios (scope for the 35mm footage and "IMAX flat/full screen" for the IMAX footage). It doesn't do that in the normal scope version, but it does for D-IMAX.
I also suspect they mess around with the sound, since their setup is somewhat different from your average 5.1 or 7.1 setup. And, I've also read somewhere that they "optimize" their 3D, so the picture contains more negative parallax (read: in your face effects). I don't know if that's somehow accomplished during playback, in the DCP or if that's just marketing BS although.
Still, I totally agree with you. IMAX has largely sold out, a lot like THX did and if studios start dictating aspect ratios because of D-IMAX, that's a bad thing. I want scope for my action movies please.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1360
From: Washington, District of Columbia
Registered: Jun 2008
|
posted 02-17-2013 09:38 PM
quote: Conor Wilson
CINEMA: AMC Tyson's Corner 16, McLean, VA
AUDITORIUM: 11
PRESENTATION: ETX, Dolby Atmos
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: A hell load of them. More on that below.
RATING: 1 (out of 10)
What happened? The ETX auditorium was okay back in 2011. The IMAX auditorium was crappy in early 2012, and got much better in late 2012. Now just recently, and I think in coincidence with the installation of Dolby Atmos in the auditorium, the ETX auditorium is crappy. Just because you installed the latest in sound technology doesn't make it sound better. It can still sound like poop without the correct tuning. This is the only Atmos auditorium in the D.C. area, and it sucks.
Now I haven't seen The Hobbit in Atmos, but let me tell you the Atmos trailer before Die Hard was cool. And it's followed by the movie, and the first thing I hear is the Fox fanfare seconds early before the logo began. This was fixed right away.
The movie was so shrill and loud that people were covering their ears. As for my first Atmos flick, I was supposed to hear sounds coming at me from all over the room, but instead I thought I was hearing mono. This was bar none, the worst presentation of a movie I've ever seen. Picture was fine, albeit grainy due to the use of film stock and 2K resolution. If there was one thing wrong with the picture, was that I was sitting to close to the screen, and the screen itself has this weird vertical line (that was always there in this auditorium) that possibly has to do with the screen itself, and not the projectors.
And as for the film being flat, what's wrong about that? Aliens was the only film in the Alien franchise to be in flat, as opposed to scope, and it was a very successful film, and that was pre-IMAX. Yes, it was possible the reason it was shot in flat was for fixed flat screens in premium auditoriums like ETX, RPX, XD, and IMAX. One premium auditorium I can think of with a fixed scope screen is Bow-Tie's BTX in Reston Town Center. That screen ran flat films before, and the only film I saw there was Skyfall, which was in scope, so I don't know how Bow-Tie compensates for flat films on their BTX screen.
Until they do a thorough EQ on the ETX screen, I won't be coming back to AMC Tyson's Corner 16.
well another person in this forum, has stated that ETX screens are already TOO loud to begin with - and I agree - Not only was 'The Hobbit' so loud, that it masked any attempt to pinpoint actually sound placement of sounds - only a few points during the film achieved this, notably the quiet scene during the 'Riddles in the Dark' sequence where the disembodied voice of Gollum is emanating/echoing in a effective soundfield.
but yes, getting back to 'Good Day to Die Hard' - it was loud, but NO WHERE as migrane-inducing as 'The Expendables' at Tysons on one of their smaller screens - now THAT was painful. And yes, I agree, did this movie sound any better in Atmos - "no" - it was just a mush of assaultive sound and little to no effective us of height or overhead sound.
big sound does NOT have to be pushed up to '11' to think it's state of the art - dial it down AMC.
in regards to Aliens - I remember reading that James Cameron wanted the film to have a 'guerrilla' like filmmaking look, thus negating the wide scope framing.
speaking of Bow Tie Reston - their BTX screen is in the process of getting made over to Atmos - but probably not til the Fall.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-18-2013 08:28 PM
I haven't seen A Good Day to Die Hard, but I had a nagging feeling it would suck even before I found out they were releasing it in flat format. There just doesn't seem to be any point to it. Honestly, the first Die Hard movie is really the only good one in the bunch. Even though I enjoyed that movie the original still has very noticeable flaws.
A Good Day to Die Hard currently has a miserable 16% score at Rotten Tomatoes. It doesn't fare much better at Metacritic (a 28% score). I'm not going to waste first run admission prices on this one; if I see it anytime soon it will be on a rental Blu-ray disc or perhaps whenever it arrives on pay TV (provided I still have pay TV by then).
quote: Brad Miller
IMAX needs to go away. They are nothing special anymore and if that theory is correct, they are now fucking up movies by trying to get people to shoot flat. They play the same DCPs and the whole thing is a scam anyway. Just like how THX got to be in the end, they'll put their name on anything for a buck.
I agree. The IMAX name only meant something when it involved 15-perf 70mm film presentations. With digital IMAX isn't anything special. Any movie theater operator could install his own 2 projector setup and probably even do a better job than what IMAX can deliver -like dual 4K projection instead of mere 2K and install a better sound system.
The proverbial bloom will come off the rose here in a couple or so years. Theater chains, driven by need to boost profit margins, will eventually cut IMAX out of the equation -just like they did with THX during the stadium seating building boom back in the 1990s. From the mid 1990s to the middle of last decade THX installations dropped off to nearly nothing and many chains discontinued certification on hundreds of existing theater screens. The same thing is going to happen to IMAX Digital unless the company can come up with a presentation method no one else can copy. That's next to impossible to do with "digital."
quote: Connor Wilson
Now I haven't seen The Hobbit in Atmos, but let me tell you the Atmos trailer before Die Hard was cool.
Connor, I'm confused. You say the Dolby Atmos trailer that played before A Good Day to Die Hard sounded great. But the movie itself was very loud, shrill, sounded like mono, etc. If the Dolby Atmos snipe sounded great and then the movie sounded like crap wouldn't that be a fault of the movie's mix itself rather than something to do with the theater?
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I've noticed this on some other recent releases too. For example: The Avengers, Wrath of the Titans, MIB 3, Journey 2: The Mysterious Island. Those are all movies that you would've expected to be in scope and not in flat (or an aspect ratio close to flat).
Unfortunately, I think this is probably the start of a very bad trend, one that could ultimately cause movie companies to stop making anything in 'scope format. I posted something similar about this in a thread on Facebook started by Michael Coate.
First of all, how many premium priced big screen theaters have common width screens? I think all the Lie-MAX screens are common width. What about those XD, ETX, etc. concepts copying the Lie-MAX concept? How many of them are common width? Those screens are generating greater profit margins than the standard theater screens, and a lot of standard sized stadium seated theaters also have common width screens. The bean counters are certainly going to notice this and want their big budget movies looking as big as possible on those premium priced screens. Driving Miss Daisy is bigger than Die Hard on a common width screen.
Then we have to look at the technical aspects of how 'scope is treated in digital cinema: IT SUCKS ASS. Flat is a hell of a lot bigger than 'scope in terms of pixel count. In 2K format, a flat image has 412,944 more pixels than a 'scope image (2,157,840 versus 1,744,896 -that's going by 1998x1080 versus 2048x852). AFAIK the current d-cinema spec doesn't allow for an anamorphic lens treatment of 'scope to at least use all 1080 vertical pixels on the DLP chips.
With movies shifting over en masse to being shot on video 'scope is being treated pretty much the same damned way. They just crop into the image to extract a 'scope frame -kinda like what happened with Skyfall. Those who paid extra to see it in Lie-MAX got to see a "full height" 1.77:1 frame.
And then there's the situation with home video. Lots of people still don't like black bars on their movies. Blu-ray has been generally very good at preserving original aspect ratio on most movies. How is OAR getting protected in other delivery methods (streaming services, pay per view, premium cable, etc.)?
The only advantage I can see with 'scope in the d-cinema and home HD realms is cost savings on bandwidth, shorter render times, etc. due to 'scope having over 400,000 fewer pixels than the flat format. Not exactly a great selling point for 'scope.
With film pretty much on its death bed and video set to take over every aspect of movie production I think anamorphic lenses and the 2.39:1 'scope frame could end up as casualties. If we want movies to look more like TV, and shooting on video is a good way to do it, then that's how it's going to be. They might as well throw out all that film look post production filter nonsense and just let the video cameras show off all their native RGB intensity. That will make the transition complete.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic