Attack of the Clones - IMAX

  • Thread starter Thread starter Der Alta
  • 28 comments
  • 876 views
Der Alta

Der Alta

Official GTP Bouncer
Staff Emeritus
Messages
9,209
Messages
DerAlta
Yesterday, Sunday the 3rd, my wife and I went to see Star Wars Episode 2, in the IMAX theatre.

Good things and bad things.

First, the screen and the sound were amazing. Scenes with the Senator's ship coming in and landing, had the bass to shake you in your seat. The sound enhancements were worth the $11 bucks to get in and see it.

The bad point was that the lens was a hair bit out of focus, and that bothered me. I originally saw the movie on a digital projector, and it was fantastic. This time around, the movie didn't look as crisp.

All things considered, it was worth the price of admission, and the popcorn and soda while there.

If you have the chance to get in and see it, don't miss it.

AO
 
Originally posted by Der Alta
Yesterday, Sunday the 3rd, my wife and I went to see Star Wars Episode 2, in the IMAX theatre.

Good things and bad things.

First, the screen and the sound were amazing. Scenes with the Senator's ship coming in and landing, had the bass to shake you in your seat. The sound enhancements were worth the $11 bucks to get in and see it.

The bad point was that the lens was a hair bit out of focus, and that bothered me. I originally saw the movie on a digital projector, and it was fantastic. This time around, the movie didn't look as crisp.

All things considered, it was worth the price of admission, and the popcorn and soda while there.

If you have the chance to get in and see it, don't miss it.

AO
Click to expand...

Agreed - out of focus movies are very irritating. However, the difference between film or digital doesn't make the difference. It's how the lense is focused, and they both have similar lense systems. Digital or film is only refering to the way the movie is stored and read - they both have to be focused.

In addition to that, the colors are rarely as bold and crisp as they are on a tube. This goes for just about any projection system, including rear projection TVs. Personally, my most enjoyable viewing has been on enourmous tube televisions. The image quality is far more important to me than the size of the picture. The Sony Wega in its 36" form is probably what I'll be picking up next time I move.
 
I wonder if the lack of focus was due to transferring to a much larger print.

Even so, I wish there were an IMAX theater near me. I think the closest one is in Rhode Island.
 
Hm...well, OK! I still don't know if I'd want to drive 2-3 hours (I live in southern Maine) to see Episode II again. I liked it OK - just not enough to go out of my way.
 
Heh, I'll definitely buy the DVD.

I actually never saw it in the theaters, whats wrong with me? I must be the only person in America.
 
Yeah, probably.

See, that's the kinda movie that should be seen in the theater. It's a special effects extravaganza; no small screen can do it justice. Especially since the movie has little else on which to go - though I must admit I enjoyed staring at Natalie for two hours on a giant screen. Just ignore her "acting". :)
 
You want big screen? Just move closer to the TV...;)

So Cobraboy, why'd they close the IMAX down?
 
Originally posted by Pako


So Cobraboy, why'd they close the IMAX down?
Click to expand...

Money issues, paying ****loads of money to see something not all that wothwhile turned people away from it so they closed it...
 
Originally posted by Klostrophobic
Heh, I'll definitely buy the DVD.

I actually never saw it in the theaters, whats wrong with me? I must be the only person in America.
Click to expand...

I did'nt see it in theaters either Klostrophobic. I did however see Episode I in theaters.
 
I think that the problem with both Episode I and II is that the hype is so unbelievable, and there are so many drones going on and on about what a great movie it is until they see it, and are inevitably disappointed, and then come away saying that it's sh** and that only Episodes IV, V and VI are any good. It's all too predictable.

I thought AOTC was pretty poor actually. The effects are excellent, and the beginning is good. I also really liked the bit where Obi Wan went to the lost world and saw the clone army. However, I felt that there was far too much time devoted to moving the plot further on, and not enough to making sure that there was a decent plot. All the love scenes between Anakin and Amidala were rubbish - Anakin's a poor actor, and Portman is much better than this part demands.

I'll be picking up the DVD, and will probably come around to this movie in about 12 months, rather like I did with Episode I, which I quite like now!
 
I'm amazed. Klos you've got an incredible theatre less than 5 minutes from your house, (digital projector as well) and you didn't fork up the cash to see the flick?

Risingson77: There is an IMAX at the New england Aquarium in Boston. I'd say you wouldn't miss much if you didn't make the drive. It's playing there through the end of January.

Giles: I too was a bit disappointed in this film, but more so in Episode 1. While #1 was laying a foundation for a great set of films, it spent too much time doing that. And the plot reeked of bad foreshadowing. Hayden Christianson was likely one of the worst actors they could have picked. I think I could have done a better job than he did. If the intenet was to have him play a whiney teen, then he was dead on. If he was supposed to play an emotionally torn young man, with incredible power, not even close. Portman on the other hand, is very good. Not her best work, but she made it worthwhile to watch.

And yes, I'll pick up the DVD when it comes out at the end of this month.

On the topic of episode 3, it is the one that ties everything together. And Christiansen is no Mark Hamill. That I fear will ruin a great movie.

AO
 
Mark Hamill was something of a whiner too! "Awww, I was supposed to be going to Toshi's to pick up some power converters" Waah waah waah!
 
Mark Hammil was a pretty terrible actor in his own right (Think to the scene where he tells Leia she is his sister), but at least the director recognized that early and kept him in check. Hayden's bad actinng is going to undo all the goodwill that talented actors from Canada have done over the past 20 years, and We (US) will go back to looking at them all as the 51st state. :p
I don't really think that this film is IMAX worthy, but it was definitely better than the movie that Jar Jar, and baby Vader ruined.
I'll buy the DVD eventually, but it's not the first on my list of things to get.
IMAX is a great medium, I just think that movies not shot specifically with an IMAX camera don't look as good as they should. Lucas used digital film, but the resolution is still below the footprint of an IMAX camera. I doubt it is still around, but Fantasia 2000 was drawn into the IMAX format, and that is a great example of how it should be done. Otherwise, I'll stick to the nature films. :)
 
Originally posted by Der Alta
Portman on the other hand, is very good. Not her best work, but she made it worthwhile to watch.
Click to expand...
You're kidding, right? Both you and Giles said this, and I can't believe we're watching the same pair of movies.

Natalie Portman looks and sounds like she's reading her script from a TelePrompter on Haydn's forehead, because she forgot to study her lines. In the scene where she finally confesses her love, and they are about to be killed, she might as well be sitting in her gynecologist's waiting room discussing her upcoming exam. I wouldn't cast her as Dorothy in a summer-stock production of The Wiz.

Haydn did an OK job to me; after all, how much difference is there between a "whiny teen" and an angst-ridden young man? Not much. His delivery was a little like Kramer's "These pretzels are making me thirsty" line, but at least he summoned up a little fire and passion.

Acting has never been a strong point of the Star Wars movies; but usually the story was good enough to carry it. Now the story is too diffuse, and the SFX aren't enough to carry that. The series in general is losing steam; actually, I only really liked the first two; Return of The Jedi could have been great but for Lucas's inability to resist putting the stupid Ewoks in.
 
Originally posted by neon_duke

Haydn did an OK job to me; after all, how much difference is there between a "whiny teen" and an angst-ridden young man? Not much. His delivery was a little like Kramer's "These pretzels are making me thirsty" line, but at least he summoned up a little fire and passion.
Click to expand...
HAHAHAHAHA "These pretzels are making me thirsty" :lol:
oh man that one was good


Portman in my opinion is a hottie, but she cant act.
Im sure they could have found someone better.
 
If I had only ever seen pictures of her, I might agree. But having heard her open her mouth, I'm afraid all the Viagra in the world wouldn't help me in her case.
 
Originally posted by neon_duke
If I had only ever seen pictures of her, I might agree. But having heard her open her mouth, I'm afraid all the Viagra in the world wouldn't help me in her case.
Click to expand...

you can always shut her up by sticking something in her mouth .....nevermind :lol:

she is rather anooying and whiney, and absolutly no emotion comes from her performances. She always just seems calm, bored almost. I hope shes better in Episode 3
 
Along these lines...

20020510l.gif


:D
 
Is there anything that Penny Arcade doesn't talk about?
:lol:
 
To bring this back on topic, I made a return trip to the IMAX this past weekend, and saw the show again. family came in from out of town, and wanted to see it.

In this viewing, I realized that almost a 1/2 hour had been chopped from the movie.

I will state now for the record, Go see this movie for the big screen and the Sound effects. Do not go see it for the movie itself.

AO
 

Latest Posts

Back