Attack of the Really Big Clones 278
An anonymous reader writes "CNN reports that Attack of the Clones is coming to an IMAX theatre near you. 50 IMAX commercial venues, and 20-30 science museum sites will begin showing the film on November 1. The IMAX version is expected to add another $20M to the films current $300M take."
Maximize the Crap! (Score:4, Troll)
Totally. (Score:2, Funny)
That said, I'm still going to see Episode 3
I mean, come on. It's STAR WARS, people!
Re:Totally. (Score:2)
I think I missed something in MBFGW. I saw that on a plane flight and thought it was the most mind-numbingly dull and tedious movie so devoid of humor and anything related to funny I thought my brain was going to erupt from my ears with such violence the plane would experience turbulence.
But I agree it was better than AotC, short of the combat scenes.
Re:Totally. (Score:2)
Maybe I just got lucky.
Re:Totally. (Score:2)
Not to get too far off topic, but the star of MBDGW is also a Canadian - Nia Vardalos [imdb.com]. It's also worth noting that IMAX is a Canadian invention...
Re:Maximize the Crap! (Score:2)
Strangely you got the Star Wars movie title correct, including the colon, yet misnamed My Big Fat Greek Wedding [imdb.com] both times.
Re:Maximize the Crap! (Score:2)
Re:Maximize the Crap! (Score:2)
Lucas: $1,782,786,982...$1,782,786,983... that's it? Damn! Still not enough money. How can I possibly take over the world with this paltry sum.
......
Speilberg: Poight!
Lucas: How can I raise the rest? My new movie wont be released for another year.
Speilberg: Say Brain, why don't you re-release Episode II and replace all the guns with cell-phones! Poight!
Lucas: What do you take me for, an idiot? Only a moron would do that.....Hmmm... re-release... into an even Bigger Hollywood Production. Say Pinky, are you thinking what I'm thinking?
Speilburg: Sure Brain, but where are we going to find velcro and vasleine at this time of the night?
Lucas:
Lucas: Your ignorance is only exceeded by your idiocy.You fool, now is the time for Episode II part II The Really Really Big Edition!
Windex! (Score:2)
Great... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great... (Score:3, Insightful)
He was hardly in the episode that is true but one must take notice of the part he played. From the lip of Jar Jar spoke the words that handed over the republic to the emperor.
Re:Great... (Score:2)
Re:Great... (Score:2)
Figures (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Figures (Score:2)
Re:Figures (Score:2)
The Lion King... (Score:2, Informative)
A Dream Come True (Score:3, Funny)
And watch Yoda bounce and skitter across the heads of the audience down in front.
Some of the more grandiose, expansive scenes will come out nicely though. These are what IMAX does best. The droid factory, the clone factory, and the city chase will be especially striking.
Re:A Dream Come True (Score:2)
Now when I sleep through this part, I can actually feel like I'm sleeping in a gentle grassland. Perhaps I'll bring a fan so I can feel the wind on my face. I'll just need to bring someone to wake me up for the good parts, incase the gentle meadow were to put me too deeply asleep.
jeez... (Score:5, Interesting)
2002-09-10 16:46:30 Attack of the really big Clones (articles,movies) (rejected)
Tasty Pixels! (Score:2, Informative)
Seriously, though, "Beauty and the beast" was hard to watch in IMAX, because you could see every little artist flaw, and the 1990-era CGI looked really terrible. And 'clones' was shot in 1920x1080, that should make the pixels approxamately, what, one foot square each? Yikes.
International version? (Score:2)
Who do I have to beat up with a light saber to get it to Europe (Denmark)?
Re:International version? (Score:3, Funny)
Don't worry. I'm sure the DivX version will be on the P2P networks in a matter of hours after the first show.
Re:International version? (Score:2)
Whaddaya mean _after_ the first show?
Pixels! (Score:2)
Re:Pixels! (Score:4, Insightful)
the upside was that you could actually see yoda moving around and he wasnt a blur like the first time i saw the movie
seeing it in digital did not make it a better movie, but seeing it on an IMAX, if properally formatted might be really nice for the battle scenes.
Pretty Skimpy on the Details (Score:2)
The real question: The CNN story doesn't list cities where it'll be playing. Anybody find any stories elsewhere that list venues?
Re:Pretty Skimpy on the Details (Score:2)
I fail to see the point (Score:2)
didn't need it bigger (Score:3, Funny)
I have a feeling it'd have the opposite effect.
Now maybe if they just took the last 20 minutes of the movie and put it on replay for an hour and half they'd be on to something.
That's no moon, (Score:5, Funny)
Not to be a troll... (Score:3, Insightful)
Now the original starwars and empire, that would be cool (am I getting old?).
Is anyone else going to see episode 3 only because we know anikin is gonna get his ass kicked by obi-wan?
Alright, mod away, I got karma to burn.
Re:Not to be a troll... (Score:2, Funny)
Well, Nataly Portman wold have somthing to do too.
Offtopic - SourceForge (Score:2, Insightful)
As we've seen, there are lots of SourceForge ads on Slashdot (both part of OSDN, I know). There are a few different kinds, but the two I see most often are the ones based off of Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. Now, I dunno/don't care about the LOTR ones but I was curious - since we all know how hard Lucas___ can come down on copyright infringement, how is it that SourceForge is able to advertise using clearly Star Wars related ads? Or are they different enough from Star Wars to avoid it?
Heh (Score:3, Interesting)
http://us.imdb.com/Charts/usatopmovies
Oh, that Lucas. Anything to say "Episode II: Highest grossing movie of 2002!!!"
Spider-Man: $403,706,375
Episode II: $301,131,530
Re:Heh (Score:2, Informative)
-
$601 Titanic 1997
-
$461 Star Wars 1977
-
$435 E.T. 1982
-
$431 Star Wars: The Phantom Menace 1999
-
$404 Spider-Man 2002
-
$357 Jurassic Park 1993
-
$330 Forrest Gump 1994
-
$318 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 2001
-
$313 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring 2001
-
$313 The Lion King 1994
-
$309 Return of the Jedi 1983
-
$306 Independence Day 1996
-
$301 Star Wars: Attack of the Clones 2002
-
$293 The Sixth Sense 1999
-
$290 The Empire Strikes Back 1980
Looks like "the empire" and "jedi" aren't there either...Re:Heh (Score:2)
Take, off of the list that shows them at 11 and 15, all of the movies that were made after them. Then, check and see where they are.
Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
The upshot is, there is no perfect relative measure of the material success of a movie. Personally, I don't give a rat's ass how much money a movie makes, because I'm not the one getting the money. Mostly what I care about is whether a movie is entertaining or not. (And, depending on the movie, its other cinematic virtues.) It annoys me more and more that there's far more focus on how much money a movie makes than there is on a movie's content, values, societal impact, etc. (With rare exceptions, like "The Matrix," but even in cases like that, the movie's financial success is what leads to widespread analysis of its content. Perhaps they're inextricable, but why be so interested in how much money "Signs" made this weekend, when a far more useful topic would be its treatment of religious credulity?)
i wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
at the last LinuxWorld show in San Francisco, i was able to catch bits of a converted Apollo 13 to IMAX format.
holy crap, the launch scene was absolutely incredible and shots from the moon actually brought a tear to my eye.
with this technology, any movie can be converted to IMAX format. here's a blurb from RedHat:
"IMAX's new patent-pending technology, IMAX® DMRTM (Digital Re-mastering), uses the processing power of Dell PowerEdge servers to re-purpose individual frames of 35mm film into IMAX films are projected on screens eight-stories high and 120-feet wide with high caliber sound and image quality. Apollo 13 is the first theatrical live-action film to be digitally re-mastered for The IMAX Experience.
The IMAX DMR technology resides at IMAX's Toronto data center which processes several hundred gigabytes of data daily and is one of the largest rendering farms in Canada. IMAX uses dozens of Dell PowerEdge 2550 servers running Red Hat Linux for its DMR process, as well as an additional cluster of Dell PowerEdge 2550 servers for testing. IMAX chose Dell PowerEdge servers running Red Hat Linux for its IMAX DMR process because of the easy-to-use industry-standard platform, outstanding price and performance, and superior Dell support."
Re:i wonder... (Score:2)
~GoRK
Then on to the good stuff (Score:2)
Also, Pinocchio, the one Disney cartoon masterpiece.
Then they can stop. Human civilization will have been completed.
Re:i wonder... (Score:3, Insightful)
I could be wrong but I believe that for a regular film if you have two characters talking to each other you could frame them so that one is at the left edge of the screen and the other is at the right edge. If you do this for IMAX (with it's larger screen) however the audience will actually have to turn their head back and forth to look at the two characters. To get around this problem an IMAX director zooms out a little so that the characters are closer together. This means that you can now see the background at the left and right edges of the screen.
So the problem with transferring a regular film to IMAX is that you have to move your head a lot while watching the film because there was no extra bits of background footage to add onto the left and right of the screen.
Re:i wonder... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:i wonder... (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? Just because IMAX uses Red Hat Linux on the servers that do the processing doesn't make it "newly developed technology by RedHat". Are you on crack, son?
Re:i wonder... (Score:2)
Ahem... (Score:2)
(Roll cube and wave my own hand over it.)
Blue! What a surprise!
It's going to suck! iMax isn't made for this (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah the idea of Star Wars on iMax is a good idea... EXCEPT the movie wasn't filmed for iMax. iMax was made to give you the feeling of being pulled into the action with it's peripheral vision filling screensize. Putting this movie on it will give you headaches and seizures. all those huge 7-story tall people on both sides of the screen making you move your head more than a tennis match
Not to mention the frame rate of iMax causes an obvious flicker when projected so large. And that this movie was filmed digitally with resolution that = crap to many movie goers now... If you couldn't tell then, I'll bet you can tell on iMax!
It will look like another iMax movie that was screwed up by camera shots that were all wrong for such a big screen
See What I hate about iMax [slashdot.org] - It isn't really iMax I hate, just what some people do to it.Re:It's going to suck! iMax isn't made for this (Score:2)
You know what I hate? When somebody consistently screws up a trademark that's easy to get right. It's IMAX, all caps. Not "iMax," which looks like you were typing "iMac" and you fat-fingered it.
Re:It's going to suck! iMax isn't made for this (Score:2)
No. See, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I thought you were making a consistent but incorrect error. As it turns out, you're just a fucking moron.
iMax is perfectly fine to say in a forum such as this
No, it's not. English is case-sensitive. When you say "IMAX," I know what you're talking about. When you say "iMax," I respond with "No such file or directory." Once I get what you're talking about, I have to do a little mental translation between what you wrote and what you actually meant. I have to correct you, in my head, because you did it wrong.
There's no situation in which consistently replacing "IMAX" with "iMax" is okay. Unless you were trying to be funny. Were you trying to be funny?
It isn't someone being stupid, these misspelling changes in capitolizations - use of obscure plural forms are intentional!
Was this sentence also intentional? I don't know where to even begin telling you what's wrong here. What you wrote just barely parses.
This is not an English class
That's too bad. If it were, you clearly would not be here.
there is one plus (Score:2)
Re:It's going to suck! iMax isn't made for this (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:3, Funny)
Digital Clones Facts & Figures (Score:5, Interesting)
The resolution of 'Clones' was in the neighborhood of 2000x1000 (2.2 million pixels sony 24p) [starwars.com]
We can assume it will be pan and scan (as all IMAX-conversions so far have been)--IMAX is 4:3.
Therefore, the vertical resolution will be about 1000 pixels per 15.6m, or 1.56 CM each. That's a pretty huge pixel. Ow.
Re:Digital Clones Facts & Figures (Score:2)
But anyway, you're assuming that the 2000x1000 is the highest resolution version of the film available. It's probably not. There is probably a "master" version that is a higher resolution. Although aparrantly they made the film version from the digital version in order that the digital version would look better than the film one.
Re:Digital Clones Facts & Figures (Score:2)
Re:Digital Clones Facts & Figures (Score:2)
Re:Digital Clones Facts & Figures (Score:2, Informative)
He was talking length, you were talking area.
Your numbers agree.
Question (Score:3, Funny)
Will it still suck?
Hope it works better than Matrix. (Score:2)
Also, I'm assuming that the IMAX media won't be showing it in digital format, so I hope that the larger size doesn't just enhance the fact that it wasn't made for the format. The movie looked good in the normal theatre, but considering the picture quality I don't expect it to look better when it's bigger.
Will it be DLP too? (Score:2)
Does that mean... (Score:2)
If you send a droid to go assassinate someone, you don't then program the droid to come right back to you when it's done! You make it blow itself up!
Along those lines, why use worms when you can use a thermal detonnator? She dies, Jedi dies, everybody within a few kilometers dies... problem solved!
Not that you'd have to do that if you had just nuked the landing platform to begin with...
The Jedi lost you in the bar. You're a shape-shifter. You can then waltz out without anybody being the wiser. So why do you try to attack one of them?
Jedi comes after you and tries to kill you before you're able to leave the planet. You have two guns, but he deflects the shots. Why not shoot both guns at the same time, making him deflect two at once? Better yet, get a freakin' shotgun!
But Obi Wan has the pesky habit of not dying. Why not destroy the damned hyperdrive he left up in orbit? Guaranteed way to keep him from following you! Dur!
Hmmm... Jedi are attacking bad guy base. They all have light sabres. You have guns. Ranged weapons! Do you honestly think that the Jedi are going to have a harder time deflecting your shots if you get close enough to... say... get your head cut off?
Jengo Fett: Bad-ass or dumb-ass? No wonder the clones dropped like flies, look at who they were trying to re-create!
Not that the good guys are much better. Let's fall in love with the freaky stalker/homicidal maniac character! Hell, if that were anything like real life, I might not have... well, let's not go there...
Science museums?? (Score:5, Interesting)
50 IMAX commercial venues, and 20-30 science museum sites will begin showing the film on November 1.
Okay, enough jokes about pixelation on the IMAX screen. Time for something serious. Am I the only one here who is getting a bit annoyed by LucasFilm's pentration into the museum market? A few years ago Lucas managed to con museums into showing a bunch of Star Wars stuff under the pretense that it was a modern day mythology and should be deserving of serious study. Now he's got science museums showing his movies? Look, regardless of whether you thought AOTC was a good movie or not, can anyone give me a good reason why it should be shown in a science museum? That's supposed to be a place for learning facts about the world around you. Not for watching a movie about explosions a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.
Are the museums going to get a cut of the profits for showing the film there? Is that why they're doing this? Or is it a gimmick to increase their attendance? Isn't it enough that I can't get a burger without seeing Anakin's smug face starting back at me? Do they have to invade museums too? Will I ever stop asking questions? :)
Seriously, the "science museum" part bugged me a lot more than the IMAX part.
GMD
Re:Science museums?? (Score:2)
Many IMAX screens are actually in science museums. I assume the museums will get a cut of the ticket sales... that can only be a Good Thing(TM).
Non-commerical environment & IMAX idle time (Score:2)
Most museums have benefactors and patrons that contribute with the idea that they are promoting a non-commercial environment for learning.
Thanks, kawika, for bringing that up. I never really said it in my original post but I was thinking that if I was some rich dude giving money to a museum and then found out they were showing Star Wars films, I'd be mucho pissedo (that's spanish for "very upset").
A number of people have stated something along the lines of "if IMAX is idle, then what's the harm?" I admit I don't live in a city with an IMAX theatre in the museum (although I have been to ones) so I'll have to ask: is the IMAX ever idle? I'm guessing that there's no shortage of documentaries that can be shown in these museums. So I'm guessing some learning-thing got bumped to make way for Lucas. Second, even if the IMAX is idle, I'm still not that comfortable with them showing Star Wars during regular museum hours. After watching a bunch of stuff get blown up onscreen, I imagine that it's pretty hard to find the educational aspects of the museum interesting at all. It kind of spoils the atmosphere of learning and wonder.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I was just surprised that no one was commenting on the silliness of showing science fiction in a science museum. Now, it would be way cool if people left the theatre and walked along a hallway explaining the scientific inaccuracies of Sci-Fi films (noise in space, etc.).
GMD
Re:Non-commerical environment & IMAX idle time (Score:2, Interesting)
You may be on to something about a "Sci-Fi vs Sci-Reality" exhibit. However, you're forgetting that many Science museums are actually "Science And Industry" museums. Both the Chicago Museum of S & I and COSI in Columbus, Ohio will regularly do exhibits about popular culture. Over the years, I've have been to or heard about exhibits covering P. T. Barnum circuses, Cracker Jack trinkets, Commodore 64 computing, Jim Henson "Muppetry," and Lego Mindstorms.
As for contributors and sponsorship, the majority of funding to science museums comes from corporations. There was a recent exhibit at CMSI about computing which had obvious sponsorship by the likes of Sun, Cisco, and IBM; I also frequently see Apple hardware in obvious placement at many multimedia stations.
This particular kind of museum has been commercial for as long as they have existed; it's usually the Natural History type museums that have the more academic culture related to them. Even then, they are not immune; the Chicago Field Museum has an exhibit on chocolate, including a section on candy bar advertising. In this age of Disneyland and Six Flags, these attractions have to resort to flash to compete.
Re:Non-commerical environment & IMAX idle time (Score:2)
Generally they just show the same stuff over and over and over again for months on end. They definitely need more content.
Just because they are showing Star Wars doesn't mean that the other films go away. They may only show Star Wars at night (when the museum itself is closed) and show the standard documentary museum stuff during the day.
Re:Science museums?? (Score:2)
It was a traveling exhibit from the Smithsonian. Museums wanted it because it brought people in. Obviously it's not fine art nor a hard science exhibit. It's basically a pop culture exhibit. Still, it's not like Lucas was out there trying to con people into seeing it. They wanted to see it and lined up all by themselves.
Re:Science museums?? (Score:2)
In San Francisco, though, the local IMAX is operated by Lowe's Cinemas in the Sony Metreon, so it's strictly commercial.
Re:Science museums?? (Score:2, Interesting)
And my local science museum (Boston) shows laser shows set to popular music in the planetarium. I can see TWO good reasons for this type of thing:
1) If they're not showing anything else, it's a great way for the museum to get some extra revenue. I'm sure they need it.
2) It's also a good way to get people interested in what the museum has to offer. Sure a bunch of people are just going to go there to see ATOC on a gigantic screen, but maybe a few of them who would not usually be interested in a museum would realize there are things there to see. That's a bit of a stretch, I tend to think it's just a good way to get supplemental revenue, but 2. could be an added bonus.
Regardless, if the theatre is not currently in use at that time, I see no reason for them not to show it. Not many museums have educational things going on late at night. I assume a movie is not going to pre-empt their regularly scheduled programming.
Re:Science museums?? (Score:3, Insightful)
The Boston Science Museum also shows "Laser Pink Floyd" every saturday night... and aside from the possible connection to chemistry, it has little to do with science.
M@
Ass - Head = Logical conclusion? (Score:2)
Maybe Lucas is employing some kind of "invasion of the science museums" idea with this, but in reality, they're the only place to find an IMAX screen within 300 miles, and science museums (the one in Boston, actually) are the ONLY place I've ever seen the dome-shaped screen in. THAT is an experience, I actually got motion sickness there once, and I'm usually very strong stomached.
Dont' get me wrong, I'm sure they said "Hey! When we convert to IMAX we can flood the museums with our merchandising crap too!" but I would imagine the availibility of screen space is the key to this move.
P.S. Isn't Star Wars a form of modern mythology? Certainly enough people are into it to quialify it somewhat. I'm not sure it should be "pushed" on a museum however...
Re:Science museums?? (Score:3, Interesting)
It wasn't necessarily bad (IMO, the cost of admission ,being above and beyond the normal museum cost, wasn't worth it), but it does give a way for kids to realize that some science fiction is a lot closer to reality than it might seem sometimes.
Of course, with Star Wars, it's much less *science* fiction, as just science *fiction*, so it would be hard pressed to argue that alone, a SW exhibit would be useful. (Would they explain what a parsec really is?) However, save for selected theaters, a good number of IMAX screens are only at science museums, and thus a tying of the movie with an attempt at a science exhibit can do nothing but to help boost attendence at these museums. (Yes, Lucas will get some portion of each pass sold, but there's still some money going back to the museum).
Re:Science museums?? (Score:2)
Normal projection field (Score:5, Interesting)
The only thing that's BIG is the LETDOWN when you realize the a huge border around the movie doesn't get used. They just show the movie in the centre of the IMAX Screen and draw the curtains to make it look bigger.
Bah, watch out for marketing tricks. If it wasn't shot in IMAX or converted to IMAX, it'll be shown in regular size, just on a bigger screen.
I hope someone can confirm or deny that my experience stands with AOTC
- Yo Grark
Canadian Bred, with American Buttering
Re:Normal projection field (Score:2)
Re:Normal projection field (Score:4, Interesting)
the answer was only a click away:
"Clones" thus becomes the second live action re-release to be scheduled for Imax re-formatting since company unveiled a proprietary conversion process in March.
"Imax re-formatting" doesn't sound like it it just being projected on a bigger screen.
Yum (Score:2, Informative)
'Nuff said.
Commercial IMAX offerings (Score:3, Interesting)
But most of all, I worry about whether the current really interesting IMAX fare would be replaced by Hollywood dreck. After all, it sells, right? The day that "To the limit" is replaced by "Gone in 60 seconds" is the day the IMAX stuff will stop meaning much.
Do they think that by showing a poor movie (Score:2)
Fantasia on IMAX (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fantasia on IMAX (Score:2)
Re:Fantasia on IMAX (Score:2, Informative)
Fantasia 2000 had only one bit from the original Fantasia, "The Sorcerer's Apprentice." The rest of the film was IMAX. I also believe that "The Sorceror's Apprentice" was shown in the IMAX theater with a large black border around it as it was in the DVD release.
Incidentally, "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was in 4:3 'standard' ratio since it's from the 30's.
Inconsistent graphics quality in Clones (Score:2)
EG. When that "stamper" in the factory was about to crush the droids on the conveyor belt, it looked like the characters were overlaid on top of a backdrop. (Same cheezy stuff you see on those late-night commercials where they want to make it look like a guy is flying, so they have him stand in front of a bluescreen and replace the blue with a photo of the city skyline.)
The movie had sort of a "cut and paste" feel to it. Some scenes (AKA. Yoda saber fight) were top-notch, but they went up against scenes where everything looked too computer-generated and "fake". In the battle scenes with many characters on the ground, I got the feel that they took scenes from Jurassic Park and replaced the dinosaurs with Star Wars creatures.
Why would I want to see this patchwork zoomed up on an IMAX screen, where the flaws become even more apparent?
Edited? (Score:2)
Really big N.P. nipple shot. (Score:2)
Imax now, not before. (Score:3, Interesting)
But when I went to buy my "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones" ticket, they said that Lucas wasn't allowing any Imax showings, arguing that the film quality was not up to par for that format. I assume they are doing a different film format, but I also can't imagine paying another $9 or $10 to see a movie I've seen before. (I'd gladly have paid the full-price ticket to see it on Imax originally, rather than paying the matinee price for the regular viewing.)
As I think about it, I'm not sure which scenes would benefit especially from Imax. The war scenes in "Pearl Harbor" were cool at that size, and Gladiator was OK at that size.
What the hell??? (Score:2)
Oh, wait, thats yoda... cool!
Re:Get some PRIORITIES! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:5, Funny)
And that will only be 11 days later [amazon.com].
For those who don't live near an Imax theatre, might I suggest this as an alternative buy the DVD [amazon.com], then sit two feet from the TV while you play it wearing headphones. If that isn't realistic enough, then invite a couple of teenage fan boys over to talk during the movie.
Then again, who can really complain about a 40' tall Natalie Portman?
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2, Funny)
I could. What fun is it when the notion of "probing" Portman with your "lightsaber" really involves a wetsuit and a flashlight?
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
However, didn't they have to edit Apollo 13 at the request of Imax and Co.? What parts of Episode 2 would prove "too much"? The scene where Anakin attacks the camp? If they want this process to gain adoption, IFE is going to have to get over some of their qualms about the content of movies.
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
Maddingly though, the closest theater that is scheduled to run it is a good five+ hours away at the Air and Space Museum. Though I certainly wouldn't mind going back, so maybe I'll see if I can get down there. (Apollo 13 is one of my favorite movies, so I would very much like to see it on an Imax screen. And the suggestion someone made of sitting a foot away from the TV is a bad suggestion for a number of reasons. But I'm rambling, so I'll stop.)
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
Well I, for one, would love to see it on IMAX. I'd love to have the detail blown up so I can nitpick the mistakes in it some more. That way, I can appear to have a more sophisticated sense of taste! Armed with a bigger screen, I can finally prove to my friends once and for all that the movie is total garbage!!
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:3, Insightful)
I disagree. I am a big Star Wars fan, but I was disgusted with Episode I. Attack of the Clones was reviews as "OK" by most critics. Why would an OK movie need to go to IMAX, and more importantly, why is THAT news? Obviously, it is to get people to see it, and I was commenting that even going to IMAX doesn't make me want to see it. I am part of the Star Wars fanbase.
I can't believe how many people were indignant with me because I didn't want to see it. People kept asking me "Did you see it yet?" and I would simply reply "No, and I probably won't". Some people were even on the verge of getting upset with me, all because I didn't want to see it. Something is wrong there. Something is wrong in the geek culture where people are derided for not having the stereotypical views. I am a computer geek, but I hate Star Trek. I don't play D&D. That boggles some people's minds, and makes them pissed at me. I just don't get it.
So say that my post may be offtopic, and doesn't do anything but state my opinion. Well holy crap Maynard, just where do you thing you are? This is Slashdot. Heaven forbid that someone disagree with what is regarded as "the only view".
Re:Haven't seen it yet, IMAX doesn't do it (Score:2)
Hot Grits The Size of Texas! (Score:2)