It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Still, an improvement over the 'fake IMAX' of SF we've all been complaining about no?
Essentially the same thing but yes an improvement because 1. It's not the whole film only a few scenes that were intended to be filmed with proper IMAX and 2. Better quality anyway.
I'm really hoping they didn't use normal 35mm film for those action sequences, otherwise in non-IMAX theaters (which is the way most people will watch the film) those big action scenes would contain less image information than the other scenes, instead of more.
Here is a little chart I just made about this issue:
http://pasteboard.co/1NIJkyAq.png
Annotations:
1. This is the image they want to film.
2. This is how the image would look on the film when shooting without an anamorpic lense. Notice the wasted space on the film (in gray).
3. The image on the film when shooting with an anamorpic lense. The image is stretched vertically to cover the entire film frame, resulting in a higher quality but distorted image. When projecting the film, a reverse, complementary lens (of the same anamorphic power) shrinks the image vertically to the original proportions. (From Wikipedia).
4. They shot a few big action scenes with spherical lenses and in 1.85:1 aspect ratio, which results this image. The image covers no more or less film area than Nr. 3., but because the image is not stretched, the filmed and projected image is bigger. (notice the space above and below the star).
5. The same image projected in non IMAX-theaters (which is the way most people will watch the film). Top and bottom of the image cut, compared to Nr. 4. Now, compare this image to Nr. 3 (wich is how a non-action sequence was shot). You can clearly see that the image covers less film area, which gives you a lower image quality, while having the same aspect ratio.
I'm not a professional, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway, everything I've written above applies onky if they used 35 mm film throughout the filming. I'm really hoping they used those 6K ARRI cameras for the fake-IMAX sequences.
What I meant by fake-IMAX sequences are the sequences that were originally intended to be shot with IMAX cameras, but were shot with non-IMAX cameras, although in 1.85:1 aspect ratio at the end.
Essentially. It wasn't shot in IMAX so shouldnt really be marketed as such. However it seems (sadly) standard pracitce. 'IMAX' means so many things (different shooting standards) that it varies greatly.
However, shooting in IMAX is a lot more challenging on the production and in post - as well as being a lot more expensive, so its not surprising.
Thats why they only say "formatted for IMAX" :)
Nice, didn't notice that, thanks! I assume that's excluding the camera cost itself which IMAX were willing to offer to them for free...?
I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to get IMAX to stump up the $7m - and they wouldn't - hence the use of the ARRI.
I wonder what sequences they will be... Mexico, Italy - Car Chase? and the finale?
Also, it seems the production team of "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation" also used these new revolutionary ARRI 6K camera's for a few sequences/scenes.
True, I think I read an interview with the makers of MI:RN who said they wanted to shoot IMAX but as their original date was Dec. all the screens would be taken up by Star Wars.
Thats also a good point, Spectre will be a few weeks before Hunger Games and Star Wars 7, both of which will take up the limited number of IMAX screens that there are. I guess when you make the decision re. shooting in IMAX you have to look at the release schedule and see for how long you can have those screens. Long enough to make your money back?
Yeah but my understanding is that MI:RN will be presented in just the usual scope aspect ratio (2.39:1)
And yeah - that's why the last Hunger Games was never released in IMAX - because of Interstellar which was shot with IMAX cameras.
You've no need to worry. DAD's action scenes are the result of a combination of poor art direction/prod design and cinematography/grading and Tamahori losing any eye he once had for visual consistency. That won't be happening in SP unless Van Hoytema, Gassner and Mendes revert to an amoebic state.
With Hoyte at the helm, not a chance :)
Hail hail @RC7 ;-). Thanks for this positive, and very true, message.
I've been reading about the different cameras used for SP and was wondering if it's common practice to shoot a film partly in 35mm anamorphic widescreen and also 6k digital with a 1:85 aspect ratio for certain sequences?
Since SF was all shot digitally using spherical lenses and the others Craig Bond's were Super 35 and spherical, SP is the first anamorphic widescreen Bond since DAD, if I have it correct. That is something I am especially really looking forward to.
Not common practice - the 6K at 1.85:1 is genuinely just a replacement for using the 70mm IMAX cameras for select sequences which achieving a similar effect in IMAX theatres.
I have "The Dark Knight" Blu-Ray, and when I watch it I see that with the original IMAX sequences the actual letterboxes disappear so it fills the screen 16:9. Does this mean it will happen to "SPECTRE" too? And next year's Blu-Ray of "SPECTRE"?
I couldn't disagree with you more. People want to watch good movies, period. The Dark Knight would be just as successful today as it was back in 2008. It wasn't some depressing little avant garde movie, it was an epic crowd-pleaser that happened to be significantly less dumb than your average summer blockbuster.
Yes, in IMAX theatres. And probably on the Blu-ray too.
Yes.
Agreed. If SP is a great movie people will go and see it.
No need to panic. Yes, Spectre probably won't make nearly as much as Jurassic World did. Guess what? It doesn't need to.
Lol ...yea the dinosaurs were the only believable actors in that flick.