Transformers: The Last Knight | 6/21/2017 | Big Budget, Weak OW?

[kowhite]

34 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

 70-75% of Dunkirk is 65mm IMAX footage. Rest of it is traditional 65mm in scope ratio. 

 

70% is amazing.

[BadAtGender]

22 minutes ago, kowhite said:

 

70% is amazing.

 

Especially since Nolan actually seems to have a clue about how and when to use the format.

 

I'll never forget watching Revenge of the Fallen, excited for the second major blockbuster to use IMAX footage after TDK, and being dumbfounded that there wasn't a single shot of the giant robot on top of a pyramid in IMAX... but a random shot of a dude waving a fighter jet to take off from an aircraft carrier? That made it in.

 

Of course, the film kinda blew its load earlier, with the Optimus vs. a million Decepticons scene. But even that wasn't clear of the aspect ratio changes, because it was interspersed with shots of the Autobots racing to try and help Optimus... and it's in that moment that the relative incompetence that Bay had with the format came all the way around and became almost brilliant. Because every time the ratio changed to normal widescreen with these shots of Chevy^TM cars racing along, it gave a sense of urgency and speed to it all that I don't think could have come across nearly as well. (I don't really know, though, since I've never seen it again since that original IMAX viewing... at least I don't think I have.)

 

It actually worked for me to such a degree that I'd almost think Bay planned it. But then, random aircraft carrier shot, and I have to think, nope, he's just winging it.

 

...

 

Come to think of it, wasn't Optimus fighting in a forest and the Autobots racing along in a desert? Wasn't all of this somewhere in the general vicinity of Washington DC? How the fuck did any of that work?

Edited June 21, 2017 by DamienRoc

[aabattery]

25 minutes ago, DamienRoc said:

Come to think of it, wasn't Optimus fighting in a forest and the Autobots racing along in a desert? Wasn't all of this somewhere in the general vicinity of Washington DC? How the fuck did any of that work?

 

Michael Bay's America.

 

[WeneedtotalkaboutKevin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6-I0YVPY0I

 

Team Moner !  She will be a break out star in this movie! Girl Power !  "FIGHT LIKE A GIRL" !

[antovolk]

3 hours ago, Biggestgeekever said:

There was a lot of it, but there's only a few scenes in the movies where it stays constant for more than a minute or two. Most of the time, it's constantly switching back and forth even during action scenes and (most baffling of all) during regular conversations. The aspect ratio would be at its largest on a close-up of Walberg, the film would then cut to Isabela Moner and be in a smaller ratio. And this would also happen in the opposite order; it was totally crazy.

Bay basically said he used the IMAX camera as the "A" camera....so of course that's how it'd end up

[Dementeleus]

2 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

 70-75% of Dunkirk is 65mm IMAX footage. Rest of it is traditional 65mm in scope ratio. 

 

1 hour ago, kowhite said:

 

70% is amazing.

 

Nolan lagging behind Old Man Clint here. 

[antovolk]

Just now, Telemachos said:

 

 

Nolan lagging behind Old Man Clint here. 

Yeah but Old Man Clint didn't shoot it on film IMAX did he

[redfirebird2008]

Just now, antovolk said:

Yeah but Old Man Clint didn't shoot it on film IMAX did he

 

LieMAX Clint

[Dementeleus]

2 minutes ago, antovolk said:

Yeah but Old Man Clint didn't shoot it on film IMAX did he

 

Sure as hell looked better than random switching ratios.  

 

I'm sure he had a good reason, but I wonder why Nolan didn't use VistaVision for his non-IMAX stuff. 

[redfirebird2008]

3 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Sure as hell looked better than random switching ratios.  

 

I'm sure he had a good reason, but I wonder why Nolan didn't use VistaVision for his non-IMAX stuff. 

 

1.66 VistaVision would be my preference. But Nolan loves scope. 

[Dementeleus]

11 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

1.66 VistaVision would be my preference. But Nolan loves scope. 

 

Loving Scope while shooting 70% of your movie 1.43:1 is kinda nutty though. I suppose it protects the home video experience a bit more, but at the expense of theatrical. 

[Jake Gittes]

4 hours ago, Biggestgeekever said:

People were discussing the aspect ratios in here, I believe.

 

I'm sure this will only apply to IMAX screenings, but the aspect ratio was completely schizophrenic. There were numerous instances where it would change about 15 times in a minute, and I mean that literally.

 

Sure when Wes Anderson does it he gets nominated for Oscars but when Michael Bay does it no one understands his genius amirite Futurist

[redfirebird2008]

2 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Loving Scope while shooting 70% of your movie 1.43:1 is kinda nutty though. I suppose it protects the home video experience a bit more, but at the expense of theatrical. 

 

90% of theatrical showings will be scope. He frames for that ratio anyway.

[Dementeleus]

Just now, redfirebird2008 said:

 

90% of theatrical showings will be scope. He frames for that ratio anyway.

 

Yes, but he could just as easily frame for that ratio while opening up the image for IMAX-esque theaters -- in other words, what he's already doing most of the time.  

 

(I know deep down you kind of agree with me -- in fact, weren't you the one who first raised this question?)  

[redfirebird2008]

Just now, Telemachos said:

 

Yes, but he could just as easily frame for that ratio while opening up the image for IMAX-esque theaters -- in other words, what he's already doing most of the time.  

 

(I know deep down you kind of agree with me -- in fact, weren't you the one who first raised this question?)  

 

I don't disagree and yes, I asked why not VistaVision. Seems like it is the closest thing to 1570 IMAX both in terms of aspect ratio and image quality. 

[cookie]

2 hours ago, DamienRoc said:

Come to think of it, wasn't Optimus fighting in a forest and the Autobots racing along in a desert? Wasn't all of this somewhere in the general vicinity of Washington DC? How the fuck did any of that work?

 

The Smithsonian is right next to a Nevada-like desert. Everybody knows that.

[dashrendar44]

Never watched a movie in theaters switching back and forth from scope to imax aspect ratio but I imagine it to be a bit like an autobot tilting the theater screen like a smartphone screen sideways on and on (without the head contortion to adapt vertically though ).

 

That has to be annoyingly distracting if it keeps on cutting back and forth pulling you out of the movie consciously focusing on the framing instead of what is in the frame if it isn't being used in a whole sequence.

[The Futurist]

Sorry to repeat myself, but yeah, it takes certain peculiar qualities to truly understand Bay s genius and the Bay Fan Club is Highly Selective,

both at BOT and in filmmakers's circles.

The Chosen Ones & Few.

 

 

 

 

[redfirebird2008]

5 minutes ago, dashrendar44 said:

Never watched a movie in theaters switching back and forth from scope to imax aspect ratio but I imagine it to be a bit like an autobot tilting the theater screen like a smartphone screen sideways on and on (without the head contortion to adapt vertically though ).

 

That has to be annoyingly distracting if it keeps on cutting back and forth pulling you out of the movie consciously focusing on the framing instead of what is in the frame if it isn't being used in a whole sequence.

 

Hell, this TF5 movie has 30 second TV ads that switch aspect ratios. Can't imagine sitting through 2.5 hours of that. 

[antovolk]

35 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

I don't disagree and yes, I asked why not VistaVision. Seems like it is the closest thing to 1570 IMAX both in terms of aspect ratio and image quality. 

Nolan did use VV on some VFX stuff on Interstellar.

 

There also appears to be a chance that they may 'specially format' JL in 1.43 (shots are definitely being completed at a taller AR than 1.85 if the first trailer is to go by)