Kal Varnsen

I am guessing that 70mm IMAX prints are really expensive. With only a one week run, Paramount probably didn't want to spend for prints.

DonnachaOne

Have any 15/70 theatres announced this, and if so, do those theatres also have digital IMAX capability? It makes sense that this would be digital-only, not just because the one-week run negates the cost of creating all those IMAX 70mm prints, but also because using limited digital theatrical releases to advertise subsequent Blu-ray releases has become much more common. You just use the 4K hi-def master to create a DCP as well as the Blu-ray.

Kal Varnsen

My local IMAX theater can do both 70mm and digital. They said it is digital nationwide.

Giles

the DCP of 'Raiders' has actually been making the rounds since early last year, the marathon will be the first time the other two, ahem, three films will be released as such.

stinkeye

I'm going regardless, because I'll sacrifice presentation for more classic releases like this *cough* Jaws *cough*

Matt

According to IMAX.com, it will be playing at the Warren in Moore, and AMC at Quail Springs, as well as the AMC in Tulsa. I'm a lot closer to Quail but I'll go see it at the Warren.

None of the AMCs here are doing the marathon, however.

TomOpus

*bump* as a reminder

TheGuy

Went to the 12:01 showing last night in NJ, there was 7 people there. Still had a great time and got a free mini poster as well.

TomOpus

How did the movie look?

TheGuy

HUGE! Filled the whole screen, very clear and clean.

Matthew Chmiel

So it was cropped or do you have a lieMAX screen that has a ratio closer to 2.1:1?

TheGuy

I am no IMAX expert, there was a little empty space at top and bottom of the screen, otherwise it filled the whole screen. Did not notice any cropping. Again I am no expert.

Giles

they cropped it to 1.78 ?? - [valley speak]"like ew"...[/valley speak]

WeylandYutani

Did you notice any brightness changes during the opening credits? Is Marion's final scream after she's bombarded by the skeletons in the Well of the Souls still muted? Is the glass reflection when Indy is face-to-face with the Cobra there like in the original release or is it still erased as on the DVD? When the Nazis in the jeep fly over the edge of the cliff and fall down the abyss, is it the original matte painting or the bullshit CGI touchup as on the recent television airings?

TheGuy

I just remember the snake reflection is gone.

lamphorn

Arg. Was planning on going as this is being widely reported as a 70mm presentation. Did someone at paramount just point-blank lie about this? Every news article bends over backwards to state that this is a 70mm film restoration when the IMAX site clearly states that this is a digital restoration. Also, here I am in L.A. with TWO full-size "real" IMAX theatres and it is not showing in either of them, but only in the fake little IMAX's as a digital projection. I'll probably pass. If I go to a theatre to see a classic film for $20, I expect to see a FILM. If I want to watch a "digital presentation", I have a perfectly lovely bluray player and gorgeous plasma at home.

It's hysterical that the movie business laments declining theatre attendance. The story has been that TV's are becoming more like cinema. While TV's have been getting bigger and nicer, the sad truth is that the cinema has been made more like television. It's the pictures that got small.

lamphorn

In addition, this will not be in 4K, but only 2K. In other words, this $20 Lie-MAX showing will be no better than the nonsense going on in the $11 theatres next door. Not gonna waste my money on this. The Egyption or the Aero in L.A. are always good about showing movies in actual 70mm when possible so I'll wait for a screening there.

You can read about the cynical cheapiness of this release here- http://badassdigest.com/2012/09/07/s...lost-ark-imax/

Matthew Chmiel

Yes. Digital IMAX consists of two 2K projectors.

When laser IMAX starts rolling out in the next year or two, all of those digital projectors will be upgraded to two 4K projectors.

lamphorn

Believe me, I understand the desire to see this (and other great movies) on the big screen again. I've seen Raiders on the big screen and it's great. But I'm saddened by the acceptance of corporate cheapskating when it comes to arguably the greatest American art form. Just 10 years ago, the majority of theatres were still showing film. Now they're showing HDTV instead. Not because it's better (it's not), but because it's cheaper. And they're not charging less for this reduction in quality, but MORE. Why are we okay with this? I love my blurays, but they are essentially a well-done approximation of the original work. Theatres should charge a DISCOUNT, not a premium, for a glorified bluray screening.

The best comparison I can make is if a museum advertised a showing of the Mona Lisa and when you arrive, it's a framed photograph of the painting, not the actual painting. It may be a very well-done photograph of the painting, and the frame may have been carefully modeled after the original, but it is not the painting.

Strevlac

I'm right there with you. The problem is, almost no one cares. 99.9% of people out there don't even know what film is, or that there is actually a projector up there in the booth with reels of film running through it. They just want to see a movie on the screen. I'm afraid the economics of film have doomed it to extinction for the general public.

That said, digital projection, even at 2K, has gotten really good. Colorspace and compression levels are much, much better than the HDTV signals you watch at home. I saw Raiders last night and even on the gigantic imax screen it looked very respectable. In terms of absolute detail it probably rivaled a 70mm blow-up. There are problems that still need to be ironed out...fine details still reveal the pixel grid and the fact that these are digital transfers of films means that the people making the masters tend to unnecessarily do a lot of digital tweaking to make the transfer look "better."

If the mastering technicians would lay of the digital tweaks and the resolution issue could be sorted out to get rid of the visible pixels I'd be very happy with digital projection.

Giles

it was never a 70mm restoration - it's been known for quite some time as a 4K 35mm restoration/transfer - it was shot in 35mm in the first place.

aside from Sony 4K projector's - most projector's are 2K, until DLP starts aggressively releasing/advertising 4K actual projection it's all rather vague if we are really seeing the full potential of 4K imagery

Osiris3657

Well I just got back from a screening, and I was also disappointed that it was being shown in a "little" IMAX, not a full, 100ft screen IMAX theater (didn't realize it would be a small one as I've never been to the theater I went to). Fortunately the ticket was only $10

That being said the picture looked great and it was an awesome experience seeing this on a big screen. This is one of the greatest adventure films of all time. Perfect!

WeylandYutani

Well, that is one alteration I can actually live with.

WeylandYutani

One of ? Name a better one. You can't.

lamphorn

It was widely reported as a 70mm release for the past month. The only place to find out that it's not is on the official IMAX site. I wonder how that happened. Did all of the reporters get it wrong, or were they all lied to?