Batman Begins ... The Bat ... Is back ...

[Shane R. Monroe]

Well, Batman Begins rules ... Pride back to the Bat.

The movie is long - and the first half is character/story building. But if you're even REMOTELY interested in seeing it, go ... you will be pleased.

More later.

[OldSchoolGamer]

Yep, saw it 2 days ago, very happy with it overall!

[Shane R. Monroe]

Here is a review that meshes pretty much with my thoughts

http://www.imdb.com/reviews/0372784

My only bitch was that the fighting scenes use that ghey "close up" camera view where you don't get to see the very capable Bale kicking major ass. If you want to see what I mean, see Bale's EQUILIBRIUM.

[Flare]

I haven't seen it yet; but I had some seconds thoughts due to the previous Bat related movie "Catwoman" which was a piece of CG crap. I somehow thought this would suck as well.

However, I can see that people here liked it, I'll give it a chance then! They are showing it on IMAX theaters over here, that should be fun.

[Shane R. Monroe]

I haven't seen it yet; but I had some seconds thoughts due to the previous Bat related movie "Catwoman" which was a piece of CG crap. I somehow thought this would suck as well.

However, I can see that people here liked it, I'll give it a chance then! They are showing it on IMAX theaters over here, that should be fun.

I dunno about IMAX ... usually they make 1 hour versions of the movie which wouldn't be any fun here ...

Yeah, I read up a lot on Batman Returns ... VERY LITTLE CGI ... in fact, so little, you'd be hard pressed to find it. REAL sets. REAL people. REAL vehicles. What a refreshing change.

[Darksol]

I dunno about IMAX ... usually they make 1 hour versions of the movie which wouldn't be any fun here ...

Yeah, I read up a lot on Batman Returns ... VERY LITTLE CGI ... in fact, so little, you'd be hard pressed to find it. REAL sets. REAL people. REAL vehicles. What a refreshing change.

I think IMAX has a lot of potential going forward. Warner Brother movies like Batman and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory are going to be available like IMAX. I've seen news circulating around about more movies houses releasing IMAX versions and big theater chains like AMC are talking with IMAX to build more theaters.

I am sure that IMAX version of Batman Begins will be the whole movie. Usually they run into problems with films that are more 2.5 hours I think and then some scense have to be cut. I am tired of regular analog projection, outrageous food/drink prices, and tons of commercials. Thanks to DVDs and 60 inch HDTVs and some friends over I can have just as much at home.

WHAT I HAVE been doing this year is to strictly go to IMAX and DLP theaters only. There is no real cost difference and the movie viewing experience is exceptional. Star Wars Episode III in a DLP theater is absolutely AMAZING!. Hollywood and the movie theaters are going to have to offer more to get myself and many others back into the theaters. If you still live in Glendale, you're not far off from a DLP screen in Peoria.

[menzel]

A real action movie. Quite refreshing.
I loved Batman and most of Batman returns (I'll admit some of the penguin stuff like the radio-controlled penguins converging on the main town square was a little too adam west for my taste -- but kim bassinger was and still is a babe). Ditching tim burton and michael keaton ruined the franchise, though, with the only bright points of Batman Forever and Batman & Robin being Jim Carey's riddler character.


I dunno about IMAX ... usually they make 1 hour versions of the movie which wouldn't be any fun here ...

Yeah, I read up a lot on Batman Returns ... VERY LITTLE CGI ... in fact, so little, you'd be hard pressed to find it. REAL sets. REAL people. REAL vehicles. What a refreshing change.

[Shane R. Monroe]

WHAT I HAVE been doing this year is to strictly go to IMAX and DLP theaters only. There is no real cost difference and the movie viewing experience is exceptional. Star Wars Episode III in a DLP theater is absolutely AMAZING!. Hollywood and the movie theaters are going to have to offer more to get myself and many others back into the theaters. If you still live in Glendale, you're not far off from a DLP screen in Peoria.

Yep, we see many movies there.

I figure once I go with a nice 52" screen at home, my theater attendance will probably go from low to almost none. I should be in a good position next year to go with a nice new TV and once I have a widescreen at home, I don't need the theater much :) There is ALWAYS something about the theater that pisses me off .. someone being rude ... a cell phone going off ... blabbing from the back, a goddamn infant screaming (sorry, you have a kid - get a sitter or stay home ... your own damn fault) .... SOMETHING.

[Flare]

... blabbing from the back, a goddamn infant screaming (sorry, you have a kid - get a sitter or stay home ... your own damn fault) ....
That's why I don't go to the movies lately... I think the last time was back in November last year :(

[Zaphod]

When I move I plan on getting a nice projector. Hopefully by then I can get something with 1080p. Combine that with hi def DVDs, oh yah....

[joejet]

Just saw the movie - i must say it is my favorite comic book movie of all time.

The movie just has a feeling of legitimacy. You never have the stupid jokes or actors running around with smug looks on their faces like "can you believe i am doing this?" They stayed true to the seriousness and the feel of the classic batman comic books.

I just hope they stick with the current crew and build on this one. It is a real treat.

[Demolition Man]

Looks like I'll be going to see this very soon. I've been skeptical on it since the previews were to be at best luke warm, but sometimes its hard to tell by a 1 minute preview if the film is going to be any good or not.

[btribble]

What I liked is that the movie got into the background and character of Bruce Wayne's father, which adds a lot of psychological depth to the character. I've heard a few reviews that said the "pre-Batman" part of the movie was too long, but I could have gone through a whole movie's worth of that part! Of course with a movie this long, we get enough of everything, I guess. =)

It was also nice how everything "made sense", no glaring plot holes. A few things I'd like to know, but can't go into without spoiling parts of the movie. The only thing that seemed a little gimmicky to me was the "bat attraction device" that was used... hm, maybe this should go in some sort of "spolier thread"... :)

[Shane R. Monroe]

Yeah, the reviews that had ANYTHING negative to say were all about how long and slow the beginning was. Oh, gee, Mr. Mike Clark, USA Today ... sorry we took a bye on the popcorn and cheese and went for ACTUAL story and character building. Sorry your attention span isn't high enough to wait through the build up before the bat suit showed up.

What I want to know is how people can BITCH about this, yet turn around and give the most BORING goddamn movies on the planet a high score. "Yes, we spend the first 3 hours of this 6 hour epic of the child ruler of the Thai dynasty in 500 B.C. watching him play the asian equivalant of jacks while his distraught mother looked on .... but WHAT A GREAT MOVIE! FIVE STARS!!!!"

Give me a break. Fickle bastards.

[Darksol]

I am watching Batman this Friday with some friends and we are watching it on IMAX. All 2 hrs and 14 minutes will be in the movie :)

[Shane R. Monroe]

I am watching Batman this Friday with some friends and we are watching it on IMAX. All 2 hrs and 14 minutes will be in the movie :)

Someone feel free to smack me on the head. But isn't IMAX 4:3 or more square? So what you're watching is a big screen Pan&Scan of the original film, right? Why would you do that?

[Flare]

Someone feel free to smack me on the head. But isn't IMAX 4:3 or more square? So what you're watching is a big screen Pan&Scan of the original film, right? Why would you do that?
I went to see Episode 3 in IMAX a couple of weeks ago and part of the screen above and below were not used.

That could have been due to the fact that it was actually the 35mm version maxed out to fit the IMAX screen but thank god it kept the widescreen format.

If Batman Begins for IMAX is in Digital format, It could be the same situation.

[Darksol]

Someone feel free to smack me on the head. But isn't IMAX 4:3 or more square? So what you're watching is a big screen Pan&Scan of the original film, right? Why would you do that?

There is no comparison between a regular theater screen and Imax. First of all you're starting with 70mm film vs 35 which allows for a much larger screen size.

You have 44 separate speakers in a general imax theater as well for incredible surround sound.

Imax does have a 4:3 aspect ratio which is the same ratio for 35mm film.

However, Pan & Scan is a method to truncate the sides of widescreen film for TV. It has no meaning whatsoever for imax because the movie was originally filmed with 70mm cams so there is no side to trim to try and make it fit on a TV.

In reality since it is 70mm film you have twice the image area of 35mm with NO LOSS of quality.

Say you film with an anamorphic camera. This camera allows you to get widescreen video on 35mm film. Widescreen video IS defined as video that has a larger aspect ration than 1.33:1 or 4:3. Even though anamorphic is wider from an aspect ratio point of view the quality is not even close. Imax is as close as we have today for that holodeck feel unless you like wearing the ****ty goggles.

[Flare]

Ok, so in this case they actually filmed "Batman begins" twice? or was there a 35mm camera crew on one side and then a 70mm camera crew on the other?

If that's the case, which one is the original version? The one that the director intended you to see?

[Darksol]

Ok, so in this case they actually filmed "Batman begins" twice? or was there a 35mm camera crew on one side and then a 70mm camera crew on the other?

If that's the case, which one is the original version? The one that the director intended you to see?

No , with Batman Begins, its filmed on a 35mm camera and using IMAX digital remastering software it blows it up to be 10 times larger to be put on 70mm film. Seeing other movies like this, it really is amazing.

Imagine filming though on 70mm or even 70mm anamorphic, drools :p

If you scour the web you can see the cameras that film natively on 70mm. But it is very very expensive.

[Flare]

No , with Batman Begins, its filmed on a 35mm camera and using IMAX digital remastering software it blows it up to be 10 times larger to be put on 70mm film. Seeing other movies like this, it really is amazing.

Imagine filming though on 70mm or even 70mm anamorphic, drools :p

If you scour the web you can see the cameras that film natively on 70mm. But it is very very expensive.
Hmmm... ok but then I think Shane is right by saying that by re-mastering the film to 70mm they are actually cutting the sides of the widescreen form so that it fits on the 4:3 IMAX screen, isn't it?

What about the scenes where there's action happening on the edges of the screen?

That is, unless the regular 35mm version will be shown in 4:3 as well.

[Darksol]

Hmmm... ok but then I think Shane is right by saying that by re-mastering the film to 70mm they are actually cutting the sides of the widescreen form so that it fits on the 4:3 IMAX screen, isn't it?

What about the scenes where there's action happening on the edges of the screen?

That is, unless the regular 35mm version will be shown in 4:3 as well.

No. Standard 35mm camera is 4:3 or if you divide by 3 1.33 : 1 (in reality 35mm is 1.37 ). The definition of widescreen is anything with a larger aspect ratio than 35 mm film.

What you and I and most other people consider widescreen is 16:9 or 1.77:1.

Before this thread is through, I think we're all going to need to take a filmography course.

[Shane R. Monroe]

IMAX movies are cropped ... Might as well be pan & scan ...

The studio greenlit the large-format initiative after producing a 3D film test using trailer imagery and, as with previous digitally mastered releases, modified the film's widescreen aspect ratio to format imagery to the squarer Imax screen. "We tested images cropped at 2.35:1 aspect ratio," said associate producer Debbie Denise, "and it didn't feel like a cheat because there was still so much to look at on an 80-foot-tall screen."

Sorry ... cropped 2.35:1 is still a cheat ... kthx.

[Darksol]

IMAX movies are cropped ... Might as well be pan & scan ...

The studio greenlit the large-format initiative after producing a 3D film test using trailer imagery and, as with previous digitally mastered releases, modified the film's widescreen aspect ratio to format imagery to the squarer Imax screen. "We tested images cropped at 2.35:1 aspect ratio," said associate producer Debbie Denise, "and it didn't feel like a cheat because there was still so much to look at on an 80-foot-tall screen."

Sorry ... cropped 2.35:1 is still a cheat ... kthx.

I'll try and notice if it makes any difference when I go with my friends on Friday. One thing I know is that I will continue to promote different film viewing technologies, and that I hope traditional film theaters all go OUT of BUSINESS. Having to watch film using technology that is a century old is unacceptable. I'm tired of getting jacked at theaters.

[Shane R. Monroe]

I'll try and notice if it makes any difference when I go with my friends on Friday. One thing I know is that I will continue to promote different film viewing technologies, and that I hope traditional film theaters all go OUT of BUSINESS. Having to watch film using technology that is a century old is unacceptable. I'm tired of getting jacked at theaters.

The next generation of film is the new 3D technology Lucas is working with right now.

http://www.movieweb.com/news/news.php?id=7210

If it really works as well as they say it works, there will be a mass feed of "classic" movies returning to the theater. Actually, i'm looking forward to it.

Digital projection is a nice move forward. Shame they ruin it by tossing those red dots every few minutes ...

[Demolition Man]

I actually remember reading a letter on Robert Ebert's mail in column in the paper of some woman complaining about "doze black barz" when she and her husband went and saw one of the "Matrix" sequals at the IMax so perhaps the reason why they are P&Sing films is because of uneducated dolts like her who don't have a freakin clue.

As for myself, I'll just go see it at my local cimema where its projected at its proper AR, and to be honest my theater at least does a good job with maintaining their equipment so its always a good presentation. :D

[Darksol]

IMAX movies are cropped ... Might as well be pan & scan ...

The studio greenlit the large-format initiative after producing a 3D film test using trailer imagery and, as with previous digitally mastered releases, modified the film's widescreen aspect ratio to format imagery to the squarer Imax screen. "We tested images cropped at 2.35:1 aspect ratio," said associate producer Debbie Denise, "and it didn't feel like a cheat because there was still so much to look at on an 80-foot-tall screen."

Sorry ... cropped 2.35:1 is still a cheat ... kthx.

Ok guys. I went and saw Batman Begins on IMAX yesterday and it was a great experience. I told you I would get back to you when I found out how they were presenting it. The movie was presented in letterbox format (widescreen) and it was pretty good looking. The IMAX software that upconverts 35mm to 70mm is pretty good at this point.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Sweet! I can live with letterbox ... totally. Esp. if the screen is 80 feet tall :)

I'm off to catch it again in about an hour ... I can do a second viewing :)

[Shane R. Monroe]

I took Arcadenut to see Batman Begins last night. I think he enjoyed it a lot. I haven't found anyone that doesn't really like this film. Speaks good for it.

[davykelly]

My only bitch was that the fighting scenes use that ghey "close up" camera view where you don't get to see the very capable Bale kicking major ass. If you want to see what I mean, see Bale's EQUILIBRIUM.

I half-agree with that.

In some scenes it worked really well. For instance in the drugs bust scene - when Batman attacked the group of thugs it gave him a real air of menace. I found it less effective with the train fight scene, though I still enjoyed it.

If found it refreshing not to be OD'd on fancy moves for a change.

[Shane R. Monroe]

I half-agree with that.

In some scenes it worked really well. For instance in the drugs bust scene - when Batman attacked the group of thugs it gave him a real air of menace. I found it less effective with the train fight scene, though I still enjoyed it.

If found it refreshing not to be OD'd on fancy moves for a change.

Right, it worked GREAT for the drug thugs .. but for the fight in the beginning .. the train fight ... I mean, it would be different if I hadn't seen Equilibrium recently (again) and saw Bale kicking major ass ... "No ... NOT without incident ..."

I'm truly hoping for a director's cut ... If they can make a 12 hour Lord of the Rings edition, I'll take 4 hours of The Bat ...

[Flare]

I just saw BATMAN BEGINS... it owns maximum ass. The best in the series I think.

Liam Neeson was excellent.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Damn great movie, right???

[Darksol]

I just saw BATMAN BEGINS... it owns maximum ass. The best in the series I think.

Liam Neeson was excellent.

I still think Tim Burton's first Batman movie is the best. Jack Nicholson was the best playing the Joker.

But the new one is very good and I rank it second.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Yeah, but if you take Nicholson out of the equation, the rest of the movie was rather weak. After all, its BATMAN ... not JOKER ... :)

Begins took my top spot with Batman as my second.

[Nectar]

I always thought the original was the best until I saw it recently and ... eh. Still okay, but not the godly film I remembered from my late childhood.

[DaMenace]

Yea I 2nd that, I liked this one a lot more than any of the others myself as well.. it's of a much more superb quality than frickin Batman with Arnold Schwhaz-his-name.. :-)