logo Sign In

Name three films that should have an IMAX upgrade

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Name three films you would want to see given an IMAX upgrade.

I ask that you list only 3, so I get a better idea of each of your individual movie tastes. 

 

On Her Majesty's Secret Service

Dances With Wolves

Superman The Movie

 

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time

The Evil Dead

The Wages of Fear

Seven Samurai

“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”

Author
Time

2001: A Space Odyssey

Brainstorm (mainly because it has seldom been seen the way Doug Trumbull intended it)

Tron (Disney should have done this before Legacy came out)

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Star Wars (some one had to say it)

The Empire Strikes Back (see parenthetical for Star Wars)

My third would have been Raiders, instead I will go with Lawrence of Arabia (which also happened to have been filmed on 70mm)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I don't think 65mm films should count, since they are already essentially IMAX sized. That excludes 2001 and LOA.

My vote? Aside from the usual suspects (SW, ROTLA), maybe Apocalypse Now, Superman, Alien, Blade Runner and The Matrix. I guess the format suits "big" popcorn type of movies, or visual ones. Would be an interesting experiment to release something like an Altman film, or something like In the Mood For Love or Hiroshima Mon Amore, something very character based and subtle. Crouching Tiger kind of straddles the line between "big" visual films and subtle character films, could be a best of both worlds kind of thing. The reason I seriously advocate character/art films is because when I saw Blade Runner: Final Cut in a 4K theater presentation in 2007 it was one of the most emotional theater experiences I had, not because of the visuals but the performances; I always thought it was a cold film, but seeing the actors that big, the scene where Deckard tells Rachel she is not human took on a whole new dimension. The acting in that scene: its 100% in the eyes, since the performances are a little (deliberately) stilted, but you only understand that when it's on a HUGE scale, it was incredible. Oh yeah, spoilers. What, you haven't seen Blade Runner?

Or for a joke, 28 Day Later or Tadpole, films shot on late 1990s standard-def consumer-level video cameras (well, they called them "pro-sumer", which is just a marketing term, but they were sold in higher-end electronics/photography stores).

I saw Jurassic Park in IMAX in 1993--I guess it was the first Hollywood feature shown this way, at least in Canada, and it was very, very limited, maybe even this one screening--and everyone should see it this way. Jaws would convert well too.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The chances of seeing a 70mm print outside a film IMAX venue is getting slimmer all the time though.

Given the time limitation IMAX used to have, wouldn't JP have been cut down shorter the way Episode II was?

I was going to suggest Plan 9 get some IMAX love. ;)

Some of the better 70's disaster flicks would be awesome too. Maybe the sound system in an IMAX theater could come close to what Sensurround was like.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

The chances of seeing a 70mm print outside a film IMAX venue is getting slimmer all the time though.

Given the time limitation IMAX used to have, wouldn't JP have been cut down shorter the way Episode II was?

I was going to suggest Plan 9 get some IMAX love. ;)

Some of the better 70's disaster flicks would be awesome too.

At 7 minutes over the 2-hour limit, I doubt my 20-year-later rememberance of my 10-year-old self could remember anything cut out since I only saw it once before. Maybe they just snipped out the credits! Or just blown up the 35mm size to fill the IMAX screen. It didn't completely fill the screen after all.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I saw The Matrix 70mm print on an IMAX screen (San Francisco). It was great, but in no way filled the screen.  What size format was Barry Lyndon in?

 

 

Edit: found this cool page> POPULAR THEATRICAL ASPECT RATIOS

 

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time

Star Wars

Empire Strikes Back

Return of the Jedi

(in their original forms)

Author
Time

Part of me wanted to name only 70mm films, because I wouldn't know where else to see them in their original forms. Anyways, now that you mention time limits, that reminds me that the current one for IMAX is 170 minutes, so I'm going to have to pick something other than LoA. How about E.T.

Author
Time

Dances With Wolves

2001: A Space Odyssey

Apollo 13

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Barry Lyndon was shot and composed for 1.66:1 but could be matted up to 1.75:1. The new editions are 1.78 and lose some frame information.

I'm still not sold on the IMAX format for theatrical presentations, even with 70mm prints. The screen is at too forced of a viewing angle and with its curvatures you cannot experience the full image on IMAX sequences. (To me it usually resembles a porthole with foggy edges.) I get a damn neckache on every IMAX movie I see. The sound is almost always too boomy and not very directional if you examine it carefully. The 70mm prints for 35mm scope films have some obvious processing going on, at least TDKR did and that was brand new.

I just don't see the need for blowups of this nature when 35mm gives you more for less. Raiders looked spectacular on 35mm and the process was done at 4K. What more can this print give? The Final Cut of Blade Runner on 35mm is one of the best prints I've ever seen regardless of presentation.

I'd rather see these in 35mm scope on a massive conventional or 70mm screen with top of the line equipment.  Or even conventional equipment at an art house.

The only thing I could possibly see IMAX doing different is maybe running full on 8 perforation VistaVision film prints, since their projectors run the film sideways like VV. But again you run into the aspect issue.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Anchorhead said:

Dances With Wolves

2001: A Space Odyssey

Apollo 13

They did Apollo 13 already. ;)

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

That's me - always on top of current events.  ;-)

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Blade Runner

Star Wars (the original, of course!)

Vertigo (though this is already 70mm and I'm watching it in 70mm this month)

Author
Time

King Kong (1933)

Gojira (1954)

The Towering Inferno (1974)

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jurassic Park

Back to the Future

Lord of the Rings trilogy

Star Wars oot. 

Raiders already was released in 70mm before but not imax.  All three original Indy films got released in 70mm.

If they imaxed raiders. might as well do Doom and Crusade.

 

And as much as i hate it i think revenge of the Sith's opening space battle would have been spectacular in imax.

As for the rest of the film not sure i could sit through the whole thing,lol.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

I am going to add "Ghostbusters" 

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time

Would not any of the HarryHausen Dynamation films look like shit on this format?

Otherwise i would say Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, Golden Voyage, Jason and The Argonauts or the clash of the titans.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

2001: A Space Odyssey (it seems most people agree on this one)

Blade Runner

Lawrence of Arabia

Author
Time

skyjedi2005 said:

Would not any of the HarryHausen Dynamation films look like shit on this format?

Otherwise i would say Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, Golden Voyage, Jason and The Argonauts or the clash of the titans.

They look bad enough in 35mm as it is, unfortunately. They would have to go and do a grain-deduction pass or something. I haven't seen any of them on BD (are they on Blu?) but I have about four or five on DVD, and these are remastered from high-quality source material. It's fine for a DVD of an old film, but I doubt anyone would be able to stomache such high levels of grain in the VFX sequences on that large a size.

I have to say though, I'd be all for a cleaned-up Harryhausen IMAX release, purists be damned!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I have "Jason and the Argonauts", "Seventh Voyage of Sinbad" and "Mysterious Island" on Blu. (The early black and white films and Clash of the Titans are available too.) MI and Sinbad hold up pretty good.

I thought the complicated mattes of Jason's skeleton fight were a little too easy to discern in HD. Still, they all look great given what was left to work with.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

I wonder if they did some clean-up for the BD already...the 70s releases are decent, Eye of the Tiger and stuff like that, but stuff like Jason and the Argonauts and One Million BC look pretty grainy just on DVD. Maybe a lot of it was dirt. The 50s films blend the best IMO because the grain is consistent in the live-action scenes too.

Author
Time

Even the '30s work of Willis O'Brien still looks fantastic. Could the color film stock that Harryhausen had to work with later on be the culprit?

Forum Moderator