Posted by Jessica Rabbit at ac902984.ipt.aol.com on November 11, 2002 at 02:01:54:
In Reply to: There is a benefit... posted by Vincent on November 11, 2002 at 01:40:00:
- that was a problem, I just didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would.
Perhaps it was a film that didn't transfer well on to a screen that size, not because of the way it was shot, just because it didn't have the content to benifit a gigantic screen.
What type of negative a film is shot on is not as important to me as it is to people who make films or know something about film making. I go see a film to be entertained. If I can walk into a cinema, forget about the outside world for 2 hours and enjoy the other place I am being taken to, then I am happy. And I appreciate that the negative and camera work is a big part of that, it's something I don't concentrate on that much I suppose.
FYI, the only time I had trouble focusing my eyes or figuring out what was going on was during the fast paced sequences (ie, the chase at the start was hard to focus on). Perhaps they were just too fast paced for a screen of that dimension.
I don't know if that has to do with the way it was shot as I am not technically minded.
I suppose at heart I still prefer the original episodes of the SW movies. Those would be great to see on a screen that size. Especially when they make the jump to light speed or they are flying through that section to blow up the Death Star.
Ok, I am going to stop talking about this now as I am starting to sound like a SW geek!
Thanks again,
~K
: - if the film in question was made in a format that can withstand being blown-up that large. For example, seeing LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, which was filmed on actual 65mm negative, on an extremely large screen is incredibly involving and breathtaking. Same goes for 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and many other film that were shot on 65mm negative...
: Vincent
: : I just don't see the benifit of seeing a movie that's 50ft in height! : ~K