Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Eug Wanker · Nov 13, 2005, 07:55 PM

Harry Potter: The Goblet of Fire seems to be doing well at Rotten Tomatoes so far (2005/11/13): 7/7

I'm likely going to see it in IMAX format... It wasn't made for IMAX obviously, but they said it was "digitally remastered for IMAX Theaters using the IMAX DMR conversion, a process that takes a 35mm film print and outputs it to true 70mm size and resolution."

What other movies were done this way, and how did they look? IIRC, I saw one of the Matrix movies this way and it was OK, although not as good as a native IMAX movie.

Lava Lamp Freak · Nov 13, 2005, 09:05 PM

I watched "The Prisoner of Azkaban" last year at IMAX. It was a wonderful experience. To me, it just feels more enveloping to watch movies at IMAX. The sound is also better than at a normal theater.

SuvsareRetarded · Nov 13, 2005, 09:09 PM

No matter what format, or how big the speakers, the movies still suck compared to the books and are a lot less interesting. I'll pass.

SShoot3r · Nov 13, 2005, 09:47 PM

Goblet of Fire looks promising

nredman · Nov 14, 2005, 09:25 AM

i will be going to see it with my wife - i have been watching the first three over the past week. i am looking forward to it.

Eug Wanker · Nov 14, 2005, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by Lava Lamp Freak

I watched "The Prisoner of Azkaban" last year at IMAX. It was a wonderful experience. To me, it just feels more enveloping to watch movies at IMAX. The sound is also better than at a normal theater.

Sounds good.

I just need an excuse to watch it on IMAX instead of the regular theatre.

Originally Posted by SuvsareRetarded

No matter what format, or how big the speakers, the movies still suck compared to the books and are a lot less interesting. I'll pass.

I've been Ca$h'd...

nredman · Nov 14, 2005, 09:36 AM

Originally Posted by Eu:thumbsup: g Wanker

Sounds good. I just need an excuse to watch it on IMAX instead of the regular theatre.

I've been Ca$h'd...

thats a good way to respond to rob, instead of getting into a fight with him.

but my wife would agree that the books are alot better. but since i dont read dem books

ghporter · Nov 14, 2005, 10:51 PM

I saw "Star Trek: First Contact" at the IMAX here in San Antonio. It was probably the creepiest and tensest of any of the Star Trek movies on a flat screen. In IMAX it was almost immersive! It was the first time my wife saw the movie, and it scared her good! I hope they run "Goblet of Fire" at the IMAX here!

Eug Wanker · Nov 14, 2005, 11:11 PM

They really know how to soak us downtowners with these first-run big-name IMAX movies.

Burbs, regular movie and regular theatre: $9.95
Burbs, Harry Potter & regular theatre: $10.95
Downtown, Harry Potter & regular theatre: $11.95
Downtown, Harry Potter & IMAX: $13.95
Downtown, Harry Potter & IMAX with advance ticket purchase: $14.95 <-- What I'll be paying

SuvsareRetarded · Nov 14, 2005, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Downtown, Harry Potter & IMAX with advance ticket purchase: $14.95 <-- What I'll be paying

Just buy the DVD and sit close to your TV. Seriously.

Eug Wanker · 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by SuvsareRetarded

Just buy the DVD and sit close to your TV. Seriously.

SuvsareRetarded · Nov 14, 2005, 11:24 PM

I've been eug wanker'd.

olePigeon · Nov 14, 2005, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I saw "Star Trek: First Contact" at the IMAX here in San Antonio. It was probably the creepiest and tensest of any of the Star Trek movies on a flat screen. In IMAX it was almost immersive! It was the first time my wife saw the movie, and it scared her good! I hope they run "Goblet of Fire" at the IMAX here!

I can't wait for Goblet of Fire. They had a sneak preview in Sacramento last weekend, but I couldn't make it.

So I get to see it on the IMAX in Livermore. I can't wait.

Man, if only Great America would open up their IMAX during the off season. I'd pay $20 to see a movie on that sucker. It'd be insane!!! 4 stories of picture! *drool smiley*

Atomic Rooster · Nov 14, 2005, 11:30 PM

We have people here young enough to be exited about Harry Pothead.

Isn't there and age limit on MacNN?

Eug Wanker · Nov 14, 2005, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

They had a sneak preview in Sacramento last weekend, but I couldn't make it.

They had a sneak preview here too... at 12 midnight on a weekday out in the boonies. Screw that.

Anyways, it's not as if I personally need to see it right away... The first couple were not really that great IMO. OK but not great. However, my GF wants to see Goblet of Fire asap. Fortunately the reviews are looking very promising, so I'm OK with fighting the Harry Potter crowds this w/e. The good news is that the downtown theatres tend to have much lower numbers of crying young-uns.

- - e r i k - - · Nov 14, 2005, 11:34 PM

Yeah, Harry Potter is for kids only

How about we have an intelligence-limit here instead?

olePigeon · Nov 15, 2005, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

How about we have an intelligence-limit here instead?

I dunno. The Piano just doesn't have the same effect on IMAX as Harry Potter.

Ratm · Nov 15, 2005, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by SuvsareRetarded

I've been eug wanker'd.

hehe...everybody leave ca$h alone! He seems like a nice guy.

Eug Wanker · Nov 15, 2005, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

I dunno. The Piano just doesn't have the same effect on IMAX as Harry Potter.

<shudder> No, nothing could be as disturbing as Harvey Keitel's full frontal on IMAX <shudder>

kcmac · Nov 15, 2005, 12:26 AM

If you've ever seen a real IMAX movie and love them, you will be disappointed in the screen size and quality of the IMAX you think you are about to see. It is just an enlarged regular screen experience.

Yeah its a little better than regular but it is in no way close to the real IMAX experience. It's hard to believe that IMAX gave out there name for this sham. They should have called it Superscreen or anything else.

Eug Wanker · Nov 17, 2005, 11:20 PM

Hmmm... It seems to be getting fairly good reviews: 70/81 (86%)

Then again, the other Harry Potter movies did pretty well with the critics too, and I didn't think they (especially the first two) were that great.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone: 79%
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets: 82%
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: 89%

OTOH, if you look at metacritic.com:

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) - 64
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) - 63
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) - 81
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) - 80

The RottenTomatoes score is the number of positives vs all reviews. The Metacritic score is an average of the ratings by the reviews.

ghporter · Nov 17, 2005, 11:40 PM

Atomic Rooster, I like any movie that is imaginative and does different things. And I've read all but the last installment of the Harry Potter series; I'm waiting for some time off from school to do that. I don't think the series is "for kids" per se. I think it's for people who haven't given up on imagination...

kcmac, I've seen (as noted above) Star Trek:First Contact at an IMAX, and the print had been created specifically for an IMAX showing. It started out as a 70mm anamorphic negative, and was printed specially for the IMAX optics. It was wonderful. Imagine the scene where Alfre Woodard is holding the phaser on Patrick Stewart and they're looking out the "window" at Earth...you could almost reach through that window from your seat. Stunning!

JustAnOl'Broad · Nov 18, 2005, 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

We have people here young enough to be exited about Harry Pothead.

I'm pushin 50, have read all but the last book, and love the movies.
Probably more little kids have learned to read with these books than
any other series printed. (JMHO, of course.)
Closest IMAX for me is Sacto; know of 2 there. Haven't seen an IMAX
flick yet.
P~

Eug Wanker · Nov 18, 2005, 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

kcmac, I've seen (as noted above) Star Trek:First Contact at an IMAX, and the print had been created specifically for an IMAX showing. It started out as a 70mm anamorphic negative, and was printed specially for the IMAX optics. It was wonderful. Imagine the scene where Alfre Woodard is holding the phaser on Patrick Stewart and they're looking out the "window" at Earth...you could almost reach through that window from your seat. Stunning!

I'm not sure if Goblet of Fire was shot on 70mm or not, but I am guessing it probably was 70mm and not 35mm. Now, as you and others probably already know, the 70mm of most films is not the same thing as IMAX 70mm:

However, for those wondering... The point is the movie isn't simply projected on a larger (IMAX) screen, the firm is essentially upsampled to IMAX size to make it look better. It won't look as good as native IMAX, but it should look better than just blown up standard 70mm.

The reason I asked though was I hadn't seen much on IMAX done this way. Thx ghporter for your comment. It sounds promising. I'll see the movie Saturday. Even as of several days ago, the IMAX showings Friday night were already sold out.

Millennium · Nov 18, 2005, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

We have people here young enough to be exited about Harry Pothead.

Isn't there and age limit on MacNN?

There is an age limit -COPPA regulations and all that- but it's not strictly enforced, and even if it were then technically Goblet of Fire would qualify anyway. Each book is written for an audience the same age as Harry is in that particular book, and for Goblet that age is 14. I always thought that was a nifty concept: a series written to mature with both the protagonist and the readers.

The Harry Potter books are a fun read. They're not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but they don't pretend to be, so what's the problem?