Inception in Imax

Phil Connolly · July 31, 2010

I'm looking forward to seeing this in IMAX, just need to make the trek to a proper 15/70 IMAX, not a 2K digital LieMAX. The 35mm print was one of the sharpest I've seen for a long time. The 35mm and 65mm looked seamless only the different bokah giving the formats away. I'd imagine the 2K LieMAX version looks worse then the 35mm print I saw.

One weird thing I did notice was that the VistaVision helicopter shots seemed soft with more visible grain then the 35mm anamorphic shots. It was subtle and I wonder if the same thing is noticeable in IMAX or if I was imagining it. Any one else notice as similar thing?

Chris Millar · August 1, 2010

complete tosh...

stressful to watch story about a series of **(obscenity removed)** ups

georg lamshöft · August 1, 2010

Don't watch it in 70mm!

I've got a response from our IMAX theatre in Berlin (they currently show Toy Story 3 3D on 2x70mm because it had the same starting date as Inception) and they still try to get an 70mm-copy from the States, so when too many people in the US watch it on 70mm, we won't get our copy! ;-) :-(

I've seen it on a decent 35mm-projection and the different formats were indistinguishable (aside anamorphic effects). The filt itself was good, maybe even a masterpiece, but I'll have to watch it again - I overlooked to many details the first time.

"One weird thing I did notice was that the VistaVision helicopter shots seemed soft with more visible grain then the 35mm anamorphic shots"

Did they use some kind of optical process to copy the 8perf-shots within the anamorphic 35mm-print?

Edited August 1, 2010 by georg lamshöft

Jason Reimer · August 2, 2010

I saw this last week for my birthday, totally looking forward to all of the amazing 15/70 sequences, after having experienced them with The Dark Knight, like many of you. Alas, it was digital IMAX. I was pissed for at least the first 20 minutes of the movie. Everyone there is paying more money and waiting in lines thinking they're getting the old-school IMAX experience they're used to, but then they get this soft digital crap with the occasional aliasing and I too noticed the grainy (actually pretty horrible looking) helicopter shots. Some of my friends who saw it with me and know nothing about photography noticed that it wasn't at all the same experience that we'd had with TDK. Looks like I'm gonna have to make the drive to LA for not just this, but also Tree of Life, whenever that finally makes it out. But you know what guys, brace yourselves for more of this. The sad fact is that it's cheaper to have some pimple-faced kid push a button than it is to pay someone a little more to actually get to know a real projector and take care of it. I don't know about the rest of you, but if they're going to turn the movie-going experience into this weak digital garbage, I'd much rather wait for movies to come out on blu-ray and watch with just my friends on one of the many nice, large home theaters that my friends have. Why bother with a theater at that point?

Mathew Rudenberg · August 2, 2010

I saw this last week for my birthday, totally looking forward to all of the amazing 15/70 sequences, after having experienced them with The Dark Knight, like many of you. Alas, it was digital IMAX. I was pissed for at least the first 20 minutes of the movie. Everyone there is paying more money and waiting in lines thinking they're getting the old-school IMAX experience they're used to, but then they get this soft digital crap with the occasional aliasing and I too noticed the grainy (actually pretty horrible looking) helicopter shots. Some of my friends who saw it with me and know nothing about photography noticed that it wasn't at all the same experience that we'd had with TDK. Looks like I'm gonna have to make the drive to LA for not just this, but also Tree of Life, whenever that finally makes it out. But you know what guys, brace yourselves for more of this. The sad fact is that it's cheaper to have some pimple-faced kid push a button than it is to pay someone a little more to actually get to know a real projector and take care of it. I don't know about the rest of you, but if they're going to turn the movie-going experience into this weak digital garbage, I'd much rather wait for movies to come out on blu-ray and watch with just my friends on one of the many nice, large home theaters that my friends have. Why bother with a theater at that point?

No luck on 15/70 projection in LA so far - The Bridge and Universal Citywalk, which are possibly the two largest IMAX theatres here, are both digital.

If anyone finds a nice 15/70 projection here and wants to let me know that would be great!

I find it rather sad and ironic that they go to all the expense and effort to shoot 65mm, embracing arguably the best film has to offer, only to be shown digitally since there's insufficient desire to screen 15/70.

Edgar Dubrovskiy · September 14, 2010

I saw it on Saturday at the London IMAX, and to be honest I couldn't tell which scenes were shot in 65mm either.

Hmmmm.

Same. Felt like it was quite soft throughout as well...

georg lamshöft · October 15, 2010

I finally saw it in Berlin in 15/70 - they got a print after two months...

It was a little bit softer throughout (in comparison to TDK-15/70-scenes) and I couldn't tell the large aquisition formats as well. But otherwise it was pretty impressive! The detail was astounding, it really shows what even 35mm is capable of! Lightyears ahead of "the social network" in digital cinema (despite a 4 times smaller screen!).

I don't think the 35mm-sequences of TDK had the same quality in IMAX - did they change the IMAX DMR-process (different scanner, new grain-reduction?). It was nearly absolutely grainless at 28m wide sitting in the front 1/3 of the theatre!