Jason Debus

Only 18 theaters showing 70MM IMAX: http://screencrush.com/star-wars-the-force-awakens-imax-theaters/ Is 'IMAX with laser' any good? Anyone know where I can see a 35mm print? I think Arclight Hollywood is all digital projection now.

I don't know what Kook Aid you are drinking but turn off the TV, radio, or web page because you are poisoned my friend.

After all of the Cameron hype I'm sure the look may underwhelm (whatever happened to photorealistic cgi?). For the most part I've tuned out the hype and the trailer got me excited to see this movie. I am familar with the general concept of the story so I knew what was happening in that lab, I'm not sure the general public would get it though. Aliens, space travel, portable consciousness, cool to see this stuff in a big epic movie. Anyone else think the producers of 'Surrogates' are freaking brilliant? It's the same general conept as Avatar, excpet for robots ... or am I out in left field here.

Not sure what to think about this other than why doesn't it look 'cooler'?: http://www.flynnlives.com/media/video/0xendgame.aspx

For those in the Los Angeles area, there is a screening this Sunday: Sunday, July 26, 2009 Time: 5:30pm Egyptian Theatre 6712 Hollywood Blvd. Hollywood, CA 90028 Phone: 323-466-3456 Discussion following the film with director of photography John Hora, ASC, visual effects designer and artist Harrison Ellenshaw and moderated by production designer Tom Walsh. It looked stunning on DVD so I'm excited to see it on the big sceen!

The one in The International was convincing I thought.

I am so torn on this movie. I like Chicago and Rob Marshall but 8 1/2 is one of my all time favorite films. To me it's like remaking Citizen Kane, it just shouldn't be done. Looking at the trailer, it looks like 8 1/2 filtered through the same lens that filmed Chicago. I hated and loved it at the same time. I'll see this film but I'm not going to like it (maybe).

I guess 50/50. I'm curious about Avatar and will probably line up at the theater like a lot of us later this year, but I think a lot of people are getting excited about nothing (the tech, James Cameron, etc.).

Can anyone tell me why this film is any different than all the other high budget sfx 3D blockbusters? (I'm hoping someone can come up with something other than uber photo-realistic cgi, James Cameron, or 3D technology that is going to revolutionize the industry).

Classic! I found a better quality version that's a little easier to read:

Hi Karl, Hulu has the movie up in it's entirety through IMDb, check it out: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035211/trailers This version looks fine to me, I'm guessing there was something strange with the transfer you saw. Or perhaps you can point out what you are seeing in this version.

Perhaps Tilman Büttner could do it?

Hi Jean, Good 35mm projection is tack sharp and shouldn't be fuzzy. My guess is you were at an AMC somewhere with shoddy projection (I don't think you gave that info, maybe I missed it?). I haven't seen Adventureland (except for the trailer) but unless you saw it at a place like Arclight I wouldn't be conjecturing about the Arrilaser or post path.