• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Dark Knight in its horrible variable aspect ratio

D

Daniel

Well-known member
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
16
So I think to myself "The Dark Knight, that was a good film - maybe I'll watch it" - BAD idea. I was getting back into the feel of the movie, when all of a sudden the ratio suddenly switches from 16:9 (1.78:1) to 64:27 (2.37:1) - and I think to myself "what the hell?" Then I stop watching the film, and instead look at the remainder of the film in segments - and I figure "this thing's broken". I really don't know if I can bare to sit through the entire movie like this now - all I know is it spoiled for me what was going to be a good movie. Apparently it's what the director wanted - but then I don't really care if he wanted to paint the entire movie in a deep red hue tint; it's a horrible horrible thing to do. A quick google search reveals that IMAX cinemas showed the "changing ratio"... but I have news for you - Imax screens are 3:4 in aspect ratio (well 1.44:1 which may as well be 3:4).

Before I close the deal on this monstrosity, I will try and watch the film in its entirety. But I still feel that it was VERY wrong to distribute a movie containing aspect ratio switching - especially as the ratio switches all the way throughout the film and not just "once or twice" which I'd be more inclined to understand (as long as it was justified as by being at the start of the film). But I suspect it'll be as horrible as Spielberg's Schindler's List with that awful distracting red coat - thankfully if I ever want to watch that film again I can remember to turn the colour off on my system first.
 
Does the Blu-Ray truly not contain a theatrical ratio version as well as the IMAX presentation?

If so, I'm glad I bought the DVD. A shifting aspect ratio would drive me up the wall.
 
Do you remember watching pan&scan movies where there'd be one or two widescreen scenes (as well as often widescreen credits at the start & end of the film)? I always found that noticeable - but not as irritable (considering that the alternative is an artificial "pan" of the shot). Thankfully it's not mine - brings back memories of when I wasn't impressed by DVD when it came out (and with good reason - the encoding of the time looked horrible compared to what we get now). I'm glad I haven't bought the format myself yet as it may be technically spectacular - the hardware itself is still way below par. I've inserted regular Australian discs into the panasonic Bluray player to be met with an "incorrect region" error message after the machine took its time thinking, and then had to re-insert the disc (which was, of course, the correct region). "At home my DVD player doesn't give a F. what region my disc is, not to mention it doesn't take a minute and a half just to load the disc". I think the argument is that the "IMAX" release was theatrical - but it's still such a bad idea. I mean, you have the choice of what aspect ratio to film for from the beginning - now I don't mind if you want 3:4, 16:9 or 2.35/2.40:1, but there's no artistic merit to changing the ratio throughout the film. And besides, you can format the film in ANY ratio and still show it on an IMAX screen. This isn't the only movie that's been shot on two different film stocks, and that isn't an excuse to switch the ratio. The funny thing is not all the "action" scenes are IMAX - so some of the heavy action is occurring in 1.78:1, while others are in 2.35:1. Anyway, I will try to watch the film start-to-finish in this "format". I will then attempt to conclude on my viewing if - a. it is acceptable; b. it should be formatted in 2.35:1 or c. should be formatted in 1.78:1.

I've seen online reviews which claim that the IMAX scenes contain more detail. And I think to myself "no level of detail is lost in a crop" and also "that's a bunch of bollocks - the movie is only in HD resolution, not IMAX resolution!"

There are two discs - but only one version of the film.
 
I just watched the Blu Ray on my home theater, and the aspect change didn't bother me in the slightest. I knew beforehand that the IMAX scenes were presented in their OAR and that it would shift. They're all big scenes, so it just adds to the depth of the shot. You had better not watch Dr. Strangelove, it would drive you mad with it's repeatedly changing aspect ratios.
 
Wow, that would drive me up the wall also. :???:
 
Uncanny Antman said:
Does the Blu-Ray truly not contain a theatrical ratio version as well as the IMAX presentation?

If so, I'm glad I bought the DVD. A shifting aspect ratio would drive me up the wall.
Click to expand...
I'm getting used to changing aspect ratios with HDTV and standard broadcasts, but yeah, with DVDs that would drive me a little nuts.
 
I agree that the BR should have the option to view a cropped (for IMAX shots) version but personally, it didnt bother me at all.
 
On the 2 disc special edition the aspect ratios are not mixed. However, the second disc contains the IMAX scenes available to watch separately. It's cool, there is a lot more to the image, but it's very strange that they did not have an option to view it both ways on the Blu-Ray.

With all the gobs of money Dark Knight made I wonder if this test run will lead to Batman 3 being the first full length Hollywood film to be shot entirely in the IMAX format...
 
The movie is good, but the framing is terrible. There are several times in the movie where the IMAX format lasts only a few seconds, it's very distracting and distasteful. In fact the very first shot of the film is the Bat-logo in 2.35:1 - and it instantly switches straight to 1.78:1 for the remainder of the opening. I couldn't notice a significant difference in quality (viewing 720p). There was no consistency in which shots were IMAX and which weren't - many scenes incorporated both; and IMAX certainly wasn't limited to just action; while other action scenes were in 2.35:1. While either aspect ratio could have potentially worked for the film, I'd go with the 2.35:1 ratio because it just feels like the movie is filmed for it, whereas the 1.78:1 scenes feel like they don't belong. It makes you feel like you're watching standard Pan & Scan - but if you pay attention you realize that the framing of the shots is entirely different to the framing of 2.35:1. I dunno, it may not have been as bad if the framing was tighter - but it wasn't. The fact that this was shown like this in IMAX cinemas makes me also believe that IMAX customers deserved better.

I did notice something I didn't notice in cinemas - one shot where the Joker isn't wearing his make-up - I had never realized this was in the movie. The only real disappointment to the film itself is that Two-Face is not only two-faced, but entirely two-dimensional as well.
 
Daniel said:
The only real disappointment to the film itself is that Two-Face is not only two-faced, but entirely two-dimensional as well.
Click to expand...
Not as two-dimensional as Tommy Lee's version in Batman Forever. :p
 
JasonN said:
Not as two-dimensional as Tommy Lee's version in Batman Forever. :p
Click to expand...
One dimension. If that. :)

Anyway, I've had a look at the IMAX scenes now, and I have to say...I prefer the 2:35 framing in most of the shots.
 
I personally felt the IMAX shots were gorgeous. I noticed the shift, but it didn't bother me. Now, I admite, if it was DVD and not Bluray and it did that; I would be ill.... But ever since I got my HD set, I kinda hoped more movies would try to maintain a strict 16:9 ratio, so I could fill my HD screen. Minor issue. I thought The Dark Knight was a great Bluray disc.
 
mrbenja0618 said:
...ever since I got my HD set, I kinda hoped more movies would try to maintain a strict 16:9 ratio, so I could fill my HD screen.
Click to expand...
No offense, but that is exactly the kind of thinking that had us stuck with pan and scan releases of movies for so damn long.

DVD finally busted a lot of people loose of that mentality...I'd hate to see us swing back again so soon.
 
It's this which makes me wish they'd used 2.40:1 as the default aspect for HDTVs...
 
Ghostcut said:
It's this which makes me wish they'd used 2.40:1 as the default aspect for HDTVs...
Click to expand...
Or do that... Actually makes more sense... If they were trying to make TV's more film-like, why not go by the film standard.
 
so is there no version that has all of these scenes presented in one apect ratio? doesnt sound like it. seems like a good idea for a custom DVD.
 
the DVD is in one AR.
 
AvP said:
the DVD is in one AR.
Click to expand...

yes, but does it have the same runtime as the version with the IMAX scenes? or are those scenes just duplicated in a different aspect ratio as a bonus feature?
 
It includes the IMAX scenes. They're vital to the plot.
 
ok cool. so the Blue Ray has the same footage, yet they just presented it in all the weird aspect ratios? totally weird. that would drive me batty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom