What is the point? Went to see it last Tuesday at the Greenwich Odeon and was appalled by the picture quality. How is a film from 1981 shot on 35mm going to look any better in IMAX? The screen was too big, forcing me to sit at the very back of the cinema to get any kind of crisp image. My eyes were straining for the first 20 minutes. There was also some kind of digital buzzing going on where areas of the two projections were not aligning properly. Compared to the wonderful screening of JAWS earlier this year, the experience was very disappointing. I didn't even notice any improvement in the 'digitally restoration' and if anything noticed more faults in the film quality (some grainy shots in south America). I eventually began to enjoy the film in the last half but I have to say it didn't seem that different to watching it on DVD. From a directors point of view I did notice in this viewing how many scenes were covered in just one shot tracking backwards and forwards and left to right with just a few additional cutaways. He also uses shadows extensively throughout the film often saving him from shooting a reverse. I suspect these were all techniques used to speed up the production so he could come in within budget and finish principal photography several days earlier that scheduled.
No comments:
Post a Comment