• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Interstellar

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
^^

That entire scene was insane


was Matt Damon in the credits or was it an uncredited cameo? The more I think about it the more brilliant this was - if he was on top billed cast you would've expected him to show up at some point, but since he wasn't that entire subplot was a surprise (at least to me). That was the first time I got Nolan'd in the movie.

Now I wanna see contact and 2001 again =X
 
Last edited:
Good movie. I missed some of Michael Cains dialog the last time he talked to Murphy.

I thought the clusterfuck of Banes voice was going to be a one time thing, but maybe this is a Nolan staple now =P
 
Good movie. I missed some of Michael Cains dialog the last time he talked to Murphy.

I thought the clusterfuck of Banes voice was going to be a one time thing, but maybe this is a Nolan staple now =P

I chalked that up to
"I bet it's kinda tough to talk when you're 30 seconds away from dying"
 
1.jpg


img_8426.jpg


Those 70mm IMAX spools of film are huge. You'll need 2 of those if shown in 3D (one for each eye). :awe:

Yeah, the dome down here at MOSI is pretty wild too, have only been over to it a few times.

Movies not formatted especially for the sphere can look a bit odd sometimes, but is pretty awesome setup. I think they have even corrected for that these days though.

http://www.mosi.org/imax-dome/about-dome-screen.aspx

Fowler-Mosi-2.jpg


t460x279.jpg

2873822315_bf49a3d574_z.jpg


Not driving over today, have a regular IMAX near me but looked and the doe has it on and think will make the drive through the Tampa traffic to see it there next Saturday.

23 miles isn't bad.

Surprised aren't any pics of the projection room online from there, it's all glass fronted and many might not even go look, it's an awesome setup.

Yeah, the film spools are horizontal and look like stock feeders on progressive die setups, and the bulb used for the projector is the same The Cape uses for lighting up the gantries on night launches I believe.

"SMPTE time code synchronization apparatus, the audio played off a series of proprietarily encoded CD-ROM discs. In the late 1990s this system was upgraded to one using a hard drive which carries a single uncompressed audio file containing the 6 channels. These are then converted directly to analogue rather than using a decoding method such as DTS. Like conventional theatres, IMAX theatres place speakers both directly behind the acoustically transparent screen and around the theatre to create a "surround sound" effect. IMAX also provides a "top centre" speaker in addition to the centre speaker found in conventional theatres. This extra channel allows the sound mix engineers to take advantage of the screen's greater height.[12]
Projectors

The 15 kW Xenon short-arc lamp used in IMAX projectors.


Drawing the large film through the projector presented challenges for both the camera and the projector. Conventional 70 mm systems were not steady enough for the 586× magnification. On the projector side, William Shaw adapted an Australian patent for film transport called the "rolling loop" by adding a compressed air "puffer" to accelerate the film, and put a cylindrical lens in the projector's "aperture block". The projector uses a vacuum to pull the film into contact with this lens. Thus the "field flattener" flattens the image field. The lens is twice the height of the film and connects to a pneumatic piston so it can be moved up or down while the projector is running. This way, if a piece of dust comes off the film and sticks to the lens, the projectionist can switch to the clean side of the lens at the push of a button. The lens also has "wiper bars" made of a felt or brush-like material which can wipe dust off the lens as it moves up or down. IMAX projectors are pin stabilized, meaning four registration pins engage the perforations at the corners of the projected frame to ensure perfect alignment. Shaw added cam-controlled arms to decelerate each frame to eliminate the microscopic shaking as the frame "settled" onto the registration pins. The projector's shutter is open around 20% longer than in conventional equipment and the light source is brighter. The xenon short-arc lamps are made of a thin layer of fused quartz and contain xenon gas at a pressure of about 25 atmospheres (367 PSI); because of this, projectionists are required to wear protective body armor when changing or handling these in case the lamp breaks (e.g., due to a drop to the floor) because of the danger from flying quartz shards when propelled by the high pressure of the xenon gas within. An IMAX projector weighs up to 1.8 tonne (2 short tons) and is over 178 cm (6 ft) tall and 195 cm (6 ft) long.
IMAX Corporation has released four projector types that use its 15-perforation, 70 mm film format: GT (Grand Theatre), GT 3D (dual rotor), SR (Small Rotor), and MPX, which was designed for retrofitted theatres.[13] In July 2008, the company introduced a digital projection system, which it has not given a distinct name or brand, designed for multiplex theatres with screens no wider than 21.3 m (70 ft). All IMAX projectors, except the standard GT system, can project 3D images."
 
Last edited:
Another masterpiece. Sure, it's not a perfect movie, but it more than makes up for that.

I saw it in IMAX here. I actually found it to be deafeningly loud. Like so loud i don't want to go see it again in IMAX (even though visually it was amazing).
 
Now I wanna see contact and 2001 again =X

Please do! I watched 2001 in 70mm last weekend for the first time with the two leads in attendance and I saw things I had never seen before even though I have seen the film about 20 times. Was epic.

KT
 
Saw the movie last night. Was okay but dragged on for too long. The "music" was obnoxious - loud and annoying.

Some of the visual effects were great. The science behind them, not so much.

Loved the part inside the event horizon - really imaginative and new.

Loved the way the movie brings out the relativity of time - message is "Enjoy it while it lasts!"
 
Last edited:
Just finished it. Loads of cheesy shit and tonnes of really cool shit. Overall thought it was decent but not great; checked my watch and rolled my eyes several times. Certainly looked cool though.

KT

The Anne Hathaway love speech had me rolling my eyes. And then she just wouldn't shut up about it.

The rendering of the black hole from the outside was really awesome.
 
Saw the movie last night. Was okay but dragged on for too long. The "music" was obnoxious - loud and annoying.

Some of the visual effects were great. The science behind them, not so much.

Loved the part inside the event horizon - really imaginative and new.

Loved the way the movie brings out the relativity of time - message is "Enjoy it while it lasts!"

Really? Physicists are praising the movie's accuracy left and right.
 
^^

That entire scene was insane


was Matt Damon in the credits or was it an uncredited cameo? The more I think about it the more brilliant this was - if he was on top billed cast you would've expected him to show up at some point, but since he wasn't that entire subplot was a surprise (at least to me). That was the first time I got Nolan'd in the movie.

Now I wanna see contact and 2001 again =X

Yeah that one caught me off guard as well. It should be done more often.
 
The Anne Hathaway love speech had me rolling my eyes. And then she just wouldn't shut up about it.

The rendering of the black hole from the outside was really awesome.

Haha, no doubt, and where the hell did that come from? I don't recall any mention of it earlier. It was like a "oh hey guys, by the way, this super important plot point is happening now, just FYI:. 😀

Agree on the black hole. That was freaking awesome.

KT
 
Haha, no doubt, and where the hell did that come from? I don't recall any mention of it earlier. It was like a "oh hey guys, by the way, this super important plot point is happening now, just FYI:. 😀

Agree on the black hole. That was freaking awesome.

KT

That's one piece that will hopefully be made clear with a second viewing.
Cooper had asked Tars about her possibility of a love interest with someone, but I cannot remember who he had said. Tars responded with a "I like discretion" type of comment. I think that is what tipped off Cooper to the idea that she had love-based motives.
 
Really? Physicists are praising the movie's accuracy left and right.

The only part that really seems obviously inaccurate to me was:

When Matt Damon didn't dock properly and blew things up. There was a sizeable fireball in space during that crash, but fireballs can't happen in space because there's no oxygen. It's a common problem with lots of sci-fi explosions.
 
The only part that really seems obviously inaccurate to me was:

When Matt Damon didn't dock properly and blew things up. There was a sizeable fireball in space during that crash, but fireballs can't happen in space because there's no oxygen. It's a common problem with lots of sci-fi explosions.
my girlfriend made that comment to me as well but it appeared the explosion came from within the segment of the Station so that could explode if I'm not mistaken?
 
The only part that really seems obviously inaccurate to me was:

When Matt Damon didn't dock properly and blew things up. There was a sizeable fireball in space during that crash, but fireballs can't happen in space because there's no oxygen. It's a common problem with lots of sci-fi explosions.

I think fuel can explode, because most propulsion methods do not require atmospheric oxygen. I think the explosion destroyed the docked vehicle, which caused the fuel to combust. It wouldn't create a lasting low-grade fire, no... but I think instantaneous burn-offs are very possible.
I cannot remember the scene clearly, but if it was the crew vehicle, I stand by that explanation. If it was internal from the station, there could be enough atmosphere to create a brief fireball. I don't know how the internal section would look in an explosive decompression, but a fuel-heavy object destroyed by said explosive decompression may very well burn up.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top