Estás usando un navegador desactualizado. Es posible que no muestre este u otros sitios web correctamente. Deberías actualizar o usar un navegador alternativo.
Nolan's The Odyssey - Potentially could be epic or an epic flop.
It's not a great film, it's very....Christopher Nolan. But's it's not that terrible. I'm sure enough normies will slurp it up for it to break even at least. No doubt the culture warriors will scream that it's a victory for their side no matter the outcome anyway. My opinion would be the woke casting was just solely so they could qualify for Oscar nominations as the nigger and Page are barely in it.
Probably not gonna break even. And this is all Nolan's fault. He's too big to say no. He has an auteur license. He made most of the major decisions. They all stem from him being a shitlib. Simple as.
"You haven't got a penis! What are you going to do? Stitch one out of felt and carry it in your pocket?"
"It's called a packer, and it's not felt."
"What?!"
"I sewed it out of yarn. Do you want to see it?"
"No!"
Only 3 of those screens show it properly on IMAX70mm, only 2 have a digital 1.43:1 backup capability, Manchester and LSM - and you don't want those seats.
And yes, it is common, the BFI is known for always selling out when they show interstellar.
Also, are they always flush to the floor like that? Traditional cinema screens are higher up meaning that it's less of an issue when someone stands up to walk out.
Yes, but IMAX screens usually include a Trench in actual GT Screens. The exception is TCL in California as that uses coverings to turn it into a GT screen.
This shows the trench well
I have multiple other posts going into the format in this thread.
There are only like 31 true 70mm IMAX screens (Nolan's weird obsession, less than half of which are in the US) around the world. The rest are varying sizes of screens bigger than normal theaters with slightly better compressed digital quality, about 1800 in 90 countries. Two of the London IMAX screens are 70mm, Waterloo and South Kensington. Normies really don't care/know the difference so the brand is basically an advertising ploy to upcharge, outside of diehard cinephiles who will seek out the 70mm screens the same way vinyl record autists do. But yes, the front rows are always the last to book with the screens being so big and exacerbating the normal theater neck syndrome you get. I've only ever been to one once and have never wanted to go back.
41 true 70mm IMAX screens, The Odyssey may be many things, but at least it has the troon number, we must give them that. I don't know the true number off of the top of my head of locations that can show it in fully in 1.43:1 but there are like 10-15 with an actual digital backup in 1.43:1. I do like actual IMAX, but i'm autistic enough to get the seats I want.
Look, this woman isn't attractive to begin with in other pics I've found of her, but holy shit does she looks like a trooned-out Mike Myers in this one.
More 20 year old movies better than modern ones in terms of effects and cinematography. The technology does not help Nolan, it makes it more embarrassing.
Also, Kiera Knightly is more attractive than all of the women in the movie. And Knightly was lacking in endowment.
The leak is hilarious. Watching that pooner run around in armor, looking like a malnourished midget compared to actual men will never not get a full on belly laugh out of me.
Look, this woman isn't attractive to begin with in other pics I've found of her, but holy shit does she looks like a trooned-out Mike Myers in this one.
The first thing I did after Googling her was trying to find the Madam's apple. The Louis Theorux with long hair head, the shitty tats and the name Emily screamed tranny.
Nolan uses and has always used CGI, going all the way back to Batman Begins. The primary facility he employs for this was Double Negative (now called DNEG after it was purchased by Prime Focus). He just uses it very sparingly (and a lot of the time, badly), and leans into the no CGI schtick to appeal to the pure cinema angle he sells his movies on
Nolan uses and has always used CGI, going all the way back to Batman Begins. The primary facility he employs for this was Double Negative (now called DNEG after it was purchased by Prime Focus). He just uses it very sparingly (and a lot of the time, badly), and leans into the no CGI schtick to appeal to the pure cinema angle he sells his movies on
From what I read he hasn't used it since he started shooting in Imax because he was against making a digital copy of the movie to add the CGI to the film, hench the empty beaches in Dunkirk and him waiting all day for a rainbow to go away in this movie.
With the dim lighting Helen of Troy is going to be borderline invisible in some scenes. You won't even be able to tell if she's there or if she took off to steal someone's TV.
You're just wrong. He has openly said he avoids using it "when possible". Look at the fucking cyclops. He built a practical statue but used CGI to fill in what wasn't possible to do practically. Oppenheimer had 200 shots with CGI. He is very open out this, you're just being intentionally ignorant.
With the dim lighting Helen of Troy is going to be borderline invisible in some scenes. You won't even be able to tell if she's there or if she took off to steal someone's TV.
1) No Gods in the film. Except for Athena. To me, that's like if you made Lord of the Rings without the ring's corrupting power or destiny. They're a core part of the story.
2) People are thinking this whole movie is just a way to own the chuds. Hollywood rubbing the chuds noses into it. To a point, sure. But I still think its just hollywood being anti-white and shitlib. And that includes the agenda to own the chuds.
