Owh Hello Dr. Watson.

The intention of Peter Jackson for this movie:

HFR 3D and Dolby Atmos.

the nearest Atmos available? The Embassy Theatre at Wellington New Zealand. The oddpart is having the distributor saying Cinemas can handle HFR 3D here! But we're close to 1 week away from the release. Well, we can only hope no delays.

TO KLCC MY BRETHREN!

Good to know GSC also has it.

Officially on this Thursday.

I feel it's the other way around. And I ride a bike.

I wonder on the height now rather than the width.

---

Added on December 11, 2012, 2:47 pm"As you can see, traditional dimensions for a genuine IMAX screen are 76' x 97', whereas these newfangled ones are 28' x 58' or thereabouts. Just as important, faux-IMAX screens use dual digital projectors rather than projecting 70-mm film, per true IMAX standards."

So if according to this dude... We're half way through the original IMAX screen?

This post has been edited by Kyoyagami: Dec 11 2012, 02:47 PM

TGv you may refer to their facebook post.

GSC nothing yet. Or maybe they aren't doing that.

not all. But some.

At first I thought it was 7 rows, but it was actually 12. Seems like there's some issue with booking at the moment.

But 29 seats in a whole row. Now that's something.

It's more of the projector enables you to have disposable 3D glasses.

You're getting Star Trek Into Darkness for 9 minutes. Quit complaining.

The real question right now is if Into Darkness is in 3D or 2D. Even if it's just post converted.

Did you complaint to TGV? Because they heavily marketed that last week.

What I meant was in this prologue. Not the whole movie.

You'll be hurt. Censorship has not passed Star Trek yet. That's why it's omitted.

---

Added on December 14, 2012, 3:21 pmAh 48FPS... You have truly changed everything I believe in movies. Of course, next would be Atmos. But that's not here yet, and probably won't be so soon.

But my simple take is that 48fps changes everything. I think it's A WAY to go. Definitely a new option to undertake like how IMAX movies are made. The shots taken were spectacular and evenly paced. Action does not become blurry (i'm looking at you Captain America) and everything looks smooth. Brightness uplifted and depth levels were astounding.

I had some issue trying to see what was real and what was CGI at times. Since it was successful in blurring that line, I felt more compelled to give it more another thumbs up.

As for the movie, never followed LOTR, but I wished I had more of Bilbo Baggins. Really did. Martin Freeman was amazing, although Armitage also gave a good one. I felt the screen time was equal to everyone.

But i felt there was some issue with editing. Mainly during the Goblin one.

This post has been edited by Kyoyagami: Dec 14 2012, 03:21 PM

All butthurt blaming TGV. Kesian...

In other words, it's only false because it's not proven true.

I'd blame FINAS. But hey, finger pointing never lead to anywhere anyways.

That you'll have to refer to TGV's facebook post on which theaters have them in 48fps. Limited though sadly.

That is a major spoiler right there.

Are you sure Cumberbatch is The Necromancer? Because he is casted as Smaug.