Writer/Director - Christopher Nolan

**P_R** · 6th July 2010, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by kid-glove

Read a review on "Inception" book-ended with 'Kubrick would have been proud'. Preceded by 'dazzling mindtrip'. Not that I cringed, but it's absurd to someone (like me) who regards Nolan to be a very different filmmaker..

I have found Nolan a whole lot more enjoyable and intelligible (a precondition for enjoyability I guess

). So ekkuththappA edhirpAkkurEn.

**Google Adsense** · 6th July 2010 06:39 PM

**Nerd** · 6th July 2010, 09:01 PM

http://beta.rottentomatoes.com/m/inception/ - Fantastic initial reviews. Will quite easily be the best film of the year. Looking forward is an understatement.

**kid-glove** · 9th July 2010, 11:01 AM

Because, of course, you're not really looking
http://twitpic.com/23nrm3/full

**kid-glove** · 9th July 2010, 11:31 AM

"I'm not a huge fan of 3-D."

The director of "The Dark Knight" added that, after doing 3-D tests, his new film "Inception" will not be released in the trendy stereoscopic format because "we didn't have time to do it to the standards that I would be happy with."

"The truth is, I think it's a misnomer to call it 3-D versus 2-D. The whole point of cinematic imagery is it's three-dimensional. ... You know, 95% of our depth cues come from occlusion, resolution, color and so forth, so the idea of calling a 2-D movie a '2-D movie' is a little misleading."

"The truth of it is when you watch a film in here, you're looking at 16 foot-lamberts, When you watch through any of the conventional 3-D processes you're giving up three foot-lamberts. A massive difference. You're not that aware of it because once you're 'in that world,' your eye compensates, but having struggled for years to get theaters get up to the proper brightness, we're not sticking polarized filters in everything."

"Well, let me put it this way: There is no question if audiences want to watch films in stereoscopic imaging, that's what the studios will be doing, and that's what I'll be doing."

"We did tests on 'Inception' with the different post-conversion processes, and they all went very well. It's quite easy to do, in fact. But it takes a little time, and we didn't have time to do it to the standards that I would be happy with."

"It's all based on all the visual-effects technology, you know, that we're currently most engaged in with match moving, so forth, and rendering 2-D imagery into a 3-D space. ... On a technical level, it's fascinating, but on an experiential level, I find the dimness of the image extremely alienating."

"There are a lot of problems with it ... the idea of shooting a whole film through a massive beam-splitter and so forth -- there are enormous compromises. Post-conversion technologies probably, for me, are definitely the future, but really it is up to the audiences what they want to see and how they want to watch their films."

"I'm certainly quite pleased with 'Inception' as presented -- it's very bright and very clear, so as the technology improves, those differences may change, and that is what I hope for."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/hero...hollywood.html