Watched 2012 over a friends house today pretty decent movie with great special effects the plot could have been a lot better and it had a lot of cheesy moments. I give it a 6.5/10.

Ship in a bottle (S6, episode 12) the sequel to Elementary, Dear Data (S2 episode 3) is the holodeck episode I have the best memories of. Best follow up episode.

Proposing everything is in the Holodeck in Hollow pursuits certainly makes the episode a lot more interesting. I'll keep it in mind when it comes up.

The last episode I watched was Angel One, pretty bad episode.
Before that Datalore, which has a nice start but develops into nonsense. It has better thought out follow ups at least.

@Chris Hu 2012 looked awesome on the projector. There is a lot of downtime in between the big special effects scenes though. And that stuff with the door of the ark not closing, wtf, why don't they go in through the top anyway, terrible design. 6.5 is pretty much spot on.

Have you read Stephen Baxter's Flood and Ark? Much better story, I highly recommend it.

Not much of a reader last time I read a novel was over a decade ago. 

The hobbit runs at 48fps instead of the standard 24fps, shot in 5K but downscaled to the usual 2K (2048x1080) digital intermediate.
After Earth was also filmed in 5K with a 4K digital intermediate (4096x2160) but all the cgi is upscaled from 2048x1080.
This is the End was also shot in 5K with a 4K digital intermediate and I guess since it's a comedy it doesn't have (much) cgi so you get 4 times the resolution throughout the movie in a compatible theater, 8.8 megapixels instead of 2.2 megapixels.

I'll watch Battleship when it comes on Space or Showcase, that's where I watched 2012. They're not really the kind of movies I want to spend money on, most of time anyway. Bits and pieces of 2012 is enough, the stuff in between the cgi scenes is not very good.

I think 2012 is a masterpiece in its genre with many memorable scenes mostly CG but who cares..we have to give Roland E. credit for what he has done after ID it has gone downhill but he still manages to make a decent movie...

I almost forgot ID2 is announced :/

SvennoJ

4096x2160 and 2048x1080 are just projector standarts, the actual movie res. is different and depends on Aspect Ratio, that's why home 4K standart is 3840x2160(1.78:1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Initiatives

Just if you didn't know.

In theater, even 2048x858 movies looks great today.

Yes, I know I didn't want to make it more complicated, until now :)

Anomorphic lenses are not supported by the source format with digital cinema projection so you lose vertical resolution in widescreen as opposed to 35mm film. (They are still used to use all available light from the imaging array of the projector, the system vertically stretches the 2.39:1 2048x858 source to 2048x1080 to be squeezed back into 2.39:1 by the anamorphic lens) So the vertical resolution suffers as opposed to 35mm film.

The same happens on blu-ray, 2.35:1 movies are stored at 1920x817, storing black bars on the disc, while DVDs were enhanced for 16:9 tv's and stored as 720x480 (NTSC) and 720x576 (PAL) then horizontally stretched to 852 pixels wide. One of the reasons a good dvd upscaler can have good results.
I guess they didn't bother with anamorphic blu-rays since the digital 2K movie source doesn't support it, and using native res on digital screens looks best. (Phillips did make a 2560x1080 21:9 tv but it's discontinued, LG still makes them for PC's)

Current digital cinema might not have much of a resolution advantage over blu-ray but it does use 4:4:4 12 bits color, opposed to 4:2:2 8 bit color on blue-ray. Meaning digital cinema prints use 4096 shades for each color for every pixel, while blu-ray has 256 shades of luminance (Y) for every pixel, but only chrominance (UV) info for every other horizontal pixel and every other line, effectively resulting in a 960x540 color image. (To be precise it's 220 shades, 16 is black, 235 is white in YUV)
Digital cinema also supports upto 250 mbps data rate as opposed to 54mbps for blu-ray.


There are already a lot of theaters out there with 4K projectors. If your theater has a 4K projector the flat 1.85:1 1998x1080 and scope 2.39:1 2048x858 are automatically upscaled to 3996x2160 and 4096x1716, the latter which can be further scaled to 4096x2160 to use the full imaging array with an anamorphic lens. That already gives a smoother picture.

After earth, This is the end and next Elysium are actually mastered in 4K (shot in 5K), 4096x1716, finally exceeding the quality of a pristine 35mm print shot with anamorphic lenses. (And maybe one day 8K will make it to the cinema to exceed TODD-AO 70mm film resolution)


The blu-ray disc association still hasn't decided on the final format for 4K home video. The decision is expected later this year. Sony has already released a home theater projector with 4096x2160 resolution, while tv's are adopting quad HD 3840x2160. The latter will most likely make it, hopefully with at least 10 bit color and support for many different frame rates.

@svennoj How is it that in my cinema image is more black from all sides but middle is brighter lol

They might be using a high gain screen to compensate for a bit weaker projector. Or are the walls right up to the screen? Then it could be a screen that rejects ambient light bounced back from the walls, also resulting in a bit darker edges.
It's naturally a bit brighter in the center anyway, unless you project on a curved screen. It shouldn't be that obvious though.