Star Wars: Episode VII to Feature a Single Sequence Shot With IMAX Cameras?

Episode VII IMAXIn an article posted by Variety about the IMAX technology and how it was used in Christopher Nolan’s latest movie Interstellar, it was revealed that Episode VII will actually use this format in only one sequence…

 

From Variety:

Nolan has helped convince other top directors, such as J.J. Abrams and Michael Bay, to embrace the company, giving the megascreen format an injection of cool. Shooting in Imax gives their films a stamp of quality with the fanboys who can make or break a comicbook epic or space opera.

 

But there are drawbacks. The cameras, particularly those for film, are large and loud. They’re great for action sequences and epic battles, but problematic for intimate scenes.

 

“The benefits outweigh the headache of shooting on Imax cameras,” says Abrams, who used them for a single sequence in “Star Wars.” “The opportunity to have an action sequence for this movie done in Imax’s natural format was too delicious an idea to pass up. As a filmgoer, it’s something I want to see.”

 

As you remember the picture above was posted by Bad Robot on Twitter during the Abu Dhabi shoot. So we can assume that this single sequence will be from this desert planet.

 

Thanks to Cantina member MagnarTheGreat for the heads up.

 

Website | + posts

Founder of SWNN, MNN and The Cantina forums.

Born on April 24, 1980.

Val Trichkov (Viral Hide)

Founder of SWNN, MNN and The Cantina forums.Born on April 24, 1980.

34 thoughts on “Star Wars: Episode VII to Feature a Single Sequence Shot With IMAX Cameras?

  • October 30, 2014 at 6:04 pm
    Permalink

    I hate when movies are partialy shot in IMAX and the ratio keeps changing while you watch the movie.

    • October 30, 2014 at 6:42 pm
      Permalink

      ratio is easy to alter in editing…maybe he will do that.

  • October 30, 2014 at 6:41 pm
    Permalink

    The dessert planet? Assuming you can only visit there on a Sundae? 😉

  • October 30, 2014 at 6:44 pm
    Permalink

    Ymmmm, dessert planet!

  • October 30, 2014 at 6:56 pm
    Permalink

    I’m guessing, it will be the crashing Tie Fighter at the beginning at the movie, after the crawl faded out.

  • October 30, 2014 at 6:58 pm
    Permalink

    If ” They’re great for action sequences and epic battles, but problematic for intimate scenes. ” in conjunction with ” only one scene is shot in IMAX ” implies that there is only one action scene in ep7, I would be happy indeed. Unfurtunately JJ has shown that he is quite cabable of adding senseless action scenes in his recent molestings of the Star Trek franchise. As long as no 3d is used it might acually turn out to be an enjoyable movie. The hobbit movies were exuberantly irritating with the continuous distractions by minuscle parts of saliva, gravel, hymenopterans, screws and boogers flying in the face of the audience. I admit in the case of the hobbit it turned the attention away from bad dialog and Blooms ill-vested visage.

    • October 30, 2014 at 7:32 pm
      Permalink

      Following to your comment comes the guy telling you to not watch the movie then. Wait for five seconds. Here hr comes….

    • October 30, 2014 at 7:39 pm
      Permalink

      Oh boy. Here we go again with yet another Hobbit whiner. Look, there are things I don’t like about them either, but they’re not as bad as people are saying. Give it a rest.

      If you don’t like the series, don’t watch them!

      • October 30, 2014 at 11:02 pm
        Permalink

        LotR = OT, Hobbit = PT

        • October 31, 2014 at 12:09 am
          Permalink

          Actually LOTR=PT certainly not the OT which was analog and done in such a different way as it was made on film as opposed LOTR which was shoot on film but not made on film.

          The Hobbit uses no miniatures at all while the PT had more miniatures in each single movie than the entire OT combined and likely more than the ST will even if they do use miniatures which they won’t have to and depending on the situation may or may not use them.

        • October 31, 2014 at 2:07 pm
          Permalink

          Once Peter Jackson applied to Oxford university and got rejected (acutally in a rather harsh way, the rejection letter said something like “your IQ is not high enough”, and “your grasp of language is insufficient”, …). Since then the B-movie maker plotted his revenge on the Brits. In a blind attack of Kiwi nationalism he destroyed one of Oxfords beloved pieces of literature and turnied it into brainless jump & run movies. The (still alive) Tolkiens are disgusted by it as would JRR be (this can be deduced by a comment JRR wrote on a previous script for a hollywood adaptation) and PJ is content.

        • October 31, 2014 at 2:13 pm
          Permalink

          Yes LOTR was better then the Hobbit, still very bad. It had pointless scenes in it that only made Nazgul look like incompetent gits. It also had very bad actors like Boom, Wood, … that just showed one facial expression throught the entire film triology. In the hobbit PJ added a new dimension of bad: His constant camera movements and the computer-game look.

        • October 31, 2014 at 2:14 pm
          Permalink

          Comments from people using disrespectful usernames will be deleted.

      • October 31, 2014 at 2:18 pm
        Permalink

        Hey good idea “not to watch it”. Why didn’t I think of that. Ah well because you don’t know beforehand, my psychic powers were below average when I bought the tickets.

        Actually there is more to it. PJ (and copyright issues) is the reason why for a long time no compentent director will attempt an adaptation. The BBC with a director versed in period drama would be the ideal team to adapt Tolkiens material NOT a B-movie splatter film-maker that cant tell the difference between continental and British Jugendstil.

      • October 31, 2014 at 2:35 pm
        Permalink

        I don’t know, suppose it’s a matter of tast. Some might find it visually pleasing. But I still think PJ completely missrepresents the books. The books are not really about story and action, but about the celebration of language, its sounds, its beauty. Even if some good actors with stage background were chosen there is so little dialog, mostly extremly poore holywood-one-liner. Even McKellen and Freeman can not undo the incompetence of Orlando Bloom or Lee Pace. Plastic woods, farting-jokes, poor horror-design (Orcs and Sauron looked more like creatures from PJs previous movies “braindead” and “bad taste”), did the rest for me.

    • October 30, 2014 at 8:41 pm
      Permalink

      Just look at Star Trek as a (necessary) stepping stone to get to Star Wars.

      • October 30, 2014 at 9:26 pm
        Permalink

        I agree, the Hobbit films are irritating but I bought them because the 3D in those films is very impressive.

        I don’t agree about Star Trek “molestation” though… I mean there are already some pretty terrible Star Trek films… including the first film. I will agree into darkness doesn’t do wrath of khan justice… but it is visually pleasing. I think we all know JJ abrams was born to direct SW after seeing those new Star Treks.

        I’m sure Star Wars will be in 3D… I guess we’ll see how good it is. I wasn’t impressed with Into Darkness’s 3D quality but there might be other people involved with the 3D processing… though it’s the same cinematographers / production company handling the filming. But I’ve found that films with excellent 3D don’t look as good in 2D & vice versa.

  • October 30, 2014 at 7:13 pm
    Permalink

    Usually I hope to be a quite progressive person, but somehow with cinema experiences I am more of a sceptic. In the old days it was merely scrotal pruritus that could hamper ones Saturday cinematic experince, otherwise one could bum around in the comfy cinema seats, at which ever position your spinal cord would accomodate. Now, I have to sit upright, fight 3d nausea and facial spasms due to humongous glasses, constantly tarnished glasses, that is.
    But I suppose I am not really the target group of some of todays action films.

    • October 30, 2014 at 8:45 pm
      Permalink

      Theres a new tech on the horizon that will eliminate the glasses. Stay tuned.

      • October 30, 2014 at 8:57 pm
        Permalink

        3D contact lenses?

        • October 30, 2014 at 9:33 pm
          Permalink

          You could just see the 2D version.

          I doubt glasses free-projection will come in time for episode VII. There are TV’s being developed with glasses free 3D (Ultra D 3D & Dolby has some tech in the works… but not for projection). These will probably be premium displays I’m guessing at least 2 to 3 thousand dollars.

          I’ve heard ultra D is better for nausea caused by 3D. Are your eyes different from one another (like as in, do you have different prescription glasses for each eye?) I’ve heard that’s an issue for 3D convergence.

          Otherwise there are certain types of 3D that are better for people who experience nausea.

          In 5 or so years there will be hybrid holographic which will eliminate the focus convergence issue. That will be a 3D tech that will allow the person’s eyes to focus on any part of the image, as opposed to having the film director doing it for you.

          • October 30, 2014 at 11:14 pm
            Permalink

            Normal film looks 3D to the human eye in the sense that it has depth. Current 3D is a pointles gimmick because it’s just bolted on to normal films. If they ever create true 3D films they’ll have to redesign cinemas.

          • October 31, 2014 at 1:08 am
            Permalink

            Depends on the film you are watching… some 3D is good, some is bad. It depends on how they transfer or film it.

          • October 31, 2014 at 11:09 pm
            Permalink

            Like Star Trek hologram decks? You’ll need eyes in the back of your head then, to watch all that’s going on in the movie.

          • November 2, 2014 at 12:24 am
            Permalink

            Probably more like theatre in the round.

          • October 31, 2014 at 12:02 am
            Permalink

            It’s called TrueD and its being developed by a startup tech company in collaboration with Sony & DLP. No contacts, really something revolutionary. Not in time for 7, but on the horizon.

            JJ2, I completely agree about redesigning cinemas. Aside from the traditional theater system being severely archaic, it’s a necessity for this tech to work.

          • October 31, 2014 at 2:36 am
            Permalink

            Sorry I was talking about tv’s… Ultra D is the company working on 3D glasses-less 3D.

            I’d like to believe theaters will upgrade… & some are (I think IMAX is installing laser projectors) but it was a huge cost for theaters & studios to have digital projectors installed. I do think it’s necessary but at the same time I’m not sure if movies are attracting enough audience members to make it worthwhile for the upgrade. When I go to see movies I see a lot of empty seats… even on premier nights.

            + the premium theaters don’t even utilize what they are advertising. I’m obsessed with Dolby Atmos and have gone to see Atmos film relesases in theaters with Atmos installed… but not activated.

  • October 30, 2014 at 9:14 pm
    Permalink

    good lord mann! ..frist jj claims the “cameras” ate to weighty and bulky,…etcknow he’s changed his mind! geeesh! c’mon let stick to one plan..dont do the “batman” movie thing ,film imax here and there! oh well,..cheers

    • October 30, 2014 at 9:37 pm
      Permalink

      JJ had used IMAX cameras for some into darkness scenes… IMAX was mentioned before too. Had he ever said that he absolutely wouldn’t shoot in IMAX?

      I don’t think he’s changed his mind about the cameras, I mean no one can change their mind because the cameras just *are* too bulky & weighty. The Dark Knight had to change the ratio constantly because of the out-door IMAX scenes. That doesn’t bother me as much as it bothers others.

  • October 30, 2014 at 9:30 pm
    Permalink

    Maybe it will be a scene like the sun rising in the desert in Laurence of Arabia except it will be Tatooine and 2 suns followed by a crashing Tie Fighter. And a John Williams dramatic score. In Imax,

  • October 30, 2014 at 11:30 pm
    Permalink

    I can’t wait to see this sequence.

  • October 31, 2014 at 6:38 am
    Permalink

    That’s so intense that he’s supposedly a stormtrooper deserter. He probably got ordered to do something that was certain death or to kill his buddy or slaughter a family at close range or something (and meanwhile he’s probably going through withdrawal from stormtrooper drugs that numb the emotions like peneural in THX1138) and, man, that moment where he bolts and there is no going back and he’s totally alone in a vast world that he has only seen in a videogame-like way from his temperature controled helmet but now he has no access to that protection and his world turns on its head and…. I’m getting ahead of myself.

Comments are closed.

LATEST POSTS ON MOVIE NEWS NET