EPandAmerica said:
I've been off the U2 wagon. What IMAX movie?
A normal film is shot on 35mm film wherein the frame size is 22mm X 16mm (35mm diagonal)
Imax is shot on film wherein each frame is 69mm X 45mm, giving it a larger surface area for exposure, and thus a much clearer picture...
and, (here is the important part) it is projected onto a screen that is a much larger one than typical formats (the average IMAX screen is 8 stories in height and 80 feet wide)
and as for the 3d process, it isn't the red eye blue eye glasses (anaglyph 3d) that you see in the movies. Contrary to popular belief, this method has only been used a handful of times, and the majority of 3d films are polarized (two images are projected simultaneously and the clear color-free glasses unite the images in the viewer's eye creating the illusion of depth perception)
Long story short...
In the past 5 years, James Cameron and his crew have been developing a new kind of HD 3d film technology that shoots digitally (even higher resolution than IMAX already was capable of) and looks more realistic (If any of you saw POLAR EXPRESS in IMAX 3d, you will understand the difference)
Thanks to these new technologies, expect a massive screen with the best theatrical sound possible, and full color high def (possibly the best picture you'll ever see at the theater) image, with the most up to date 3D effects currently available.
And judging by the setlist from last night, (and hoping that they don't trim it the way they usually do for a U2 filmed release) it is going to be an awesome show.
One item of note, To the best of my knowledge, there is a common rule of thumb that IMAX movies DON'T exceed 2 hours in length. They trimmed down Star Wars episode 2 and both Matrix Sequels to fit into that alotted timespan, so don't be surprised if they do the same to the U2 film. (the reason they give is that more than 2 hours in an IMAX presentation can cause disorientation, and, appropriately enough - vertigo)