Don't get fooled into this when you see Iron Man 2

A few years ago I was very excited to see that my local IMAX theater was showing 'Batman Begins'. It was a movie that had already been out for a few years but I never had the chance to see it in the IMAX setting. I was so eager to see this movie. What I left with was disappointment and a curiousity of IMAX features.

I love watching IMAX features. The sheer size of the screen and the detail it provided always made for a good time when I went. So why did 'Batman Begins' look absolutely terrible when I went to see it? The answer I found out was in the camera they used to film the feature. Most movies of today are shot using 35mm cameras or the new hi-def cameras that are available. These pictures are meant to be displayed in one of two aspect ratios at your local theater. These two aspect ratios are either 2.35 to 1 or 1.85 to 1. What this means is that the feature is shown on a screen that is 2.35 times wider than it is tall or 1.85 times wider than it is tall. A hi-def television is of the aspect ratio of 1.78 to 1. When you play a movie that is 2.35 to 1 on your hi-def tv you will get an image that has black bars on the top and bottom of your screen. These aspect ratios have been used for movies for over fifty years. But what is the difference in an IMAX feature?

A true IMAX feature is shot with a 65mm camera on 65mm film. The images are massive and the detail is second to none. But very few feature length movies have ever been shot with 65mm film. Only parts of movies have been shot with this technology. There were a few scenes in 'The Dark Knight' as well as 'Transformers 2' that were shot with 65mm cameras. If you saw those movies in a real IMAX theater then you saw the screen change from a normal picture to one that takes up the entire screen during scenes that were shot with 65mm cameras. The shots are awesome and make the price of the ticket worth it. The success of 'The Dark Knight' made seeing movies on an IMAX screen the choice for movie-goers. Last year, 'Star Trek' was shown on IMAX screens but fans were disappointed in what they saw. Why was that? It's because not one scene in 'Star Trek' was shot using an 65mm camera. They took a movie shot on 35mm and basically zoomed it in so it would be large enough to take up the entire screen. Now that is not exactly what they did but the technique they used distorts the picture and the actual resolution of the picture suffers. One way to avoid seeing movies that are not shot with 65mm cameras on IMAX screens is to check the aspect ratio on IMDB. Movies shot with scenes in 65mm will show an aspect ration of 1.44 to 1. This represents the resolution when the scene switches to 65mm and the picture expands to take up the entire screen. If you look on IMDB for the aspect ratio for 'Iron Man 2', you will see it as 2.35 to 1. This means that if you see this on an IMAX screen you will not be seeing a true IMAX movie. My advice is to stick with seeing it the way it was shot. 'Iron Man 2' was shot using 35mm cameras. Try to find a 35mm showing in your area with the largest screen in the aspect ratio of 2.35 to 1. I think that will be more than pleasing for 'Iron Man' fans.

On another note, Christopher Nolan has stated the he is seeking a way to shoot the third installment of the Batman series completely in 65mm. This will be the first feature length movie to be completely shot in 65mm if he can pull it off. My guess is that he will shoot it in a similar style as 'The Dark Knight'. He may just use the 65mm camera in more scenes. Shooting in 65mm is extremely expensive but my guess is that Nolan will have an open budget considering the success of 'The Dark Knight'.

Another one bites the dust...

Well another year of promising Mavericks basketball has come to an end before the 1st of May. Remember how spoiled we got for a few years? Now it feels like the end of an era. The only problem is that this era never paid off they way we thought it would. As heartbreaking as 2006 was, I think we all thought that we would eventually get back and win it all. And it looked like we might during the '06-'07 season. But that came to a pitiful end and they really haven't stopped since.

Tonight was such a microcosm of the entire season. Slow first half (October thru February), an impressive rally (13 game win streak), and a flat finish to once again bounce this team way too early during one of the last few years of Dirk's prime. There were several reasons why we lost this series but I think you have to look back to the entire season to find out why. Why did such a talented team struggle so much on its home floor? Why did they often start slow and have to rally late in the 4th quarter to such inferior teams? Why did Carlisle say time and again that this team didn't have the energy it needed? I'm sure there are many answers to these questions. Let me make my observations on this position by position.

PG-Without a doubt, Jason Kidd is one of the greatest point-guards in the history of the game. Jason Kidd is 37 years old. His game is not built around scoring. He needed to become a scorer in order for this team to become successful. He went and made himself into a very respectable 3-point shooter and this team benefited from it a great deal. The problem with his 3-point shooting is that it relied on him being wide-open for him to hit these shots. Jason is not at the point of his career where he can create a shot on his own. His drives to the baskets rarely result in points and he often turns the ball over in those situations. Jason Kidd is not a scorer. Look at the great point-guards in the league like Williams, Paul, Billups, and Parker. They are all very good scorers and good defenders. Jason Kidd is still a good defender but not the scorer the Mavs need from that position. Poppovich essentially took Kidd out of the series by not leaving him at the three-point line. Roddy B is the point-guard of the future for the Mavs. He is exactly what Devin Harris was a few years ago. Roddy can get his shot off when he needs to and can drive to the basket. He will be the backup point-guard for this team in the coming year and will eventually take the starting job away from Kidd. JJ Barea is one of the gutsiest players the Mavs have had in some time and I can see why Carlisle stuck with him. At 5'10", he was more fearless in going to the basket than almost anyone on this team. I don't think Barea is back for the '10-'11 season but will definitely find a job in the NBA.

SG-It's tough to write about this position since the Mavs haven't had a true off-guard since Michael Finley left several years ago. Caron Butler is the closest player we have to that position. Caron is a player that this team can use for the next few years. His toughness is something that this team sorely needs. But Caron can't be this team second option if it wants to find success in the next few years. If he is your second best option then you don't have the team that you want to have. I see Caron sliding over and playing his natural small-forward position next year. Jason Terry might be my second favorite Maverick. Jet has given us all some great memories over the years and no one appreciates a crowd like Jason Terry. There have been plenty of times in Jet's career when he took over games. Game seven in San Antonio in 2006 comes to mind. Jet came out in that game and hit his first six or seven shots and helped Dallas win that game. But I think Jet's time here is up. Jet is not the players he was a few years ago. He had less and less games where he would take over and dominate. His defensive lapses were killer to this team. If Jet is to stay with this team I think he can no longer be this teams first option of the bench. I can only see Jet as this teams seventh or eighth option going forward.

SF-Shawn Marion came to this team with great potential. The Matrix was a scorer in Phoenix who never needed a play called for him but still managed to score 18 points a nite. The pairing with him and Jason Kidd seemed like it was exactly what this team needed, if only it was 2004. But this is 2010 and The Matrix can no longer jump and be a threat around the basket that he could in the Phoenix days. Marion had several shots blocked at the basket and that was a sign that he has lost a step or two. His three-point shooting was gone and his overall offensive game lacked what we thought it had. He was still this teams best on the ball defender. But he often had lapses and showed a lack of interest at times. Marion's contract makes him a tough player to trade but some team might see some use out of him. I just don't think Marion is a starter on a team that contends for a title. Now Marion can be a useful weapon off the bench. If he was to accept a role similar to Bruce Bowen then I think this team can use him. I just don't see Marion as the answer at the small-forward going forward and I hope that Caron Butler holds this position starting next year.

PF-Undoubtedly, there will be several who point out Dirk's foul trouble in game six and that he lost control of him emotions. It really bugs me to hear Dirk get criticized. Dirk has never had superstar play along side him in his career. Look at every team that was won an NBA title and tell me that that team didn't have two of the twenty best players in the NBA on their roster. Dirk has never had a player like that on his team. Dirk has done more with less than any player in the NBA. Dwayne Wade gets bounced in the first round and people say he doesn't have enough help. Kobe loses in the first round without Shaq a few years ago and people say Kobe can't do it all alone. Kevin Garnett couldn't get out of the first round for years because he didn't have help around him. For some reason tho, Dirk can have very little help but he will take more criticism than any superstar in this league. The guy has been as tough as any player in the league for the better part of a decade. No one plays thru more pain and no one has done more with less than Dirk Nowitzki. His prime is nearly up. He turns 32 in June. He might have one or two more years of a very high level of play before he starts to go south. Eventually, those injuries are going to catch up with him. He won't be able to return from a severe high ankle sprain in a few days. I really want to see Dirk Nowitzki win a title. If not here then somewhere else. If Mark Cuban can't bring in the proper help then he owes it to Dirk to give him that chance elsewhere. I don't see Dirk as someone who plays well into his late 30's. I think Dirk plays until 36 or maybe 37 and then calls it quits, title or not.

C-Every team who wins the NBA title has had a guy who can play with his back to the basket. Shaq, Duncan, Garnett are just a few that come to mind. Some might say the Bulls teams never had a great post player but Jordon and Pippen could post up almost anyone up and find success. The Mavericks don't have a player like that. Erick Dampier came here with a lot of promise. For a few years Dampier had the reputation of a good defender with the ability to set picks on the offensive end to free up the shooters. But the reality of Dampier has set in. His defensive skills have diminished and he never had a great offensive package to begin with. His hands are awful as he finds difficulty in catching easy passes. He can't finish around the basket and and he gets into foul trouble easily. Dampier should not be a Maverick next year. His contract makes him a valuable trade piece and he is someone Mav fans will not miss. Brendan Heywood may be the best center this team has to offer. His offensive skills are a upgrade from Dampier and he is extremely active on the defensive end. He is someone who the Mavs can feed inside. He usually has a high fieldgoal percentage and can almost be counted on for a double-double if given the minutes. Brendan Heywood is a center that this team can work around for the next few years.

Coach-Rick Carlisle came here after the 2008 season and promised to give this team back to the players. He was a players coach. But many questions loom over Rick Carlisle as Poppovich got the better of him in these playoffs. Why didn't Heywood keep the starting role after Dampier got back? Why did this team lack energy on so many nights? Why wasn't Roddy B given more minutes that Barea seemed to get? Why did Butler and Marion sit out almost the entire second half of game 3? Calisle seemed to preach all the right things but he rarely got his team to do them. This team never played the consistent defense that it needed to play despite having some decent on the ball defenders. I'm really wondering if Rick Carlisle lost this team. This team just did not look ready to play on too many nights. You can't have the biggest game of the year and score eight points in the first quarter without looking at the coach and wondering what's going on. I think Carlisle needs to look at himself and maybe take the blame for how this season ended. I think he had the talent to make a run in the west, maybe not win the west, but at least scare some teams. This team did not respond the way it needed in crucial situations and the coach needs to take some blame for that.



So where does that leave us? The summer of 2010 has officially begun for the Mavs. What does this team need to do to become successful? Lets look at the 2006 team and try to find out why they were the best Mavs team in history.



PG-Jason Terry and Devin Harris held this spot during 2006. What you notice here is two guards who can shoot the ball well as well as penetrate to the basket. The point-guard of today is a superior passer but does not have the ability to create his own shot. I think this position is crucial going forward. The Mavs have to have a point-guard who can breakdown a defense off the dribble.


SG-This position consisted of Adrian Griffin and Jerry Stackhouse. These are two tough minded guards who play physical defense but are not heavily relied on for their scoring. This has always been a position of need for the Mavs since Michael Finley left. I know Joe Johnson will be someone the Mavs will look at if he is available this offseason. Caron Butler filled this position after the trade but I believe he suits this team better as the starting small-forward.


SF-Josh Howard was a very serviceable small-forward before the injuries to his ankles. Since then he has become a shell of his former self. Caron Butler can fill the need for this position nicely. I don't think Shawn Marion is this teams starter at this position next season. He would be great coming off the bench as his days of being an effective starter appear to be coming to an end.


PF-Dirk entered the best patch of his career starting in 2006. He has since played to that level and beyond but those days may be coming to an end. Most players peak years end at about 32-33 years of age. Dirk has to have superstar help or this team will continue to flounder around the first or second round.


C-Damp and Diop occupied this role in 2006 and things weren't much better for this team until the trade this year that brought Heywood in. I think that Heywood is this teams starter next year or is at least involved in a trade to bring in the starter (Bosh). Either way I think this position is improved over the previous few years.

So another pathetic end to a season that looked so promising just a few months ago. It's hard to watch the playoffs knowing the Mavs are out but this doesn't sting like '05, and '06 seasons. The earlier you go out the less it stings and in the end only one team ends up happy. I like to see teams that play the game the right way do well. I hope Utah can make a run. I think Jerry Sloan deserves a title and his team looks good. Only eight franchises have won the title since 1980. The Lakers have a legit chance at repeating but I think I want to see a new team get it done. The Cavs or the Jazz would satisfy my basketball appetite.