And 4 out of 9 in SCOTUS don't neither.

There's my upvote.

Honest opinion, song is well structured, but has no hook. Nothing that grabs me. Also, there are some weird production choices. At several points, I thought I heard my vacuum cleaner turning itself on before I realized that sound came from your song.

How are you going to prove that you'll walk the distance?

Thank you so much. I'll eat my words, you were right.

DNEG also appears as a logo on the video I posted. Interesting.

But do you work or are studying filmmaking or animation?

Full agree. It's just another version. Why not let the consumer choose how to watch your media, if you have options available?

I'd also be pretty happy with the 16:9 IMAX version. Same with Blade Runner 2049.

That's interesting. It makes sense to move objects around to fit the framing on both formats, and makes me less sad that I'm not getting the most visual information possible.

I mean, I was sad that there were some shots that the 4:3 worked so much better, like the circular rotating ceiling door opening up, or the shot from the balcony above overviewing the spice harvester carriers with the baloons (there's a whole ship missing in ultra-wide) or the shot of Paul being pulled by Gurney into the thopter while the sandworm swallows the harvester in the background.

Please do. I'm interested to hear more. Also, did you work in the production of this film, or in something related to it in any way?

https://youtu.be/yqnyksnpnHI

According to this video, the sourcing of the ultra-wide version from the 4:3 IMAX version was not done with "digitally adding sides to the image".

That process would not make any sense anyway. Why spend time and resources to add CGI to the sides of the screen, if you can just film the shot you want in ultrawide with IMAX cameras and crop out the top and bottom sections you don't want for the theatrical ultra-wide release, release the full picture in IMAX and spend all the CGI budget refining the effects so they look as realistic as possible?