Missing is quite entertaining. Some fun twists, etc. Good time at the movies imo.

Probably not, but he's extremely good at it for sure.

Thom Andersen's Los Angeles Plays Itself is L.A. cannon.

Chantal Akerman's News From Home is maybe the best look at New York in the '70s that you can find.

Guess we're just gonna ignore the obvious gay subtext going on in the film.

Yeah, the way I tend to think about it, especially in the case of Dune, is that it was specifically design for two aspect ratios (and a third technically in between). So with the scope ratio I’m not actually missing anything per se, I’m just seeing the image Villeneuve intended for the majority of screening venues, including at home. I can be confident that he composed the images to work well in that aspect ratio, and they do.

Meanwhile, the 1.43:1 ratio shots were designed both for that ratio, but also for viewing that ratio on the IMAX-sized screen, and I can respect deciding not to expand it for the home video version.

What’s too bad is that the 1.43:1 version is not made available for us to see at home how those images were composed. I wish we could get that version, even just as an extra. I know there was a Dark Knight trilogy box set that had a special feature with all the IMAX footage full frame, and I’d happily take something like that for movies like Dune, Dunkirk, Interstellar, Tenet, etc.

The best Carpenters movie has already been made and it's called Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story, one of the greatest films of all time (not hyperbole).

That video only has the shots in it that were made available in a couple of IMAX teasers and a VFX real. People involved in the film have already explained that while most of the IMAX shots were just done by shooting at the 4:3ish ratio, there are also some shots that were extended on the sides for the widescreen version, along with some shots where objects in the frame were moved around digitally to better fit the framing for each format.

Mubi is very much something! A ton of great films on there.

Best recommendation I can offer is to simply watch more and more films, try not to think too much, and let the emotions of them, or the images or sound or what have you kind of wash over you to the extent that you can. And then read, read, read. Look up serious criticism about film. Not Letterboxd or YouTube reviews, but actual criticism by great writers and thinkers like Pauline Kael, Andrew Sarris, Jonathan Rosenbaum, Melissa Anderson, etc. Read histories of cinema, too, especially various waves of cinema like the German Expressionist period, Italian Neorealism, the French and American New Waves, etc. You'll learn a lot, and it will all help situate you in the history of the medium, its evolution over time, what sorts of techniques filmmakers have attempts and why, and how receptive audiences have engaged with works in ways you might otherwise have missed.

If you can get the Criterion Channel, I also highly recommend that. They've got excellent curated collections of films, to help you dive into a certain actor, director, style, movement and more. Often with very good introductory videos by scholars to help get you started.