ok, maybe i was naive about this but when i see a poster like this
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.fandango.com%2F%2FImageRenderer.ashx%3Fim%3Dimages%252fMasterRepository%252fFandango%252f102194%252fspiderman3imax2.jpg%26amp%3Bw%3D200%26amp%3Bh%3D295%26amp%3Bmid%3D102194&hash=deaab6334596e766d2378ff3223fb19e2b79e8c4)
i am under the impression that i am seeing an IMAX film. it wasnt until yesterday when i read that it was all a lie.
Although it is not unusual for 35mm-lensed features to be remastered to screen in Imax theaters, "Dark Knight" is the first major feature to be even partially shot using Imax cameras. These sequences will be combined with the rest of the film -- lensed in 35mm -- to produce the final product.
What the use of Imax technology in the production means for audiences in Imax theaters is that when the select scenes are shown, the aspect ratio will morph to the larger size, expanding the image to fill the entire screen. In traditional theaters, the goal is that the Imax-lensed sequences "would jump off screens ... and give patrons an experience they haven't seen in 35mm presentations," said Dan Fellman, Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution.
isnt that bullshit that you're paying for THE IMAX EXPERIENCE and really just getting a film that's been blown up and stretched to fill a larger screen? not increased resolution and everything else that other REAL IMAX films have. that sort of pisses me off. i wish Nolan were allowed to film the entire thing with those cameras because a few scenes, while cooler than nothing is sort of like making 20 minutes of a movie 3D. go all the way or don't go at all.
I don't know. I've seen a few films in IMAX but overall, even if it's just a 35mm blow-up, I've been satisfied. Maybe not as satisfied as true IMAX but I've always known they blew up the prints. The only one that sucked was Attack of the Clones because the fact that it was shot digital was very very evident. However, I have no complaints with how the 35mm blow-ups that I've seen in IMAX look (Matrix Reloaded in particular looked great) and I don't feel scammed. I'm still seeing a giant print of it, so you get to see all the nooks and crannies of Laurence Fishburne's giant fucking face.
That all being said, I think the studios should be selective about what films (or more to the point, which directors or cinematographers) they dump extra money into for IMAX sequences. They're not getting THAT much money from the IMAX screens, right? And I really doubt most people give a shit about or would even notice the difference between blown-up 35mm and true IMAX.
Christopher Nolan and his Oscar-nominated DP Wally Pfister... YES! Let them shoot a sequence in IMAX for what is likely going to be a great popcorn film. Even giving Jon Favreau and (specifically) Matthew Libatique the chance to shoot some IMAX sequences for Iron Man would be fine. But so help me God, if they give Ratner an IMAX camera...
yeah, its not that i've been disatisfied with the presentation. its more that their intentions have not been made clear. they have sold these movies as THE IMAX EXPERIENCE even going as far as having separate posters when in actuality the MT. EVEREST and SPACE movies are the only true IMAX films.
I remember seeing the phrase "enhanced 35mm" in the ads for some of these IMAX screenings. They don't shoot entire films in IMAX because the film stock alone would be a ton of money. The only IMAX films I've seen are Superman Returns and Ant Bully, so I've never seen anything blown up from 35mm.
Superman Returns wasn't shot with the extra large IMAX lenses so I think that would count as a blow-up, despite it being shot on HD. Though I'm not sure how it works with a digital source now that IMAX is digital projection.
I remember around the beginnings of IMAX they would show presentations and have displays in the lobby on how the negative was larger and so were the cameras, so I never felt 'duped' knowing that none of these 'studio' films were made in the true IMAX format. I wouldn't call mod naive, but I kinda thought that this was known; that all you were paying for was to see it on a much larger screen.
I went to see some other 3D type films in IMAX and it was cool... but when I went to see Superman Returns I was very disappointed. I dont know about most IMAX theatres, but the one here in South Florida is an old theatre with little ass seats and no leg room. It was uncomfortable to sit for over two hours there and watch something very similar to what I saw in the regular theatre. The 3D scenes were cool, and the sound maybe was better, but no big deal.
For me going to the theatre is already an experience to watch it with better sound and a bigger screen, so at least I want to be comfortable. If it wasnt for the big screen I would watch all movies from my living room.
Quote from: MacGuffin on May 30, 2007, 03:26:34 PM
I wouldn't call mod naive
I'm gonna go ahead and call mod naive.
Seriously, Mod, you thought they were shooting these movies on Imax cameras just to have the majority of people see it shrunk down to 35? Have you seen the Imax camera? it's huge.
Imax really is best when it's short subject. I love going underwater or into space.
Quote from: RegularKarate on May 31, 2007, 11:44:52 AM
Imax really is best when it's short subject. I love going underwater or into space.
I used to go to the Omnimax (domed screen) theater regularly but there are only so many fish and space films I can take. Maybe if they made one about a fish
in space...
OTOH, Hurricane on the Bayou (http://www.hurricaneonthebayou.com/logo.html) looks like a good film.
I seriously thought everone'd know that feature film can't be shot on imax with our current technology--those cameras are clumsy and costly.
well i feel like if thats the case they shouldnt sell it as IMAX. thats like making a vhs copy to dvd. they should just say EXPERIENCE IT ON A HUGE SCREEN, not EXPERIENCE IT IN IMAX. because that is a lie.
Quote from: modage on June 01, 2007, 03:51:20 PMthey should just say EXPERIENCE IT ON A HUGE SCREEN, not EXPERIENCE IT IN IMAX.
This is the fancy way of saying that:
Spider-Man 3: The IMAX Experience has been digitally re-mastered into the unparalleled image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience® with proprietary IMAX DMR® technology. This riveting adventure will transport audiences to thrilling new heights as they experience Spider-Man 3 on the world's largest screens, surrounded by state-of-the-art digitial surround sound.
Well its just a brand buddy... and thats their marketing strategy... if you want to go after IMAX you have to go after many brands, as everyone does the same...
Quote from: modage on May 30, 2007, 10:55:03 AM
i wish Nolan were allowed to film the entire thing with those cameras because a few scenes, while cooler than nothing is sort of like making 20 minutes of a movie 3D. go all the way or don't go at all.
Maybe you can envision how the film would look with the two cut together already but I am picturing something a little more favorable (stylistically speaking). He said the IMAX cameras would be used during the fight scenes and all I can really imagine at this point is sharp/fast paced fight scenes which isn't necessarily throwing you off from the momentum of the story. It can turn out to be a great integration, right? And I guess all I'm saying is... let's wait before we jump to conclusions.
Imax, AMC ink deal for 100 theaters in U.S.
Source: Hollywood Reporter
TORONTO -- Imax on Friday unveiled a 100-theater deal with AMC Entertainment that promises to greatly enlarge its U.S. commercial footprint.
Friday's joint venture agreement will see 100 digital-projection systems from Toronto-based Imax go into 33 AMC locations during the next three years.
An initial 50 Imax digital-projection systems will be installed from July at AMC theaters in 24 of 33 selected U.S. markets, with another 25 set for rollout in 2009 and 25 more in 2010.
Once all 100 theaters are installed, Imax said it will have doubled its 3-D large-format theater presence in North America and extended its reach in the suburban multiplex market.
"An agreement of this magnitude not only bolsters our goal of expanding the network more rapidly, it also enables us to receive a more significant part of the Imax boxoffice from the theaters, as well as a continuing piece of Imax film revenues from the studios," Imax co-CEO Bradley Wechsler told analysts during a conference call Friday.
Wechsler also touted the AMC deal as beneficial in financial and strategic terms as it coincides with the major studios embracing the 3-D format as digital cinema is rolled out.
Imax estimated that the AMC deal will annually add $30 million-$35 million in incremental cash to its bottom line once all 100 proposed theaters come on stream by 2010, as scheduled.
As part of its agreement, Kansas City-based AMC proposes to retrofit existing auditoriums with an Imax digital-projection system designed for multiplexes. This will take place, for example, in six multiplexes in Los Angeles, including the AMC Burbank 16 and the AMC Century City 15, and six more New York venues, including three in Manhattan.
Other AMC locations to receive the Imax treatment include AMC South Barrington 30 in Chicago, AMC Mesquite 30 in Dallas and AMC Neshaminy 24 in Philadelphia.
The Imax-AMC joint venture theater agreement is set to run for seven years, with an option to continue for three more years.
As part of the deal, AMC will cover the cost of retrofitting its auditorium with a bigger screen and reconfigured seats, while Imax will carry the cost of manufacturing and installing its digital-projection systems at $500,000 per theater.
Imax and AMC will then share boxoffice revenue as part of a prearranged split during the course of the joint venture agreement.
"We are committed to delivering a premium entertainment experience by offering a menu of entertainment alternatives inside our facilities," AMC Entertainment chairman and CEO Peter Brown said.
"Our expanded relationship with Imax and the deployment of its state-of-the-art, next-generation digital-projection systems is a key part of our strategy of continuing to broaden and enhance the AMC experience," he added.
The Imax digital-projection system, now in development and slated for launch in mid-2008, will enable theaters to receive movies on a hard drive for exhibition. That eliminates the need for costly and heavy Imax film prints that require loading on bulky projection systems.
Imax argues the switch to digital projection should boost profitability for studios, exhibitors and itself by cutting out costs for film prints and increasing the number of movies passing through Imax theaters.
Typically, an Imax 2-D film print costs about $25,000, and a 3-D movie runs to about $45,000 a print.
Imax is betting that eliminating film print cost for studios will sharply increase a gross margins for an Imax release of a traditional 35mm movie, as the only remaining major cost to studios will be P&A.
I've kept this close to my chest because it's been a difficult transition to make and I still have almost no idea what I'm doing, but over the past two weeks I've started training to be an IMAX projectionist. We use 70mm film on a massive domed screen, which is supposedly the only one in the Northeast. All films shown are Nature/Science/Historical documentaries, but for the last 2 months out of every year 'The Polar Express' is screened. My boss has recently started pushing hard to get prints of 'The Force Awakens' and 'Rogue One' but our Museum simply can't afford them. Over the next 3 years our film projectors will be phased out as we upgrade to Digital, and I'm making it my goal not only to see every goddamn thing I can up there, but also to screen any kind of Narrative film besides 'The Polar Express'. The kind of films I'd want to see, like '2001' or 'Tron' unfortunately aren't 'family friendly' enough for our audiences. Some examples of what we've shown in the past are 'Harry Potter', 'Night At The Museum' and 'The Lion King'. I'm too new to the job to even begin to discuss how our programming and distribution from the studios works, but it's the next thing I'm really curious about after I've gotten the whole projection process down.
I feel really lucky to be in this position for a myriad of reasons. I get to learn a process that won't be around for much longer in this format and use my knowledge to contribute to keeping it afloat wherever possible. I will also finally have a thorough understanding of how film works at the highest level. I've always been really intimidated by it, and thought it'd be too expensive for me to ever use myself, but the more I project it I may reach a comfort level with the technology that allows me to learn the photography side of it just as well. I'm also seeing how a movie theater runs, in the most old fashioned sense of everything depending on the film being perfectly locked in and ready to go.
Unfortunately our ticket sales have been really low for a long time. I think it's an issue with our programming. Most customers are parents with their young children, and our movies don't quite appeal to that crowd. They're all really dry documentaries, these kids aren't gonna settle for anything less than Pixar. The films that do really hold their attention are the ones full of all different kinds of animals, but we haven't been playing anything like that for MONTHS! It's peculiar to me, that we wouldn't try to milk everything we can out of our most successful movies. Maybe it's that we need clearance from the distribution company before we screen their prints? This is all stuff I'll need to go over with my boss once I've gotten into the swing of things.
I've been enjoying myself, learning a lot and trying to immerse myself in film more and more everyday. Watching tons of movies and feeling less guilty or lazy about it, because it only makes me care more about my job. Whereas watching movies was something I used to do to distract me from the day. They take on a much grander scope in my mind now because my interests and aptitudes towards it have been affirmed, instead of always brushed aside by myself and others as some worthless hobby. Everyday I feel a little closer to being a filmmaker, but for now I just have to focus on being a good projectionist, or 'Reelist', if you will.
Quote from: Reelist on April 05, 2017, 07:16:12 PM
...or 'Reelist', if you will.
Aaaayyyyyyyyyy.
But really, that's awesome to hear.
Very specific technical knowledge. The last of our local 35mm projectors were converted to digital back around 2012.
I'd hate to see IMAX become a 'historical' format. Unfortunately, I don't think there are any film IMAX theaters left in my country.
Hopefully, Dunkirk will get more butts into them IMAX them seats. Relevant to this thread, Dunkirk is shot entirely on IMAX and 65mm.
That's fantastic! I'm jealous and/or happy for you.
The Science Museum of Minnesota has had the Omnitheater (http://www.imax.com/theatres/omnitheater-science-museum-minnesota) for a while. I remember going there on field trips in elementary school. Seeing high-definition nature and space documentaries projected on this dome absolutely blew my mind. Think about it... you'll have the chance to create those transformative experiences for today's youngsters.
Meanwhile, the IMAX theater I grew up with (we're talking floor-to-ceiling curved screen IMAX) has literally been demolished (http://www.startribune.com/it-was-a-drill-not-for-your-amusement-valleyfair-imax-theater-set-ablaze/229543431/).
That's awesome. Really happy for you (I know you're in your element) and I'm just as fascinated about the business decisions behind it all too. The science museum near me (http://www.fwmuseum.org/omni-imax-now-showing) is, I believe, one of the few remaining genuine IMAX theaters in Texas. Their documentary programming smacks of the same issues you described, but they often get non-family-friendly blockbusters screened there too. Last movie I saw there is going back a ways (Dark Knight Rises) and it was a full house, plus a packed lobby waiting for the next showing when we came out.
Well, I've been doing it a little over two months now and I can handle every part of the process on my own, but I don't think I've fully grasped what all of those steps are for, if you follow. I'm really just trying to memorize everything in the correct order so it becomes second nature and it's almost impossible for me to screw up as long as I go by that drill. So, even though I've threaded up and played many films by this point, I haven't yet been entrusted with running the theater entirely on my own. Which I am prepared to do, but it will be a stressful day when it does come. I will like working on my own because there won't be the feeling of eyeballs on my every move, making sure I don't miss anything. I'll also have that sense of pride in knowing that these people got to watch their movies today because of me, and only me.
It's bizarre to work with Film everyday, the relationship is so intimate. You're lugging these massive reels around and touching the film in this variety off odd ways that feel so unnatural at first. The celluloid itself is very strong, it's the equipment that's super sensitive and prone to mess something up with the smallest glitch. Man, I've made pretty much every blunder you possibly can, but I've learned that it's all pretty much to be expected and the training process is really closer to 5 months. Where I am now, I can do everything, but that doesn't mean I understand how it all works.
Anyways, today was good because I got to work with the 3rd projectionist of our crew who I hadn't been with before, and he's exactly the type of mentor I need in this whole learning process. He's been projecting films for 60 years and it seemed like everything that came out of his mouth was something even more helpful and interesting. The other guys I work with are a little more jaded by all of it, their particular life circumstances seemed to have gotten in the way of them handing me down any real wisdom. It's a weird give and take because the one guy, who I've known for years really hounds me and gets on my ass when I mess up, and the other one is the most easygoing guy about it, but he seems to really want to do all the work himself. Since he's not there to see what I'm being taught everyday he really doesn't know how far along I am in the training and freaks out whenever he see's me doing stuff on my own.
I've been unnecessarily stressing out about this job when I make little mistakes and assume their thinking "well, maybe he's not cut out for this after all," but working with a guy like George today who's been doing it for so long and seen the worst of it finally got it through to me that a lot of things are going to fuck up along the way and our job is basically just damage control.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on April 05, 2017, 08:35:01 PM
That's fantastic! I'm jealous and/or happy for you.
The Science Museum of Minnesota has had the Omnitheater (http://www.imax.com/theatres/omnitheater-science-museum-minnesota) for a while. I remember going there on field trips in elementary school. Seeing high-definition nature and space documentaries projected on this dome absolutely blew my mind. Think about it... you'll have the chance to create those transformative experiences for today's youngsters.
That has been the single most gratifying part of the job so far. Right now we're getting an influx of school groups everyday since their year is winding down and it's the only time we ever have a packed house. We keep a microphone in the theater that's feeding into the projection booth so we can check on the sound quality at all times, and after eavesdropping on whatever inane bullshit they're talking about, when the lights go down there's always this cacophony of screams. Then the image comes up and there's a resounding "WHOOOAAAAA!!!" throughout the theater. And you'll hear kids like "Oh my god! This is awesome!" What's so cool about it is that we are using IMAX for it's highest function right there, to amaze and educate. Our regular theatergoers are very skeptical about the whole thing, I don't think most of them come into the theater having much of a grasp of what they're about to see. It's hard to gage their reactions unless they speak up about it. I've heard a guy say "Oh, it's one of the old fashioned ones that feels like you're in a bubble and make you all dizzy," and people who flat out loved it and want to know everything on our schedule. Those kids have no financial stake in the deal, they get to be in a movie theater instead of a classroom. We don't get any happier customers than that.
The first thing I'm impressed by is that it's still possible to have a job running celluloid thru a projector!
And I shudder at the memory of my experience as a manager--with complete responsibility and zero power to actually change anything. It's the absolute definition of "lose-lose".