Large Format/"Premium" Theaters (IMAX 15/70, Digital IMAX, XD, ETX, RPX, etc.)

[erixon20]

Originally Posted by benji888578

I am so with you on 3D, IMAX 3D and realD 3D are vastly different, very disappointing IMAX cutting back on 3D showings. I also think most people have seen crappy 3D and think that’s all there is to it...if only they tried IMAX 3D.

Check your local listings, my IMAX is alternating 2D/3D showings for aquaman, and if it is showing in 3D, go for it, it’s a great IMAX 3D experience!

Only 2 previews were in 3D tonight: Avengers Endgame and Alita.

As far as bumblebee goes, I have zero interest in any more transformers, especially a reboot, or whatever this is.

Seeing this in Imax 3D on monday at lincoln center.

[Dreamliner330]

Interesting experience this weekend. I typically only go to movies on weekdays on the earliest screening of the day because I prefer a quiet and empty theater. Since Christmas is Tuesday and most people will have next week off I decided to try weekend shows.

I went to the 9am Friday showing of Aquaman IMAX 3D.

Then on Sunday I went to Bumblebee RealD 3D in one of the small rooms at my local AMC theater. I typically avoid non-premium rooms, especially for 3D but with Bumblebee it was unavoidable.

I was actually impressed. Since the screen was smaller it really wasn't hurting for brightness and the 1.85:1 aspect ratio of the movie helped it feel not so small. I also sat in the first row behind the split.

I was so impressed that I decided to immediately watch Aquaman again in RealD 3D (the theater I was at today only had IMAX 2D).

In both instances, I mentioned to management that I'm used to IMAX sound and to make sure they didn't have the volume too low as that has happened to me before.

I'll still seek out IMAX 3D but I had zero issues with RealD 3D sitting close with a smaller screen.

Regarding the movies themselves, Aquaman is very good. Bumblebee is much slower than I expected.

[Chaotic]

The AMC IMAX's by me don't have 3D for Aquaman, which pisses me off. They had atleast 1 showtime for Mortal Engine but not for this. The real IMAX here is only showing it at 10:15 at night which i can't do. Ugh.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by Chaotic

The AMC IMAX's by me don't have 3D for Aquaman, which pisses me off. They had atleast 1 showtime for Mortal Engine but not for this. The real IMAX here is only showing it at 10:15 at night which i can't do. Ugh.

Make it happen.

[Chaotic]

I guess I can always call out of work.

[xbs2034]

https://deadline.com/2018/12/imax-1-...18-1202525564/

IMAX passed one billion box office this year for the first time in company history.

[Creed]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

https://deadline.com/2018/12/imax-1-...18-1202525564/

IMAX passed one billion box office this year for the first time in company history.

I see it happening again next year, with Endgame, Star Wars IX etc.

[Dreamliner330]

Interesting. Here I was thinking the movies this year haven't been overly spectacular.

I'm sure someone at IMAX will likely find a way to draw a conclusion that less 3D = more box office.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

Interesting. Here I was thinking the movies this year haven't been overly spectacular.

I'm sure someone at IMAX will likely find a way to draw a conclusion that less 3D = more box office.

I wouldn't be surprised if some make that claim. But I'd note how Ready Player One was one of the few films this year to have virtually all IMAX showings be 3D and it is their 5th biggest movie (probably will end sixth with Aquaman still making money) despite not being near the top of highest grossers of the year in general. Plus their #1 movie, Infinity War, mixed a lot of 3D showings in with 2D ones, so at least it seems like having a 3D option is not limiting films.

[benji888578]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

https://deadline.com/2018/12/imax-1-...18-1202525564/

IMAX passed one billion box office this year for the first time in company history.

Article updated with top ten $, (I assume these are global numbers)

“TOP 10 IMAX FILMS OF 2018
Avengers: Infinity War: $143.58M
Black Panther: $81.11M
Jurassic World: $66.75M
Mission: Impossible – Fallout: $53.6M
Ready Player One: $52.12M
Aquaman: Currently $43M, projected to reach $63M by Dec 31
Venom: $42.84M
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald: $40.02M
Ant-Man and the Wasp: $32.1M
The Meg: $29.91M”

I’m glad IMAX is doing well, with more premium format competition than ever, but, still want 3D to be made more available.

[Riddhi2011]

What is the difference (if any) between regular 2D and IMAX (2K) 2D in picture quality?

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

What is the difference (if any) between regular 2D and IMAX (2K) 2D in picture quality?

Depends on the title but lately a lot of movies in IMAX have expanded "IMAX" scenes that are taller than what you see in a regular 2D theater. Talking hardware alone, IMAX 2K uses 2 projectors to the image is much brighter and the screens are a lot bigger...which is also what makes IMAX 3D so great.

[Dubstar]

new 'Prime' auditorium at AMC Rio (Gaithersburg, MD) and with Dolby Atmos (!) ~ huzzah, thank you AMC

[Connoralpha]

Are there any 2019 movies that are confirmed to feature 15/70 footage? Or even any shot digitally that use the whole 1.43?

I'm hoping Star Wars IX will since VII did, but no official word on it yet.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Connoralpha

Are there any 2019 movies that are confirmed to feature 15/70 footage? Or even any shot digitally that use the whole 1.43?

I'm hoping Star Wars IX will since VII did, but no official word on it yet.

originally episode IX was supposed to be shot entirely in 70mm, unfortunately I think those plans were nixed when directorial duties got changed.

[Connoralpha]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

originally episode IX was supposed to be shot entirely in 70mm, unfortunately I think those plans were nixed when directorial duties got changed.

That's what it looks like. The production photo JJ posted on instagram had a 35mm camera that they had also used for TFA.



And if they need to mix in unused 35mm footage of Carrie Fisher seamlessly, they probably won't be using 70mm for the rest of the film. I'm hoping for some 15/70 scenes though.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

originally episode IX was supposed to be shot entirely in 70mm, unfortunately I think those plans were nixed when directorial duties got changed.

It was? I seem to recall people saying the exact same thing about Ep VIII before that got started. Didn't happen there and it wasn't going to happen here.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It was? I seem to recall people saying the exact same thing about Ep VIII before that got started. Didn't happen there and it wasn't going to happen here.

It was announced from previous director.

https://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-...-shot-on-65mm/

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

It was announced from previous director.

https://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-...-shot-on-65mm/

that's the story - thank you

but yes with Abrams in tow, 35mm is pretty much a given.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

It was announced from previous director.

https://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-...-shot-on-65mm/

Well, it doesn't actually have a quote from Trevorrow or Kennedy or anyone actually involved in the production, it just says Kodak added Ep IX to their slate for upcoming 65mm processing and then makes the leap that the whole thing will be shot in 65mm. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. It being shot partially on 65mm wouldn't have been a surprise, given that that's what Trevorrow did on Jurassic World, but nah: I still don't buy it that the whole film was to have been done on 65mm.

Unrelated to that: in the playlist article that the /film article links to (https://theplaylist.net/star-wars-ep...5-mm-20161111/) they have a bit where they state that the Kodak press release mistakenly made a reference to JJ being the director of Ep IX (this being 2016, when Colin still had a job at Lucasfilm)...it's funny how things work out.