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

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Mike0284

The 11-mile long IMAX print of Oppenheimer.

The largest I carried on my shoulder was Braveheart in 35 which should be about 3 miles. Slightly bigger was Schindler's List but I didn't have to carry that one

A single reel of 70mm in its metal case weighs quite a bit too.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

The largest I carried on my shoulder was Braveheart in 35 which should be about 3 miles. Slightly bigger was Schindler's List but I didn't have to carry that one

A single reel of 70mm in its metal case weighs quite a bit too.

And people wonder why the push to digital.

[unberechenbar]

Will IMAX 70mm showings of new movies still happen once Nolan stops making movies?

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by unberechenbar

Will IMAX 70mm showings of new movies still happen once Nolan stops making movies?

Depends. There have been other movies that have used 15/70 IMAX film for certain scenes. No one uses it to the extent that Nolan does.

It is not easy and it's very expensive to shoot in 15/70 IMAX. That's why almost all directors avoid it.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

And people wonder why the push to digital.

Yeah, for money.

Originally Posted by unberechenbar

Will IMAX 70mm showings of new movies still happen once Nolan stops making movies?

I doubt it. I doubt he’ll even be able to keep it up to the end of his career.

[Poya]

They didn't even make 70mm prints for No Time To Die or Nope.

Nolan's the only person keeping that industry alive.

[singhcr]

How have the 15/70 or 70mm experiences been for people here?

My trip to Indianapolis was a bust as the projection was out of focus for the 15/70 show I flew in for. I came back to the Twin Cities to see it in Plymouth (Emagine Willow Creek) and that was both out of focus and the image was unstable. There is one more 70mm showing in Southdale but at this point I don't know if I want to bother going out there and getting my hopes dashed for a third time. My argument with the manager for the local showing about "it's fine, I saw it myself" and how it being put of focus and not sharp was because it was 70mm drove me insane.

I enjoyed the movie despite the poor presentation but my saga to see it properly has been a frustrating one.

[Deciazulado]

I'd had that experience (manager: "I looked. It's fine") many times. They go to the hall, open the door at the back, and look at the screen from the farthest row to the screen for one second. "It looks fine". They can't see it's out of focus. I sometimes offered to go to the booth and focus it myself. Sometimes, they let me. (I have a license.)

*hugs his OLED

[Fang Zei]

I saw Oppenheimer in 70mm in the main house at AFI Silver. It was the first time I’d seen a movie projected on film since I saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood in 35mm in that very same auditorium four years ago.

It was crazy going from the electronic glow of the digital projector for the trailers to the flicker of celluloid as the Universal logo started and the curtains opened a little more.

I’m pretty sure they simply had two projectors alternating reels although I never bothered to turn around during the changeovers to check. There was one around halfway through the movie after which suddenly the frame lines weren’t lining up perfectly (I don’t know what you call it, but you could see the top of the adjacent/previous frame at the bottom of the screen) but I could tell there was someone in the booth immediately fixing it because the black border subtly shifted upward to line up with the frame, except then the projected image wasn’t lining up so well with the screen on that projector (a little bit of black space at the bottom of the screen and the top of the picture spilling onto the masking above the screen). Unfortunately that was the projector being used for the final reel also because of the alternating. Also, there was a slight focus issue in that latter stretch of the movie where it seemed both sharp and blurry (if that makes sense).

So, the presentation wasn’t entirely seamless but there’s still nothing quite like seeing a movie in 70mm. It’s the analog experience Nolan intended, for better or for worse.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by hanshotfirst1138

Yeah, for money.

That's only part of it.

But for distribution - making thousands of prints of 35MM film wasn't easy, and 70MM prints were even more difficult and cumbersome. Not to mention the difficulty of quality control. Yeah, it's money - but it's also time. Much quicker to download an updated DCP rather than make another print run and rush it to theaters. Heck, better for the environment too. Prints require chemicals. They require vehicles for transport. They're usually disposed of when finished. None of that with digital.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Originally Posted by singhcr

How have the 15/70 or 70mm experiences been for people here?

My trip to Indianapolis was a bust as the projection was out of focus for the 15/70 show I flew in for. I came back to the Twin Cities to see it in Plymouth (Emagine Willow Creek) and that was both out of focus and the image was unstable. There is one more 70mm showing in Southdale but at this point I don't know if I want to bother going out there and getting my hopes dashed for a third time. My argument with the manager for the local showing about "it's fine, I saw it myself" and how it being put of focus and not sharp was because it was 70mm drove me insane.

I enjoyed the movie despite the poor presentation but my saga to see it properly has been a frustrating one.

I drove three hours and the 15/70 projector broke 10 minutes in. It was very frustrating, and doesn’t bode well for future presentations on film.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

And people wonder why the push to digital.

No, I don’t. I’d like the two things to just coexist, but I think we’ve reached a point financially and logistically where that’s just not possible.

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

I'd had that experience (manager: "I looked. It's fine") many times. They go to the hall, open the door at the back, and look at the screen from the farthest row to the screen for one second. "It looks fine". They can't see it's out of focus. I sometimes offered to go to the booth and focus it myself. Sometimes, they let me. (I have a license.)

*hugs his OLED

This sort of this makes my blood boil. I get that it’s just a job to some people, but I sure miss having projectionists up there who could solve these problems.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

That's only part of it.

But for distribution - making thousands of prints of 35MM film wasn't easy, and 70MM prints were even more difficult and cumbersome. Not to mention the difficulty of quality control. Yeah, it's money - but it's also time. Much quicker to download an updated DCP rather than make another print run and rush it to theaters. Heck, better for the environment too. Prints require chemicals. They require vehicles for transport. They're usually disposed of when finished. None of that with digital.

Yeah, I understand the logic behind it. It’s just a shame that film has die completely. Like I said, people like us who are interested special presentations on film are a minority at best. It would be nice if the two could coexist, but like I said, that’s simply looking less and less possible.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by hanshotfirst1138

I drove three hours and the 15/70 projector broke 10 minutes in. It was very frustrating, and doesn’t bode well for future presentations on film.

That is very sad. I don't think the IMAX projectors have a ton of spare parts since most of them were built in the 80s-90s, or if that isn't an issue it's general mainteance and above all else competent projectionists.

I have two arthouse theaters in the Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul MN) that have 35mm projectors and one 70mm projector all from the 1970s. Those run perfectly because they have people who actually care about such things.

In the case of IMAX the projectors aren't used that often so that just compounds the issue. I agree, it is quite frustrating. You drove 3 hours, I flew out of state, even people who drove 20m would be irritated at that.

[Pieter V]

IMAX Interview with David Keighley - YouTube

[Modren]

Originally Posted by singhcr

That is very sad. I don't think the IMAX projectors have a ton of spare parts since most of them were built in the 80s-90s, or if that isn't an issue it's general mainteance and above all else competent projectionists.

I have two arthouse theaters in the Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul MN) that have 35mm projectors and one 70mm projector all from the 1970s. Those run perfectly because they have people who actually care about such things.

In the case of IMAX the projectors aren't used that often so that just compounds the issue. I agree, it is quite frustrating. You drove 3 hours, I flew out of state, even people who drove 20m would be irritated at that.

I hope IMAX is paying attention to the reported problems with the 15/70 screenings. Even though there's a very small number of film projectors out there, they should be protected and cherished as the crown jewels of the format. Ideally, they'd be working on making new replacement parts and working to train projectionists, and maybe also working on ways to keep the projectors in service more often. Maybe work with the studios to have revival screenings?

[RossyG]

I used to be a projectionist and for the first 30-odd years of my life saw everything on 35mm film in cinemas.

I can see why people like seeing film projected, and I loved seeing 2001: A Space Odyssey on 70mm pre-pandemic, but having seen many films since in 4K Dolby Vision, be they’d shot digitally (Barbie; MI7) or on film (Babylon; Oppenheimer) I actually think 4K is your best bet for local cinemas.

The projectionists simply aren’t there anymore outside a few big venues.

I used to go to the Duke of York’s in Brighton most weeks as they slowly transitioned from film to (2K) digital. The film showings were markedly worse than the digital. Not necessarily because of the format, but because they used dirty prints of new films and never seemed to be able to focus it properly. And this was when they had full-time professional projectionists.

And all this month they were supposed to be showing Oppenheimer on 35mm but had to switch to digital after a week or so due to “technical issues”.

I’m afraid most cinemas need “idiot proof” projection now and digital is just that. And 4K looks terrific on a big screen.

[Fang Zei]

It would be nice if the dual-laser at the Air & Space Museum was open, but it’s looking like it won’t reopen until the building’s entire seven-year project is finished in 2025.

That’s why it sure would be nice if it turned out the AMC Georgetown’s current closure of their LieMax is to convert it to “single” laser. How long does that tend to take? It’s already been at least a couple weeks since they stopped listing Oppenheimer Imax showtimes, with nothing for Blue Beetle. The Creator is still more than a month away, but maybe they just want to get it done in time for Dune: Part Two a month later.

This is all assuming they’re upgrading to laser at all. I asked the manager there back in October about it and he said something about getting new seats. But with DC itself having gone without a full-sized Imax of any kind for three and a half years now it sure would be nice - even on a 45-foot screen (yup) - to have dual-4k 1.9:1 projection as a temporary compromise.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Fang Zei

It would be nice if the dual-laser at the Air & Space Museum was open, but it’s looking like it won’t reopen until the building’s entire seven-year project is finished in 2025.

That’s why it sure would be nice if it turned out the AMC Georgetown’s current closure of their LieMax is to convert it to “single” laser. How long does that tend to take? It’s already been at least a couple weeks since they stopped listing Oppenheimer Imax showtimes, with nothing for Blue Beetle. The Creator is still more than a month away, but maybe they just want to get it done in time for Dune: Part Two a month later.

This is all assuming they’re upgrading to laser at all. I asked the manager there back in October about it and he said something about getting new seats. But with DC itself having gone without a full-sized Imax of any kind for three and a half years now it sure would be nice - even on a 45-foot screen (yup) - to have dual-4k 1.9:1 projection as a temporary compromise.

AMC is still drowning under their massive debt load. Their stock has not done well. AFAIK, they have halted any upgrades to existing theaters in an effort to save cash which they are running out of.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

AMC is still drowning under their massive debt load. Their stock has not done well. AFAIK, they have halted any upgrades to existing theaters in an effort to save cash which they are running out of.

I know AMC has had some stock/money issues, but I really doubt they have halted all upgrades unless there is reporting of that. I know they did a lot of laser projector upgrades recently (one just in April for theater closest to me) for instance, and just 6 days ago this article mentioned a road map for more laser upgrades to come

https://www.amctheatres.com/amc-scen...n-laser-at-amc

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

I know AMC has had some stock/money issues, but I really doubt they have halted all upgrades unless there is reporting of that. I know they did a lot of laser projector upgrades recently (one just in April for theater closest to me) for instance, and just 6 days ago this article mentioned a road map for more laser upgrades to come

https://www.amctheatres.com/amc-scen...n-laser-at-amc

AMC Entertainment Could Run Out Of Cash, CEO Says After Court Ruling; Urges Stockholders “To Take Bankruptcy Risk Off The Table” Even As Shares Surge

https://deadline.com/2023/07/amc-ent...rs-1235446471/

AMC CEO Sees “Serious Liquidity Issues” Even As Box Office Booms; “The Dumbest Thing We Could Ever Do In This Industry Is Run Out Of Cash”

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...224408342.html

[Fang Zei]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

I know AMC has had some stock/money issues, but I really doubt they have halted all upgrades unless there is reporting of that. I know they did a lot of laser projector upgrades recently (one just in April for theater closest to me) for instance, and just 6 days ago this article mentioned a road map for more laser upgrades to come

https://www.amctheatres.com/amc-scen...n-laser-at-amc

If they’re upgrading a lot of their regular theaters to laser, I feel like the odds of them switching their liemax here in DC over to laser is that much higher since it benefits Imax also and they can charge more per ticket.

When you factor in that DC/Maryland/Virginia aren’t even on the list of locations planned for the “regular” laser upgrade (at least not yet, according to that link), I feel like it becomes that much more obvious of a decision.

Still, even if they converted to Imax laser, it’s too bad their screen is so small. Their Liemax at Rio in Gaithersburg, another shockingly small “Imax,” got the laser upgrade at some point in the last few years.

Meanwhile, the one at Regal Majestic in Silver Spring, a 65-footer, is languishing with the dual-2k xenon.