|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: More IMAX BS, This time from the IMAX CEO
|
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster
Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 09-17-2008 01:08 PM
This guy has really lost it IMHO!
____________________________________
IMAX CEO: IMAX is not the "giant screen"
Richard Gelfond, co-CEO of Imax Corporation, told a meeting of IMAX
theater operators and filmmakers "we don't think of [the IMAX brand]
as the giant screen." Rather, he said, "it is the best immersive
experience on the planet." Speaking to the Giant Screen Cinema
Association in New York City on Sept. 10, he went on to say that
although the 76x98-foot (23x30-meter) screen of the AMC Lincoln
Square IMAX Theater in which he was standing was "phenomenal…it' s not
just this. It's the sound, it's the raking of the seats, it's the
color, it's the content…it's the way the images are captured, it's
the way they're projected, it's the sound system, it's the sum of all
parts."
This new position from the 40-year-old company that has used the
tagline "Think Big" for the last several years, coincides with the
rollout of its new digital projection system, intended to be
retrofitted into 35mm multiplex auditoriums. Imax has signed deals
for more than 170 digital theaters, about 50 of which are expected to
be installed by the end of the year. The screens in these houses will
be between 40 and 60 feet wide, averaging less than one-third the
area of the average film-based IMAX screen of 60 by 80 feet (18 by 24
meters).
The news was not well received by most of the 100 operators of IMAX
film-based theaters at-tending the meeting. GSCA chair Toby
Mensforth, who oversees the Smithsonian Institution' s three IMAX
theaters, told Gelfond that the company had "grossly underestimated"
the concerns of many of his colleagues at IMAX theaters in museums
and science centers. He asked Gelfond if the company would reconsider
branding the new screens, to differentiate them from the larger, film-
based venues.
Gelfond said he would listen to the industry's concerns, but "the
question of creating a different brand is really off the table." The
company's position is that all IMAX theaters, regardless of format or
screen size, provide "the IMAX Experience."
He said that in discussing the issue internally, Imax execs had
decided that branding the newer theaters as "digital," with its
connotations of newer and "cooler," might create the perception that
the older theaters were "second class citizens." Gelfond went on to
say that "Your customers are going to know that your screen is bigger
than someone else's and when the consumer decides whether they want
to go to your theater or another theater, that'll be one of the
factors they con-sider."
In a separate session, Imax's executive VP of theater development,
Larry O'Reilly, said that digi-tal system customers AMC Entertainment
and Regal Entertainment Group had initially asked for a separate
digital brand, but the company had talked them out of the idea.
After the meeting, giant-screen industry insiders expressed their
dissatisfaction with the news. Mark Bretherton, CEO of Australia's LG
IMAX Theatre Sydney, told LF Examiner that Imax could have
characterized the digital system as "IMAX quality in a new setting.
Tell consumers that, meet their expectations, and they will be happy.
Tell them they will have an IMAX experi-ence and then offer them
something below their expectations and they will feel cheated."
Another long-time theater manager who asked not to be identified
challenged the idea that the IMAX experience can be divorced from
giant screens. "If the size of the screen and the resolu-tion of the
image are taken out of the equation, that leaves stadium seating, six-
channel surround sound, and the occasional 3D. By these criteria,
Real D and Dolby are delivering the IMAX Ex-perience. "
Ed Lantz, an expert on digital planetariums who spoke at the
conference, said, "With regards to Imax's marketing strategy, they
have seemingly ignored the concerns of their existing theater cli-ent
base and [independent] producers by not clearly differentiating the
new digital systems from true 15/70…theaters, which have far greater
resolution than the new digital systems. This disre-gard for existing
stakeholders who essentially built the IMAX brand over the last
decades is a major PR blunder in my opinion, with extensive moral, if
not financial, repercussions. "
Gelfond also confirmed what LFX had previously speculated, that the
IMAX digital system is proprietary, and that any producer who wants
to distribute films to those theaters will have to go through Imax
Corporation for special processing and, presumably, permission. (This
is in con-trast to conventional digital cinema projectors, which use
open, non-proprietary standards.) Gel-fond said that the company had
decided to allow productions "captured on either 15/70 or 8/70 [film]
and…less than an hour" to obtain that processing at "minimal" cost.
Fred Ashman, producer of "Proud American," a 105-minute film shot in
15/70 and 35mm, told LFX, "Imax is assuming full vertical market
control of the digital screens, and will unilaterally decide what
movies get converted, played, when, what the costs will be. This is
very disturbing news for filmmakers and theaters."
Other News
The Blue Man Group has announced that it is planning to make a giant-
screen film with producer Charlotte Huggins. The 45-minute film will
not be based on the group's eccentric stage show, but will have a
storyline and will incorporate accurate scientific information about
the human brain, delivered with the group's trademark humor.
Also, following the lead of Chris Nolan, director of "The Dark
Knight," director Michael Bay is using IMAX cameras to shoot portions
of "Transformers 2," which is set for conventional and DMR release in
June 2009.
These and other stories, along with comprehensive coverage of all the
news and activities at the Giant Screen Cinema Association conference
last week, will appear in the October issue of LF Examiner.
--James Hyder
Editor/Publisher
LF Examiner
www.LFexaminer. com
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Brian Michael Weidemann
Expert cat molester
Posts: 944
From: Costa Mesa, CA United States
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 09-17-2008 04:25 PM
The general population does not read press releases, is not privy to this stuff. When I hear anecdotally that someone went to see The Dark Knight in IMAX, at an MPX location, and then says, "I thought it was in IMAX, but the screen wasn't big, and I couldn't tell which were the 'IMAX parts'" ... it makes me very upset. They're not going to Google "IMAX" and research. They won't think twice about it, and their impression will thereafter be: "IMAX is just hype and I'm not going to pay for it again".
What's the benefit of repeating Nolan's stunt for Transformers 2? Not to mention that Bay probably won't use the cameras for aerial establishing shots, but close-up action instead.
What is "The IMAX Experience" if it is, by definition, "what you get when you see something in an IMAX auditorium"? It isn't hard to see the flaw there. So why assure people that "all IMAX theatres provide the IMAX experience"? This says absolutely nothing! (I'm thinking of an analogy to Star Wars. Lucas can't let the original Episode IV stand as the great thing it's heralded to be. He can always change it and, at the end of the day, claim it's Star Wars, because Star Wars is whatever he wants it to be. If CLONE WARS is where it goes, so be it. IMAX-MPX was Greedo-shoots-first, and IMAX-DIGITAL is Anakin-builds-C3P0.)
Personally, what IMAX forever meant to me was that it fills your peripheral vision. That was the trick, the key component, to the illusion of immersion. The high resolution film image just cinched it. Eliminate one, and then both of those ... then it's just a good quality show, at best.
In short, I think too many people know that these are solely financial decisions on IMAX's part (since building giant screen auditoriums is no longer--if it ever was--a lucrative business model), and it seems silly for them to pretend it's not. Meanwhile, we have little to do other than nitpick their statements. Isn't this fun?
The views, opinions, remarks, endorsements, etc. as indicated here and throughout the rest of my posts are my own; they do not, in any way, represent those of the various companies or organizations with which I may imply being associated, through such means including, but not necessarily limited to, current or past employment; nor do I speak on behalf of any such companies or organizations.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug
Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 09-17-2008 04:41 PM
quote: Brian Michael Weidemann
The views, opinions, remarks, endorsements, etc. as indicated here and throughout the rest of my posts are my own; they do not, in any way, represent those of the various companies or organizations with which I may imply being associated, through such means including, but not necessarily limited to, current or past employment; nor do I speak on behalf of any such companies or organizations.
Brian, I LUV your disclaimer and will use it in all my furture porno film contracts... ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif) ![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
OBTW: I see IMAX has found a new way to f*ck over theatre and science center owners...I wonder how the theme parks that use 1570 will do in the IMAX digital CONversion?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Topic Closed
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic