Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » People are catching wise to IMAX MPX/Digital... (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
Author Topic: People are catching wise to IMAX MPX/Digital...
Mike Olpin
Chop Chop!

Posts: 1852
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 05-12-2009 08:48 PM      Profile for Mike Olpin   Email Mike Olpin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This just hit the blogosphere in a big way today:

From http://azizisbored.tumblr.com/post/106587114/reblog-the-fuck-out-of-this-warning-amc-theaters-are

quote:
REBLOG THE FUCK OUT OF THIS. WARNING: AMC theaters are running FAKE IMAX's and charging $5 extra for a slightly bigger screen. Boycott IMAX, AMC, and Regal. Don't let them fool you.
I went with a friend of mine to see Star Trek: The IMAX Experience at the AMC Theatre in Burbank today. I drove out of my way to see the film on the large IMAX screen and paid an extra $5 for the ticket, which felt worth it at the time.

HOWEVER, we get in the theatre and its just a slightly bigger than normal screen and NOT the usual standard huge 72 ft IMAX screen. I was very upset and apparently this problem is happening all over at Regal and AMC theatres. Here’s a graphic representation of what’s happening at these “FAKE IMAX” screens:

 -

If you don’t want the whole long story, I did some research online and found this article that explains it. Basically IMAX is whoring out their brand name and trying to trick people. These new “IMAX” theatres are really just nice digital screens with good sound, but they ARE NOT IMAX, in that they don’t have the huge 72 ft gigantic screen which people would expect. However, they still charge $5 more for tickets as they would for the regular IMAX.

REGAL, AMC, AND IMAX - YOU ARE LIARS!

Boycott them. Fuck them for taking advantage of people and charging them $5 extra. If you’re in LA, go to the Arclight from now on, and fuck the IMAX screens (fake and real).

Some people at Regal and AMC both wanted to call these screens IMAX Digital so as to differentiate it somehow from the giant IMAX screens people are used to associating with the name IMAX. Apparently IMAX doesn’t see anything wrong with duping customers like this and insisted on simply keeping it as IMAX. Well, I have a better term how about - “BULLSHIT IMAX.” Cause that’s what it is.

According to this piece, IMAX CEO, Richard Gelfond said the company only puts IMAX digital systems into multiplex auditoriums that meet certain criteria. He jokingly said, “It’s a very scientific test. It’s called the ‘wow’ factor. So if you don’t go in and go ‘wow,’ we won’t do it.” HAHAHA! REALLY FUNNY RICHARD!!!! What happens if I go in the theatre and go “This isn’t a fucking IMAX screen, I just got ripped off for $5!!” Do I get my money back?

At the AMC theatre this was my experience at guest services:

Aziz: Yes, I’d like my $5 back. I paid $5 extra for an IMAX screen and that’s not nearly as big as what I have known IMAX to be.
Guest Services: I can’t sir. Its IMAX quality picture and sound.
Aziz: But the screen isn’t big, that’s the whole reason I pay $5 more for IMAX.
Guest Services: Well sir, you watched the whole movie, you could have come out and we could have given you tickets to a different one.
Aziz: Why would I do that? I’d leave Star Trek, the movie I wanted to see and you’d give me a ticket for Ghosts of Girlfriends Past? Oh yeah that’s fair! No, you need to give me the $5 back, its the principle of it. Can I see a manager?

Manager: Sir, we can’t refund the money, you saw the whole film.
Aziz: I don’t want $15, I just want $5 cause AMC lied about IMAX.
Manager: Sir, I can give you popcorn and a drink.
Aziz: I don’t want to go home and drink a nasty soda and eat nasty ass popcorn. I want my $5 back. Its not about the money, its the principle of the matter, ITS NOT IMAX.
Manager: Sorry, I can’t do anything.
Aziz: You know what Twitter is? I have 25,000 followers, I’m tell 25,000 people you run fake IMAX’s and that they should boycott AMC.
Manager: I don’t really care sir.
Aziz: Yeah, I wouldn’t care either if I worked here, but you know you are in the wrong! You should give me $5!!
Manager: SIR, I CAN GIVE YOU POPCORN AND A SODA.
Aziz: I DON’T LIKE POPCORN AND I DON’T LIKE SODA, I WANT MY $5!!!
Manager: Ok here’s two free passes.

UPDATE: In addition to this terrible tragedy, there are also terrible things going on in Darfur. Please Google around for more info on how to help there.

While the guy was a total douche in his interaction with the AMC employees, and while his post is full of technical inacuraacies (AMC isn't lying or running fake, that is to say unlicensed, IMAX screens), I think Aziz' perspective is indicative of the comon sentiment people have twords MPX and Imax digital installations.

This article is circulating throughout twitter and was made popular on the front page of Digg.com a few hours ago, generating potentially millions of hits.

If IMAX doesn't bend and allow AMC and Regal to differentiate their MPX/Digital screens from their larger GT and SR screens, then they may significantly damage the IMAX brand.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 05-12-2009 09:48 PM      Profile for Mark Lensenmayer   Email Mark Lensenmayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Here are a couple of other links to "Fake Imax" BLOGS:

Destroy Fake Imax

From THE CONSUMERIST, from Consumer Reports

IMAX on Facebook is trying to promote the system with some hype, but people are posting about the small screen sizes at AMC Theatres.

 |  IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 05-12-2009 10:00 PM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think he was being a complete douche.

He was obviously pissed off and rightly so.

IMAX need to realise that their name used to mean something. Now it means didly squat.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-12-2009 10:27 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Guy actually got a pretty good deal in the end -- two free passes, worth at least $17 or more, instead of the five bucks he was screaming about.

While I agree the fake Imax thing is a sham and a bunch of crap, the customer really got a great deal and should give the staffer credit for doing a good job of making him "beyond whole."

 |  IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 05-12-2009 10:34 PM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mike Blakesley
Guy actually got a pretty good deal in the end -- two free passes, worth at least $17 or more
A good deal...unless they are valid 'only for IMAX presentations'

[eyes]

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 05-13-2009 12:10 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
I am glad to see this is spreading. Now someone needs to go after that stupid XD3 Cinemark rip-off.

All the branding in the world won't save a poor quality product. Do it RIGHT and they will come.

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 퍼항시, 경상푹도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007


 - posted 05-13-2009 12:28 AM      Profile for Chris Slycord   Email Chris Slycord   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
IMAX has already been damaging their brand. The so-called IMAX-Jr's have been around for many years.

And I think it's a bit wrong to call the exhibitors "liars" for calling it IMAX when that's what the IMAX people want it called. This would be like calling a computer store liars for selling a computer that says "Compaq" on it because there was a time when Compaq computers didn't suck.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 05-13-2009 08:33 AM      Profile for Mark Lensenmayer   Email Mark Lensenmayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
IMAX is now calling those complaining "purists".

IMAX executives are trying to say that MPX systems, both digital and film, are exactly the same experience as seeing something on a traditional IMAX screen. Anyone who has seen TO FLY or HAIL, COLUMBIA or any of the MANY "made for IMAX" films would most definitely disagree with that idea.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2009 09:31 AM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sounds like IMAX thinks it's a soda pop. There are about 20 different types of "Coke" and they are all soft drinks, but only one is the "real thing."

 |  IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2009 09:40 AM      Profile for Martin McCaffery   Author's Homepage   Email Martin McCaffery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
"IMAX" is the new "THX", just a meaningless bunch of letters that are supposed to fool the public into thinking they are getting something better.

quote:
Aziz: You know what Twitter is? I have 25,000 followers, I’m tell 25,000 people you run fake IMAX’s and that they should boycott AMC.

[puke]

 |  IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002


 - posted 05-13-2009 09:58 AM      Profile for Lyle Romer   Email Lyle Romer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Martin McCaffery

"IMAX" is the new "THX", just a meaningless bunch of letters that are supposed to fool the public into thinking they are getting something better.

THX and the new "IMAX" do mean something mostly having to do with the sound system. The difference is that nobody ever charged more for movies in THX that I know of. THX was a bonus or the reason to see something at a particular theatre.

Also, I don't care what IMAX or anybody will say that as long as the viewing angles are similar you are getting a similar experience. Raw size does matter. When I sit 3 screen heights back from my 65" TV I do not get the same experience I do from sitting 3 screen heights back from a 30 foot screen. Maybe it would be the same if there was no other size reference in the room and your own body was covered except the eyes but due to other visual cues we can tell that the picture is bigger. A real IMAX screen awes you with its size. 40 - 60 foot screens do not.

 |  IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005


 - posted 05-13-2009 11:15 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
AAh, yes. . . .brand extentions! Same as Sony at AMC.

The "Cinerama Effect" doesn't last very long these days.

FYI: Cinerama Effect: 3 locations in USA; sold out. 25 locations in USA; sold out. 300 locations in USA; Ho, Hum!

Actually this is more like 70mm in little multiplexes. Big film on small screen. Not quite the same as the road show houses with 125 ft screens. Louis

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 05-13-2009 01:21 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm happy to see the "IMAX Digital" plan is now in the process of blowing up in the faces of IMAX executives and marketing people. I figured there was a good chance casual movie theater customers would grow wise to the sneaky plan.

Negative buzz is growing regarding IMAX Digital and the company's screwy strategy of labeling film-based and digital-based theaters both the same way. There was a pretty good discussion in one of the "insiders" forums at Blu-ray.com. One of the fellows at The Digital Bits web site routinely calls IMAX Digital "fake IMAX."

I don't agree with the judgment from "Aziz," stating we should say "fuck you" to both real IMAX and its misnamed fake digital version. 15-perf 70mm needs to stick around. Further, 5-perf 70mm needs to be re-introduced to commercial theaters with giant sized traditional screens.

Obviously, the folks at IMAX need to do some serious damage control in terms of marketing and re-think their strategy of marking a difference between true IMAX theaters and cheaper, smaller digital houses. A film-based IMAX theater costs a lot more to build and equip than a traditional movie theater auditorium. Operators of film-based IMAX theaters should be leading the pack of those outraged by the misrepresentation and brand-dillusion of IMAX digital.

quote: Richard Gelfond, IMAX CEO
It’s a very scientific test. It’s called the ‘wow’ factor.
Some wow factor. It's more like, "wow, I can't believe I paid $5 more for this crap!"
[Roll Eyes]

quote: Louis Bornwasser
Actually this is more like 70mm in little multiplexes. Big film on small screen. Not quite the same as the road show houses with 125 ft screens.
I think IMAX Digital or "IMAX" is worse. It would be like sticking "70mm" on the multiplex marquee and then only showing the movie in 35mm or 2K digital. It's classic bait and switch bull crap.

At least with 70mm in little multiplex locations the projector was really using 70mm film. By the time the syndrome of 70mm in regular multiplex locations got started next to no movies were being originated in 65mm/70mm format anyway.

We have a backward situation now with "megaplex" sites offering 1 or more giant sized screens yet dimly lighting it only with 35mm.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Olpin
Chop Chop!

Posts: 1852
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 05-13-2009 02:24 PM      Profile for Mike Olpin   Email Mike Olpin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
http://www.mainstreet.com/article/lifestyle/are-smaller-imax-screens-worth-price?page=1

quote:

Are Smaller IMAX Screens Worth the Price?
By Stephen Dalton

The lure of watching Star Trek in IMAX has moviegoers shelling out as much as seven extra bucks at the theater with the expectation of getting more screen space.

But most of the company's new digital screens, specifically those built in the past six years, are significantly less than half the screen size of what many consider the traditional 60 foot by 80 foot IMAX (Stock Quote: IMAX). The size of these smaller screens varies, but one set of dimensions is 25 feet by 58 feet (see the graph, below). These surprisingly inconsistent dimensional requirements for IMAX screens (despite a ticket premium of as much as 40%) are making some moviegoers madder than a Klingon.

Recently actor and comedian Aziz Ansari unleashed a profanity-ridden yet honest rant on his personal blog after feeling duped into paying an extra $5 for what he deemed a not-large-enough IMAX experience. Most new IMAX digital screens, which are not differentiated by name from their behemoth science center-sized forebears, are only slightly larger in size than traditional movie theater screens.

It may not be an out and out scam, but the lack of specifics in terms of what size screen qualifies as "IMAX" is confusing consumers.

Industry Pro: IMAX "Brand Dilution" Exists
James Hyder, editor and publisher of LF Examiner, the self-proclaimed "independent journal of the large format motion picture industry," is surprised IMAX has gotten away for so long with what he calls “brand dilution."

“The size of the screen is much smaller than the older IMAX, and the digital quality is only slightly better than conventional digital," says Hyder. "Most of the people who go to the new digital theaters must not have been to a real IMAX theater ever.” According to IMAX, 72 of its 138 screens are the smaller size, or just more than half.

IMAX Responds: More than Size Matters
MainStreet spoke to Richard Gelfond, CEO of IMAX, who defended IMAX against Ansari's rant and other blogs covering the issue.

Gelfond says more modest IMAX screens in local multiplexes have been around for at least six years. Despite Ansari’s outrage, Gelfond says the positive feedback from consumer testing and ticket sales at these IMAX theaters is significant.

“IMAX did 15% of Star Trek’s total domestic box office in the whole country on only 138 screens," which is less than 2% of all movie theatres, says Gelfond. "This is compared to the earlier releases of Watchmen, where we did 12% of the box office and Monsters and Aliens, where we did around 10%. Clearly a lot of people are going back to IMAX theaters.”

Gelfond also points out that not everyone shares Ansari’s views. “The overwhelming majority of comments on that guy’s blog this morning, more than 90% of them, are vehemently disagreeing with him. And consumers are confirming this with their continued purchases of tickets.”

Movie Lovers: What You Need to Know
For those confused by the differences between IMAX and traditional screens, Gelfond says the pricier IMAX experience is more than just screen size.

The version of the film projected on IMAX is different from that shown in traditional movie theaters, he says. The resolution is increased using a process called Digital Remastering, the sound quality is enhanced, and several front rows of seating are removed to improve the viewer’s experience (read: prevent neck cramps).

Budget-minded Star Trek fans should familiarize themselves with the details of the new projection system on IMAX’s web site and should check for the details at your local IMAX theater before purchasing tickets. Don't boldly go where you might be surprised by the lack of screen space.


 |  IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 05-13-2009 02:59 PM      Profile for Martin McCaffery   Author's Homepage   Email Martin McCaffery   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Gelfond says more modest IMAX screens in local multiplexes have been around for at least six years.
We've scammed them this long so statute of limitations has run out???

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.