Is IMAX Worth It?

Quote:

---

When you go to see a movie at an IMAX theatre, the general understanding is that you’re going to see it on a big ass screen that is over 70 feet tall. The movie may or may not have footage that was actually shot to fit the entire screen (The Dark Knight is one of the few that did) and it may or may not be in 3-D, but either way, you’re getting a much bigger image that basically encompasses all of your peripheral vision. Whether or not we actually need a screen this big is up for debate, but the fact of the matter is, you are paying an extra $5 for that screen size, and IMAX is pushing this idea that it is the ultimate way to experience a major blockbuster film

It seems that IMAX has started slapping their name on theatres that simply have the IMAX digital system for high quality picture and sound. Which might be okay… if they weren’t charging extra money for it!

---

http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/05/12/i...scam/#comments


This got me thinking, I've experienced almost every flavor of imax: dome screens, regular screens, smaller screens, and movies in 3d.

On top of all the educational films I've seen in museums and such, I've also seen these regular movies in IMAX:

- The Matrix: Reloaded
- Batman Begins
- The Polar Express 3D
- Superman Returns 3D
- Speed Racer
- Watchmen


Out of these movies, I think that the Polar Express 3D benifitted the most from the format, wheras Batman Begins suffered the worst, that movie was just one enormous blur on such a large screen.

I'm starting to wonder, is it really worth paying the extra price for this?

I knew there was something fishy about the theater down the hill suddenly having an IMAX theater, yet had no new construction.

The Dark Knight was worth it. I Am Legend looked really sharp for the visuals of a destroyed NYC. Can't think of any other film that was a good use of IMAX. Superman Returns sucked with the occasional 3D scene effects.

I don't like it. Most of the Imax theaters I've been too have the seating way too shallow, so that if you're not in the back 3 - 4 rows the screens just way too fucking big. So much so that you're really only taking it what's directly infront of you. I don't want to have to turn my head to see the sides or the screen. Plus for 3D movies if you rotate you're head a bit the 3D effect goes out of sync which doesn't happen for me on a regular theater screen. I'm pretty much done with Imax.

The "no distortion" domes are horseshit unless you're sitting in the sweet spot. So dumb.

If I recall correctly, Batman Begins and Matrix were not IMAX formatted, that's why it was ass. (standard digital print being shown for those 2)

As far as the 70ft screen, it looks amazing at the Cinemark here in Dallas. The sound system also kicks major butt

Watched a few 3d flicks there and it was ok. Educational dome flicks are always fun. For actual Hollywood films, best Ive seen so far have been

Dark Knight
Watchmen
Harry Potter OotP
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Just be picky and look for the films that have prints meant for this type of display. When it's done right, it's amazing

Yeah, seeing a movie in IMAX has a lot of accompanying distractions. The seating is very uncomfortable, there's a lot more moving your head around, and - at least where I go - you get shuttled out the door like cattle the second before the credits start to roll. If there's a scene during or after the credits, you have to watch it with the house lights on and scores of people pushing past you in tightly confined aisles.

That said, 300 and The Dark Knight looked amazing. Most of the other movies, not so much.

How is it justified that it costs more money to watch something in a digital theatre? It should be fucking less. There's no film to load and shit like that. It's basically a DVD player with a projection unit on it, isn't it?

I was excited to see Watchmen in Imax when it came out, but it turned out to be one of those AMC Imax except not really screens that are way too small.

I don't like the format. I really like old style theaters a LOT more, actually.