Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Interstellar locations running in 70MM

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Interstellar locations running in 70MM (Page 23)

This topic comprises 23 pages: 1 2 3 ... 20 21 22 23

Author

Topic: Interstellar locations running in 70MM

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 01-17-2015 04:18 PM

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
But it is in the best interest of IMAX not to supply prints as what they really want is to sell new digital units.

It is in the best interest of IMAX to provide a level of quality that no other system can match. However they have ditched that approach and instead have sank down to a vastly inferior system all around, both sound and picture. They are relying solely on their name from back when it stood for quality.

That being said I'm glad to hear of their decision. This way IMAX can die as a company and just go away. It is SO EASY and CRAZY CHEAPER to make a PLF theater that far exceeds the quality of digital IMAX it isn't even funny.

| IP: Logged

Allan Young
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 125
From: EGHAM, Surrey UK
Registered: Jun 2011

posted 12-01-2015 03:28 AM

quote:
£22.50?! Bugger me with a soldering iron! I last saw a show at the Odeon, Leicester Square in the early '00s, and I think the tickets were £9.something.

One year on and front circle seats at the Odeon Leicester Square are now a frankly unbelievable £27.00. That's $40.80 at the current exchange rate.

Oh, and an extra quid if you need 3D glasses.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-01-2015 09:49 AM

$40 for a movie ticket? I really am going to laugh if Star Wars: The Force Awakens turns out to be a turd.

quote: bold pro-IMAX claim
So far there are over 65+ IMAX laser Interstellar-ations [Wink] to be done.

Here we are, nearly a year after that comment was made, and only a couple weeks before the release of a movie that is being hyped by the movie industry and global media in general like no movie in the past 20 or so years (if ever), and how many IMAX with Laser installations have been installed? Less than a dozen world-wide at this point.

The IMAX company made claims they had over 60 or 70 orders for their laser-based system back in April when they were bringing the first installations on line. It would have been easy to figure most of those orders would have been filled in advance of the new Star Wars movie's release. Why have so few of these systems been installed? Only 14 IMAX-branded theaters are slated to show Star Wars with the new laser-based setup. Oddly, at least 15 theaters (13 in the US) will be showing the movie in 15-perf 70mm.

Does IMAX not have the money to install all these systems? During the summer IMAX' stock price dropped from nearly $44 per share down to $29. It has since risen to around $38 per share.

How complicated is it to install one of those dual 4K laser-based systems and the updated 12 channel sound system? Could this be the issue?

One thing is certain: IMAX is doing little to advertise the laser-based system or true 15/70mm IMAX format. The company seems to be sticking to its guns, making customers think all IMAX theaters have the same gear in the booth and show quality is the same across the board. I suppose if customers knew most IMAX-labeled theaters weren't delivering the best of what the company had to offer those customers might want a discount on that pretty high ticket price.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 12-01-2015 12:35 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
$40 for a movie ticket? I really am going to laugh if Star Wars: The Force Awakens turns out to be a turd.

Well it could be the greatest movie in the history of the galaxy but that doesn't matter; there are going to be legions of Star Wars fans who are going to hate it just because:

1. They're preconditioned to hate it because it's impossible to top the original trilogy

2. They hate Disney and everything Disney does

3. They will say it's "just not the same" not having the Fox logo open the film

4. It's rated PG-13

5. Without Lucas's direct involvement, it 'just won't be the same' (even though many of the same people said he did a crappy job directing the most recent three films)

6. It doesn't give them that giddy thrill they experienced when they first discovered Star Wars. (Which is impossible, it's like trying to get the same thrill the second time you ride a roller coaster - it can't be recreated.)

My own fear is, it's going to have one of those incomprehensible six-arc stories like we get with almost all action movies these days, as opposed to the wonderful straightforward stories of the original three films. I'm hoping against hope that isn't the case.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-01-2015 03:14 PM

Obviously some people are going to hate the new Star Wars movie regardless if the movie is a genuinely great show. They'll do it just to be contradictory to the crowd. I won't use the term "non-conformist" since that term could be interpreted as a compliment. Hating something just because everyone else likes it makes the hater an asshole.

However, the movie industry and global media (led by Disney and ABC) have really been hyping the hell out of this upcoming release and spawning off tons of merchandise as if this new Star Wars installment is guaranteed to be truly great film. News flash: there are no guarantees. There is actually a real chance this new movie could be pretty mediocre or even just plain bad. The way the hype machine has been going into hyper-drive and hyper-space it's almost like they're trying to jinx the damned thing. Audience expectations are going to be pretty high.

SW:TFA will definitely make a shit-ton of money its opening weekend. But will the movie be good enough to still be putting butts into all those IMAX-branded seats in mid-January?

There's a number of legitimate factors working against the movie. The PG-13 rating isn't a problem for a movie like this. But PG-13 ratings don't work on so well for horror movies and movie re-makes whose original was R-rated.

Regarding audience expectations, they're not going to come away from this thinking it was a ground-breaking, industry changing movie the way Star Wars was in 1977. There's no way to top that while making yet another Star Wars movie. The only thing the people involved in the production of SW:TFA can do is just do the best job they can with already very familiar material and hope the audience likes it.

My biggest worries involve J.J. Abrams. One positive thing: he's a huge fan of Star Wars. Maybe there's a chance he'll treat the material properly. OTOH, look at his past movie and TV work. He spends more time producing movies and TV shows than directing them. All four of his previous feature film directorial efforts have featured at least a few baffling WTF moments that were either unintentionally funny or anger inspiring. And that's on top of the movies all feeling like they were copying something else. His two Star Trek movies took a giant shit on the saga's canon, with the second one riffing off and revising Wrath of Khan in such a cheesy manner it made rap samples of classic rock songs seem distinguished by comparison. Super 8 had a physics defying freight train crash that went on and on implausibly, and with box cars that seemed to be crashing faster and faster as the crash progressed. Mission: Impossible III had more than its share of logically stupid and/or implausible moments -like Tom Cruise wasting time to leap across a big gap in a bridge to get within range for his super duper machine to shoot down a helicopter.

quote: Mike Blakesley
My own fear is, it's going to have one of those incomprehensible six-arc stories like we get with almost all action movies these days, as opposed to the wonderful straightforward stories of the original three films. I'm hoping against hope that isn't the case.

Given the fact J.J. Abrams was one of the guys behind Lost that's definitely a real risk.

Lost was a pretty good TV series in its beginning. But it turned into a completely baffling, illogical cluster**** by the time it came to an end.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 23 pages: 1 2 3 ... 20 21 22 23

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.