|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Movie-Theater Chains Take On IMAX
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-23-2013 10:46 AM
quote: Bruce Hansen
This sounds like it could be the death of IMAX. Too bad they moved away from 15/70 film. It was THE thing that made them special. Now with digital crud, they are no longer special, and anyone can build a theater that will do the same thing as a lieMAX theater.
Exactly. Momentum is gaining with the construction of these like-LieMAX theaters. The theater chains are taking a page from IMAX' marketing play book, building these acronym-labeled big screen theaters without being clear to the public about how they're being equipped. They have opportunities to cut corners yet make customers feel like they're buying a product just like IMAX digital when the premium priced house may be no different than a standard theater. Single projector 3D and 5.1 sound, but with a bigger screen and louder volume.
IMAX is at a horrible disadvantage in this situation.
IMAX can't call the public's attention to any specifics about why their IMAX Digital theaters are better than rivals like RPX, ETX, XD, BigD, TitanXC, etc. IMAX would be biting the hands that feed it since just about all those theater chains have at least one or more IMAX-branded theaters. Even if IMAX could get into comparitive specifics about its digital theaters versus its rivals, doing so would ruin the illusion so many customers have about IMAX theaters. Educating customers would reveal the limitations with IMAX' rivals and IMAX Digital. On top of that, IMAX wouldn't come out well in the sound department since it doesn't have a next generation sound format like Barco/Auro 3D 11.1 or Dolby Atmos.
If anything, a theater chain not in a partnership with IMAX could start teeing off on IMAX by openly advertising point by point specifics on why its premium priced giant screen theater is better.
In the near term, it is vital for IMAX to get their dual 4K laser projector system off the ground and into theaters ASAP and have 4K native resolution 3D movies playing on those setups. That will at least put IMAX a big step ahead of theater companies trying to build big screen premium theaters on the cheap. In the long term there's nothing to stop theater companies from actually spending the money to match whatever IMAX does with its digital theaters or even surpassing it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Edward Havens
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 614
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Mar 2008
|
posted 12-25-2013 08:48 AM
Bobby, your hypothesis requires that every single cinemagoer cares about this topic as much as you and many of us here do, which we should all know by now is not the case.
IMAX has made its greatest strides within the public consciousness since the implementation of their digital system. Even with the extremely small but very vocal minority of people who can't stop calling it LieMAX, their digital system continues to see unparalleled acceptance from the general public.
The arrogant will call the general public "stupid" for accepting a "clearly inferior" product, but they are not comparing systems the way you might be. To them, they are comparing the IMAX screen to the regular screens at their multiplex based on their personal experiences, not to the 15/70 screens that are your personal experiences.
For myself, if I have to see something in 3D, like Gravity, then I prefer to see it in IMAX if it is a choice. The image is cleaner and brighter, and the eye strain issue just does not exist. If I can see it in 15/70, even better, but that was rarely an option before IMAX digital even when I was living in New York City or Los Angeles.
But how are movie theatre chains taking on IMAX, when so few of these PLF screens exist? Regal, the largest exhibitor in the United States, has about 80 IMAX theatres in their 575 location, but only 60 or so RPX screens. AMC has around 150 IMAX theatres but barely more than a dozen ETX houses. The few chains that have more PLFs than IMAX houses are the ones that never really got in to bed with IMAX in the first place.
When Regal has 40-50% of their locations with at least one RPX screen, then I'll start believing they're taking on IMAX.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-25-2013 10:42 AM
@Edward, finally some mature comments regarding IMAX and other premium large formats. You are right pointing out that despite the few that call IMAX "liemax" there has been a almost unparalleled acceptance from the general public regarding their 2K x projector set up. Aside from The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, almost nobody except the few care about 15/70 material that was shot in 15/70, Catching Fire had a almost no buzz about the 15/70 material and the movie did very, very well.
And you are also correct that these people are comparing IMAX to their regular screens and not to the 15/70 that are purpose built venues. Yes it does suck that 15/70 is gone from most places and I cannot watch it my area, but such is life.
Also, one must not forget that IMAX has been adopted and accepted by the studios, IMAX to the regular person is synonymous with "big event" movie. For studios to allow another company to alter the picture, the sound and then distribute it themselves and thus charge a surcharge is pretty significant. I don't think we have seen this is movies before.
I am not sure where Bobby gets his incorrect idea that momentum has swung to the PLF theatres, IMAX is still selling out or close to capacity when a movie is released in it, people are not shying away from IMAX. 7 of the top 10 box office locations in my province are IMAX theatres, IMAX has a drawing power that the others do not have. Right now IMAX has an alternative competitor but those PLF competitors have not gained momentum.
As for Barco/Auro 3D 11.1, are you freaking kidding me, Barco/Auro 3D 11.1 is as about as irrelevant as Dolby 7.1 Surround right now. Dolby Atmos although a good format is not going to have any impact on the current perception or acceptance of IMAX right now. To my ears, the classic 15/70 sound set up is better than Atmos and the current IMAX set up is a good enough.
quote: Edward Havens
For myself, if I have to see something in 3D, like Gravity, then I prefer to see it in IMAX if it is a choice. The image is cleaner and brighter, and the eye strain issue just does not exist.
I prefer to see it in IMAX as well, I like the reserve seating and the classic purpose built IMAX theatre near me is a very nice set up.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 12-25-2013 11:25 AM
I dunno...it is more than a "few" that call it LieMax...and it is really a lie. It has very little in common from what people have known as IMAX. I think the perception would have been different if IMAX had chosen to brand it differently...say IMAX-Digital or something like that...something that distinguished it from the classic 15/70 system yet still built on the IMAX brand/reputation.
As for IMAX having control over a picture sound like no others before...um....Cinerama, ToddAo, D150...These processes received different prints than the mainstream and the movies conformed to their format. I'd say CinemaScope but that was more of a universal format for Fox and if you wanted the title, YOU converted as opposed to the primo houses of the larger formats.
As for the other sound formats, Surround 7.1 is doing VERY well for us and many, many movies are offered in the format. One thing it has going for it is that one need not spend much if any money to adopt it. The benefits do depend on the people mixing the movie, obviously. Movies like Gravity will show off any sound system, Surround 7.1 included. I don't have high hopes for Auro 11.1 because I've yet to hear it add to anything. Just adding height channels just doesn't seem to work (to my ears). It is a lot of money for very little bang. Atmos, if Dolby promoted it better, would probably be a game changer for the bigger markets. It is that much different and better. They have taken sound in a different direction (literally and figuratively). Dolby, like IMAX, has brand recognition and they are going to inherently get more credit for a sound innovation than a projector company that no one outside of our or the A/V industry has heard of. However, I think they are resting a bit too hard on their name for Atmos (or Dolby 3D) and not getting their name/process out there to the general public. Time will tell but one thing is for sure...more and more Atmos titles are coming out and the installed base of theatres keep rising. IMAX hasn't really done anything for sound in 40 years. They were ahead of the curve in the 70s in how they handled a 6-channel sound system...but they are stuck there and really have no need for Center-High anymore. It is great that you like their sound and I'm not saying you shouldn't but it is easily demonstrable how a 5.1, 7.1 and Atmos system can do everything that an IMAX system can do, and also do much more.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-26-2013 08:55 AM
Pravin, this is just my opinion but I think the IMAX digital experience is superior to the PLF experience in my area. We have Cineplex AVX and while it is good, I prefer IMAX if I want to watch a big event type movie.
Cineplex offers Atmos but to me Atmos is not good enough to switch over. AVX is simply too dim of a picture for my liking.
quote: Pravin Ratnam
do we really have to nitpick over one sound format over another as offering such a significantly superior sound experience to the viewer?
I don't really think it is that big of a deal, Dolby wants to become relevant again and good for the with Atmos. I really don't care how many channels the format has or how well in pans in the rear surrounds and all, I think most sound is good today. I saw Gravity in Atmos and it was very good, better than IMAX I would say but in the end both were still very good.
quote: Mike Blakesley
Imax movie is always the biggest new release and is being shown in the biggest auditorium in a complex.
Mike, I don't think you get it. Stop being so ignorant.
IMAX Mississauga seats 262 seats, the same theatre has six other auditoriums that seat 300 seats or more, four of the theatres seat seat close to 500 seats and those same four were former THX theatres.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 12-26-2013 12:13 PM
I normally don't like to get involved in other people's business, however...
quote: Mike Blakesley
Imax movie is always the biggest new release and is being shown in the biggest auditorium in a complex.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Mike, I don't think you get it. Stop being so ignorant.
IMAX Mississauga seats 262 seats, the same theatre has six other auditoriums that seat 300 seats or more, four of the theatres seat seat close to 500 seats and those same four were former THX theatres.
While there are obviously some exceptions, as you point out, Mike's observations agree with mine. That is, the auditorium chosen for IMAX conversion is almost always the largest in the building, with (close to) the largest screen and (close to) the highest seat count before conversion. Mike has been a well-respected member of this community for well over a decade. I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't appreciate your comment towards him. We're all going to disagree from time to time. If you feel someone made an error in stating a fact, it can be pointed out without name-calling.
Just my $.02.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-26-2013 12:13 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
However, they chose to make no distinction and I think they deserve every hit they take for that. It was a deception to customers to think that the digital version of IMAX is the same as a 15/70 system.
I agree with you Steve, but seriously it has now been five years since IMAX came out with their digital system, people need to get over it. I have no option of watching a DMR movie in my area in 15/70 and it sure does suck, but I have gotten over it and I am not sure how people like yourself can't.
I had the chance to see Elysium in 15/70, what a mistake I made by not going. It probably was the last DMR 15/70 in my territory.
quote: Ken Lackner
While there are obviously some exceptions, as you point out, Mike's observations agree with mine. That is, the auditorium chosen for IMAX conversion is almost always the largest in the building, with (close to) the largest screen and (close to) the highest seat count before conversion. Mike has been a well-respected member of this community for well over a decade. I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't appreciate your comment towards him. We're all going to disagree from time to time. If you feel someone made an error in stating a fact, it can be pointed out without name-calling.
Just my $.02.
Well, thank you for your .02 cents. Please explain how the three purpose built IMAX venues in Toronto Scotia, Mississauga Colisuem, and IMAX Vaughn all have seats counts of 408, 262 and 262, all three have at least four auditoriums that approach 500 seats and the Scotia and Vaughn locations were all THX at one time.
Mike's point is really not valid because if IMAX was not popular with customers than they would not be watching or selling out the IMAX venues. Customers are not going to shell out $7 on top of an already expensive ticket price.
quote: Steve Guttag
One thing that IMAX does have going for it that the other house brands don't.
IMAX also has the customer idea that an event movie goes along with IMAX.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-26-2013 12:49 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
One thing that IMAX does have going for it that the other house brands don't...the ability to say what is good enough.
The problem is IMAX isn't getting into any specifics about what is good enough. In the end the customers just see rival brand names.
quote: Edward Havens
Bobby, your hypothesis requires that every single cinemagoer cares about this topic as much as you and many of us here do, which we should all know by now is not the case.
Actually my hypothesis requires the reverse of that. The less they care the more IMAX is screwed in the long term. If a big screen with loud sound is good enough then the movie chains will build fewer and fewer LieMAX theaters and build a lot more house-brand big screen theaters. And then they'll eventually dump IMAX just like they did THX.
There is little, if anything at all, IMAX can do about this in terms of marketing. Just about all of IMAX' multiplex theater customers have some sort of private label big screen concept. IMAX can't take pot shots at those private label screens without pissing off its multiplex partners who are building those screens. IMAX can't get into comparitive specifics without goofing up the illusions customers have about IMAX itself (and coming up short in the surround sound department).
quote: Edward Havens
But how are movie theatre chains taking on IMAX, when so few of these PLF screens exist? Regal, the largest exhibitor in the United States, has about 80 IMAX theatres in their 575 location, but only 60 or so RPX screens. AMC has around 150 IMAX theatres but barely more than a dozen ETX houses. The few chains that have more PLFs than IMAX houses are the ones that never really got in to bed with IMAX in the first place.
Movie theater chains are now building these private label big screen theaters at a faster pace than what they're doing with IMAX. If anything, they're slowing down with new IMAX screen builds. In Regal's case, the RPX theaters started showing up late in 2010. LieMAX has been around nearly 3 years longer. If they keep adding RPX theaters at this clip the RPX theaters will soon outnumber their IMAX branded houses. Cinemark has built 91 "XD" labeled screens so far. They have 14 IMAX branded theaters in their chain and at least half of those were 15/70 theaters built before LieMAX was introduced. Carmike has 16 IMAX branded theaters it acquired from other chains (Regal, Muvico, etc.) and a deal with IMAX to add 10 more. Carmike's "BigD" concept is fairly new; they already have about 20 of those screens built. One BigD screen replaced an IMAX screen in Myrtle Beach, SC.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
You are right pointing out that despite the few that call IMAX "liemax" there has been a almost unparalleled acceptance from the general public regarding their 2K x projector set up.
General acceptance from the general public? Baloney. If you quiz every customer coming out of a LieMAX theater 99.9% won't have a clue of what's really in the projector booth, much less have a reasonably informed view of what to accept.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
I am not sure where Bobby gets his incorrect idea that momentum has swung to the PLF theatres, IMAX is still selling out or close to capacity when a movie is released in it, people are not shying away from IMAX.
Terry, you might want to go back to page 1 of this thread and read the article you posted for starters. That's not the only news article like that online. Take a look at theater chain web sites. Most theater chains of any significant size now have some kind of private label big screen theater concept. These like-LieMAX theaters haven't all been around since IMAX Digital was launched.
quote: Steve Guttag
Dolby, like IMAX, has brand recognition and they are going to inherently get more credit for a sound innovation than a projector company that no one outside of our or the A/V industry has heard of. However, I think they are resting a bit too hard on their name for Atmos (or Dolby 3D) and not getting their name/process out there to the general public. Time will tell but one thing is for sure...more and more Atmos titles are coming out and the installed base of theatres keep rising.
Is Dolby still doing all of the Atmos installations or are they starting to let others do the work? If Dolby is continuing to do it all themselves there's only so many theaters they can equip in a certain amount of time. A possible upside is better quality control on the installation.
I have no idea what Dolby's marketing budget may be, or even what they might be trying to do to improve the marketing visibility of Atmos. Obviously, they need to take care of some basics, like getting all Atmos-equipped theaters to use the Atmos sound format trailers and display posters and other materials around the movie theater complex. I'm finally seeing the Atmos logo on more movie end credits. The Atmos logo has to get on more movie posters. Dolby needs to do some friendly arm twisting to give Atmos more visibility on theater chain web sites. Dolby does have a social media presence and is pushing Atmos there. Dolby is well ahead of Auro in terms of movie releases.
Then again, it may not make nearly as much of a difference for Dolby to market Atmos directly to the average ticket buyers in the public as much as it does for them to sell Atmos to theater operators. Considering the cost of Atmos, Dolby may have to get creative in helping theaters finance Atmos installations if they want Atmos screen counts in the thousands rather than hundreds.
quote: Mike Blakesley
I've said this before but Terry seems never to get it: This has mostly to do with the fact that the Imax movie is always the biggest new release and is being shown in the biggest auditorium in a complex.
Terry gets the point, he's just continuing to deliberately ignore the point.
Customers are used to seeing movies at certain evening time slots, like 7:00-7:30 and 9:30-10:00. The premium big screen theater, IMAX in particular, is always going to have the newest hit movie playing in those time slots. If you want to save a couple bucks and watch the same movie in a different house you'll have to watch the show at an odd time, like 5:00pm or 8:00pm. Terry ignores this point too.
quote: Pravin Ratnam
Theater chains should be more worried about improving the general chain experience better to get more patrons to their theaters instead of focusing on one just one screen. Make sure every screen is bright and in focus. Sound is crisp and acoustics are well designed in every screen.
The chains should be doing this, but too many are not. Even worse, the projection quality in these big screen theaters is often compromised. This is especially true for IMAX as well as any other theater shooting 2K material on a giant sized screen. Many of these theaters deliberately shift the image out of focus to hide the pixel grid.
One thing I loved about film projection is that when it was done right you could see the film grain swimming around on the screen if you sat close enough. I never see that with "digital." The focus is never dialed in perfectly. Some of it I suppose comes from the one size fits all lens designs. The other comes from the need of hiding the pixel grid screen door effect. Type and graphics on screen all look soft and blurry. The same movie has tack sharp detail at home on Blu-ray.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-26-2013 05:18 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
Customers are used to seeing movies at certain evening time slots, like 7:00-7:30 and 9:30-10:00. The premium big screen theater, IMAX in particular, is always going to have the newest hit movie playing in those time slots. If you want to save a couple bucks and watch the same movie in a different house you'll have to watch the show at an odd time, like 5:00pm or 8:00pm. Terry ignores this point too.
Bobby, that is not exactly the case and I am not ignoring that.
Scotia IMAX Toronto is playing Hobbit 2 in the following showtimes:
IMAX 6:20 and 10pm
3D 7:15 and 8:35p
2D 9:20pm
You just want to hate on IMAX, there are plenty of showtimes that are in the sweet spot that is non IMAX or AVX.
At the same theatre, Wolf of Wall Street is playing
AVX 6:40 and 10:40
reg 8:50 and 9:40
I know you have huge issues with IMAX and their new digital presentations, but seriously, it has been five years, can you not move on from it?
quote: Bobby Henderson
trying to do to improve the marketing visibility of Atmos.
Sadly, Secret Life of Walter Mitty cannot be seen in Atmos in my territory. Even worse was the fact that it was originally slated for Atmos in AVX and then at the last minute it was pulled for Wolf Of Wall Street it was advertised all week as in Atmos, they showed the Atmos trailer in front of Wolf Of Wall Street yesterday, not sure if the movie has a Atmos mix but if it doesn't then we have some pretty poor marketing on both Dolby and Cineplex's part.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 17 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15 16 17
|
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
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic