Imax worth it?

armenianmovieman

According to Wikipedia, the 15/70mm theaters are:

Bradford – National Media Museum (15/70 mm, 3D)

London – BFI London IMAX Cinema, British Film Institute. Both 15/70 mm 3D and digital projectors.

London – Science Museum (15/70 mm, 3D)

Manchester – Odeon, The Printworks (15/70 mm, 3D)

Glasgow – Cineworld/Glasgow Science Centre (15/70 mm, 3D)


How much of the film fills up the entire screen?

Is it worth it? Because I remember in Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar the movie looked like VHS on that huge screen, especially when compared to the crisp IMAX sequences... though I know this one has no IMAX sequences I want to get the huge full Bond experience.

So is it worth it or is a regular screen better?

Thanks!

Dutchfinger

I'll have my first IMAX expierence ever tomorrow, so I'll be able to tell you then! (No clue if an IMAX in the Netherlands is comparable to one in the UK though)

armenianmovieman

Dutchfinger wrote:

I'll have my first IMAX expierence ever tomorrow, so I'll be able to tell you then! (No clue if an IMAX in the Netherlands is comparable to one in the UK though)

Thanks for the reply!

If you're watching it at the Omniversum OMNIMAX theater (15/70 mm, 2D) in The Hague on a freakishly large screen then our experiences will be comparable!

Dutchfinger

armenianmovieman wrote:

Dutchfinger wrote:

I'll have my first IMAX expierence ever tomorrow, so I'll be able to tell you then! (No clue if an IMAX in the Netherlands is comparable to one in the UK though)

Thanks for the reply!

If you're watching it at the Omniversum OMNIMAX theater (15/70 mm, 2D) in The Hague on a freakishly large screen then our experiences will be comparable!

Unfortunately no! It'll be in the city of Tilburg. (Which is on the direct oppossite of where I live, so it'll be a little trip tomorrow )
Not sure how big the one is over there exactly. Only specifics I can find quickly is the sound quality (Dolby Digital 7.1, IMAX Sound)

armenianmovieman

Dutchfinger wrote:

armenianmovieman wrote:

Dutchfinger wrote:

I'll have my first IMAX expierence ever tomorrow, so I'll be able to tell you then! (No clue if an IMAX in the Netherlands is comparable to one in the UK though)

Thanks for the reply!

If you're watching it at the Omniversum OMNIMAX theater (15/70 mm, 2D) in The Hague on a freakishly large screen then our experiences will be comparable!

Unfortunately no! It'll be in the city of Tilburg. (Which is on the direct oppossite of where I live, so it'll be a little trip tomorrow )
Not sure how big the one is over there exactly. Only specifics I can find quickly is the sound quality (Dolby Digital 7.1, IMAX Sound)

Friendly warning: it is going to be only slightly larger than a regular movie screen.

Napoleon Plural

One big advantage of the Imax Waterloo is that the floor is sloped, like an gladiator arena, so you won't have to dodge some tall guy sat in front, a big problem with the Odeon Leicester Square. I've just come back from there, and did choose a good seat on the aisle to avoid that (J33 if anyone's interested) so you get to look up at the screen too, but even so there was a potato head in the central section that threatened to annoy, and some of the subtitles are right along the bottom of the screen, so you had folk sitting up in their seat to read them.

Waterloo Imax is very good, but too large imo so if you get a seat, get one in the back row or near enough, or you will be overwhelmed. For all that, pic quality and sound quality will be much better than in Odeon L Square, still you are slightly looking down on the screen so it is not an old style movie experience.

Empire L Square is showing Spectre too and that may be the best option, not sure. It may also be that a deep screen is not really a more enjoyable experience anyway, sometimes it is better to have a widescreen.

Gassy Man

I'm seeing it on the equivalent of an IMAX screen (same idea, but different patent). To me, modern films don't really benefit that much. Mendes tends to fill his screen with a lot of emptiness -- a lone car driving through forests and hills, for instance. I don't know that I need IMAX for that. But older films, with crowds of thousands and directors who know how to block actors and stage a scene for the big screen, definitely benefit from the bigger screen size, even if they were not such films.

Loeffelholz

A friend of mine saw SF in IMAX and swears by the experience, so I believe I'll give it a shot with SP; the nearest one to me is about 30 miles away. I've never seen a feature in that format---the last time I went to one was more than 10 years ago, and they were only showing short subjects.

Lexi

Napoleon Plural wrote:

One big advantage of the Imax Waterloo is that the floor is sloped, like an gladiator arena, so you won't have to dodge some tall guy sat in front, a big problem with the Odeon Leicester Square. I've just come back from there, and did choose a good seat on the aisle to avoid that (J33 if anyone's interested) so you get to look up at the screen too, but even so there was a potato head in the central section that threatened to annoy, and some of the subtitles are right along the bottom of the screen, so you had folk sitting up in their seat to read them.

Waterloo Imax is very good, but too large imo so if you get a seat, get one in the back row or near enough, or you will be overwhelmed. For all that, pic quality and sound quality will be much better than in Odeon L Square, still you are slightly looking down on the screen so it is not an old style movie experience.

Empire L Square is showing Spectre too and that may be the best option, not sure. It may also be that a deep screen is not really a more enjoyable experience anyway, sometimes it is better to have a widescreen.

I think Imax are worth it...the sound is 'bigger' and you literally sit 'in' the movie...

But make sure you sit center and near the back, as most IMAX screens are steeply sloped as NP states and quite narrow in length.

I'd even go as far to pay the bit extra to get premium seating too... :007)

Napoleon Plural

Isn't this film 35mm or something, the texture is grainy and better quality? I figured I might be taking my Mum to see the film, and she is in a wheelchair (advanced Parkinson's) and they have v good wheelchair access on the back row, which is great for Imax anyway, but in the Odeon L Square it is at the back and you get a restricted view, it sucks.

So I figured I could do the Imax on the second bounce. I think you might get a more discerning audience for the Imax too, these are people who want to pay for a good movie experience, the ones in the Odeon L Square were, I dunno, not as classy as I remembered from the days of GE, sort of sat there in their anoraks and trainers. I felt a bit of a snob, but there you go.

armenianmovieman

Loeffelholz wrote:

A friend of mine saw SF in IMAX and swears by the experience, so I believe I'll give it a shot with SP; the nearest one to me is about 30 miles away. I've never seen a feature in that format---the last time I went to one was more than 10 years ago, and they were only showing short subjects.

I think the reason he loved it so much is because the entire movie pretty much filled the screen; Roger Deakins shot for 2.35 (big black bars on DVD\Blu-Ray) but enough so that it would fill a screen bigger\taller than that (i.e. an IMAX screen)......

So Skyfall filled up the entire screen, but I don't think Spectre will. Which is what I'm curious about.

Napoleon Plural

For me, that would work better.

I saw OHMSS on the Imax Waterloo and loved it, but SF didn't quite work for me in that format, largely admittedly cos I went and chose the same seats as for OHMSS, and I was too much in the movie, I couldn't process it, it was huge.

Can't really remember if UNCLE, which I saw at Imax, was an Imax presentation, don't think so. It's all very confusing these days isn't it?

HowardB

IMO, the introduction of the Arri 65 6K Digital camera (which was used to film some scenes in SPECTRE) which apparently approaches the quality of 70mm film along with the gradual conversion of larger digital IMAX theaters from duel 2k projection to duel 4k laser projection will elevate Digital IMAX close to the level of the shot w/ IMAX cameras and projected in 70mm.

Bleuville

Napoleon Plural wrote:

One big advantage of the Imax Waterloo is that the floor is sloped, like an gladiator arena, so you won't have to dodge some tall guy sat in front, a big problem with the Odeon Leicester Square. I've just come back from there, and did choose a good seat on the aisle to avoid that (J33 if anyone's interested) so you get to look up at the screen too, but even so there was a potato head in the central section that threatened to annoy, and some of the subtitles are right along the bottom of the screen, so you had folk sitting up in their seat to read them.

Waterloo Imax is very good, but too large imo so if you get a seat, get one in the back row or near enough, or you will be overwhelmed. For all that, pic quality and sound quality will be much better than in Odeon L Square, still you are slightly looking down on the screen so it is not an old style movie experience.

Empire L Square is showing Spectre too and that may be the best option, not sure. It may also be that a deep screen is not really a more enjoyable experience anyway, sometimes it is better to have a widescreen.

I'm not in London -but did anyone get a Premiere brochure-or is there a magazine about the film.
If not I suppose one has to buy the £25 book -Blood,Sweat and Bond.

Bleuville.

blame_thatcher

There's no need to see the film on an IMAX screen. It was shot on 35mm with anamorphic lenses with an aspect ratio of 2.40:1. There is no additional image in the source at the top and bottom of the frame to fill an IMAX screen in the standard IMAX ratio. Skyfall did have that additional image at the top and bottom of the frame because it was shot with spherical lenses - the 2.40:1 aspect ratio was achieved by cropping the frame. That's why television bradcasts of the film fill your 16:9 screen without losing the sides of the frame.

Loeffelholz

IMAX it is! Tickets to be bought this Friday -{ The next 3 or 4 times I see it will be on standard screens, so I'll have a personal point of comparison.

HowardB

blame_thatcher wrote:

There's no need to see the film on an IMAX screen. It was shot on 35mm with anamorphic lenses with an aspect ratio of 2.40:1. There is no additional image in the source at the top and bottom of the frame to fill an IMAX screen in the standard IMAX ratio. Skyfall did have that additional image at the top and bottom of the frame because it was shot with spherical lenses - the 2.40:1 aspect ratio was achieved by cropping the frame. That's why television bradcasts of the film fill your 16:9 screen without losing the sides of the frame.

That's what I thought initially when it was first announced that SPECTRE would be shot on film, specifically 35mm anamorphic (Panavision) which would need to be cropped at the sides to fit the 1.90 to 1 Digital IMAX screens and would yield less picture and make no sense. However as more information became available regarding how SPECTRE was being filmed, it is apparent that SPECTRE was shot using multiple formats including the aforementioned 35mm anamorphic, but also Super 35, VistaVision, and Arri 65 6K Digital. The latter three formats lend themselves well to multiple aspect ratios. I'm still trying to find out if the IMAX version of SPECTRE is being presented in shifting ratios. According to the tech specs on IMDB.com the IMAX version is primarilly 2.40 to 1 with some scenes shifting to 1.90 to 1. But IMDB can be wrong. Hopefully someone here who has seen it in IMAX could confirm or unconfirm this.

As far as a film being 2.40 to 1 not being worth seeing in IMAX, everyone is entitled to their opinion but I think that is a bit of an oversimplification. Most non-IMAX theater screens use movable masking, whether horizontal or verticle to conform to the aspect ratio of the film being shown anyway. For me, I will only invest in IMAX if the screen is large enough. For example there are two IMAX locations within 20 minutes of my home. Both are Digital IMAX and conversions of pre-existing multiplex auditoriums. However one is far superior in terms of screen size (70'x36' vs 46'x27") and that's the only one I will go to. That being said, there is a bit more to IMAX than just screen size. I find that IMAX has superior sound (especially for a big action film), the picture quality superior (especially in terms of brightness) and at least in the IMAX I go to, the configuiration of screen, seating, etc do make for a more immersive experience.

Another note regarding Digital IMAX vs 70mm IMAX. Digital IMAX tends to get bashed as "liemax" and in some ways this is deserved (IMAX has not been real upfront about the differences and many converted theaters are substandard IMO re screen size). However, with 70mm IMAX film, unless a movie was either filmed entirely or partially with IMAX 70mm cameras what you are seeing is a blown up version (albeit corrected for color, etc) of a 35mm or digital film. Remember, most of these older 70mm IMAX theaters with the super tall squarish screens were not intended for theatrical films, but documentaries shot with big, honkin' 70mm IMAX cameras that would fill that entire screen. As per Roger Deakins himself, the Digital IMAX version of Skyfall looked far superior to the blow-up to 70mm film.

Surrie

IMO IMAX is best. More immersive experience of picture and sound. However, you will need to sit near the back. If you are too close to the giant screen you tend to focus on one area of it rather than its entirety.

blame_thatcher

HowardB wrote:

it is apparent that SPECTRE was shot using multiple formats including the aforementioned 35mm anamorphic, but also Super 35, VistaVision, and Arri 65 6K Digital. The latter three formats lend themselves well to multiple aspect

Howard, I worked on the film and can confirm those formats were used, but the only sequence that was shot spherical throughout was the pre-title sequence (35mm). The VistaVision was used for VFX plates for the Austria sequence. The Alexa 65 was used for the London exteriors at the climax of the film - you can easily tell which shots because of different depth-of-field and focus effects compared to the 35mm anamorphic shots.

HowardB

blame_thatcher wrote:

Howard, I worked on the film and can confirm those formats were used, but the only sequence that was shot spherical throughout was the pre-title sequence (35mm). The VistaVision was used for VFX plates for the Austria sequence. The Alexa 65 was used for the London exteriors at the climax of the film - you can easily tell which shots because of different depth-of-field and focus effects compared to the 35mm anamorphic shots.

That's great information. Must really be something else actually working on a film, especially a Bond film. Really appreciate you sharing this type of stuff, some might find it uninteresting, but I really find it fasinating how films are made. Should be interesting to see how SPECTRE looks compared to Skyfall, which was all Arri Alexa.
I'll do IMAX for my first viewing....takes me back a bit to my youth when I saw the Bond films on those giant movie palace screens.

Markyb64

Lexi wrote:

Napoleon Plural wrote:

One big advantage of the Imax Waterloo is that the floor is sloped, like an gladiator arena, so you won't have to dodge some tall guy sat in front, a big problem with the Odeon Leicester Square. I've just come back from there, and did choose a good seat on the aisle to avoid that (J33 if anyone's interested) so you get to look up at the screen too, but even so there was a potato head in the central section that threatened to annoy, and some of the subtitles are right along the bottom of the screen, so you had folk sitting up in their seat to read them.

Waterloo Imax is very good, but too large imo so if you get a seat, get one in the back row or near enough, or you will be overwhelmed. For all that, pic quality and sound quality will be much better than in Odeon L Square, still you are slightly looking down on the screen so it is not an old style movie experience.

Empire L Square is showing Spectre too and that may be the best option, not sure. It may also be that a deep screen is not really a more enjoyable experience anyway, sometimes it is better to have a widescreen.

I think Imax are worth it...the sound is 'bigger' and you literally sit 'in' the movie...

But make sure you sit center and near the back, as most IMAX screens are steeply sloped as NP states and quite narrow in length.

I'd even go as far to pay the bit extra to get premium seating too... :007)

I've just seen the movie today at the Empire Leicester Square which is using the new "laser projection " system and the view , picture and sound were superb...as was the film!!

armenianmovieman

blame_thatcher wrote:

HowardB wrote:

it is apparent that SPECTRE was shot using multiple formats including the aforementioned 35mm anamorphic, but also Super 35, VistaVision, and Arri 65 6K Digital. The latter three formats lend themselves well to multiple aspect

Howard, I worked on the film and can confirm those formats were used, but the only sequence that was shot spherical throughout was the pre-title sequence (35mm). The VistaVision was used for VFX plates for the Austria sequence. The Alexa 65 was used for the London exteriors at the climax of the film - you can easily tell which shots because of different depth-of-field and focus effects compared to the 35mm anamorphic shots.

So does the IMAX screen will fill up during the pre-title sequence and the finale?