RE: IMAX question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings



Message


sam_m -> RE: IMAX question (13/4/2012 12:21:23 AM)

I'm not sure about anyone else, but for me there is alot more to it than just how big the screen is. The sound plays a massive part for me and a recent viewing of wrath of the titans on the Crawley IMAX I was blown away how good it was. The screen filled my peripheral vision so I have absolutely no complaints there, and it was bright and crystal clear, and the emmersive experience from the newley installed sound system was Absolutely fantastic.

Whether its clased as liemax or whatever, the whole experience is so much better than any standard screen I've been too. This is a standard I wish all theatres would have!!!




Drooch -> RE: IMAX question (13/4/2012 12:49:49 AM)

quote:

Whether its clased as liemax or whatever, the whole experience is so much better than any standard screen I've been too. This is a standard I wish all theatres would have!!!


I agree, but it should be priced accordingly. It's still a notably less impressive experience than true IMAX and should therefore cost less, not more, and its relative shortcomings should be made clear to paying customers, who are otherwise being duped into paying for a full, true IMAX experience.




Jaynd -> RE: IMAX question (14/4/2012 9:57:54 PM)

So with Avengers coming on the 26th is it worth going to the (Digital) IMAX at Cineworld? I read online that this movie wont be shown in real IMAX as its only been transferred to digital. So surely it will look great on these screens right? It cost £10.28 to book online and considering a ticket at the Vue is £11 it just seems stupid to not go IMAX... Also about seating, is it best to be closer to the screen or further away? Ive never been to IMAX but i heard the effect is much better the closer you are? All the front row seats have sold-out and most center. :( Anyone have any images of inside these Cineworld screens? Would really like to see exactly where the seats are before booking!

Thanks.




adambatman82 -> RE: IMAX question (15/4/2012 12:48:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaynd
Also about seating, is it best to be closer to the screen or further away? Ive never been to IMAX but i heard the effect is much better the closer you are?
Thanks.


IMAX is designed to envelope your complete scope of vision, so yes, closer is better than further away. To be honest tho, I'm not sure how this applies to Cineworld's fake IMAX, given that its built to a different spec to proper IMAX. In a regular IMAX screen the seating is limited by design, as to afford everyone the desired view, whereas the Cineworld screens are simply conversions of regular screens, with the old seating arrangement and a screen that has been moved a couple of feet forward.




jrewing1000 -> RE: IMAX question (15/4/2012 10:12:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

My complaint to Odeon and their subsequent reply:



Dear Odeon,

I recently visited your newly refurbished Swiss Cottage branch to see Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol in your new 'IMAX' screen. When purchasing my ticket, the ticket-seller assured me that the screen was 'almost as big' as the full-sized BFI IMAX screen in Waterloo, so I paid £16 for a 'premium' seat ticket.

Shortly after taking my seat I felt incredibly misled. The screen was barely larger than the standard screen that it replaced, and roughly a quarter the size of the BFI IMAX screen, and the sequences shot in IMAX were cropped at the top and bottom to fit the new ratio, cutting out a huge portion of the image that the filmmakers had composed specifically for The format.

The true IMAX theatre at Waterloo charges £15 for a full IMAX experience, you are charging £16 for a massively compromised version of the same. That would be fine if this was advertised as a reduced/different form of IMAX and priced accordingly, but at the moment your marketing and, in this instance, your staff are misleading customers.

I went online shortly after the screening to find countless articles, blogs and forums damning 'LIE-MAX' and 'fake IMAX'. Like these people, I feel deceived by the experience I had and will certainly seek out true IMAX cinemas in the future.

Do you have any plans to re-brand your IMAX cinemas in a way that makes clear that the presentation is vastly different to the full IMAX experience?



Thank you very much for your E mail of the 1st Jan and apologies for the considerable delay in replying to you.

I was surprised by your comments as we are very impressed with our IMAX screen and this represents a huge transformation in the original screen size and is now around 4 times larger than the original screen. While it compares very well to other IMAX screens and is ODEONs largest digital IMAX we are a local cinema withnfive screens and it cannot compete with our IMAX in Manchester Printworks or the BFI which are stand alone centrepiece cinemas. I was sorry to hear that you felt misled. It is not our intention to compare ourselves to other cinemas nor would we want to as Swiss Cottage has other features -our other screens, our AMBAR, COSTA and club screens with waiter service that make it unique.

Unfortunately it has been some time since IMAX have built a 70mm cinema and it is under their guidance that the industry is now mainly digital. IMAX stopped developing new 70mm cinemas in 2008 as the cost of 70mm prints is becoming unsustainable and the number of laboratories processing 70mm are very rare now and IMAX digital will eventually take over. As a film fan I regret this but each film is now tailored specifically for each format so that no quality is lost. Whether shot in digital or 70mm the directors and IMAX view each film carefully frame by frame so that each experience is exactly as the director intended eg when James Cameron showed Avatar he projected the 2D and 3D versions in different ratios in addition to IMAX 65 and digital.

I can understand the internet complaints when a very small cinema is converted into IMAX but our screen can hardly be seen as small and at 18m wide is one of the largest screens in the country rivalling all of the Leicester Square screens and in terms of IMAX is in the top 5%. IMAX also take great care and attention on each frame of each film and in every part of process. The sound is calibrated every day for at least 45 minutes and our sound and picture quality are monitored 24 hours a day by IMAX in Canada.

I would like to thank you for taking the time and trouble to write to me. This is extremely useful for improving our guest service. I would urge you to try our IMAX cinema again or our other screens and I do hope that your future visits to our cinemas prove more enjoyable.

Yours sincerely

Richard Mann
General Manager




Another pitiful example of a business not understanding a complaint. Richard Mann doesn't once acknowledge the public perception of the existing IMAX brand, and how misleading their IMAX Digital claims are.




Filmfan 2 -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 4:01:41 PM)

Very interesting thread, I had no idea about this whole D-IMAX thing.

For those of you who have frequented the IMAX screen in Edinburgh, how much bigger is it compared to how screen 1 at the Cineworld used to be? I've not visited it yet and I had planned to perhaps see Batman there when it's released, but I'd rather go through to Glasgow if it's not as big as that.




Spaldron -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 4:25:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Filmfan 2.

For those of you who have frequented the IMAX screen in Edinburgh, how much bigger is it compared to how screen 1 at the Cineworld used to be? I've not visited it yet and I had planned to perhaps see Batman there when it's released, but I'd rather go through to Glasgow if it's not as big as that.


Its quite a fair bit larger than the old screen there. I saw MI:III there and it was pretty awesome however the Glasgow IMAX is larger so it really depends on whether you're prepared to make the journey.




Jaynd -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 6:40:12 PM)

Yeah im seeing Avengers in the Edinburgh Cineworld IMAX and depending on what i think i might see TDKR there too! I planned to see TDK in Glasgow IMAX but didn't go in the end. Might do this time though, just depends on how i feel after the Avengers.




sam_m -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 7:58:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaynd

So with Avengers coming on the 26th is it worth going to the (Digital) IMAX at Cineworld? I read online that this movie wont be shown in real IMAX as its only been transferred to digital. So surely it will look great on these screens right? It cost £10.28 to book online and considering a ticket at the Vue is £11 it just seems stupid to not go IMAX... Also about seating, is it best to be closer to the screen or further away? Ive never been to IMAX but i heard the effect is much better the closer you are? All the front row seats have sold-out and most center. :( Anyone have any images of inside these Cineworld screens? Would really like to see exactly where the seats are before booking!

Thanks.


I would say 100% yes!!!! If im compeltely honest I found watching a film in the DIGITAL IMAX more enjoyable than the London BFI Imax, and the main reason was because there is no legroom in the London Imax which almost ruined watching Avatar for me. The Cineworld Crawley D-IMAX screen really is fantastic (which will be pretty much the same experience at all of the Cineworld IMAX screens), it fills my peripheral vision, which is surely what you want and this was about just over halfway towards the back of the auditorium, much bigger than the screen in there before and that was pretty big, they had to raise the ceiling 2meters to get the new screen to fit aswell, and also the sound system kicks out some serious power, and you literaly feel every thump from the subs and the detail and dynamic range are some of the best I`ve heard. I do understand that alot hate what the Digital IMAX screens are compared to the original IMAX screens, but for me I would pay the extra to see every film in a D-IMAX screen as to me its worth every penny. I just hope that the fact it is labeled IMAX that there is a standard they have to keep in there and if any problem does arise it has to be sorted out pretty quick, as when speakers stop working, or the subchannel decides not to push out any bass in normal screens it just gets left and the managers never get engineers in to fix it.




Jaynd -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 9:03:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sam_m


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaynd

So with Avengers coming on the 26th is it worth going to the (Digital) IMAX at Cineworld? I read online that this movie wont be shown in real IMAX as its only been transferred to digital. So surely it will look great on these screens right? It cost £10.28 to book online and considering a ticket at the Vue is £11 it just seems stupid to not go IMAX... Also about seating, is it best to be closer to the screen or further away? Ive never been to IMAX but i heard the effect is much better the closer you are? All the front row seats have sold-out and most center. :( Anyone have any images of inside these Cineworld screens? Would really like to see exactly where the seats are before booking!

Thanks.


I would say 100% yes!!!! If im compeltely honest I found watching a film in the DIGITAL IMAX more enjoyable than the London BFI Imax, and the main reason was because there is no legroom in the London Imax which almost ruined watching Avatar for me. The Cineworld Crawley D-IMAX screen really is fantastic (which will be pretty much the same experience at all of the Cineworld IMAX screens), it fills my peripheral vision, which is surely what you want and this was about just over halfway towards the back of the auditorium, much bigger than the screen in there before and that was pretty big, they had to raise the ceiling 2meters to get the new screen to fit aswell, and also the sound system kicks out some serious power, and you literaly feel every thump from the subs and the detail and dynamic range are some of the best I`ve heard. I do understand that alot hate what the Digital IMAX screens are compared to the original IMAX screens, but for me I would pay the extra to see every film in a D-IMAX screen as to me its worth every penny. I just hope that the fact it is labeled IMAX that there is a standard they have to keep in there and if any problem does arise it has to be sorted out pretty quick, as when speakers stop working, or the subchannel decides not to push out any bass in normal screens it just gets left and the managers never get engineers in to fix it.
Thats very good to hear! [:D] Really looking forward to it now, it might not be true IMAX (I agree that it should be advertised as such.) but if its much improved over standard projection then im all for it! I will most likely pop back in on Thursday to say what i thought of it.




DJ Rob C: Mark II! -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 10:43:06 PM)

It seems Avengers is only on at fake IMAX's, Manchester aren't showing it because it's only Digital.... does that mean it's not showing in IMAX realistically? Hmm




adambatman82 -> RE: IMAX question (24/4/2012 11:43:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DJ Rob C: Mark II!

It seems Avengers is only on at fake IMAX's, Manchester aren't showing it because it's only Digital.... does that mean it's not showing in IMAX realistically? Hmm


There's not really any reason to, given that none of the film was shot in IMAX anyway. The aspect ratio and whatnot make no allowances for proper IMAX, so Digital IMAX is its only real platform. TBH all this IMAX release is essentially is is the "a bit bigger" version to sit alongside the regular and the 3D versions on the poster. Plus, you have to view it in 3D if you see it in IMAX which is a shame (I've seen the film in 3D and wasn't terribly impressed, given how dark the film is at times).




Jaynd -> RE: IMAX question (26/4/2012 3:43:30 PM)

Just got back from the Edinburgh D-IMAX after seeing Avengers and i was pleasantly surprised but also annoyed by a few things.. The screen was really vibrant and even in 3D i didn't notice much detail/colour loss. I seen Thor in 3D and it was too dark for that format, cant say Avengers has that issue in 3D on D-IMAX. The conversion was nice, definitely the best converted to 3D movie ive ever seen! Looked no different than a movie shot that way. There were some gripes though, lots of times in the movie the picture was compressed and looked weird.. [&:] Also when the camera rotated it became blurry! Best example is from the scene in the trailer where the camera rotates around the Avengers. It looked horrible! But most of the time it looked great, sound was a little naff to be honest. Not bad per say but didn't blow me away.

Not a fan of their 3D glasses system either, having to wear a pair that several other people already wore isn't pleasant... The lenses were all smeared with sweat! [:'(] Will be buying my own pair for future viewings! So yeah i would definitely go back, seen the trailer for Promtheus, Amazing Spiderman, Men and Black III and the Hobit which all looked great, the MIB3 time jump was awesome! No adverts too!! I like that! [:D]




Spaldron -> RE: IMAX question (26/4/2012 4:01:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaynd

Not a fan of their 3D glasses system either, having to wear a pair that several other people already wore isn't pleasant... The lenses were all smeared with sweat! [:'(] Will be buying my own pair for future viewings!


Did they not sell you a new pair when you bought your ticket? We got a brand new pair when we saw Hugo and still got them for the next 3D film (probably Avengers).




Jaynd -> RE: IMAX question (26/4/2012 4:42:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jaynd

Not a fan of their 3D glasses system either, having to wear a pair that several other people already wore isn't pleasant... The lenses were all smeared with sweat! [:'(] Will be buying my own pair for future viewings!


Did they not sell you a new pair when you bought your ticket? We got a brand new pair when we saw Hugo and still got them for the next 3D film (probably Avengers).

Unfortunately no! :( I think the IMAX screens use different style glasses? They weren't the standard Real-D ones, they were bigger and less comfortable. [:@] Had IMAX written on the side too. Maybe the standard glasses do work and they just want you to wear glasses worn by the blob! But i had a quick look on ebay and people sell IMAX 3D glasses and Real-D glasses so i can only presume they are different. Im going to buy a clip on pair for my prescription glasses, wearing two pairs of glasses is heavy on the nose!




DJ Rob C: Mark II! -> RE: IMAX question (27/4/2012 6:51:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: DJ Rob C: Mark II!

It seems Avengers is only on at fake IMAX's, Manchester aren't showing it because it's only Digital.... does that mean it's not showing in IMAX realistically? Hmm


There's not really any reason to, given that none of the film was shot in IMAX anyway. The aspect ratio and whatnot make no allowances for proper IMAX, so Digital IMAX is its only real platform. TBH all this IMAX release is essentially is is the "a bit bigger" version to sit alongside the regular and the 3D versions on the poster. Plus, you have to view it in 3D if you see it in IMAX which is a shame (I've seen the film in 3D and wasn't terribly impressed, given how dark the film is at times).


Well I've seen more than a fair share of films not shot in IMAX at Manchester, in fact out of the twenty thirty or so times I've been over the years, three of those films had IMAX footage (Transformers 2, TDK, and MI4) so I can't really see why not, especially given every single time I've been there since Christmas, there's been advert after advert up on the screen saying 'Avengers IMAX 3D, coming soon at IMAX Manchester' so it's a bit of a shame... but I agree, don't want to see 3D at all, so got my ticket booked for a normal 2D showing [:D]




Boon27 -> RE: IMAX question (8/7/2012 9:55:29 PM)

Film based IMAX is dead, I wish is was not. with Kodak going bust the ability to print on 35mm, 70mm or 15/70mm now has a time limit, but I will come on to why this is not the end of the big screen format later.

I have researched IMAX screen sizes recently, in the past cinemas were built around IMAX projectors and screens, this worked but as the format got increasingly popular more and more cinemas were retro fitted with IMAX systems. This would be the screen (quality and ratio) sound and projection system. You will find film based and digital IMAX screens have a taller ratio than standard cinema, now with a film like Dark Knight you will see a change in aspect ratio in digital but it will be a greater change in the film based screens, so you will get more than standard cinema screen.

I know most people have the idea of IMAX as that big screen, but with both film and digital I have always thought it was about quality, the image is mastered for IMAX along with the sound, anyone here could make a film and if the film distributors thought it would make some money you could get it in a cinema, I think of IMAX as a quality control especially when we talk about 3D, I've seen some very bad 3D films but never in IMAX, partly based on the different way they project 3D but mainly down to the fact they remaster the 3D just for there own systems.

It's true that digital IMAX is not the same as the film based version but reading recent articles it looks like they are on the cusp of change, any projectionist (if they still exist) will tell you the bigger the screen the bigger the lamp you have to use, with laser light around the corner the power produced from a laser unit could be four times that of the largest film based IMAX screens, I don't think it's going to be to long before we start to see some massive screens in the future.

But saying that if you look at IMAX digital cinemas across Europe you will find them the size of the BFI and Manchester (2 of the largest screens in the UK), they still have the slightly lower aspect ratio that the film based systems but still has the impact you would expect from films like MI4 and Batman. The UK tend to have the largest screen the cinema has as the IMAX screen, the problem is if that cinema has small screens in general there biggest may not be big to you, I know the cinemas just don't plug in a IMAX system, most of the retro fits have building work to raise the night of the roof and maximise the width but they will be stuck with the height and width of the building or main walls.

Personally I have been to some of the smaller IMAX screens in the UK, I have also visited the BFI and Manchester so I know the difference. I know I could be watching the film on a bigger screen but I know it's the biggest screen they have with the best sound on offer, so I get to watch a film I want to see in the best quality available.

I have looked in to the technology behind IMAX digital but it's very hard to get any info, there are some systems that use 2 projectors but you can never get them lined up 100% but yet IMAX has something in place that can do this, from what I can tell it can do this on the fly in real time. I also talked to a projectionist who said the digital system runs a self calibration everyday, this was for image and sound, i could to find anything online about this, I also like the idea when I sit down to watch a digital IMAX film is was check and calibrated that very morning, I don't think the same can be said for standard digital screens.

What I see happening is as laser light hits the market DLP would then be able to drastically increase the physical size of a DLP chip as you get much more light from a laser system, bigger chips equal bigger image and even the ability to go back to the original IMAX aspect ratio even if it is becoming more and more unused.

As for Avengers not being released in film based IMAX, I was told this was a film distributor decision and it could have been down to the cost of printing the 15/70mm film.

Sorry to go on, I like IMAX and it's something I like to research, also having a few people who work in this area helps.









st3veebee -> RE: IMAX question (9/7/2012 10:47:08 AM)

I'm booked in for the new Odeon Digial Imax (Isense?) in he Docklands in Dublin for the DKR in less than two weeks.

How much beter are these lieMax screens than normal cinemas and how much worse than real IMAX? ( I have been to a proper Imax in Australia and it was beyond incredible.)




adambatman82 -> RE: IMAX question (9/7/2012 11:20:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

How much beter are these lieMax screens than normal cinemas and how much worse than real IMAX?


It depends on the screen in question tbh. Thats one of the most annoying things actually, its not a standard, there are screens of differing sizes. As is probably clear from this thread I'm a great dissenter of the IMAX format being watered down for these substandard (when compared to real IMAX) screens, but as a viewing experience I actually think they're vastly preferable for a feature film. 2+ hours is just far too long to spend in a full IMAX. I'm seeing TDKR in both full and faux-IMAX, with the former a second screening out of interest more than anything.




st3veebee -> RE: IMAX question (9/7/2012 12:22:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

How much beter are these lieMax screens than normal cinemas and how much worse than real IMAX?


It depends on the screen in question tbh. Thats one of the most annoying things actually, its not a standard, there are screens of differing sizes. As is probably clear from this thread I'm a great dissenter of the IMAX format being watered down for these substandard (when compared to real IMAX) screens, but as a viewing experience I actually think they're vastly preferable for a feature film. 2+ hours is just far too long to spend in a full IMAX. I'm seeing TDKR in both full and faux-IMAX, with the former a second screening out of interest more than anything.


Really? Why?

I remember sitting through  MI:4 in proper Imax and apart from a little nausea on the building scaling scene I found it fine ( and wanted more more more). Probably not the best film to judge from as others passed out apparently the night before in this. The guy beside me had to leave for a while as well.




Boon27 -> RE: IMAX question (9/7/2012 12:39:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

I'm booked in for the new Odeon Digial Imax (Isense?) in he Docklands in Dublin for the DKR in less than two weeks.

How much beter are these lieMax screens than normal cinemas and how much worse than real IMAX? ( I have been to a proper Imax in Australia and it was beyond incredible.)


From what i can find out Odeon wanted to attempt there own Large screen format, the projector is just a standard cinema projector with nothing extra and the sound system, im told is 22 channels but unless the film has been mixed in this sound format it plays in the usual 6 channels, the web site does not tell you this. I have tried to find a film that has been mixed with 22 channels but have yet to find one.

As for Dark Knight in this format it would be just like every other normal cinema, the aspect ratio will not change during the film as it will in both digital and film IMAX. Cineworld is due to install an IMAX system in their Dublin cinema.

I guess iSense begs the question, would you like to watch films on just a big screen or would you prefer to watch it on a IMAX screen that was slightly smaller?




adambatman82 -> RE: IMAX question (9/7/2012 1:45:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

How much beter are these lieMax screens than normal cinemas and how much worse than real IMAX?


It depends on the screen in question tbh. Thats one of the most annoying things actually, its not a standard, there are screens of differing sizes. As is probably clear from this thread I'm a great dissenter of the IMAX format being watered down for these substandard (when compared to real IMAX) screens, but as a viewing experience I actually think they're vastly preferable for a feature film. 2+ hours is just far too long to spend in a full IMAX. I'm seeing TDKR in both full and faux-IMAX, with the former a second screening out of interest more than anything.


Really? Why?

I remember sitting through  MI:4 in proper Imax and apart from a little nausea on the building scaling scene I found it fine ( and wanted more more more). Probably not the best film to judge from as others passed out apparently the night before in this. The guy beside me had to leave for a while as well.


It was MI4 that was the film that turned me away from proper IMAX actually: it was the next strain that killed it for me! I do think there's definitely an argument to be made that IMAX exhibition was never designed to be viewed for long periods of time too, given that for the first 35 years or so of it's existence it was pretty much only used for 40 minute-long short documentaries in museums and the like.




Dpp1978 -> RE: IMAX question (20/8/2012 10:04:23 PM)

I saw The Dark Knight Rises at the BFI IMAX the other day. As expected the native footage looked spectacular. The change in resolution going from the large format footage to the 35mm blow up footage and back again was far more striking than the shifting aspect ratios. All in all it was well worth the effort of travelling up to the South Bank.

On a less positive note they showed trailers for Man of Steel, The Hobbit and Skyfall before the main feature. All three of them demonstrated significant aliasing on sharp edges, and in bright areas you could clearly see the individual pixels which made up the image. I was sat 2/3 of the way back so it wasn't merely due to being too close. I hate to think how obvious it would have been if I were sat closer.

I don't know if this was due to the file format the trailers were delivered in, how they were shot ( although I doubt this is the reason) or the method of projection (I know they have had a new IMAX digital projector installed which I assume was used for these trailers). I hope it is merely a limitation of the trailer footage rather than the projection method as watching an entire movie with these artefacts would drive me nuts.

It does illustrate one of the ever diminishing advantages film has over digital, at least with respect to very large screens: blow up film too much and you get a slightly softer image and a slight increase in perceivable grain. Blow up digital too far and it starts to look just that: digital.




Darth Marenghi -> RE: IMAX question (21/8/2012 12:52:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978

On a less positive note they showed trailers for Man of Steel, The Hobbit and Skyfall before the main feature. All three of them demonstrated significant aliasing on sharp edges, and in bright areas you could clearly see the individual pixels which made up the image. I was sat 2/3 of the way back so it wasn't merely due to being too close. I hate to think how obvious it would have been if I were sat closer.

I don't know if this was due to the file format the trailers were delivered in, how they were shot ( although I doubt this is the reason) or the method of projection (I know they have had a new IMAX digital projector installed which I assume was used for these trailers). I hope it is merely a limitation of the trailer footage rather than the projection method as watching an entire movie with these artefacts would drive me nuts.




They must have been showing those trailers digitally as you surmised - I've seen DKR on our IMAX a couple of times now and there were no trailers. Someone on here said that DKR takes up the full IMAX film platter! [sm=ohmy.gif]




Beastmaster -> RE: IMAX question (15/9/2012 1:15:47 AM)

Hi there.

I've got a question but it's non-technical.

I'm really peeved about the IMAX in Manchester. Odeon to be exact and their scheduling and availability process.

Looks as though they are the only IMAX not showing Raiders of the Lost Ark and Skyfall tickets are available for every other IMAX in the country. They didn't show The Avengers either.

Anyone know why this is? Didn't show Hunger Games or Total Recall either but that turned out to be a blessing.




Shifty Bench -> RE: IMAX question (15/9/2012 1:35:46 AM)

Why don't you ask them? [:)]




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125