Yeah, it's bigger now than the original post. This needs an anchor.

*** ORIGINAL POST ***

This shit is just UNACCEPTABLE

http://azizisbored.tumblr.com/post/106587114/reblog-the-fuck-out-of-this-warning-amc-theaters-are

REBLOG THE FUCK OUT OF THIS. WARNING: AMC theaters are running FAKE IMAX's and charging $5 extra for a slightly bigger screen. Boycott IMAX, AMC, and Regal. Don't let them fool you.
I went with a friend of mine to see Star Trek: The IMAX Experience at the AMC Theatre in Burbank today. I drove out of my way to see the film on the large IMAX screen and paid an extra $5 for the ticket, which felt worth it at the time.

HOWEVER, we get in the theatre and its just a slightly bigger than normal screen and NOT the usual standard huge 72 ft IMAX screen. I was very upset and apparently this problem is happening all over at Regal and AMC theatres. Here’s a graphic representation of what’s happening at these “FAKE IMAX” screens:



If you don’t want the whole long story, I did some research online and found this article that explains it. Basically IMAX is whoring out their brand name and trying to trick people. These new “IMAX” theatres are really just nice digital screens with good sound, but they ARE NOT IMAX, in that they don’t have the huge 72 ft gigantic screen which people would expect. However, they still charge $5 more for tickets as they would for the regular IMAX.

REGAL, AMC, AND IMAX - YOU ARE LIARS!

Boycott them. Fuck them for taking advantage of people and charging them $5 extra. If you’re in LA, go to the Arclight from now on, and fuck the IMAX screens (fake and real).

Some people at Regal and AMC both wanted to call these screens IMAX Digital so as to differentiate it somehow from the giant IMAX screens people are used to associating with the name IMAX. Apparently IMAX doesn’t see anything wrong with duping customers like this and insisted on simply keeping it as IMAX. Well, I have a better term how about - “BULLSHIT IMAX.” Cause that’s what it is.

According to this piece, IMAX CEO, Richard Gelfond said the company only puts IMAX digital systems into multiplex auditoriums that meet certain criteria. He jokingly said, “It’s a very scientific test. It’s called the ‘wow’ factor. So if you don’t go in and go ‘wow,’ we won’t do it.” HAHAHA! REALLY FUNNY RICHARD!!!! What happens if I go in the theatre and go “This isn’t a fucking IMAX screen, I just got ripped off for $5!!” Do I get my money back?

At the AMC theatre this was my experience at guest services:

Aziz: Yes, I’d like my $5 back. I paid $5 extra for an IMAX screen and that’s not nearly as big as what I have known IMAX to be.
Guest Services: I can’t sir. Its IMAX quality picture and sound.
Aziz: But the screen isn’t big, that’s the whole reason I pay $5 more for IMAX.
Guest Services: Well sir, you watched the whole movie, you could have come out and we could have given you tickets to a different one.
Aziz: Why would I do that? I’d leave Star Trek, the movie I wanted to see and you’d give me a ticket for Ghosts of Girlfriends Past? Oh yeah that’s fair! No, you need to give me the $5 back, its the principle of it. Can I see a manager?

Manager: Sir, we can’t refund the money, you saw the whole film.
Aziz: I don’t want $15, I just want $5 cause AMC lied about IMAX.
Manager: Sir, I can give you popcorn and a drink.
Aziz: I don’t want to go home and drink a nasty soda and eat nasty ass popcorn. I want my $5 back. Its not about the money, its the principle of the matter, ITS NOT IMAX.
Manager: Sorry, I can’t do anything.
Aziz: You know what Twitter is? I have 25,000 followers, I’m tell 25,000 people you run fake IMAX’s and that they should boycott AMC.
Manager: I don’t really care sir.
Aziz: Yeah, I wouldn’t care either if I worked here, but you know you are in the wrong! You should give me $5!!
Manager: SIR, I CAN GIVE YOU POPCORN AND A SODA.
Aziz: I DON’T LIKE POPCORN AND I DON’T LIKE SODA, I WANT MY $5!!!
Manager: Ok here’s two free passes.

UPDATE: In addition to this terrible tragedy, there are also terrible things going on in Darfur. Please Google around for more info on how to help there.

http://www.lfexaminer.com/20081016.htm

Posted 10/16/08



Is IMAX the next "New Coke"?



An editorial by James Hyder, Editor/Publisher

In April 1985, the CEO of Coca Cola held a press conference in New York City to announce that the company was changing the century-old formulation of its famous soft drink. The new version was officially given the “Coca Cola” name, and production of the original formula was halted that week.

The new soda, which became widely (but unofficially) known as “New Coke,” had received favorable reactions in taste tests and focus groups. But ultimately, millions of customers, angered that the company would suddenly change the product it had labeled “The Real Thing,” pressured it to reintroduce the original flavor. The company hurriedly returned it to store shelves less than three months later, re-branded as “Coke Classic.” Coke executives were widely ridiculed for underestimating their customers’ devotion to the brand and for their perceived highhandedness in tinkering with a classic.

In September 2008, Richard Gelfond, co-CEO of Imax Corporation, told members of the Giant Screen Cinema Association that “we don’t think of as the giant screen.” Rather, he said, “it is the best immersive experience on the planet.”

The company takes this position because it has chosen not to differentiate its new digital projection system in any way from the 15/70 film systems it has been installing in giant-screen theaters since 1970. This despite the fact that, according to Imax VP Larry O’Reilly, its two major digital partners, AMC Entertainment and Regal Entertainment Group, both originally wanted to brand the new screens as “IMAX Digital.” And based on the reaction Gelfond’s announcement received in New York (and on many conversations I’ve had since) many, if not most, institutional IMAX operators would prefer this as well. In short, virtually all of Imax’s customers and partners would like to see a distinct new identity for the digital system.

But Gelfond flatly rejected this possibility, offering an absurdly flawed analogy with BMW automobiles. He said that the German carmaker offers the 7-series line of larger, more powerful, luxury models as well as the smaller, entry-level 3-series cars. “People don’t say ‘The 3 isn’t a real BMW because it’s smaller.’”

Of course, this ignores the fact that the model numbers, to say nothing of the prices, clearly distinguish BMW’s different product lines in consumers’ minds, while maintaining the unity of the brand. No car buyer believes he has bought a $125,000 760Li only to receive a $30,000 328i.

Yet this is the position in which Imax is now putting customers who pay $15 to see Eagle Eye: The IMAX Experience at New York City’s new AMC Empire 25 IMAX digital theater, with its 28x58-foot (8.5x18 meter) screen. They see the IMAX name on the theater and have no idea until after their ticket has been torn and they walk into the auditorium that that screen is about the same size as the one in the adjacent 35mm auditorium, and less than a quarter the size of the one in the AMC Lincoln Square IMAX 15/70 theater, 26 blocks away. The screen in the older film theater is 76x98 feet (23x30 meters). Here’s a graphic representation of the difference:



Gelfond explained that the company feared an “IMAX Digital” brand might cast the older film-based theaters as “second-class citizens” in the public’s mind, since “digital” generally has connotations of “newer,” and “cooler.”

Although this apparent concern for museums and other “old school” operators is touching, it seems far more likely that the company was worried that ticket buyers who noticed the difference between the average 4,800 square-foot (450 square-meter) 15/70 film screen and a digital one 1,250 square feet (120 square-meters) in area wouldn’t return to the smaller if they could see the same movie on the larger.

In other words, “IMAX Digital” might become the next “New Coke.” Widespread public preference for the “classic” experience would harm Imax’s return on the tens of millions of dollars it is investing in the 170+ joint venture deals it has signed.

The “wow” factor
Gelfond claimed that the company only puts IMAX digital systems into multiplex auditoriums that meet certain criteria. He jokingly said, “It’s a very scientific test. It’s called the ‘wow’ factor. So if you don’t go in and go ‘wow,’ we won’t do it.”

In more than 24 years in the business, I have personally been in 132 giant-screen theaters of all brands, formats, and sizes, including four MPX (15/70 film) theaters and five IMAX digital screens. I may be jaded, but none of those nine coaxed even a faint “wow” from my lips, because all were merely ordinary multiplex houses that had been modified slightly. The seating rake was unchanged and nowhere near the 20–25-degree angle that is standard in purpose-built IMAX theaters. The room’s depth, from the screen to the last row, may have been reduced slightly by moving the screen forward and removing a few rows of seats. But most were still significantly deeper than the width of the screen, thus providing the audience a narrower (i.e., less immersive) average field of view.

But most importantly, of course, the screens were only a fraction of the size of a “real” IMAX theater screen. And all were shorter, 1.9-aspect-ratio screens, not the tall 1.44 screens of classic IMAX theaters. And let’s face it, the biggest aspect of the “wow” factor is height. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that even a very wide screen is not nearly as impressive as a one that towers six or eight stories high.

The screen door effect
Using two high-powered digital projectors, the IMAX digital system projects an image that is bright, with good contrast and slightly better resolution than other digital projectors. But every IMAX digital theater I’ve been in has also had a noticeable “screen door effect,” that is, a visible dark grid pattern separating the pixels. It is particularly noticeable in lighter image areas, and is less visible the farther you are from the screen. But even with my 53-year-old eyes, I was able to see it from the front half of most of the five theaters I’ve been in. If you move back to eliminate the pattern, your field of view becomes narrower, and hence no different than an ordinary movie theater.

At the New York demonstration, I was seated in the fourth row next to a long-time IMAX theater manager. I had not said anything to him about my perceptions of the IMAX digital theaters I had already seen. But the moment the first image came up on the screen — it was the MPAA rating card for the first trailer — I heard a gasp as he noticed the screen door pattern that made the card’s white-on-green text look “jaggy.” He later confirmed being stunned at how obvious and distracting the pattern was.

Although many people I spoke with after the demo shared this reaction, to my surprise not everyone found the pattern as noticeable or distracting as I had. Some didn’t see it, others did, but didn’t mind it as much.

But for me it is clearly the biggest reason to say, “This is not IMAX.” I grant that the image is bright and contrasty, and has good color. And it only took hearing a shuttle launch in Space Station 3D to know that the new sound system is fully up to IMAX standards. I might even be willing to compromise on the aspect ratio.

But IMAX — real IMAX — presents reality. Not reality as seen through a screen door.

And even though it beats conventional 2K for brightness and contrast, IMAX digital is not, in my opinion, better than Sony’s 4K SXRD system. At ShoWest in Las Vegas last spring, I saw 21 in 4K on a screen that was at least 60 feet wide, maybe bigger. I intentionally took a seat less than one screen-height from the screen, right next to David and Patricia Keighley, as it happened. I found the Sony’s image to be bright, contrasty, and sharp, and as good or better than film would have been at that size. And most importantly, I couldn’t see any pixels or patterns.

Conclusions
Let me make one thing clear: I am not opposed to digital projection in principle, or to the IMAX digital system in particular. I think the change to digital projection in the giant-screen world is inevitable. And I fully admit that the IMAX digital system is superior, in certain respects, to some other digital systems.

But I object when anyone claims that two patently different things are the same. Where I come from that's known as “lying.” And call me naïve, but I don’t believe that any company whose business plan is based on deceiving its customers can succeed with that strategy for very long.

Imax Corporation, whose very name means “image maximum,” has spent four decades persuading the public that that name is synonymous with “big,” with giant screens, with an experience that is completely unlike that of conventional multiplex cinema.

If, for perfectly understandable business reasons, Imax now has to move into those smaller screens, let it distinguish this new product from the other screens in that theater, as a “premium multiplex experience,” as Sydney’s Mark Bretherton has suggested.

But expecting the ticket-buying public to believe that that experience is identical to one on a screen three or four times larger is insulting. People who have been to a true giant-screen theater will realize they have been misled, and will be disappointed, if not angry. Those who haven’t will wonder what the big deal about IMAX is, and will assume that any real giant-screen theater they come across in the future has nothing better to offer and perhaps never will have the real IMAX Experience.

By not distinguishing between two different products, Imax has degraded its brand with all customers. And far from protecting the film-based theaters from second-class status, it has lowered the public’s perception of all IMAX theaters. This has even led some theaters in the institutional segment to consider dropping the IMAX brand from their marketing and perhaps even their signage. When your oldest customers want to disassociate themselves from your brand, something is wrong.

The tragic irony is that, forty years after Imax Corp. started trying to persuade Hollywood to shoot with IMAX cameras, the success of Chris Nolan’s The Dark Knight, the first to do so, has finally encouraged several other directors to follow suit. Three or four coming films may incorporate 15/70 footage. And yet, by the time these movies open, the majority of IMAX theaters may be digital screens with 1.9 aspect ratios that make the dramatic transitions in resolution and image size all but invisible. What a waste!

The lesson from Coca Cola is clear: Although the “New Coke” incident was initially perceived as embarrassing to management, the company’s reputation was ultimately enhanced by its prompt response to customer concerns. With two distinct products, “Coke Classic” and “New Coke,” sales rocketed and the company regained the top market position it had lost to Pepsi years earlier. It has remained number one ever since.

but don't nobody wanna BE Steve Jobs. You can't use that reality distortion field on bullshit that the general public can perceive instantly on their own.

in NY for DECADES the only Imax theater was in Lincoln center, then last year suddenly 3 more popped with a bunch more in progress. In my head I wondered that Imax must be major cakey to have them renovate the theaters to that extent, especially considering how much it would cost to completely switch around those buildings with NYC prices.

I guess all they did was install new speakers and a new projector, lol.

This is just going to hurt them long term. Seems Imax Digital versus regular Digital isn't worth the 5 dollar fee. Only thing possibly saving them is that only blockbusters will be shown on Imax digital, guaranteeing that for the most part it will sell out anyway. This will only last for the hot movie seasons: when the real Imax theaters show special films with the lure of it being on a HUGE screen(nauture shit, 3d shit)...they won't be able to compete. And I don't think anyone is going to pay to see 5 bucks more for Obsessed in Imax during the offseason. Mark my words, five years from now this will hurt them bad.

glad i didn't fall for the okie doke

going to see ST at lincoln square tonight

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/05/screencompa_03.JPG

Can't click too many of the links in here, cuz I'm at work, so sorry if it's a re-post.

and then ask for some of your money back?


if you come to MY restaurant and eat the WHOLE fuckin meal, guess what? Fuck off cause you ain't gettin shit. If the cat didn't think it was right then he should have left when he saw the screen and went somewhere else.

Especially if you've had the authentic IMAX experience... as others here have said, I found it quite odd to go to a theater where a new IMAX screen suddenly has appeared... nonetheless, I got jerked out of my $5 bucks for Watchmen... and the $5 that my man is missing out on will pay better dividends for everyone in the long run anyway, since he's getting the word out about what's going on... in short, he lost $5 so that others wouldn't have to in the future...
________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

He's only asking for the extra amount of scratch that has, for the past 40 years, meant "shown on a really fucking big screen".

He's saying that he watched it on the same size screen as the regulars.

But the more I think about it, the sound and image were enhanced. Maybe he should just get like 13.79% of the $5 back.




© I got Magnum Brown, Shooskeybalooskey, Supercalifragilesticexpeyalladooskey

It's like he ate a $40 meal, it turned out you hadn't served him wagyu beef but some average supermarket steak and he doesn't want to pay full whack - like maybe $30. not saying who's right or wrong, but he ain't trying to eat for FREE.

I don't know what to even say to this. I'm about to read that second link for more/better info, but I'm really annoyed at this development. I tell people all over the country to run to their nearest IMAX for certain movies, and I might have been sending them to cheap copies. That doesn't sit well with me. Thanks, Aziz.

p.s., that Darfur thing was funny.

nm

email/inbox me with your local IMAX screen and let me know if it's "real" or not. Gimme the addy and a personal description.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=113621990356540393221.000469b6c5915161c3667&ll=36.207299,-86.693566&spn=0.010787,0.019312&t=h&z=16

and broke me off with a map of real joints. I'll update soon with them. They are a lot.

I was pissed when I took my kids to see Monsters vs. Aliens 3D in their "new IMAX theatre" and then got in there to see a slightly bigger screen in the same old auditorium. Never again.....

the showcase by me does that shit

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

and any real ones you've been to.

We went there to see Watchmen and when we got in the theater, I was like this is some BULLSHIT!

The screen is bigger but not like Lincoln Square.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=amc+42nd+street+IMAX&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&sll=35.270650,-84.731978&sspn=11.077657,21.560543&latlng=40756636,-73988285,6054131045734055437&ei=ZYIJSruPI42MNoX-7O4P&cd=2

-------------------
"Fuck yo couch, nigga!" - Tom Cruise

http://blog.melanism.com
http://twitter.com/Melanism
http://preptimeposse.blogspot.com
http://write.melanism.com
http://www.myspace.com/melanism
http://www.last.fm/user/Melanism/

http://destroyfakeimax.blogspot.com

sorry i could have told you that
got fooled once
NEVER AGAIN
those bastids
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
Afro-American haiku: If Elvis Presley / is King / Who is James Brown, / God?(c) Baraka

showed up at like 930am and was like "this is just a slightly bigger screen..." but didnt know imax was being scheisty like that

Thanks!

The few times I've watched a movie on IMAX, it was at AMC theatres.



"I halfway hope people put "btw, rappers lie and shit" on CD covers, like a parental advisory sticker." - OKP Villain

www.dreamertodesigner.com
www.twitter.com/lexlamont

Universal in Universal City, as those are the theaters I know of in the area that are authentic IMAX screens

I think a friend of mine saw it at the same theater she went to yesterday...

I saw Watchmen at this very theater in March, and remembered thinking that the screen looked exactly the same size as the other screens in the theater...


So, to recap (for The European Miracle)

AMC Universal City IMAX: Real

AMC Burbank IMAX: Fake

National Amusements The Bridge Cinema De Lux (Westchester, by LAX): Real
________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

This is what I get when I plug "AMC Universal City IMAX" into Google Maps:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&t=h&msa=0&msid=113621990356540393221.000469b6c5915161c3667&ll=37.857507,-98.789062&spn=47.935945,74.707031&z=3&source=embed

Don't assume I know your area. Get the address for me, and hit me with a link. I wanna put your shit in there, trust. Just make it simpler for me. I'm already neglecting shit I need to do answering these emails. Help me cut the time down if you already know exactly what the spot is.

________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

Glad I didn't fall for it, but I'm very disappointed. There is s showcase in town that has a real one, but is a half hour away while the AMC is only a couple of minutes away

I think it was in Cherry Hill, NJ...it felt NOWHERE near as big as when i had seen Dark Knight in IMAX in King Of Prussia a few months earlier.

the one in neshaminy is fake too

IMAX digital is a standard 2k projector with an IMAX logo. IMAX Digital 3-d is two of those projectors running at once.

IMAX - the one we all loved in the past - is 15/70 format that provides the higher resolution needed to fill traditional IMAX flat screen.

Star Trek was *not* shot in IMAX, it was shot in 35mm so the IMAX presentation will be a fake "DRM" blowup that will look worse than watching the film on a 35mm or standard digital system.

Out of all the non-3d mainstream films released in IMAX - the Dark Night was the only one with real IMAX footage. But I felt the standard 35mm footage looked awful in IMAX, and several scenes were so dark as to be invisible.

IMAX is a rip-off unless you are seeing a 70MM film, or a true 15/70 film. Everything else is a gimmick.

Go see Star Trek at the ARCLIGHT, NOT IN THE DOME, if you're in L.A. that'll be better than UC or the Bridge. I drive up from San Diego to see movies at least once a month (unless it was shot in 4k - we have some okay 4k equipped theaters in San Diego.)

Speed Racer was THE SHIT on IMAX, and it wasn't shot on no 70mm.

Matter of fact, I can't imagine watching that damn movie on anything BUT IMAX, lest it just be Speed Racer.

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2009/05/08/vfx-engineer-on-why.html

VFX engineer on why Star Trek ain't IMAX
Posted by Joel Johnson, May 8, 2009 6:51 PM | permalink

My friend, a VFX engineer, shares this frustration with the IMAX version of Star Trek (which she otherwise dug):

Just for future reference, ST was not shot in IMAX, and therefore is not a true imax film. imax is 65mm, 15-perf film, with an aspect ratio of 1:1.37 and a MASSIVE amount of image area, approximately 4x the size of VistaVision (VV is also the same format 35mm still cameras shoot, imagine a negative almost four times the surface area of one that was shot in your still camera.)

Star Trek was shot in cinemascope, an anamorphic format that squeezes the image on the film, but projects it through lenses that stretch it back out horizontally to its 1:2.35 aspect ratio. C-scope is run through a normal movie camera vertically, (90 degrees to a still camera) and exposes a frame taking up four perfs of film - about half the film area of a 35mm still camera.

What Star Trek has done for their imax projection is just stretch their anamorphic cinemascope (1828x1556) image to 3656x1556 and then blow it up by 12% to 4096x1746 where it only takes up 60% of the height of the half-resolution imax - 4096x2988.

(that is, unless they have cropped in at the sides to literally do a pan&scan on the 1:2.35 cinemascope image, ugh!)

The end result of all this unsqueezing and blowing up is that at the very best, you will get an image that has 1/8th the information of a standard imax image. What you see will be much softer, although it may not be noticed by the general public unless they see a side-by-side comparison with a true imax print. Full-resolution imax is 10240x7470 (10k by 8k), btw, but it isn't often used in visual effects because of the sheer amount of data required for each frame.

Other films will be shot in imax and c-scope, with some sequences being full imax, so in the theater the screen will jump to a taller picture for some sequences. I think Batman did it last summer. Normal theaters will only see a c-scope extraction (trimming top and bottom) during the imax sequences.

I don't know about Aziz or anyone else on here, but I'm aware of all this when I peep a film on IMAX. IMAX is still usually way more enjoyable to me. It's just more immersive, and goes a long way towards keeping me from inadvertently pulling out of a film.

>I don't know about Aziz or anyone else on here, but I'm aware
>of all this when I peep a film on IMAX. IMAX is still usually
>way more enjoyable to me. It's just more immersive, and goes a
>long way towards keeping me from inadvertently pulling out of
>a film.

Well, I think you're part of the "geneeral public won't notice a differnce" crowd then.

The technology of IMAX has always been 15/70 (or 65) , and that's why it's a better. The resolution TRUMPS 35mm, and 35mm's resolution TRUMPS 2k digital. It's like taking a 640x480 JPEG taken with a digital camera and showing it on a 30" 2560x1600 Apple 30" monitor. the lack of resolution actually makes it look worse to everyone - except the "general public."

You might like the DRM blow-ups but they are pretty weak when comapred to a true IMAX image. Kind of like how a lot of poeple have 720P Vizios at home and can't image why someone would spend the extra money for a Pioneer Kuro. Or more like a single colorwheel DLP can drive some people *crazy*, and others can't notice anything wrong with it.

The thing about (even digital) IMAX theatres is that they often have better sound systems than the other theatres in the multiplex - which can lead to a better experience. (Although I can't imagine anyone have a good experience watching Speed Racer in any format.)

(Don't get me started about IMAX 3-d vs. Dolby 3-D vs. Real-D and Disney 3d.)

>Well, I think you're part of the "geneeral public won't notice
>a differnce" crowd then.

I know the difference. I'm saying I don't attend IMAX screenings of non-70mm Hollywood films for their resolution. I go for the size, the way the seats are arranged, and as you pointed out, the sound.

Again, everything you're spitting figures on is true, but it's not the issue at hand.

>I know the difference. I'm saying I don't attend IMAX
>screenings of non-70mm Hollywood films for their resolution. I
>go for the size, the way the seats are arranged, and as you
>pointed out, the sound.

It's a BIG image with LOW resolution. It's why I *don't* go to IMAX unless it's an IMAX film, or it has a feature not available in another theatre. (I believe Harry Potter in 3-d was only at the IMAX screens.)

Luckily we still have a film based flat IMAX theatre in San Diego. But I'm sure it'll go digital-only at some point in the future.

I love it bigger. Absolutely true.

There is a certain leeway there. I'm not a resolution snob. I like movies. If the movie is good I can tolerate a lower resolution if it gives me better immersion. I don't see the point in criticizing art based on science.

..........

>UPDATE: In addition to this terrible tragedy, there are also
>terrible things going on in Darfur. Please Google around for
>more info on how to help there.

He only gave Darfur two lines.
---------------------------------------
http://i36.tinypic.com/8k5w.jpg

The OKP® King of the Late Pass™
---------------------------------------

you know how people say stupid shit like:

"all the problems in the world, and you're bitchin' about IMAX screens?!?!?"


as if there were a hierarchy of things that should piss people off...

I do agree, it is some bullshit.

Just sayin'.
________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

Sometimes confusing and conflicting entries come up. Besides, I got shit to do and have to make find these things quick as crap. I've got like 25 right now, though. I wish Aziz would shout out the map and get more people to holler. I mean, really, we should be able to knock out all of the U.S. in a week.

AMC Burbank 16 (FAKE IMAX)
125 E. Palm Ave.
Burbank, CA 91502


AMC Citywalk Stadium 19 (REAL IMAX)
100 Universal City Plaza
Universal City, CA 91608


And "Westchester" is really Los Angeles, at least according to The Bridge website:

THE BRIDGE: Cinema de Lux (REAL IMAX)
6081 Center Drive
The Promenade at Howard Hughes Center
Los Angeles, CA 90045
________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

In the NJ/PA/NYC area go to King of Prussia, Franklin Institute (IMAX Dome is crazy when high) or Lincoln Center!!!

walked into the theater and was like WTF?? i was even more pissed cuz i actually live 5 minutes from a "real" IMAX in seattle, but drove to the other one because i was meeting a friend.

http://www.mainstreet.com/article/lifestyle/are-smaller-imax-screens-worth-price?page=2

http://azizisbored.tumblr.com/post/106910193/aziz-vs-imax-round-2-imax-ceo-responds-and-so-do-i

On this site, IMAX CEO Richard Gelfond addresses my complaint.

“The overwhelming majority of comments on that guy’s blog this morning, more than 90% of them, are vehemently disagreeing with him. And consumers are confirming this with their continued purchases of tickets.”

WHAT A SURPRISE ANOTHER IMAX LIE. Who did those numbers? The same guy who measures your bullshit tiny IMAX screens???

Read the comments and you’ll find that’s not the case and its definitely not the case on Twitter responses either. Many, many, many people have agreed with me in that they paid $5 extra expecting the full 72 ft IMAX screens and instead saw this new BULLSHIT IMAX regular screen which your company says is the same because its an “experience.” Well I “experienced” a huge 72 ft screen that was awesome when I saw a film at Bridge Cinema and then when I went to AMC Burbank, I “experienced” a piece of shit ripoff.

If you agree and have been duped or feel this is a ripoff, add it to the comments on the original post or on here.

The chunk of comments backing IMAX and AMC are I believe a result of this Fark post that was titled - “Blogger gets his knickers in a twist over “fake” IMAX screens. Then uses the “do you know how many followers I have on Twitter?” threat to try and get a refund.” It kind of portrays the situation as I’m some idiot blogger who seriously goes around threatening people with Twitter, which is an absurd notion that I agree should be lambasted. However, I didn’t seriously do that, THAT WAS A JOKE.

Also, to those commenters, yes I understand Darfur is a serious issue. The IMAX thing is ultimately a stupid issue, that’s my point.

For those saying, “Dude you saw the movie! And then you want a refund!!! Why didn’t you leave??” First off, I just asked for the $5 IMAX surcharge on the principle that it wasn’t IMAX. I was fine paying the other $10 for seeing the movie. Second of all, I’ve been dying to see the movie and I finally had a window of time to see it. I was going to watch the movie. I didn’t want to deal with that hassle and not get to see it. Someone brought up a good analogy in the comments. If I bought a first class plane ticket and then got on the plane and saw all the seats were coach, I’d still get on the flight. I wouldn’t get off, miss my flight, and totally inconvenience myself. I would get on and then deal with the issue afterwards.

Now, here’s what I want do. I’m publicly challenging IMAX CEO Richard Gelfond to go on television and debate this issue with me. If you really think I’m in the wrong, LET’S DEBATE.

Imax Jr. is lame as hell.

I WANT MY $5!!!
Manager: Ok here’s two free passes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHR8Y-kI3JM

He jokingly said,
>“It’s a very scientific test. It’s called the ‘wow’ factor. So
>if you don’t go in and go ‘wow,’ we won’t do it.” HAHAHA!
>REALLY FUNNY RICHARD!!!! What happens if I go in the theatre
>and go “This isn’t a fucking IMAX screen, I just got ripped
>off for $5!!” Do I get my money back?
>

I've been shouted out on multiple entertainment sites, and the result has been a FLOOD of emails informing me of real/fake IMAX screens. I've got info in from Australia, UK, Hong Kong...I've got 200 emails to go through right now. I even had a lady register a domain name that links to the map, "www.liemax.com"

CRAZY. People are really passionate about this shit. Heard some horror stories, too. I'm spending way too much time on this now, but I can't quit part way through.

most of them are giving props, but making sure to school me on some of the details that are being forgotten in the process. I have some learning to do. Most of the details point to the big idea, though, which is that IMAX are fucking up the brand. Some of these spots that are being reported as fake may or may not be, though. I need to put something up specifying what "real" and "fake" are as soon as I can.

Yeah, this shit is wild, tho. Someone sent me a link to an unofficial IMAX projectionist message board and those dudes are cheering this thing on something FIERCE.

Doing consumers a great service. Serious. This shit should hit the mainstream media eventually (or maybe that's wishful thinking).

i saw you didnt have all the nyc-area ones yet.
-kips bay amc on 2nd ave is fake
-roc city in new rochelle is real
-liberty science center in jersey city is real
-museum of natural history is real

i also know one in the virginia beach aquarium is real too.

jamespeach@gmail.com

It's just WAY quicker for me since you know what you're talking about and I don't.

Only a matter of time until Peach wakes up and finds a bunch of severed Gummi Bear heads in his bed

and begging me to not attach their names to their words in case I repost them. One woman said "your site is making it's way into circles that aren't pleased. Please don't attribute any info I give you to my real name. People are mad."

Lots of emails with "This email and all the info in it are property of BLAH BLAH BLAH company."

lol Lucky for everyone I've got so many emails that there's no way even 5% of them go up before IMAX does SOMETHING to fix this....

right?

Times are tough, folk can't afford to be spending extra bread on something they're promised, only to come away with some bullshit

And anyone looking to argue that last point should probably shut the fuck up and read the article in the first post
________________________________________________________________________
He is stupid
But he KNOWS that he is stupid
And that almost makes him smart
Let's listen

http://digg.com/movies/IMAX_or_LIEMAX_Google_Maps_Tells_You_Which_Is_Which

you haven't updated the map with them yet....

that what I've had to do is just take a list I was supplied with and go down state by state entering them in. You can track progress on the blog. Once I've got the U.S. done, I'll go international again and start sifting through emails to see which ones people are disagreeing on.

I definitely felt ripped the first time seeing IMAX at my local theater since I had been to real IMAX theaters before. I smelled a rat, but figured it must be some bullshit IMAX LITE. And yeah, I went back for more, because, well I guess I'm a fucking sucker that way. But this is some serious bullshit and they need to come correct something fierce. This is some old-fashioned sidewalk magic crap they are selling us.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/05/the-new-imax-experience-is-it-a-big-screen-or-a-big-scam.html

I shoulda switched my email over when I said I was gonna. Holy fucking crap, this thing is gonna backfire when folks don't get their shit updated within the timeframe they think it should.

this shit is swallowing my free time already...and I'm not really feeling like I've bettered the world OR made myself profitable. Ain't that some shit. I was excited at first, now it's just work.

I'm sure it's too late. Hell, I wouldn't even know how to do that.

DO IT.

fuck.

do it.

I was checking times for Star Trek last weekend and was trippin trying to figure out where they all came from.
__________________________________
Reunion Radio May Artist of the Month: The Gap Band

http://reunionradio.blogspot.com/

R.I.P. Robert Brookins (1965-2009)

I suppose my first clue should have been that it was just a guy in a white Chevy Astro with "IMAX" written on the side of it.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/5711/imacs7000844306164.jpg

I can't believe it got that big. I only go to the ones at the Smithsonian so I know those are real, anything else is just fake to me.

Too bad it's the only stock I bought that's doing anything

Call your board members. Let them know they're hurting the brand in their attempts to not hurt the brand.

lmao.

in four days may be a reason for concern, and a talking point for any stockholders that want some accountability. As are the 700 emails I got in the same amount of time, many of which were from theater managers and projectionists.

I mean, come on, the CEO is a douche. Dude shitted all over the theater managers in a meeting last September, which is linked in this thread. Then, when the owners' concerns were actually realized this week, dude straight lied about things and dismissed all the pissed off consumers, which, by the way, are mostly consisting of people who have previously been ride-or-die for the IMAX brand.

broken down by the experts, IN A MEETING WITH IMAX BIGWIGS.

http://www.lfexaminer.com/20080915.htm

-----------------------------
NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM.
http://renegadefrenchfry.wordpress.com

Just needs some cleaning up. Also, I'm gonna beef up the blog with articles and testimonies.

glad i "only" paid 11 for the matinee showing.

that movie sucked by the way.

I'll fuck you up if you say Star Trek.

Okay, maybe not. I might dislike you for a couple of hours, though.

I would be mad if he watched 17 Again on Imax


-------------------------------------------------------

Stop using slang just for you to be cool
Cause I go back to when it was cool to be you

I don't even know how to process that. I was talking to the wife about it tonight. I can't imagine what 100,000 views even looks like. As in, I don't think I've even looked at HER 100,000 times.

Amazing. It's slowed, but by no means has it stopped.

My hat's off to you, sir.

www.www.facebook.com/pages/DJJedi/44191809751
www.myspace.com/djjedi1
www.twitter.com/DJJedi

...I learned a lot from all this info. One, I didn't know that IMAX has existed as a company for such a long period of time, I thought it was just a trademarked style of giant movie screen, something from the past 15 years or so.

I can sort of picture that there might be a different attitude within the company, like, they might be used to thinking of themselves as more than just giant movie screens, but as I don't know anyone who doesn't think of them as giant movie screens, it still would suggest a disconnect between perception within and without the company. It does seem disingenuous on some level, particularly after reading suit comments re: "wow factor," etc.

(edit: yeah, and I agree, the darfur line was funny)

http://www.fernbankmuseum.org/imax/now_showing.aspx

but it doesn't show regular movies.

but goddamn I just peeped that map and I saw several places on long island and in the city that definitely advertise for imax but do not have IMAX screens.

Wow, okp doing big things.

<------ Boho Model Madness presents: Soft and Purdy

http://www.rareformnyc.com
http://www.myspace.com/shinobishaw
http://www.myspace.com/djshinobishaw
http://www.last.fm/user/ShinoShaw

"Arm Leg Leg Arm How you doin?" (c) T510

http://tinyurl.com/pddxnq

WORD.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

"I predict...................Nadal will embarrass dudes" - Deebot

http://www.facebook.com/kurlyswirl

I be Scrobblin': http://www.last.fm/user/TasteeTreat/

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0799996/

IMAX May Tell Moviegoers Dimensions Of Screens

26 May 2009 2:49 AM, PDT | From Studio Briefing | See recent Studio Briefing news

Responding to the recent flap over the smaller size of IMAX screens in new locations, IMAX CEO Richard Gelfond says that he has asked a Hollywood market-research firm to determine how serious an issue the matter is. In an interview with Los Angeles Times columnist Patrick Goldstein, Gelfond says that he expects the study to determine, "Is it just a few bloggers or is there really a bigger adverse audience reaction?" Asked by Goldstein why the company doesn't simply put up a sign outside IMAX theaters specifying the size of the screen, Gelfond responded, "We're thinking about doing that kind of thing," then said more emphatically later, "We're going to do something about disclosing information. Period. The market-research survey is really just to help figure out what to do, not if we should do something."

Yes, we are close to achieving victory.

Mech

"Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one"-Anonymous


The sharpest sword is a word spoken in wrath;the deadliest poison is covetousness;the fiercest fire is hatred; the darkest night is ignorance.-The Buddha

http://www.kvbc.com/global/story.asp?s=10588314

Make them pay for their insolence.