-Five-
An IMAX-Sized
Scandal
Visitors to the website are greeted with the
following claim: "IMAX: the world's most immersive
movie experience." For years, IMAX movies were
considered to be a cut above the rest in terms of the
technological quality of
the movies played in their
theaters. Yet over some
time, ordinary movie theaters
have gone through incredible
advancements in technology,
begging the question: do
IMAX films truly offer a
superior viewing experience,
or would we be better off
saving the extra cash and
heading to our neighborhood
movie theater instead?
The company
boasts that the IMAX film
experience is like no other, that the moviegoers are
privy to a sense of "being inside of the movie," due
to superior audio systems and larger screens. In
fact, until quite recently, no one could argue--larger
screens mean a higher, clearer resolution, and more
advanced sound systems allow for a surround-sound
sensation, not to mention just a larger picture in
general. Technology buffs across the blogosphere have
taken up arms against what seems to be an IMAX-
sized scandal. With the openings of several new IMAX
theaters this year, the company conveniently forgot to
inform its customers that these new screens are only
slightly larger than an ordinary movie screen--the only
distinction between these new screens and ordinary
screens are the use of the digital system for quality and
sound. As the blogs and websites are quick to point
out, while discerning customers might wise up to the
"difference" within a few minutes of the movie, by
then it's too late--they've blown at least five extra
bucks on "the world's most immersive movie
experience" when it's hardly more "immersing"
than what they'd have experienced at their local
movie theater!
Victims of the "scandal" feel deceived;
comedian Aziz Ansari, a regular on TV's Parks
and Recreation, blogged about his experience. He
recalls how he paid five extra
dollars for admission to the
IMAX version of the new
film, "Star Trek: 3-D" only
to realize that the purportedly
huge screen was really
only a tad bit larger than
an ordinary screen. When
he approached the theater's
guest services for a refund,
he was offered popcorn and
a drink. He's now calling
for a boycott of all IMAX
films. To that I say "good
luck"--never underestimate
the power of a blog. Yet in all
seriousness, the scandal goes
beyond the moviegoers; IMAX spent 40 years
persuading film producers to use IMAX cameras
with a 15/70 screen per minute ratio, despite their
higher expense, in the interest of higher quality
resolution and larger image size. Many producers
have accepted the deal, but they are now faced
with quite a problem: recently, some IMAX
screen sizes have dramatically decreased, the
changes made in the quality of the films will not
be noticeable and will simply be a waste of time,
money, and effort on the behalf of the producer.
If you're riled up, take a deep breath. The
solution is pretty clear: when faced with either
laying out the five dollars for what you hope will
be a bona fide IMAX experience or simply paying
the regular admission price at the neighborhood
movie theater, go ahead and keep your cash.
TECHNOLOGY
Why the big screen is not always what it seems..
Danielle Sobol(`13)