Cross-Section
Member
Good.
IMAX 3D glasses are so uncomfortable to wear.
IMAX 3D glasses are so uncomfortable to wear.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
IMAX Is Moving Away From 3-D: Consumers Have Shown a Strong Preference
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
Astral Dog
Member
New 2D Era
$20 dollars?
Jibbajabbawockky
Member
I have no issue with IMAX 3D glasses really.
Personally, I don't really have any issue with 3D movies if they're done well. But if I had to choose between something like Avatar where they shot it in 3D or something like Dunkirk where they actually shot it in IMAX, I'd go with legit 70mm IMAX every single time.
That's what IMAX should be pushing for- more directors and studios pushing forward with 70mm IMAX and trying to have better legit IMAX theaters- whether that's 70mm IMAX film or better IMAX laser projection so you have that 1:43 aspect ratio for things shot in IMAX.
Seeing non IMAX filmed movies in IMAX is still fine, even if it's 2D. I mean, I saw Logan in 2D IMAX and that was fine. Issue with the IMAX I go to is that it's an older IMAX theater that has the proper huge screen but they took out the IMAX 70mm film projectors and replaced them with the Xenon digital IMAX so that they could do the IMAX 3D movies. The only times they've dusted off the 70mm IMAX film projectors in the past has been for Nolan's movies- The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar. But for Dunkirk, since it's been almost 3 years since Interstellar, they weren't going to do the maintenance and cost of getting a special projectionist out here to just show Dunkirk in 70mm IMAX. I'd assume if more movies were utilizing IMAX 70mm film, it might be a little more financially feasible.
Go to a better theater- I saw Dunkirk around the same time on Saturday in IMAX (non 70mm) for $9 a ticket.
Personally, I don't really have any issue with 3D movies if they're done well. But if I had to choose between something like Avatar where they shot it in 3D or something like Dunkirk where they actually shot it in IMAX, I'd go with legit 70mm IMAX every single time.
That's what IMAX should be pushing for- more directors and studios pushing forward with 70mm IMAX and trying to have better legit IMAX theaters- whether that's 70mm IMAX film or better IMAX laser projection so you have that 1:43 aspect ratio for things shot in IMAX.
Seeing non IMAX filmed movies in IMAX is still fine, even if it's 2D. I mean, I saw Logan in 2D IMAX and that was fine. Issue with the IMAX I go to is that it's an older IMAX theater that has the proper huge screen but they took out the IMAX 70mm film projectors and replaced them with the Xenon digital IMAX so that they could do the IMAX 3D movies. The only times they've dusted off the 70mm IMAX film projectors in the past has been for Nolan's movies- The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises and Interstellar. But for Dunkirk, since it's been almost 3 years since Interstellar, they weren't going to do the maintenance and cost of getting a special projectionist out here to just show Dunkirk in 70mm IMAX. I'd assume if more movies were utilizing IMAX 70mm film, it might be a little more financially feasible.
Go to a better theater- I saw Dunkirk around the same time on Saturday in IMAX (non 70mm) for $9 a ticket.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
WOW! You must be very young, because IMAX has only been known for 2D movies during their history. Until the last few years.
Chezzymann
Member
Its cause 3D isnt worth the extra money.
CreepingFear
Member
I hope The Last Jedi is in 2d Imax. Fuck 3d.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Probably will be. Johnson shot scenes using IMAX cameras.
It's actually kind of a problem with IMAX, and has been for awhile. The brand came to be so identified with 3D by default that IMAX has spent the last year basically implementing "THE 2D EXPERIENCE" as branding on their non-3D screens.
Basically - IMAX had to make up a new nonsense term to describe showing regular ass big movies because IMAX had become synonymous with 3D, and that was hurting them.
NealMcCauley
Member
Maybe they could also be more selective with what movies get the imax treatment. A few years ago an exec complained they were losing money because the movies were shit and that hasn't seemed to change.
CreepingFear
Member
The question is if LucasFilm will produce a 3d IMAX conversion. I am hoping not.
The 70mm 2D trailer that played before Dunkirk was very sexy.
Scorpion Soldier
Member
They are, of course.
InfiniteBento
Member
3D is trash
I definitely prefer 2D with IMAX for sure
I definitely prefer 2D with IMAX for sure
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Why would they if IMAX itself is phasing out 3D screenings?
Why pay for a conversion to a format the owners of that format don't even really want anymore?
I think that moving away from regular 3D will be easier for exhibitors now that audiences are being trained to seek out premium shows, whether that be IMAX, Ultra AVX, DBOX, or VIP/18+ screenings.
All of those carry larger premiums than regular 3D, and have perceived value aside from weating a pair of plastic glasses to get a darker, blurrier experience.
Conversions will become a China tax. I also expect them to be done as cheap as possible.
All of those carry larger premiums than regular 3D, and have perceived value aside from weating a pair of plastic glasses to get a darker, blurrier experience.
Conversions will become a China tax. I also expect them to be done as cheap as possible.
TomWaitsForNoMan
Banned
How would 3D even work without glasses? You need a different image for each eye, and as long as the screen is a 2d surface the only way to do that is to block half the image from each eye, whether by strobing alternate frames or by polarising the image. Other than making the screen itself 3 dimensional somehow or beaming images directly into each eye separately, which both seem far-fetched, I'm not even sure how it's possible. I know the 3ds did it with a lenticular screen, but that only works for one person directly in front of the screen and isn't feasible for a theatre full of viewers all in different positions
Yes, $20.
$17.95 + $2.00 Fandango Fee.
I'd go to another IMAX screen to see it but it's the only IMAX screen here
Won't pay that for Dunkirk, but I'll be there for sure if there is a 2D showing for Star Wars at the end of the year.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Great point.
But is there a point on the horizon where international audiences hit the point we've hit, or is that farther out than the less-than-a-decade lifespan we've lived with it.
Beer Monkey
Member
It's time for 3D to die.
Also, unless it's a Nolan film or a documentary, Dolby Atmos with a 4K projector > 2D IMAX.
Also, unless it's a Nolan film or a documentary, Dolby Atmos with a 4K projector > 2D IMAX.
I agree. IMAX needs to improve their projection systems because Dolby Cinema outclasses it
HarryDemeanor
Member
Good. All the IMAX showings at theaters around me are always 3D and I hate it. I always end up going for the 2D showing.
Masterspeed
Member
I saw Spiderman Homecoming in 3D because all the 2D tickets were sold out on the day.
I gotta admit, I don't remember anything about 3D in the movie because 3D isn't a memorable experience, it's just cool for the hour or so and then you forget you even saw the movie in it.
I gotta admit, I don't remember anything about 3D in the movie because 3D isn't a memorable experience, it's just cool for the hour or so and then you forget you even saw the movie in it.
Beer Monkey
Member
Also IMAX audio is antiquated. Six channel surround mixes are so 1977.
Yes, $20.
$17.95 + $2.00 Fandango Fee.
I'd go to another IMAX screen to see it but it's the only IMAX screen here
Won't pay that for Dunkirk, but I'll be there for sure if there is a 2D showing for Star Wars at the end of the year.
Fandango has a fine racket going in the States. One that I don't understand at all. The major theatre chain up here, Cineplex, lets you buy tickets online for no extra fee. There's no third party service involved.
Good, please stop the 3D movies. I enjoyed Avatar and Transformers: Dark of the Moon because they where in active 3D. Currently everything at my local theater is shown in 3D and it adds nothing to the experience. It's dark, blurry and distracting.
My 60" oled supports 3D and I watched one or two movies in 3D.
Dunkrik and Alien: Covenant showed that movies work perfectly without 3D.
Did you guys got a chance to play Assassins Creed 3 in 3D on PS3? I was amazed how good it worked and would love to see it more with games.
My 60" oled supports 3D and I watched one or two movies in 3D.
Dunkrik and Alien: Covenant showed that movies work perfectly without 3D.
Did you guys got a chance to play Assassins Creed 3 in 3D on PS3? I was amazed how good it worked and would love to see it more with games.
True Savior
Member
cameron failed revolution.
0ptimusPayne
Member
Since most movies have on the path of shooting fake 3D, I dont care for it anymore. Im glad itll be easier to get an IMAX showing without having to wear those massive glasses.
Scorpion Soldier
Member
Internationally 3D is still doing quite well, especially in territories like China etc.
tearsintherain
Member
Oh thank god, I refuse to see movies in 3D in theaters anymore its just annoying and I am paying tons extra for the annoyance and usually the only IMAX theaters in town show movies in 3D the first week they are open, which means I never see them in IMAX (fake IMAX sadly).
Team Filler
Member
I'm not the biggest fan of 3D, but I also would still like to see it persist for movies natively shot for 3D, especially now with better projection methods available (IMAX Laser). I'm fine with it still being a thing for the Avatars and Tron sequels (please gives it to us, Disney).
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll