What is the difference between an Imax Theater and a regular movie theater?

Question

I'm thinking of seeing the movie 300 at an Imax Theater near me and am wondering if it is worth it.....

Answer 1

Should you see a movie made for the cinema but transcribed for IMAX? The short answer: sure, why not. This practice has many admirers, notably Roger Ebert (who even says the 3-D IMAX features come out to good effect in “The Polar Express”), for its clarity of picture and overall experience.

However, IMAX is not just cinema biggie-sized: there are fundamental differences between the two methods of movie making and in the technology and equipment used to create them.

First, I’ll get the issue of audio out of the way. IMAX lead the way in multi-speaker, digital sound, but not long after, DTS entered mainstream theaters. IMAX may still have the lead due to a more elaborate speaker set up, but really I would be surprised to find much of a difference here.

The principle design feature of the IMAX format is the immersive images created which leads to there trademark: “The IMAX Experience.” As the IMAX website puts it, “Because these screens fill your peripheral vision, you feel like you’re right in the action.” When you view a TV, computer monitor, or conventional cinema screen, you focus on what is directly in your line of sight and ignore your surroundings. On the other hand, IMAX’s design fills your peripheral vision as well, which goes a long way towards convincing the brain that what the eyes see truly matches what the body is experiencing (this leads to feelings of vertigo or queasiness in some).

Three characteristics of the IMAX design work together to accomplish this cinematic immersion. To fill the peripheral vision, their first step was to physically place the audience nearer the screen. If you have never been in an IMAX theater, you will be surprised by how close all the seats are to the screen- it’s like stadium seating, but with half as many rows so even the guys in the back aren’t too far from the screen. (This means fewer available seats per show, which partly explains IMAX’s higher ticket price.)

Second, the screen is closer to a TV shape than widescreen cinema. Once again, this is because a normal movie doesn’t care if you see anything up or down, but in IMAX the visual effect REQUIRES filling in that area of the vision.

These first two properties lead to a problem, though. It’s pretty much the same problem as you will see if you sit a foot away from a TV: basically, everything is blurry. This is where the IMAX’s third characteristic comes into play, and the IMAX format’s innovation. To make the large screen clear, they had to increase the resolution of the film dramatically. This lead to the development of their own 70mm film stock. This film provides the superior clarity required for the IMAX design to work.

It is an expensive film to shoot and print movies for. Physically more than double the size of the normal movie film stock (which is 35mm, but measured and oriented differently so it is actually less than half the dimensions of IMAX film), this large format film requires special cameras as well as projectors to handle the film. Both must be larger, more complicated, and stronger to handle the heavy duty film. The cost is partly responsible for the short length of most IMAX movies (about 50 minutes), though this short run time also means the theater can have more showings in a day to recoup some of the expense.

These are all technological differences of IMAX, but there is a technical difference in the making of an IMAX movie, as well, and this is where we will see the mismatch between IMAX and traditional cinema. Because most of the IMAX picture is actually meant to be ignored, only what is in the middle of the screen is important in terms of focusing your attention. If we are following the Colorado River along the Grand Canyon, the walls may be flying by to our sides, but our focus is on the river and the canyon immediately to its sides. The farther from the center the canyon, the less we pay attention and the more our peripheral vision processes the image to tell our brain that we really are flying along the canyon. Contrast this to a cinematic picture in which we are meant to observe a scene in its entirety, for instance, a battle scene with a general on the right of the screen talking to a soldier, the rest of the army to the left, and the enemy far in the distance preparing for attack at the top of the screen. If this scene were simply thrown onto a gigantic IMAX screen, we would have to move our head all around just to see what’s going on. Look left, there’s an army, but who’s in charge? Look up at the top and there’s another army. Are they on the same side? Oh, wait, look on the right and there’s a general yapping. Hold on, I think the army in the distance just shot a volley of arrows at the other army, but I’m not sure because I was looking at the general talking to some other guy. At a cinema, we absorb all this information continuously and at once.

The point here is that the fundamental methods of filming the two styles are different. Let’s consider another example. We have a conversation between two guys. Nothing special. Now, let’s take this scene on an IMAX. Suddenly the heads are two stories tall, and we need to swing our head back and forth when each guy takes his turn speaking, but what’s the point? So we can see their buck teeth and the pimple on the ugly guy’s neck? The two formats just aren’t meant to be interchangeable.

You’ll notice something else about IMAX. As I said earlier, its aspect ratio is very close to a television’s 1.33:1 (4:3). Widescreen, on the other hand, is 1.85:1 (very close to 16:9 as the new widescreen TVs are, but this is actually 1.75:1). This means that taking the a cinematic widescreen feature to the IMAX theater requires either shrinking the movie down and placing black borders on the top and bottom of the screen (just like watching a widescreen DVD on a normal TV), or cutting off the left and right ends of the movie, or a combination of the two. I know that for “Apollo 13” they simply cut off the sides; I don’t know what they’re doing for “300” (they also trimmed the run time of Apollo 13 by 20 minutes for IMAX: just one thing to watch out for in “300”).

Finally, there is the issue of the “increased resolution” (AKA “high definition") of IMAX. It is the 70mm film that makes the IMAX picture high resolution and clearer than a conventional image. Simply taking a movie filmed in 35mm and showing it on an IMAX projector will no more increase the resolution or clarity than showing a B&W film on a “color” projector will magically make the movie colorized. In fact, if they were to just show “300” on such a large screen as IMAX, the picture would simply become fuzzy because the 35mm film is not meant to be projected onto such a large screen. To bypass this inherent limitation, the studio must go through an IMAX “digital re-mastering,” as they put it, to process the 35mm picture with computers into a form that can be printed onto IMAX 70mm print which will then work on the IMAX screen. How close this comes to an actual IMAX 70mm picture is not stated. However, if it were indeed close, you would expect the high cost of actually shooting in 70mm would be abandoned in favor of shooting in 35mm and the re-mastering the product. This has not occurred.

I’m seeing “300” with a friend that has seen theatrical movies in IMAX format before. He liked the experience, and wants to see 300 in IMAX as well, which means it will be my first. I’m looking forward to the clarity of picture, but I’ll be sure not to sit so close that I’ll constantly have to swivel my head to fully appreciate the fast paced images before me- just the opposite of the long, graceful scenes in an IMAX movie that you are meant to enjoy and savor the experience.

Answer 2

The Imax screen is huge! We have seen several movies in Imax and it was so great. Made the movie experience much better. Harry Potter flying on his broom or Beauty and the Beast were great!

The ticket price was higher than the regular theater.

Answer 3

An IMAX theater has a huge screen and the type of sound system that will put you right in the action.For this sort of movie I think it would be worth the extra money.

Answer 4

Imax is basically High Def movies. The Film Reals are larger, each frame is wider making the overall quality better. The screens are angled in a different way to make it a higher quality from every seat. The sound is played in a higher decibel level (my imax theathre is because the equipment is actually canadian.) H-D Movies!

Answer 5

I think it would be. Imax have a larger screen and they have better sound than your regular theatre. Plus the area where the play the movie is large which makes it an interesting viewing experience. For me at least.

If you go to the link below and scroll down a bit you can find out some more information about it.

Answer 6

I don't know the movie that you're talking about, but it's probably worth it. Imax is a huge screened movie theater and you wear three-dimensional glasses -- great effects -- it looks like you can actually touch the characters, etc. I would definitely recommend it. You may get motion sickness at first from the glasses, but it's an overall really cool experience. Hope this helps you!!!

Answer 7

Imax is high definition.

Answer 8

i think imax has a bigger screen and stuff

Answer 9

well,the screen in imax is huge!and oh,maybe in 3D!!!!!!!!!!