Imax Corp. is facing complaints that it is misleading consumers, even as it announces it grossed a record $8.5 million during Star Trek's opening weekend, beating out The Dark Knight.
Comedian and actor Aziz Ansari (Parks and Recreation and Human Giant) is leading the charge against Imax, after discovering it has been rolling out smaller screens -- with the same branding and price.
"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," Ansari said via his blog.
For instance, he points out that the 28-by-58 Imax screen at New York's AMC Empire 25 is less than a quarter the size of the 72-by-97 foot Imax screen at the Lincoln Square theater just 20 blocks away. But customers wouldn't know that until they had paid for their ticket and entered the theater.
"Does American Airlines brand a (Boeing) 767 (flight) differently than a 727? We wouldn't put our name on it unless it lived up to the 'Wow!' factor and to the Imax brand," he tells Reuters.
Eleven percent of the $79.2 million that Star Trek brought in last weekend came from Imax screens -- significant since Imax accounted for only 2 percent of the screens the movie was shown on. But in the long run, will the smaller screens, especially in light of Ansari's high-profile protest, hurt the Imax brand?
In other news:
Speaking of outrage, Tweeters everywhere are rebelling after Twitter Inc. made a "small settings update," removing options from its @reply system. Now users can only view replies the people they follow make to other people they follow. In response, angry users are tweeting their complaints, causing "#fixreplies" to appear at the top of Twitter trends. [Ed. note: I guess this is the Twitter equivalent to joining a Facebook protest group.]
Early reviews for Pixar's upcoming Up, which will be both the first animated film and the first 3D film to open the Cannes Film Festival, are drifting in, and they're overwhelmingly favorable. "Though it's not yet summer, we can declare that Up, like WALL-E, will prove to be one of the most satisfying movie experiences of its year," Time's Richard Corliss writes.
IMAX has always been an extremely reputable company with a strong and respected brand. Promoting smaller screens as IMAX is a mistake, especially if the presentation is from a digital projector rather than the 70mm 48 fps IMAX film strip. I actually encourage IMAX to expand their product offerings using digital projection and smaller screens but they need to develop a new name for the product like IMAX Digital or something. I'd like to hear more details about these new theaters to properly assess what's going on. Has anyone had any experience with these smaller IMAX screens?
I totally agree with what you're saying. I feel like when most people think of "Imax" they think "huge friggin' screen." And sure, other products are great -- but give them different branding. Apple makes smaller iPods but they have the grace to separate them with different product names and different pricing, so you know before you open the box whether you're getting an iPod Touch or an iPod Shuffle.
I haven't been to one of the smaller screens, since I tend to see movies at Lincoln, but I thought this picture, which Aziz posted on his blog, was pretty indicative of the type of difference you're looking at:
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
To save this item to your list of favorite Contentinople content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.