"Pacific Rim: Uprising" Is (Almost) Playing Exclusively in IMAX 3D

Though the realization has been slow, it appears that IMAX is starting to come to terms with the fact that that their 3D showings are not only NOT the reason for declining ticket sales, but is actually an asset of theirs!  After almost completely ignoring it for "Black Panther," "A Wrinkle in Time," and "Tomb Raider" (the latter of which I only found playing in Mexico for some reason), 3D is back with a vengeance in IMAX.  Granted, it's not a complete return.  There are still a healthy amount of 2D showings, but what is promising is that 3D makes up the majority of the show times.  Heck, at the Universal Citywalk and Esquire IMAX have NO 2D showings at all (which is a nice change considering 3D really shines on those screens)!  I'm not saying 3D will completely take over again as I do believe there is a good number of people who want IMAX 2D presentations, but I think the company is having a hard time justifying 2D only screens when 3D fans are their most dedicated paying customers.

Not that "Tomb Raider" and "A Wrinkle in Time" were huge hits or anything, but how frustrating was it for them to realize most of their fans passed on seeing those movies in IMAX because they wanted to see them in 3D?  I mean, RPX and XD are nowhere near as big, but since they had 3D versions...well, that's better than nothing right?  If the movie is going to be in 2D, I think most would rather use their MoviePass and see it on a standard screen (then they aren't paying anything).  What's more, the official website confirms that "Ready Player One" and "Avengers: Infinity War" ARE going to have 3D showings in IMAX (the latter is sort of required though, being the first Hollywood movie in history to be fully filmed with IMAX 3D cameras)!  I'm seeing "Pacific Rim: Pacific" in IMAX 3D today.  I'm very grateful because while the first movie wasn't great per se, it was an excellent theater experience, and the excellent IMAX 3D format was a major reason for that.

Hopefully I'll get something similar here.

Read more »

"Justice League" on BluRay 3D: The Way it SHOULD Have Been in Theaters!

I picked up "Justice League" on BluRay 3D a couple days ago.  This isn't a movie I really wanted to own in 3D.  Not only is the movie pretty terrible regardless how much you like the characters, but I saw the movie in 3D on a Cinemark XD screen and was pretty unimpressed with what I saw.  The 3D was inconsistent, mostly flat, and rarely engaging.  It was probably inevitable that this wasn't going to be a great (or even good) 3D experience.  The movies long and troubled history resulted in the film having two directors, with two completely different styles and shooting methods.  It was one of the few times when director Joss Whedon (NOT Zach Snyder) was so unimpressed with the 3D conversion of the film as a whole, that he asked IMAX not to bother showing it in three dimensions.

So, coupled with the fact that the movie wasn't enjoyable, I was surprised to find myself buying the BluRay 3D.  I find myself doing that for a lot of movies I don't care for though, just to throw the format a few bucks (and to complete the DC Extended Universe collection...whatever that's worth at this point).  When I got home I ultimately did end up watching the movie again, and ten minutes in I was stunned and shocked: This was a COMPLTELY different 3D conversion of the film!  What's more, this is what should have been presented in theaters, and (more specifically) the kind of visual experience that would have been right at home in IMAX 3D.  This new 3D conversion is so much better, that it results in a movie that is almost completely different as far as visuals are concerned.  The dialog scenes actually have field depth that makes the images immersive.  The action sequences pop in a way they just didn't in theaters.  The IMAX aspect ratio is kept, giving the picture an epic scope.

Why on Earth wasn't this the version show in theaters?

Look, I know this doesn't make the movie any better, but it does goes to show that if the film had been delayed a little bit, Warner Bros. would have had an excellent 3D theater experience on their hands.  Heck, had they delayed it they might have also had a better movie, but I'll let other videos and articles debate that one.  In the meantime, Warner did good by going back and completely redoing the 3D conversion so that it was actually watchable at home.  They didn't need to do it.  They certainly knew they weren't going to ship a lot of copies.  But they did right by their consumers, and that is easily one of the best things I can report on this site in a long time.  Oh, also, it appears Best Buy and Target are taking the high demand for the 3D disks more seriously this time around, as there were MANY copies of the BluRay 3D on store shelves, so hopefully fans will actually have the chance to buy it this time!

Read more »

IMAX Screws 3D Fans with Release of "A Wrinkle in Time"

It looks like IMAX is not only doubling down on their belief that people don't want to see 3D movies, they are doubling down HARD!  Despite all the advertisements for Disney's upcoming "A Wrinkle in Time" promoting the new family adventure as a 3D experience, IMAX is projecting almost all of their showings in 2D.  What's more, the movie itself is largely going to be 2D only at many theaters, in one of the biggest 3D purges I've seen the format receive yet.  There are so few 3D showings in California, that I first assumed that the release had been cancelled altogether, until I noticed the few random late night 3D screenings at a couple of Cinemarks.  Because of this it should be noted that IMAX is not the only theater who seems to be taking a hard stance against the 3D showings of "A Wrinkle in Time," but I will focus on IMAX because they are still in a perfect position to prove that the format is still viable.

This whole mess started with their belief that people didn't want to see 3D movies anymore, and that they would start showing less of them.  "Blade Runner 2049" was their first experiment with not showing 3D at all.  The experiment did not result in more tickets being sold, and thus 3D screenings returned in limited form with "Thor: Ragnorok."  When "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" became a smashing hit in 3D, I was hoping we could put this silly notion that 2D only screenings were the way of the future, and that movies that people wanted to see would ultimately sell tickets.  But IMAX decided to push their agenda even father and with more passion with "Black Panther," where there were scant few IMAX 3D screenings to be found (and I had to compromise by seeing it on a less-than-ideal screen size).  While the movie wasn't hurt at the box office with the lack of 3D releases, it's not like the 3D screenings were vacant by any means.

They were mostly filled with people who wanted to see the movie, and many of the standard 3D showings were also filled in the first two weeks of the films release.  Now with "A Wrinkle in Time" though IMAX is pushing harder than ever to show that their method is going to work.  As of this writing there are actually no IMAX 3D screenings of the movie anywhere in California that I can find, and I had to search several states in to find theaters that would show it even once a day.  Since the 2D and 3D can be switched very easily on these projectors, I don't understand why IMAX doesn't at least give viewers the option of which version they would like to see.  Maybe the 3D version can be exclusive to the opening week, and further screenings could be in 2D?  But then, when people went to IMAX they rarely complain when the movies are in 3D, and most seem disappointed when the movie isn't in 3D because they expect it at this point.

Since "A Wrinkle in Time" has been described as being a visual powerhouse where the 3D was very much a focus of the filming process, why gimp the picture with 2D?  People have sent me tweets asking what they should do since they want to see the movie in IMAX, but they also want to see it in 3D.  And I have to tell them quite bluntly that this is a situation where you will most likely have to choose which you'd prefer: IMAX or 3D.  In some rare cases you can have both, but whether those options will be real IMAX screens is another matter altogether.  Personally I think places like the Esquire IMAX, the TLC IMAX, and the Spectrum IMAX should be showing the movie in 3D, as those are the biggest screens, thus the 3D works best there.  But hey, if they are going to play this game, I guess I'll go to one of those late night showings at Cinemark, and hope IMAX wakes up and realizes that if they want to sell more tickets, they have to have better movies (which there is some debate whether this one is).

Read more »

Midnight's Edge Discusses Lack of 3D Release for "Star Wars: The Last Jedi"

Midnight's Edge and The Digital Bits have uploaded a new video discussing "Star Wars: The Last Jedi."  In the video they discuss the film, their thoughts on it, the highly anticipated UltraHD release (AKA: 4K), and they express their frustration about the lack of a domestic 3D release.  It might not give us any clue as to why Disney completely passed over the 3D here in the states, but there is some speculation, and it's nice to know there's more people out there (other than me) who cares about this big problem with home media.

Read more »