IMAX Ditches "Justice League" in Favor of Re-runs of "Dunkirk" and "The Polar Express"

Whatever hopes you had for "Justice League" being a huge success, I would put those desires on hold for a very, very long time as the movie is more than a certified flop at this point.  It went on to break records for the lowest grossing release of the entire DC Extended Universe.  The movies as they stand are currently dead and there is virtually no hope of the thing being salvaged at this point.  "Justice League" is going to do to superhero movies at Warner Bros. what "Batman & Robin" did for that franchise: Stop it dead in its tracks while the studio takes a break from it and reevaluates what to do ten years down the road.  I know this isn't how people wanted things to turn out.  Fans wanted a good movie.  The studio wanted a profitable franchise.  IMAX wanted a movie with enough legs that it could carry through the holiday season until "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" dropped.

In short, everyone got screwed here, and there are no winners, only losers.

While there have been countless articles highlighting the failures of the movie, we're going to focus on the fact that IMAX got stuck with a movie that didn't sell tickets.  Most of the theaters were played to empty screenings.  There is no possible way the company can hope to keep this around for three more weeks.  So, many theaters will be getting rid of it.  Theaters that are equipped to show 70mm movies will (ironically) be bringing Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk" for an undetermined amount of time.  Many IMAX's will be going back to 2004 and reviving "The Polar Express" for the holidays (easily one of 3D's biggest cinema success stories).  While there has been no announcement, don't be surprised if "Thor: Ragnorok" makes a surprise come back as well.  This, just goes to show, not to put too many eggs in one basket, because the basket may break and crack your eggs.

Now, I'm typing this story for two reasons.  The first is that it is always nice to see "The Polar Express" return to IMAX 3D.  I've seen this movie on the really big screen almost every year for the last decade and a half, and I even have watched the BluRay 3D a few times.  Despite "Avatar" getting all the credit, it was really "The Polar Express" which showed how good and successful 3D films could be, as the film opened to low box office, only to have IMAX 3D showings being sold out on a daily basis.  The other reason I'm reporting on this is because this is another spectacular failure for IMAX in their '2D only' policy, and if it hasn't been made clear yet that scrapping the 3D doesn't result in more ticket sales yet, then I honestly don't know what will.  Now, I have to stress again that the 3D version wasn't a whole lot better this time around, and I have heard rumblings that Joss Whedon simply felt the 2D version was better (for whatever THAT'S worth to the fans...).

Also, this movie didn't make money in either format, so it's not like having the 3D would have resulted in more ticket sales either.  The point (again) is that IMAX saw sagging ticket sales, looked at "Dunkirk's" success, and deemed that it was probably because the movie was in 2D that it did so well (completely ignoring the 3D successes of "Beauty & the Beast," "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2," and "Spider-Man: Homecoming").  "Dunkirk" did well in IMAX because it was shot with 70mm IMAX cameras and was a good movie.  Nothing more, nothing less.  I took personal issue with IMAX throwing 3D under the bus when they had 3D movies that were actually bigger successes than "Dunkirk."  "Justice League" did not sell tickets even though it was only showing in 2D.  Heck, the only way it might have done well is if it was an excellent movie (although...).  Truthfully, I think IMAX should take a hard look at what they are replacing it with: Movies that take full advantage of the giant screen and the formats with which they were filmed in.

In the new year I will begin a series of articles about what IMAX's strengths were, how they lost sight of their ultimate goal, what their problems are, and what they can do to fix them going forward.  In the meantime...I'm going to enjoy taking my niece to see "The Polar Express" for the first time!

Read more »

IMAX Scraps 3D Version of "Justice League"

My earlier suspicions were correct: IMAX has scrapped the 3D release of "Justice League."  Early posters for the movie proudly touted the movie as being an IMAX 3D release...only to slowly get away from that claim and just being advertised as being "in IMAX."  Though this may not be the final listing, so far...

...NO ticket pre-orders are selling any showings of the movie that are in 3D, which means its pretty unlikely there will be any when the time comes!  This contributes more to the notion that IMAX is getting out of the 3D game, but it should be noted this seems like an exception to the rule rather than the norm.  Right now "Thor: Ragnorok" is playing in IMAX theaters with 2D and 3D showings being split pretty much down the middle.  "Geostorm" was shown completely in 3D regardless where it played.  "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" will have some 2D showings, however the vast majority will be in 3D.  Which means, since making the original announcement, "Justice League" will be only the SECOND release to ditch 3D from a movie that has a 3D version available (the first being "Blade Runner 2049" of course).

What is odd about this movie is that originally it was being directed by Zach Snyder, who stepped away from the project after his daughter tragically committed suicide (and my thoughts and prayers are still with him).  Joss Whedon was brought in to finish the film, but in the process has apparently restructured the film, has written lots of new scenes, cut Lex Luthor from the film, and has made the movie more humorous and colorful.  From many accounts, it is now more Whedon's film than Snyder's.  Why do I mention this?  Because while Snyder was making a movie that he knew was going to be converted to 3D, Whedon might not have been.  Granted, he HAS directed 3D films before ("The Avengers" and "The Avengers: Age of Ultron"), but he might have been too busy fixing the movie to worry about how it was going to be presented in 3D!  Warner Bros. does have a conversion in the can, but it might not compliment the scenes Whedon has directed, and it's entirely possible the director told IMAX not to bother projecting the it that was as a result.

Or, maybe, "Thor: Ragnorok" really did sell more 2D tickets than 3D.  Look, it's entirely possible.  I personally think that if you did that you made a mistake because the 3D in that movie was extremely well done and immersive, and it reminded me why I loved 3D movies so much.  There's no solid numbers on that though, so...I can't comment on it.  Right now I'm thinking the lack of an IMAX 3D release has more to do with changing directors than anything.  However, I will do my due diligence and see the movie in both formats and give you my two cents on them, and which one you should see.

Read more »

Warner Bros. Solicits "Wonder Woman" on BluRay 3D

"Wonder Woman" is the surprise hit of the year.  Not because it features a female superhero, but, rather, because it is part of the DC Extended Universe, a franchise that was on the verge of collapsing until this movie came along.  Warner Bros. has not been shy about releasing BluRay 3D's of their films (they just released "The LEGO Batman Movie" in the format when most theaters wouldn't even project it in 3D), so the fact that they will do the same for one of the biggest hits of the year is unsurprising.  You can pre-order it at most online retailers, but I'll link to the one that makes the boldest statement: Warner Bros. official website!  And, don't worry, this is one DC movie that's worth getting.

Read more »

The LASER Sharp 3D of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice"

Last weekend "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" managed to get toxic reviews yet easily claim the number one spot for the weekend.  With a $170 million opening, an extended universe starter had just been unleashed upon the world.  Like "Zootopia" a lot of the business was helped by 3D and IMAX screenings (85% of movie theaters showed the film on screens that required glasses).  The second weekend the movie was dropped like a bad habit (by about 68% some reports suggest).  I saw it last weekend and joined most of the world in hating it.  Frustratingly, I hated not because it was consistently terrible, but because it was really good before the extended universe selling came into the picture.  This is a drop so deep that it puts the future of this franchise into question.  Yes, the studio can afford to take a critical hit, but if those numbers hold up, then long term Warner Bros. could have a real disaster on their hands.  It seams the lessons of "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" weren't learned: Audiences don't want to buy tickets to commercials for future products, they just want a ticket to THIS product!

I could repeat my opinions of the film all I want, but I already wrote a review for it and it would be more constructive of my time if you were to just read that.  I'm not even going to discuss the success (or lack therefor) of the film itself much.  Yes I opened with it because I couldn't resist the urge, but I really want to discuss the format I saw the movie in.  See, I saw "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in the famous TCL Chinese Theater!  A couple of years ago they replaced their really big screen and put in a really big IMAX.  Since that upgrade it became home to the first ever IMAX 4K Laser projection. Despite using lots of gadgets in my everyday life, I'm not always sure what new type of cameras and projectors are on the market or what they intend to do.  This new stuff always promises to "make images more detailed," but sometimes in practice I can't see what the heck the companies are talking about.

Dolby Vision may have been designed to bring out contrast in the image better than it ever had been before, but all I see when I watch a movie in that format is a brighter image.  High Frame Rate may have been invented to make movies look more realistic, but the effect just comes off an uncanny.  When I watched "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in 4K Laser projection I have to admit that I was pretty impressed.  Not because it made the image clearer (I believe we're at a point where images can't get clearer than they already are), but because it made the images on the screen smoother.  More specifically, it made the 3D run smoother than I had ever seen it before without compromising the image.  Before this the smoothest 3D I had seen was with Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy.  While I was very critical in my views of the 48 HFR filming, I did have to admit that those extra frames did make the 3D images much easier on the eyes.

The thing about 3D is that is can be a strain to watch sometimes.  Doctors recommend not to watch it all the time because your eyes and brain are constantly working to make out the double images and turn them into a fully working experience.  While it never really bothered me before, I noticed pretty quickly that the Hobbit movies were much easier on the eyes.  I was partially happy with that effect.  What's the point of gaining a better viewing experience though when the rest of the image looks like YouTube garbage?  It was a step in the wrong direction (I don't want to have the movies look worse just so 3D is less stressful... I don't like the format THAT much).  With the 4K Laser projector though, I think we might have found the best solution for this problem thus far.  While I wasn't completely thrilled with "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" as a movie, I did notice that the 3D was excellent.

It's some of the best 3D I've seen, and during the (admittingly overblown) action sequences, the camera angle's, editing, and sweeping images were all complimented by the 3D in ways I haven't experienced in an action movie since "Mad Max: Fury Road" ("The Walk" doesn't count because that films use of 3D is very different in nature).  Action movies are extremely difficult to make good 3D films out of, because their very nature and the way most of them are made clash with what makes 3D really work sometimes.  3D needs long shots, steady pacing, and an image that is content to sway rather than jerk around.  Most action films, in contrast, have short shots, quick editing, and cameras that shake all over the place.  It makes the 3D blur up and jerk around.  In cases like "Noah" the resulting effect was such a visual disaster we didn't even get it in the states.  What's interesting with "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is that the way the movie is shot suggests that the 3D should have been a complete disaster.

Zach Snyder is not a subtle director.  In fact, dare I saw it, I don't think he even knows HOW to direct sometimes!  With the exception of "300" and "Watchmen," his movies are so frantically paced that there is almost no room to breath.  "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" does have lots of breathing room early on, but once the fighting begins it brings up the same problems "Sucker Punch" had.  This kind of film making does not lend itself well to 3D.  Yet on an IMAX 4K Laser projection system, the 3D looking beautiful and the image was sharp.  I will be seeing the film again in a standard IMAX 3D to see if the image still holds up, but if it doesn't, then that means laser projection could be the first step in eliminating what many people dub "the 3D headaches" altogether.  It's just a shame I had to discover this through THIS film!

Read more »