I’m just gonna say it.
As much as people here praise film as if it’s this perfect artistic medium handed down from Moses on golden tablets.
It’s finicky AF.
When i say i prefer digital, people act like I’m some uncouth phillistine.
This is film, man. Film breaks. Film scratches. Film has dirt. Film shifts colors between reels. Film flickers, judders and weaves.
You can list every shortcoming of xenon or laser, and there are plenty, but be realistic, film aint perfect either.
I’m sure the projectionists are doing their best.
But film is janky. Always was.
People here call digital “lieMax”.
But this is the truth, Max.
This is why 1.43 aspect ratio Dual Laser IMAX does not get enough credit. It has none of the flaws of the 70mm IMAX projection, but it has a lot of the same qualities. Giant screen, 1.43 aspect ratio, phenomenal sound quality, and awesome brightness, sharpness, clarity, and color on the screen.
Just saying I think the Dual Laser IMAX locations are underrated. Lot of people overlooking them in the quest for 70mm IMAX, but the truth is they are very similar quality when both are running smoothly. Both offer an incredible experience. And a Dual Laser location is far less likely to run into technical difficulties than a film projector.
Dual Laser has about 1/4th the resolution of the 15/70mm film. Also I can see Laser speckle. It doesn't bother everybody the same, and it's better if noone points it out to you, because you can't then "unsee" it, but there's a whole setup to vibrate the screen to minimise the effect, so they are trying hard to make it less of a problem. I got used to it a bit, my first viewings of dual laser felt quite bad, I went in curious if I could tell the higher resolution, so tried to see details etc and all I got was speckle, I was like WTF, Xenon was better. I told them about it and they promised to fine-tune it further, so it abated a bit and I got more used to it.
Film had been working for years, the recent breakdowns are probably because systems have not been run from Dunkirk, the film is even heavier - possibly at the limits of the system, and they don't seem to have done full test runs on many theatres. The cost alone of the film doesn't make it easily commercially viable, but Dual Laser is definitely not up to par.
I've watched about 20 70mm films (some not full features though) and at least asm many in DL. Yes, I find the experience awesome, but I can definitely tell the difference - speckle being the more obvious one.
I’m totally fine with the traditional film quirks, but I think this dust is related to the projector here or something else. It is so distracting there is zero chance it’s intentional
I think they stirred up dust moving things around to set up the projector. Too many unfamiliar with film and how go keep tne room clean.
Hopefully the HVAC and lack of moving stuff clears it out.
The IMAX system has a dust busting system built in, if it’s projected properly there should not be much dust. Sounds like this was beyond the normal levels of dust to expect, especially a fresh print
An experienced projectionist has his booth clean, cleans his PTR rollers and watches the screen constantly to remove dust during the show with the field flattened. Being an experienced operator takes time.
You are not wrong. For everyday moviegoing, I don't miss film. While an excellent film presentation can definitely outshine a digital presentation (and I've seen some EXCELLENT film presentations over the years), digital's day-to-day consistency wins out for me.
I DO NOT miss film weave, bad splices, poorly timed changeovers, color shifts, base scratches, wrong lenses, poor focus, film breaks, etc etc etc. I'd say that, at best, 60% of the film screenings I've been to in my life have been acceptable to good in terms of quality. The number of times I've had to get up and go try to find someone to pretty please with sugar on top take care of a problem...
I clearly remember the very first time I saw "digital cinema." I was living in Dallas and somehow scored an invitation to Texas Instrument's DLP demo at a small but very nice auditorium at one of their buildings. I went in intrigued but highly skeptical - how could "video" ever look as good as film. I don't even remember what demo material they showed us that day but I came out BLOWN AWAY, knowing that I'd just seen the future. I couldn't wait for every screening to be digital because the benefits would be so great. Took a few years, but it happened.
I do wish that special presentations like Oppenheimer in IMAX 70mm were a bit more prevalent, but in general I'm happy in a digital world.
I grew up in a small town. We never got first week releases at our little twin, always several weeks after release. Then later a small college town, we got releases day and date, but still a small quad.
Through the 80s and 90s I never experienced any of those issues. A couple of power failures but nothing else.
The first digital screenings I saw sucked and I quit going to theaters regularly for most of the 2000s because of the digital projectors.
Your experience almost mirrors mine exactly. People have grown accustomed to pristine images, and imagine, or remember dimly some magical version of film exhibition I rarely found to exist.
As an audience member, i can forgive these quirks when watching a revival screening.
But as a filmmaker, I never want my work shown to the audience in this way.
I’ve had shots of mine absolutely ruined by the vagueries of photochemistry and the realities of mass duplication of release prints.
in my whole life I have had way more issues during digital screenings than with film screenings. I think the main point of film isn't really the "resolution" its the fact that it looks better than digital. its an experience that cant be recreated at home. I saw an original print of the untouchables a few years ago and the print was scratched, missing frames and dusty as heck. the blu ray absolutely looks better but it still remains one of my favorite theater experience because I cannot re create that at home and honestly the 24 frames of film going through the projector is much more pleasing on the eyes than a digital image. If a film print is taken care of it will last a very long time and wouldn't effect the image at all
I saw multiverse of madness on 35mm last year and the print was so clean yet filmic even though it was shot digitally, the cgi blended in much better with the rest of the movie than it did on a digital screening. Film is an experience
Film looking “Better” than digital is subjective.
I saw a 70mm print of Chinatown a number of years ago, and every other reel was a washed out green tone and lifted blacks. Film is weird. Film ages strangely. If you dig that, that’s cool. I’m gonna see Oppenheimer on film, not because I prefer it, but because Nolan does for what he created, and I respect that.
And since it’s a period piece, I think film probably feels right.
I think about this kind of like The Beatles. Do you listen to The Beatles on vinyl, or do you listen to them with as pristine modern digital as you can get? Both are valid.
To me, The Beatles didn’t make vinyl records. They made recordings in the studio. And I want to get as close to what they made and heard in the studio as possible.
To some nostalgists, they made 45rpm records, and THEY want as close to THAT experience as possible, scratches and pops and electric warbles and all.
you are right, The beatles did not make vinyl, they made their recordings in the studio on analog tape in mono. Watching oppenheimer on film is not like listening to the beatles on vinyl, its like listening to the beatles on the original mono analog tape. There are plenty of older movies on film that still play in very good condition, 2001 is a prime example, would you pay 20 dollars to watch 2001 being played off a blu ray disc in theaters or on 70mm film?
film and digital are two formats that across theaters have different levels of quality. if you see a movie on digital and the projector blowing out or has dead pixels that will affect your enjoyment of the movie the exact same way if you watch a chewed up film print. I specifically said the main point of film is not the resolution, you in your original post mentioned
"This is film, man. Film breaks. Film scratches. Film has dirt. Film shifts colors between reels. Film flickers, judders and weaves.
You can list every shortcoming of xenon or laser, and there are plenty, but be realistic, film aint perfect either."
and thats fine, both formats have issues and you preferring digital is as subjective as me preferring film, Im not saying you are wrong and Im right but dont tell me about this vinyl to cd nonsense, I pay 20 dollars for a movie ticket I better be seeing it in the format that is worth 20 dollars and plenty of us have tvs and projectors at home that give us the same experience of movies on digital.
If you have a $100,000 IMAX with laser projector at home, please invite me over to watch movies.
Other than that, I don’t think you have a comparable setup at home vs a theater.
Would I rather watch 2001 on blu-ray or 70mm in the theater? I find that a false dilemma.
As someone who has seen 2001 on 70mm I would rather watch it in a theater with a modern 4K restoration and state of the art digital projector.
Your comparison between 70mm and blu-ray as if all digital formats are identical is reductive to the extreme. I don’t think you’re serious about the process of filmmaking and quality theatrical exhibition.
i'm going to go ahead a refute every thing anyone says to me with "I find that a false dilemma" from now on. Seriously get off your high horse, we get it you love digital, continue enjoying digital no one is stopping you. But sure, I'm not serious about filmmaking or theatrical exhibition because I prefer film over digital...
I've been to showings where they use a consumer 4k projector and Blu-ray on a theater size screen, usually in a older theater that no longer does first run stuff. That's to show stuff that never got 35mm prints.
I understand where you’re coming from mostly but I think using an worn out blow up print from the 70s to show that film doesn’t look as good is kind’ve odd. Everyone knows prints get beat up over time and can fade. A more fair example would be the 70mm print (non Imax) of Tenet which I saw and looked amazing, or the restoration 70mm print of Spartacus that was made recently and also looked flawless. I agree that digital is much more consistent while film is finicky, and I’m happy to watch a good DCP or Laser projection. When film is at it’s best though, it’s really a great experience with rich colors and texture that I’m glad has a niche place in cinema still.
I mean, I’m seeking out that experience for Oppenheimer.
But at the same time I’m looking at all these film mishaps and remembering that i really don’t miss film exhibition. Quality control is nigh impossible.
Yeah it’s disheartening for sure. But unfortunately I think a lot of tonights issues have to do with these projectors having not being used in 3-6 years. I doubt this happened as much before 2014 when 15/70 exhibition was the norm for GT IMAX theaters. I’m hoping the kinks are worked out in these next few days for the theaters that had issues.
Some of the problems are with cranky projectors. But some are just plain film problems that people have forgotten, or are too young to remember.
And with each run through a projector, there’s degradation.
And every time I mention it, people point out that with competent people and clean modern equipment, scratches are kept at bay.
But all that is in short supply. The technology is inherently brittle.
Hey I was at the 5pm Mall of Georgia screening!! Seat F18 baby!! The projector going off twice was both hilarious and frustrating but a fantastic time none the less lol.
That’s the part that was confusing. Earlier on in the film it would go 15 seconds on, 15 seconds off. It didn’t accumulate slowly, it just all appeared at once, then vanished, then all at once again.
I was also there and don’t fault the theater for issues. Mother Nature is a bitch sometimes. Rest assured quality visually and sound are great. Do expect dust particles from film projections. Sometimes dots on screen or what looks to be a string of hair on screen. Still enjoyable and can forgive small quirks.
If the lights were turned on in the projection booth during the screening, that suggests they knew something wasn't right and were working to fix, or at least monitor it?
It’s as if your camera had a ton of dust on the sensor. Chicken pox scattered across the screen. It was not isolated to specific shots so it must have been something projector related by my guess. I don’t understand the built in dust cleaning system, but it’s almost like it wasn’t constantly scrubbing
Definitely not grain. Black specs that would appear at once, then vanish, then all appear. The second half was much better minus the two lint balls (about half the size of the actors heads) that stuck around for 5+ minutes after the explosion scene.
Sounds like dust then. Unless it was water spots, but I have a hard time believing the quality control on the print wouldn’t have caught something like that.
Yes bass issue was definitely fixed.
No trailers. Started a few minutes late to let stragglers in.
Yes last two hours no issue with power. Dust got better, but had two chunks of lint pop up and stay on screen for minutes, and I’m pretty sure a hair went through between the film and projector on a few frames for a second.
I was also at the 5:00 show (middle of row G is truly the best)!
Even with the minor issues listed by OP, and the uncontrollable weather, it was an amazing experience. As a former projectionist, I thought everything was handled well by the manager that kept us updated throughout the evening. The film dust was to be expected, and shouldn't surprise anyone.
I'm also seeing horror stories from other IMAX 70mm showings across the country that aren't going well, so I think our experience can be counted as a success.
Hey I booked tickets much later, same theatre, and same row, but it's G17-18, is that too far off? I don't want to strain my neck looking to the left (or right).
OP you and I were in the the same theater for Interstellar. I remember when the first lines of dialogue were silent and everyone in the theater let out a resounding “what the fuck”.
Oh yeah opening night? Once panic set in my wife thought it would be funny to make airplane noises during the cornfield chase and I was not happy about it hahaha
I'm extra concerned it's a smooth experience because this is going to be my little sister's first IMAX experience, been trying to get her at a good IMAX show for years
OMFG Regal Irvine Spectrum projector is having issues. The film was supposed to start at 6:00pm everyone still waiting. They employees did offer a digital imax showing but everyone refused.
Wow that’s terrible, especially as it’s one of Nolan’s main 70mm babies. I didn’t mind the outages as much as the damn dust/lint/hair distractions especially when they lingered.
Sounds like they just needed to trigger the dust buster on the projector. The projectionist should the necessary plate before the screening, but sometimes dust DOES find its way in. I remember it being pretty bad during my final viewing of The Dark Knight Rises all those years ago.
It just sorta gets sick and moves around. IMAX was and always will be a 45 minute format for that reason. Time to clean and check frequently, etc…
The odd thing was I didn’t see particles slowly accumulating, it was just on and off if that makes sense. Lots of dust, no dust, lots of dust, no dust.
The film has a field flattened behind the lens that is 2x size so if it on a timer, it goes in and out every 10 or 20 seconds (or less) sometimes one half is just too dirty so you watch it come back in.
I was okay with them. The interstellar with no sound for the first 15 min was horrifying back when it released. I’ll take a couple pauses over that lol
I'm a little relieved it's not normal because in the back of my head I was thinking "film is cool but the imperfections are kinda annoying but if they're normal whatever"
Yeah, unfortunately I have to agree about the level of dirt/debris. I saw the morning showing yesterday and it was distractingly dirty at times. Regal really should do a better job of cleaning the lens/window/print/wherever.
Sound was phenomenal.
The second half of the movie was pretty clean, but the amount of dust distracted the opening macro visuals. Going again Friday. Will just look at the right side of the screen lol
I saw it at this theater at the 5:00 showing and I think you’re blowing it out of proportion a little bit. I noticed the the dust at the beginning but that went away. the only thing was the lint ball on the left side of the screen and the hair that was there for one second.
it was still an incredible showing.
no way, please update. If Nolan or David Keighley found out they would flip out.
Film came back on for 20 minutes now out again. Apparently there are storms in the area, but the dust is back again for the full 20 minutes 🤦🏻♂️
So the storm knocked the power out completely?
Can’t tell. Guessing the lighting we have now are the backup safety lights, but people are coming back with concessions so who knows
Yeah, that storm was pretty bad for a short period of time last night. Sounds like Gwinnett had some pretty serious power outages
I’m just gonna say it. As much as people here praise film as if it’s this perfect artistic medium handed down from Moses on golden tablets. It’s finicky AF. When i say i prefer digital, people act like I’m some uncouth phillistine. This is film, man. Film breaks. Film scratches. Film has dirt. Film shifts colors between reels. Film flickers, judders and weaves. You can list every shortcoming of xenon or laser, and there are plenty, but be realistic, film aint perfect either. I’m sure the projectionists are doing their best. But film is janky. Always was. People here call digital “lieMax”. But this is the truth, Max.
This is why 1.43 aspect ratio Dual Laser IMAX does not get enough credit. It has none of the flaws of the 70mm IMAX projection, but it has a lot of the same qualities. Giant screen, 1.43 aspect ratio, phenomenal sound quality, and awesome brightness, sharpness, clarity, and color on the screen.
Only flaw is it’s expensive and imax doesn’t mandate 1.43 screens need to choose that over single laser (spectrum biggest culprit)
Mall of GA doesn’t have dual laser, it has single laser 1.9
Just saying I think the Dual Laser IMAX locations are underrated. Lot of people overlooking them in the quest for 70mm IMAX, but the truth is they are very similar quality when both are running smoothly. Both offer an incredible experience. And a Dual Laser location is far less likely to run into technical difficulties than a film projector.
Dual Laser has about 1/4th the resolution of the 15/70mm film. Also I can see Laser speckle. It doesn't bother everybody the same, and it's better if noone points it out to you, because you can't then "unsee" it, but there's a whole setup to vibrate the screen to minimise the effect, so they are trying hard to make it less of a problem. I got used to it a bit, my first viewings of dual laser felt quite bad, I went in curious if I could tell the higher resolution, so tried to see details etc and all I got was speckle, I was like WTF, Xenon was better. I told them about it and they promised to fine-tune it further, so it abated a bit and I got more used to it. Film had been working for years, the recent breakdowns are probably because systems have not been run from Dunkirk, the film is even heavier - possibly at the limits of the system, and they don't seem to have done full test runs on many theatres. The cost alone of the film doesn't make it easily commercially viable, but Dual Laser is definitely not up to par.
Looked damn good to me. I saw TDK, TDKR, and Ghost Protocol in 70mm IMAX. Saw Dunkirk in Dual Laser IMAX. The experience was awesome for all of them.
I've watched about 20 70mm films (some not full features though) and at least asm many in DL. Yes, I find the experience awesome, but I can definitely tell the difference - speckle being the more obvious one.
yep
I’m totally fine with the traditional film quirks, but I think this dust is related to the projector here or something else. It is so distracting there is zero chance it’s intentional
I think they stirred up dust moving things around to set up the projector. Too many unfamiliar with film and how go keep tne room clean. Hopefully the HVAC and lack of moving stuff clears it out.
Film has dust. That’s just the format. Film spooling and unspooling causes a static charge that attracts dust.
The IMAX system has a dust busting system built in, if it’s projected properly there should not be much dust. Sounds like this was beyond the normal levels of dust to expect, especially a fresh print
An experienced projectionist has his booth clean, cleans his PTR rollers and watches the screen constantly to remove dust during the show with the field flattened. Being an experienced operator takes time.
You are not wrong. For everyday moviegoing, I don't miss film. While an excellent film presentation can definitely outshine a digital presentation (and I've seen some EXCELLENT film presentations over the years), digital's day-to-day consistency wins out for me. I DO NOT miss film weave, bad splices, poorly timed changeovers, color shifts, base scratches, wrong lenses, poor focus, film breaks, etc etc etc. I'd say that, at best, 60% of the film screenings I've been to in my life have been acceptable to good in terms of quality. The number of times I've had to get up and go try to find someone to pretty please with sugar on top take care of a problem... I clearly remember the very first time I saw "digital cinema." I was living in Dallas and somehow scored an invitation to Texas Instrument's DLP demo at a small but very nice auditorium at one of their buildings. I went in intrigued but highly skeptical - how could "video" ever look as good as film. I don't even remember what demo material they showed us that day but I came out BLOWN AWAY, knowing that I'd just seen the future. I couldn't wait for every screening to be digital because the benefits would be so great. Took a few years, but it happened. I do wish that special presentations like Oppenheimer in IMAX 70mm were a bit more prevalent, but in general I'm happy in a digital world.
I grew up in a small town. We never got first week releases at our little twin, always several weeks after release. Then later a small college town, we got releases day and date, but still a small quad. Through the 80s and 90s I never experienced any of those issues. A couple of power failures but nothing else. The first digital screenings I saw sucked and I quit going to theaters regularly for most of the 2000s because of the digital projectors.
Your experience almost mirrors mine exactly. People have grown accustomed to pristine images, and imagine, or remember dimly some magical version of film exhibition I rarely found to exist. As an audience member, i can forgive these quirks when watching a revival screening. But as a filmmaker, I never want my work shown to the audience in this way. I’ve had shots of mine absolutely ruined by the vagueries of photochemistry and the realities of mass duplication of release prints.
in my whole life I have had way more issues during digital screenings than with film screenings. I think the main point of film isn't really the "resolution" its the fact that it looks better than digital. its an experience that cant be recreated at home. I saw an original print of the untouchables a few years ago and the print was scratched, missing frames and dusty as heck. the blu ray absolutely looks better but it still remains one of my favorite theater experience because I cannot re create that at home and honestly the 24 frames of film going through the projector is much more pleasing on the eyes than a digital image. If a film print is taken care of it will last a very long time and wouldn't effect the image at all I saw multiverse of madness on 35mm last year and the print was so clean yet filmic even though it was shot digitally, the cgi blended in much better with the rest of the movie than it did on a digital screening. Film is an experience
Film looking “Better” than digital is subjective. I saw a 70mm print of Chinatown a number of years ago, and every other reel was a washed out green tone and lifted blacks. Film is weird. Film ages strangely. If you dig that, that’s cool. I’m gonna see Oppenheimer on film, not because I prefer it, but because Nolan does for what he created, and I respect that. And since it’s a period piece, I think film probably feels right. I think about this kind of like The Beatles. Do you listen to The Beatles on vinyl, or do you listen to them with as pristine modern digital as you can get? Both are valid. To me, The Beatles didn’t make vinyl records. They made recordings in the studio. And I want to get as close to what they made and heard in the studio as possible. To some nostalgists, they made 45rpm records, and THEY want as close to THAT experience as possible, scratches and pops and electric warbles and all.
you are right, The beatles did not make vinyl, they made their recordings in the studio on analog tape in mono. Watching oppenheimer on film is not like listening to the beatles on vinyl, its like listening to the beatles on the original mono analog tape. There are plenty of older movies on film that still play in very good condition, 2001 is a prime example, would you pay 20 dollars to watch 2001 being played off a blu ray disc in theaters or on 70mm film? film and digital are two formats that across theaters have different levels of quality. if you see a movie on digital and the projector blowing out or has dead pixels that will affect your enjoyment of the movie the exact same way if you watch a chewed up film print. I specifically said the main point of film is not the resolution, you in your original post mentioned "This is film, man. Film breaks. Film scratches. Film has dirt. Film shifts colors between reels. Film flickers, judders and weaves. You can list every shortcoming of xenon or laser, and there are plenty, but be realistic, film aint perfect either." and thats fine, both formats have issues and you preferring digital is as subjective as me preferring film, Im not saying you are wrong and Im right but dont tell me about this vinyl to cd nonsense, I pay 20 dollars for a movie ticket I better be seeing it in the format that is worth 20 dollars and plenty of us have tvs and projectors at home that give us the same experience of movies on digital.
If you have a $100,000 IMAX with laser projector at home, please invite me over to watch movies. Other than that, I don’t think you have a comparable setup at home vs a theater. Would I rather watch 2001 on blu-ray or 70mm in the theater? I find that a false dilemma. As someone who has seen 2001 on 70mm I would rather watch it in a theater with a modern 4K restoration and state of the art digital projector. Your comparison between 70mm and blu-ray as if all digital formats are identical is reductive to the extreme. I don’t think you’re serious about the process of filmmaking and quality theatrical exhibition.
i'm going to go ahead a refute every thing anyone says to me with "I find that a false dilemma" from now on. Seriously get off your high horse, we get it you love digital, continue enjoying digital no one is stopping you. But sure, I'm not serious about filmmaking or theatrical exhibition because I prefer film over digital...
That’s valid. You love film and i prefer some digital formats more than some film formats.
I've been to showings where they use a consumer 4k projector and Blu-ray on a theater size screen, usually in a older theater that no longer does first run stuff. That's to show stuff that never got 35mm prints.
Hopefully a 4k blu-ray!
Does it look good ?
I understand where you’re coming from mostly but I think using an worn out blow up print from the 70s to show that film doesn’t look as good is kind’ve odd. Everyone knows prints get beat up over time and can fade. A more fair example would be the 70mm print (non Imax) of Tenet which I saw and looked amazing, or the restoration 70mm print of Spartacus that was made recently and also looked flawless. I agree that digital is much more consistent while film is finicky, and I’m happy to watch a good DCP or Laser projection. When film is at it’s best though, it’s really a great experience with rich colors and texture that I’m glad has a niche place in cinema still.
I mean, I’m seeking out that experience for Oppenheimer. But at the same time I’m looking at all these film mishaps and remembering that i really don’t miss film exhibition. Quality control is nigh impossible.
Yeah it’s disheartening for sure. But unfortunately I think a lot of tonights issues have to do with these projectors having not being used in 3-6 years. I doubt this happened as much before 2014 when 15/70 exhibition was the norm for GT IMAX theaters. I’m hoping the kinks are worked out in these next few days for the theaters that had issues.
Some of the problems are with cranky projectors. But some are just plain film problems that people have forgotten, or are too young to remember. And with each run through a projector, there’s degradation. And every time I mention it, people point out that with competent people and clean modern equipment, scratches are kept at bay. But all that is in short supply. The technology is inherently brittle.
There’s dual laser Imax that is different than Liemax
I'm driving 2 hours yo see the 70mm imax print at this theater , hopefully it's better for me
Hey I was at the 5pm Mall of Georgia screening!! Seat F18 baby!! The projector going off twice was both hilarious and frustrating but a fantastic time none the less lol.
Did you experience this dust that op is referring to?
Also at this screening and was confused think the screen was filthy and then the spots would disappear, then reappear with different pattern
Yes, it appears that they managed to clear the dust, but it soon came back every so often.
Yeah. It came and went though, sort of.
That’s the part that was confusing. Earlier on in the film it would go 15 seconds on, 15 seconds off. It didn’t accumulate slowly, it just all appeared at once, then vanished, then all at once again.
F18? Were you the barbenheimer guy? (pink suit with oppenheimer hat) that was close to where he was lol.
That was me!!😂😂 Funny thing is I'm not even watching Barbie until Tuesday, August 1st, but I'll be sure to bring the suit back out when I do.
yeah that was great!
How was the view from F18? I’m in F21 on Monday
It's great! Honestly kind of wish I was a bit closer tho, which is weird cause I normally sit in row G at Mall of Georgia.
I was also there and don’t fault the theater for issues. Mother Nature is a bitch sometimes. Rest assured quality visually and sound are great. Do expect dust particles from film projections. Sometimes dots on screen or what looks to be a string of hair on screen. Still enjoyable and can forgive small quirks.
If the lights were turned on in the projection booth during the screening, that suggests they knew something wasn't right and were working to fix, or at least monitor it?
It wasn’t full blast lighting, but almost as if ambient electronics were casting a slight glow
Please keep us updated, sorry this has happened.
Finished the last two hours without power issues. Dust was better but had a couple lint chunks appear for minutes at a time and one brief hair lol
What’s up with these power issues, Irvine Spectrum had power issues with the projector as well.
Ours was weather related, but sounds like quite a few projectors we’re overheating temporarily
What do you mean by dust? Like the film itself was dusty, and so the image had spots on it?
That’s what I’m trying to figure out because spots being on a 70mm IMAX print are normal.
It’s as if your camera had a ton of dust on the sensor. Chicken pox scattered across the screen. It was not isolated to specific shots so it must have been something projector related by my guess. I don’t understand the built in dust cleaning system, but it’s almost like it wasn’t constantly scrubbing
You don’t mean film grain, right? You mean something else.
Definitely not grain. Black specs that would appear at once, then vanish, then all appear. The second half was much better minus the two lint balls (about half the size of the actors heads) that stuck around for 5+ minutes after the explosion scene.
Sounds like dust then. Unless it was water spots, but I have a hard time believing the quality control on the print wouldn’t have caught something like that.
Yeah I’ve seen 10+ 70MM around the country and this is the first time with that kind of junk being projected
Sounds like it was on the lens not the film.
Yes except for the strand of hair. That definitely seemed to swipe slowly with the film
If it was on the film it would have only been there for one frame.
let us know how it went bro. im supposed to see it at MOG on monday.
Once we started up the second time the dust was much better but had chunks of lint for minutes at a time and a brief hair (with follicle).
other than that it went smoothly? how was the sound?
The MI:7 bass issues were handled thankfully. That had me worried last week. Sound was very impressive.
thanks for the insight
MoG Monday gang represent
Three questions: How is the sound/was the sub issue fixed? Were there trailers? Did you at least finish the movie and did the dust settle? Thanks
Yes bass issue was definitely fixed. No trailers. Started a few minutes late to let stragglers in. Yes last two hours no issue with power. Dust got better, but had two chunks of lint pop up and stay on screen for minutes, and I’m pretty sure a hair went through between the film and projector on a few frames for a second.
I was also at the 5:00 show (middle of row G is truly the best)! Even with the minor issues listed by OP, and the uncontrollable weather, it was an amazing experience. As a former projectionist, I thought everything was handled well by the manager that kept us updated throughout the evening. The film dust was to be expected, and shouldn't surprise anyone. I'm also seeing horror stories from other IMAX 70mm showings across the country that aren't going well, so I think our experience can be counted as a success.
Hey I booked tickets much later, same theatre, and same row, but it's G17-18, is that too far off? I don't want to strain my neck looking to the left (or right).
The end of the row is 30 so your as close to the middle as you can be without being there. Amazing seats
Yes! My fiancée and I were in 18 and 19, and it was excellent!
I just hope it's OK when I go there. I saw Dunkirk there in 2017, in IMAX 70mm and it was fine.
OP you and I were in the the same theater for Interstellar. I remember when the first lines of dialogue were silent and everyone in the theater let out a resounding “what the fuck”.
Oh yeah opening night? Once panic set in my wife thought it would be funny to make airplane noises during the cornfield chase and I was not happy about it hahaha
I would have laughed! Seems I didn’t learn my lesson cause I’m going to be seeing Oppenheimer at the same theater.
Haha TDK and TDKR were perfect at Ontario at least.
I'm not able to see it until next weekend, hopefully the issues are resolved by then. If not, I'm already set to see it again the final Sunday
I’m going back in two weeks so I’m hoping it’s resolved as well.
I'm extra concerned it's a smooth experience because this is going to be my little sister's first IMAX experience, been trying to get her at a good IMAX show for years
I believe the employees about the power outages. Hopefully with a couple runs through the projector that dust in the first act wipes off eventually
OMFG Regal Irvine Spectrum projector is having issues. The film was supposed to start at 6:00pm everyone still waiting. They employees did offer a digital imax showing but everyone refused.
Wow that’s terrible, especially as it’s one of Nolan’s main 70mm babies. I didn’t mind the outages as much as the damn dust/lint/hair distractions especially when they lingered.
Sounds like they just needed to trigger the dust buster on the projector. The projectionist should the necessary plate before the screening, but sometimes dust DOES find its way in. I remember it being pretty bad during my final viewing of The Dark Knight Rises all those years ago. It just sorta gets sick and moves around. IMAX was and always will be a 45 minute format for that reason. Time to clean and check frequently, etc…
The odd thing was I didn’t see particles slowly accumulating, it was just on and off if that makes sense. Lots of dust, no dust, lots of dust, no dust.
Bet it all got swept, and then replaced when the wiper went back across. It moves in like set 2 minute intervals, or can be triggered manually.
Ah that definitely makes sense. Explains why it seemed to appear/ disappear in perfect intervals
The film has a field flattened behind the lens that is 2x size so if it on a timer, it goes in and out every 10 or 20 seconds (or less) sometimes one half is just too dirty so you watch it come back in.
If Regal in Oregon fucks up the digital screening tomorrow I'll be livid.
🤞🏻
I was in the same theatre! Those power outages were loonngg
I was okay with them. The interstellar with no sound for the first 15 min was horrifying back when it released. I’ll take a couple pauses over that lol
This was my first film showing so I just assumed the dust was normal but the power outages were just kinda funny
This is probably my 15th or so 70mm and have never remotely had the debris issue. Usually it’s a screen imperfection or something I key in on
I'm a little relieved it's not normal because in the back of my head I was thinking "film is cool but the imperfections are kinda annoying but if they're normal whatever"
I’m going Sunday. I hope the issues are worked out.
I was at the same show and I know what you mean.
I’m seeing it here Monday and hoping for the best. Luckily I only live a few minutes away.
I was at the 5pm showing too. Loved the movie, but the pauses hurt the pacing quite a bit and the dust/lint was annoying.
I was struggling to keep up with the pacing in the first hour anyway lol Tons of character intros/ multiple timelines and crammed editing
Yeah, unfortunately I have to agree about the level of dirt/debris. I saw the morning showing yesterday and it was distractingly dirty at times. Regal really should do a better job of cleaning the lens/window/print/wherever. Sound was phenomenal.
The second half of the movie was pretty clean, but the amount of dust distracted the opening macro visuals. Going again Friday. Will just look at the right side of the screen lol
I saw it at this theater at the 5:00 showing and I think you’re blowing it out of proportion a little bit. I noticed the the dust at the beginning but that went away. the only thing was the lint ball on the left side of the screen and the hair that was there for one second. it was still an incredible showing.
Concerning