Producer Frank Marshall Says “Don’t Spend Your Mon...


Producer Frank Marshall Says “Don’t Spend Your Money” on IMAX Digital

Posted by SexiVixxEN 166 days ago
Over the last month, we’ve written quite a few times about the new Digital IMAX theatres and how we believe that the IMAX Corporation is ripping off moviegoers by placing the IMAX brand name on subpar sized cinema screens nationwide. Actor/comedian Aziz Ansari started the public fuss, Pulitzer Prize winning movie critic Roger Ebert publicly came out against the practice, yet IMAX ignorantly ignored the critisism, and insists that audiences are too stupid to notice the difference (obviously, they didn’t phrase it that way, I’m just giving you my interpertation — read the linked article for exact quotes). Now big Hollywood players are beginning to step up and take a stance on the issue.

Producer Frank Marshall agrees that IMAX Digital is false advertising. For those who might not recognize the name, Marshall has produced over 80 films over the last 30 years, including the Indiana Jones series, Poltergeist, Gremlins, Goonies, Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, The Sixth Sense, The Bourne films, Signs, Seabicuit, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and more. basically, he’s one of the biggest producers in Hollywood. So what did Marshall say about IMAX?

Marshall tweeted: “While attending screening of BRUNO last night, I stopped into the much hyped IMAX theater at the AMC on 42nd st. NYC. I was stunned…” … “there is nothing remotely resembling an IMAX screen or presentation, don’t spend your money for this.” … “I can’t believe they can get away with this. It’s really false advertising…”

IMAX really needs to be honest with the consumers. The longer they ignore this problem, the more harmfull effect it will have on their name brand.
20
 
Interesting Story?
Yes No

Comments


  • Booker300
    I was just glad I read Aziz's article when it came out. Like most people (regardless of what IMAX says), audiences associate an IMAX film with the screen size before the digital presentation. If i would have got suckered into paying $16 to watch something on a regular sized movie screen, when i thought i was getting the 80x90 screen. I would be telling everyone i knew (actually i have already) not to go. I really think that's going to backfire on them...

    posted by Booker300 157 days ago
  • oibenwalden
    I saw Watchmen at the Greenwich Odeon in "IMAX". Sure its crystal clear but its normal size for double the rice!
    AND the seat upgrades were a complete waste of money but that's another story..
    posted by oibenwalden 159 days ago
  • aidanholla
    It its a short feature film its quite good but a film. They just show 30 mins of it in 3-D and thats it. I have 2 local Imax thearters. One in Waterloo which is a 20 min train ride or Wimbledon Odeon (which is really really really bad!. The one in Waterloo is the biggest screen in the UK and an hour and half documentary in Imaz is definitely worth a fiver. But at the Odeon in Wimbledon it is just a screen that is 1/4 of the size of the one in Waterloo and 3/4 of the films DON'T HAVE ANY SCENES IN IMAX!!! Harry Potter 5 had the last 15 mins in 3-D, although it was on the biggest screen in Britain it was still a HUGE SCAM!
    posted by aidanholla 159 days ago
  • gilbertgumphrey
    it's highway robbery, but unfortunately, they know damn well that just because some film students read critics or producers on their Twitter pages, the grand majority of audiences won't notice any difference, and probably keep on paying extra for the lame-ass IMAX screens. it's a shame their awesome reputation is being so badly tarnished.
    cheers
    KZ
    posted by gilbertgumphrey 165 days ago