[Review] Imax cinema - London

Imax cinema - London

Not quite a piece of hi-fi kit, but I thought I'd pass on my thoughts about the Imax at Waterloo and couldn't think of a more appropriate forum to put it in.

The location is Waterloo, which at a 10min walk from my office, makes it at least convenient. Cost was £11.50 each, which is about on par with West End cinemas, i.e. not cheap.

A few things struck me on first sitting down. Great seats, and the rows were at a high angle, meaning that you never had the person in front of you obscuring the view, even if they're 6'12".

I always thought that Imax screens wrapped around behind you given a 270 degree viewing angle, guess I was wrong. This one was basically flat and in front of you. Having said that, it was HUGE. The seats are basically based around the centre of the screen, meaning that some of the screen is below you, the rest above. The width was maybe 50m (rough guess). With scenes involving verbal exchanges between characters at either end of the screen, it was like watching a tennis match, as you simply couldn't watch both without moving your head.

Audio quality was ... OK. The good thing was that it certainly had an all enveloping and consistent sound. Still, so it should with 12,000 watts and 42 speakers. What it didn't do that well was low bass (my own system can grumble better), and sheer clarify and naturalness of sound (again, outperformed by my home kit).

Visual quality was also a mixed bag. Quality on fairly static scenes was awesome. I don't know what res they're using, but it easily outperformed anything I've previously seen.
Unforunately, didn't fair so well during panning scenes, at which point motion blur turned the image into something of a unintelligable mess, not nice at all. Not sure about the cause, but I'm guessing refresh rate of clips.

The film we watched was Matrix 2. Much better than I expected from reviews. I know that some have slagged off the plot, but I found the philosophy references interesting (there were a lot of them), and clearly the special effects were rather ... special.

Overall, recommended, even at the cost. Worth doing at least once.

 

I didn't know that Matrix Reloaded (I loved it too btw) was released in an "IMAX" version? It's possible that they used a different setup there just so you could watch a "normal" film on a HUGE screen.

When I lived in Portland, Oregon (USA) I went to the IMAX cinema there and saw some documentary about the Grand Canyon which was VERY impressive. The screen was distinctly "wrap around" allthough not more than a 180deg viewing angle (ie nothing behind you) but completely filling your field of view really giving you the feeling of "being there".

AFAIK films have to be specially made for IMAX, hence my question about Matrix 2

Michael.

 

The matrix looked like a normal film, just shown on a VERY large screen.

The reason for my comment about a wider field of vision was because the walls to either side certainly did not look like they'd move, infering that the screen in front of us, was what you'd get with an eyemax film. Still, could be completely wrong.

 

I went with friends to an IMAX type cinema in the Blue Mountains in Oz to see Titanic. My friend afterwards was sick, I guess the motion and the shear size of it and perhaps Leonardo's acting got to her.
________
Medical Marijuana Patients

 

The Verkehrshaus (Transport Museum) in Luzern (Lucerne) has one and we've seen a few things there. I've also been to the one in the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum. The particular films were made for Imax, and in one scene (a helicopter ride down a canyon) I found myself hanging on to the seat for dear life, so realistic and involving was it.

 

IMAX is probably only going to look good with film that has been shot on an appropriate format (either 65mm or 70mm). I awould also imagine that there are some special filming techiques required to make a picture look good on that kind of screen. MOst movies are now shot with both cinema and video in mind - this has a big impact on the way the film is shot in the finder.
I don't know why you would get motion blur... but what I suspect you were seeing was some kind of hi-speed camera effect (ie slow motion) that is intended for much lower resolution viewing. Probably wrong, but that's my feeling.
As for sound, cinemas of today have demonstrably inferior sound to the cinemas of 30 or 40 years ago ie to cinemas in pre-surround *and* pre dolby days. Most cinemas now use lots of cheap and rather nasty PA speakers, the old Siemens, Altec, Westrex and Vitavox systems have been stripped out and shipped to Japan

 

What a novel subject for a review thread. Looks like quite a few of us have experiences to share though.

I've been to the Waterloo iMAX too. Went to see Disney's Fantasia 2000 there when it was first released. This was certainly the most impressive out of the 2 other iMAX experiences I've had. The other 2 were a 3D presentation (with 3D specs) at Disney World Florida, and the other was at Kennedy Space Center. Fantasia 2000 was shot first and foremost with iMAX in mind and digitally etched to the iMAX sized negatives, whereas I suspect the Matrix Reloaded was a conversion from the original ordinary cinema format which may have possibly accounted for the motion blur.

Strangely enough, I had similar thoughts about the extreme low bass at the Waterloo iMAX. It didn't seem to have that roaring or room rumbling quality to it, but IMO, the sound was very clean across the whole spectrum and seemed to be balanced towards being natural and flat, rather than for action films. Isn't it strange at hi-fi shows how OTT the subwoofer settings are, and I've not been to many cinemas where the bass is as exhuberant as most home a/v set-ups seem to be balanced. I just wonder how close most people's home a/v set-ups closely resemble the sound balance you'd get as heard by the film director at their studios - I suspect many home a/v systems are balanced with a bottom end bias which may not be true and so making most commercial cinema sound systems sound wrong by comparison? I've been to the THX certified Warner Village screen in Licester Square to watch American Psycho and bass was deep, taught and natural but nothing like many home a/v set-ups I've heard - you could certainly feel your chest and innards move as he started rev-ing up the chainsaw before throwing it down the stair well.

Maybe the close proximity in which we sit to our home a/v speakers in comparison to the distances in commercial theatres might have something to do our expectations on sound balance? Dynaimc range is the other, dynaimcs in a large theatre vs the same in our more confined spaces is going to sound different I suspect too not to mention volume level matching issues for these different sizes of space.

 

Been to the waterloo one twice. Both times to see a 3D thingy. Mucho impressio!!!

Even the intro, this is what we've got, sort of thingy was good. I admit that i found MOself ducking and reaching out and such when large blobs of paint fly towards me and then floated there. And I swear that dude who fell off the ladder landed in my pop corn!!!

The actual show was a bit of everything. Sort of a 3D showcase. MOst meMOrable part being the 3D simpsons! If anyones seen the episode (I think Homer goes behind the cupboard to hide from Marges sisters than gets sucked into the 3D world!!!) it's great to see it in this way

Also went to the Honey, I shrunk the audience show at euro disney. Very amusing! Went one step further and had vibrating chairs and air/water effects. Whne the dog sneezes.... you feel it!

Comfy chairs, sensibly angled, fun for all........ just a shame about them glasses!!!

 

saw a brief demo of the imax at bradford a good few years ago very impressive,As for the filmstock used

"IMAX uses 15-perforation, 70mm film to shoot and project images of incredible sharpness. The 15/70 frame is 10 times larger than the 35mm used in regular theatres and three times larger than standard 70mm film used in classic Hollywood epics. This makes it the largest commercial film ever invented"

more details at http://www.imax.com/

it may suprise you that alot of cinemas dont have a 5.1 setup,more like prologic, left-center-right-surround. its olny fairly recently that dolby digital ,ex have started to apear.
The sound is eq'ed for a flat responce and the optimum level is set at 85db,(vol no 7 on the proccesor) and the use of a sub is optinal

 

I went to the same Fantasia 2000 showing as Henryt - quite impressive although the "old" bits from Fantasia 1 that were included looked REALLY grainy!

The 3D "Ghosts of the Abyss" film (James Cameron) was AWESOME in the Waterloo IMAX - it's the first time I've been able to properly see a 3D effect - blew me away - well impressed...

 

I also saw Matrix Reloaded at the IMAX Waterloo recently and was very impressed. If you have bad skin though, (Lawrence Fishburn, Keano etc. mere make up is not enough!)
BTW the best cinema sound I know is the Empire in Leicester Sq. Anyone else any recommendations?

liam.

 

I saw the Matrix Reloaded at the IMAX and was stunned. I really enjoyed the sound quality too, definitely the best cinema I've heard, very smooth dialog, not a bit harsh.

I since read about the IMAX film process, where they scan the film negative at something like 3000x3000 and digitally interpolate up and print on to the IMAX larger mm film negative. They've done it for Apollo 13 too if I recall.

regards,
Rob.

 

Now that would probably make me sick! Watching it in a standard cinema was dizzying (made up a word???) enough!

I've still not seen a *normal* film in the IMAX, just the 3D ones. Will need to get round to it. Are they still showing Reloaded? The LOTR Trilogy would be good too Any plans for that?

 

The bad motion blur is most likely either due to the IMAX format itself - which is displayed at a rate slower than normal film's 24 frames per second (can't remember what it is exactly - maybe 18-20fps?), which can lead to stuttering, or excessive motion blur - or the conversion process from 24fps to the lower IMAX rate. And yes, Reloaded was one of only a handful of "mainstream" films that have been IMAXified. As FluffUser said, they use a high-definition digital remastering technique to convert from regular 35mm film to IMAX format, which supposedly looks rather good, though not as good as films made originally in IMAX format.

Dunc

 

There was a movie starring Tom Hulce shot specifically for IMAX 3D several years ago called Aces (or similar) about flying aces of WW1.

It was shot on 70mm film at a speed of around 60fps!! Seems that once you approach 40+fps the human eye starts to think its real life motion.

The main problem filming it was at 60fps the film had a tendancy to snap quite often.

The result was said to be very impressive.

 

Hello

There's only one format that I can think of that is filmed and projected back at the same rate of frames Showscan that was developed by visual effects wizard Douglas Trumbull.

Showscan
http://www.showscan.com/