Frequent commenter “Mahkno” mentioned in response to a previous post that “IMAX was [as of the last time he looked into it] moving away from the singular movie theatre venues. Their principle growth has been in partnering with large theatre chains to sell their IMAX brand, equipment, and format. It might be more likely at this point that one of the area multiplexes would adopt the IMAX format before the museum would.”
As a matter of fact, IMAX has indeed been partnering with large theater chains, including Goodrich Quality Theaters (which owns Willow Knolls 14 in Peoria) and AMC (which will soon own ShowPlace 14 in Pekin). But these multiplex IMAX theaters are not the same as standalone IMAX theaters. They’re smaller. A lot smaller. In fact, here are a couple of screen-size comparisons that I’ve shamelessly swiped from other websites (here [WARNING: lots of profanity] and here):
Click on the images to enlarge. As you can see, the retrofitted multiplex theaters don’t really hold a candle to a true IMAX giant-screen experience. But that really isn’t what has gotten everyone so upset. After all, the screen is larger than most multiplex screens, and the sound is far better.
What bothers critics — including Roger Ebert — is that IMAX is not differentiating these smaller theaters from their traditional giant-screen theaters. So Joe Blow goes to his local AMC multiplex and plunks down an extra five bucks for the IMAX experience, walks into the theater and… surprise! It’s not a giant-screen theater, but just a slightly-larger-than-average multiplex theater screen. And he feels scammed. Ebert offers some common-sense advice:
But apparently, IMAX is not going to do any such thing. This whole outrage over what many are calling “fake IMAX” broke out nearly a year ago, and so far no differentiation has been forthcoming from IMAX.
Nevertheless, given AMC’s deal with IMAX and the fact that AMC is buying Kerasotes Theatres, I wonder if the museum might have some competition for landing a local IMAX theater. Time will tell.