Cineplex Cinemas Yonge-Dundas

10 Dundas Street East,
Toronto, ON M5B 2G9

Unfavorite 4 people favorited this theater

Showing 51 - 75 of 90 comments

igoudge
igoudge on September 30, 2010 at 6:29 pm

Its a case that it will stay the same (ETX), again if they retrofit any of the theatres it will be 6, 9 or 10 on the main floor or one of the one is the centre lobby on the top, but it will be tricky again since from my understanding for 70 mm the auditorium needs to meet certain specifications for seating as well for screen side and sound which is why it is easier to start from scratch such as the ones Famous has made for Colliseum, Scotiabank and Collosus. Since AMC are already existing houses and have limted room makes more sense to convert to etx rather than imax.

Jon Lidolt
Jon Lidolt on September 30, 2010 at 6:25 pm

I wonder if the AMC’s ETX auditorium will be the one they retrofit for IMAX? If it is the same one, I certainly hope they eliminate the one row of seats in the middle of the auditorium where you can’t see over people’s heads. The two rows of seats are on the same level. So much for stadium seating throughout the entire complex. It’s got to be very annoying when paying a premium price for ETX and you can’t see the bottom half of the screen if you get stuck sitting in that row.

As an aside… the Scotiabank’s Imax auditorium screens 35 mm films that are blownup to large format 70mm stock. I suspect that all Imax theatres screening Hollywood features will soon be converted to digital projection technology. The cost of 70mm film prints (especially for 3-D since it requires two prints, one for the left and one for the right eye) is incredibly expensive.

igoudge
igoudge on September 30, 2010 at 1:12 pm

It is not going to be a True Imax screen, just a retrofitted auditorium akin to the ETX to better compete with the Imax screenings taking place with Cineplex Entertainment, mainly the Parascotia. Whenever a new Imax auditorium is built in the city it is customarily built when the theatre is built or from scratch as part of an expansion (Colliseum 13 built further into the parking lot to built it to spec). The AMC doesn’t have the room. Not the first time I heard this rumor. Also heard someone at the Queensway saying their new Ultra AUX system was IMAX which it isn’t just higher resolution presentation.

qwo06
qwo06 on September 30, 2010 at 11:21 am

This AMC is getting an Imax. Don’t know how the future hold for Scotiabank Theatre.

scruffywilber
scruffywilber on February 11, 2010 at 7:03 am

I think this will be considered a classic one day.
I like the Auditorium sizes much better than the shoe boxes around the corner at the “Market Square Rainbow Cinema”

http://i50.tinypic.com/rs4j76.jpg

John Fink
John Fink on September 10, 2009 at 9:39 am

Interestingly enough TFF this year is using Theater #7. I might try to catch Cleanflicks (a documentary about the mormons editing Hollywood films to make them more family friendly) in ETX. Sweet.

Jon Lidolt
Jon Lidolt on September 10, 2009 at 8:13 am

The ETX auditorium at the AMC has nothing whatsoever to do with the IMAX corporation. IMAX has developed a system that uses two 2K projectors running simultaneously to beam a brighter image onto an enlarged screen. They have also developed audio technology to provide the same standard of sound reproduction that you hear in a film-based 70mm IMAX theatre.

ETX on the other hand is projected from one Sony 4K machine – the same projectors that AMC has installed in their entire 24 screen complex. AMC has also worked on improving the sound reproduction, providing a more immersive experience. That being said, there are more similarities than differences between the two. And at least ETX is not pretending to be a genuine “IMAX experience.”

john230
john230 on September 9, 2009 at 11:06 pm

The ETX system is plain bad. This joint venture between IMAX and AMC is terrible. Not that it looks bad… but I saw Star Trek in #6’s large screen, and sneaked a peak at #7’s Star Trek. Looks exactly the same!

Watching digital cinema on 4K projectors is as good as it gets, IMAX /ETX don’t have anything better. There aren’t any 8K projectors… well not yet anyways. Not worth an extra 3 or 4 dollars or whatever it is.

At least they called it ETX (Enhanced Theatre Experience) in Canada. In the states they apparently just label these theatres IMAX, like every other IMAX theatre. Big backlash has happened. Check out the “Mini-IMAX” section under IMAX on Wikipedia.

igoudge
igoudge on June 26, 2009 at 1:10 pm

Has anyone been able to see the new ETX system working as of yet? I have been wanting to see a screening with it for the past month and a half and unfortunately schedule hasnt worked and had already seen star trek by that point. But it is defintitely not the old school definition of Classic Movie Houses but in the modern contempoary definition in comparison to the Silvercities and the Parascotia, I would consider it to be a palace. I think it might even be better than the Varsity in some cases, both in presentation for projection and set up.

kamikaze4511
kamikaze4511 on May 29, 2009 at 12:28 am

123 seats – #1,4,5,8,11
134 seats – 14,15,22
155 seats – 16,17,18,19,20,21
223 seats – 23,24
247 seats – 9,10
283 seats – 2,3,12,13
432 seats – #6
450 seats – #7 (minus the first row of seats)
Total looks like 4901 seats give or take a few seats in each auditorium. Sorry but don’t know the exact screen sizes. Seat count will dictate screen size.

Jason Whyte
Jason Whyte on May 16, 2009 at 12:41 pm

Do you have a seat count/screen size/pictures for the auditoriums?

kamikaze4511
kamikaze4511 on May 9, 2009 at 9:59 pm

The 35mm Projectors are interchangeable with the Sony SXRD 4k’s.

kamikaze4511
kamikaze4511 on May 9, 2009 at 9:07 pm

Auditorium #7 now has the ETX (Enhanced Theatre Experience) set up with a 4 storey (floor to ceiling) curved screen and upgraded 11.1 Surround Stereo system. Auditorium revamped and now showing Star Trek (May 8, 2009).

Auditorium #9,12,23,24 have 2k Real-D capabilities. First 3D feature will be Disney/Pixar ‘Up’ on May 29, 2009.

Just to confirm, we have just under 5000 seats in the complex. A whole row of seats was removed in #7 for the big screen.

Auditorium #3,4,5,7 have 35mm Strong Projectors since the ‘08 TIFF.

telliott
telliott on September 16, 2008 at 8:15 am

Theatres of this size and on upper floors all have fire exits from each cinema that take you right down to the street. No need to go through the lobby and down the main escalators or elevators.

mik
mik on September 16, 2008 at 7:33 am

Anybody else think the theatre is a firetrap? During the festival, the two down escalators from the floor with theatres 1 to 10 was backed up just with people exiting one or two movies. If everybody had to get out at once, they’d be totally inadequate. It would take half-an-hour to get the numbers the theatre will hold out, even if there was no panic. The two elevators are tiny and just as slow as the escalators. Whoever decided to put this theatre on the fourth level and up was an idiot. Whoever approved the exit system was a big idiot. Of course, many cinema treasures were firetraps, too — maybe they’re just keeping up the tradition?

John Fink
John Fink on September 14, 2008 at 8:01 pm

I just got back TIFF so I have a few notes on the complex: the box office for the theater is on the first floor, with an automated box office at the entrance of the theater, which shares the forth floor of the Toronto Life Center with Jack Astors Bar & Grill and Milestones. Screens 1-10 are on the forth floor of the complex, with Screens 11-24 (I think) on the sixth floor. The festival took over screens 1-10 so I can only comment on those, with the larger theaters you entered the theater on at the mid-point, with stadium seating both upwards and downwards. The smaller theaters had a few rows of sloped floor seating with stadium seating upwards.

The festival was using 1-10, and instead of using the large lobby inside for ticket holder lines, they created a single line out front in Young Dundas Square wrapping around the block, so much so at one point it touched Ryerson University, a long block away. The theaters are used in the morning by Ryerson University as classrooms, which explains why the festival didn’t have morning shows at AMC (they did at Scotiabank, where they took four theaters this year). I suppose getting back to that line issue TIFF could have used some of the unused space in the Toronto Life Center to create a better system. The mall is mostly filled though, with a basement floor connected to the PATH (therefore I could walk from my hotel to the theater, only having to go outside to wait in the ticket holders line). They still share films with Scotiabank with that theater having an IMAX screen that gives them a bit of an advantage over getting some hotter films (ie: Dark Knight). AMC shows move-overs from Scotiabank, art films that aren’t getting booked at the Cumberland, Varsity or Carlton for some reason, and some new studio films. Food options between the food court and the two restaurants that share the forth floor aren’t in short supply, since unlike Scotiabank this theater doesn’t have its own food court.

Boczki
Boczki on May 28, 2008 at 3:23 pm

That’s all I’m saying Jon, to each his own. Lets give film a chance. Film may have never been appropriate for multiplexes but that doesn’t mean it should go away. I always thought film seemed out of place in a multiplex because it is too graceful of a format and was never intended to be draped across rollers back and forth or laid on it’s side. I still feel like a single projector with a platter looks like an amputee without a projector 2. D-cinema suits the multiplex era much better both for practicality and that sterile, robotic terminal feel that defines most multiplexes.

Jon Lidolt
Jon Lidolt on May 28, 2008 at 7:01 am

To each his own.

markp
markp on May 28, 2008 at 4:08 am

I got so excited, I meant to say SAYING, sorry.

markp
markp on May 28, 2008 at 4:02 am

Someone give Boczki a cigar!!! FINALLY someone who agrees with what I’ve been sating.

Boczki
Boczki on May 28, 2008 at 12:06 am

I have read all the above posts and I have to make a comment. We can be on here all day arguing pixels, film grain, product and practicality to gain an inch for film or digital but I think there is something that has been missed. You can’t say that you wish all the old ways could be back in the same breath as you say it’s probably gone forever. I’m just not buying it. I am reading between the lines and I say it reads, “Thank God film is dead!” I know a little bit about film projection and I know a little bit about human nature too. People rarely make decisions based on logic and practicality although; it always seems to be dragged in to support an emotional issue. We all do it. I am emotional about film and I look for logical reasons it should stay. All the logic in the world can’t make film stay around. In fact the only thing that can make film stay is an emotional response from audiences. Digital is just a buzzword and audiences think its better because they don’t know what it is. What is killing film is that audiences don’t get to feel the print between their fingers and hear the gentle purr of the projector. I’ve found that when I talk to people who know nothing about film or theatres, they get really excited about film. Then again there’s not much I can say about D cinema that’s any more exiting than a Circuit City salesman can tell you about a home theatre set-up. I’ve run film and installed film projectors. I’ve run digital cinema and installed digital cinema. D cinema servers are just computers with network addresses, digital projectors are overblown computer monitors and as far as I can see nothing about that seems to be interesting to the average person. I think film is an important medium for creativity like paint on canvas. Film is not just a technology it is an art.

Jon Lidolt
Jon Lidolt on April 9, 2008 at 6:24 am

I agree that the loss of real live projectionists has been somewhat of a disaster. On the other hand, I found that many union guys couldn’t have card less either. But then, the ones who did, were worth their weight in gold. Things are just different and no matter how much I personally would prefergoing to a properly run theatre with 70mm film projected onto a huge curved screen, intermissions with curtains, overtures before the film begins, ushers to take us to our reserved seats – those days are probably gone forever. And as to shooting on film, does it really matter anymore? The original negs are immediately digitized so that color corrections, fades, dissolves, titles and special effects are done on computers. The finished product is then either converted back to film or sent to cinemas on hard drives. Then after a couple of months these same films appear on the shelves of our local video stores. I think the movie business as we knew it has basically Gone Away With the Wind.

markp
markp on April 9, 2008 at 5:54 am

OK Jon, you got me on at least one point, and when someone is right, I admit being wrong. I have been an IATSE projectionist for almost 33 years now. In all my time, working in grindhouses to multiplexes, I have always, always tried to give 150%. My father, who was IA for 55 years tought me that. The only sad thing was, that even when we started to get those ‘secret shoppers,’ and I would get scores of 96 – 100%, I was still looked at as a liability. My booth was so clean, you could eat off the floor. My projectors always looked like they came out of the crate, day one. My presentations never scratched, or dirty, even as I went from reel-to-reel, to platters. For this, I was told by the last major chain I worked for 4 years ago, that I was a dinosaur. So I guess what I’m saying is that all the good people are gone, replaced by kids and popcorn poppers who don’t know, and don’t care about presentation. (if they even know what it means) Thanks for calling me on that one.