TCL Chinese Theatre

damn, I double checked 3 weeks ago when I reserved my seats, it showed 2.35:1…

I just saw Justice League, I notice they seem to be shown in ratio 1.89:1.

And since Justice League is 2.35:1 (on imdb), does that means they crop out the sides?! What the heck!?

@Cliffs

Citywalk: Yeah, and that’s understandable because the screen is actually 1.33:1 instead of 1.43:1, so cropping would have to occur (I sat in 3rd to last row).

Chinese: That’s what I hate too!!!

But it doesn’t really get onto the lighted up screen when the movie’s playing, if you avoid 1st & 2nd row.

I sat in 3rd row to see Blade Runner 2049 and it was at bay (but you do peek at it during the slow parts lol).

@*Haas

For True IMAX, You would have a poor viewing distance/angle at lower rows no matter what. By reservation, I mean higher rows.

@Norton

“lie-max” still means legitimate IMAX screens, just not the “big ones”, I thought it’s common sense? People do use “True IMAX” to describe “original format”.

Quote from Nolan: “I have been a longtime proponent of film – particularly the Imax film format – as a storytelling medium, the immersive quality of the image is second to none, drawing the audience into the action in the most intense way possible.”

I “actually” sat in multiple rolls and seats at AMC Citywalk and TCL Chinese to calibrate my viewing angle/distance, and I only reserve those seats. If I don’t get those seats, I don’t watch the movies.

I agree some seats are not good, but you did just dismiss the whole theater because of that.

@Hass

For True IMAX, You would have a poor viewing distance/angle at lower rolls no matter what. By reservation, I mean higher rolls.

Hi leotyx,
I’m not going to get into a discussion about what IMAX is best other than to say that “true” IMAX means nothing because any theatre licensed to show IMAX is legitimate. Maybe call it “original format” IMAX if you want!

I’d also question “as intended” by the director. Certainly he knew it would be shown in multiple formats and was OK with that, or he would have pulled a Tarantino and only released it in IMAX 70mm. When I worked in the film biz we had monitors with multiple formats outlined so all information was captured for all formats. I’m sure Nolan did that.

My point was really to compare the architecture, the relationship of audience to screen. The theatre was almost empty, I could have sat in almost any seat, and I did more once. I stand by my conclusion that the steep rake and relationship of seating to screen at the Universal Citywalk is not conducive to watching a full length movie, at least for me. The seating relationship was designed for short event films, and is spectacular for that use in my opinion, but it doesn’t work for me for a full length drama. In the end, there is no “right”, it is a matter of opinion, and I expressed mine knowing I would get some pushback!

Mark— It’s 1.90:1. When they ran INTERSTELLAR on 70mm there, they brought the curtains in to mark the sides for 1:43:1.

What was the aspect ratio for all the IMAX-filmed scenes at the Chinese? Was it the 1.43:1 as it would be for the 15 Perf 70mm prints? I saw another IMAX film at the Chinese that appeared to be 1.90:1 with room at the top and bottom of the (*%#&@ unmasked) screen to spare.

I just saw Dunkirk at the Boeing IMAX in Seattle with Laser projection and it was full 1.43 for the IMAX sourced scenes. Although the Chinese had room to spare on screen when I was there it didn’t seem to be enough to go full 1.43:1 while maintaining the width of the screen. Am I wrong?

BigJoe59, I finally saw Dunkirk at the Chinese and it was pretty amazing! Very immersive, with stunning visuals and sound design. If you like Nolan’s style I think you would like this. If you are frustrated by Nolan’s multilayered sound style, this will drive you crazy. That is rally the main criticism I’ve heard, that you “can’t hear the dialogue”. For me that was just fine. Now to the projection and sound. I decided to see it in 70mmIMAX so I could compare (here is another theatre nearby that was showing it in that format).
I’m sure I will get plenty of disagreement, but I thought the quality of the IMAX Laser and the IMAX 70mm were almost indistinguishable, and both looked incredible. The sound in both theatres was very similar too. What made the experience at the Chinese much better for me was the positioning of the screen and seating. At the 70mm theatre Universal Citywalk, unless you were near the very back you have to crane your neck to see the full screen, which I found uncomfortable. At the Chinese I sat at my favorite place, just behind the cross-aisle near the middle, and that put me square in the middle of the screen. No neck ache!

Has anyone seen the new souvenir book that TCLchinesetheatres has begun selling on their website (for $10 plus shipping)? I assume they also pitch it to all the tourists doing the tour. “TCL Chinese Theatre History of the Iconic Hollywood Landmark Souvenir Book.” A photographic look at the theatre’s 90 year history.

I wonder if the book is worth it. Or if it’s just mostly photos of the handprints and the old movie star doing the handprints

Hello From NYC-

i saw Dunkirk at the Loews Lincoln Square IMAX auditorium and the experience was !!! WOW !!!. the sound and projection was A+. i felt like I was one of the stranded soldiers on the beach. what was it like at this theater?

Happy to help! If you just look at the walls and ceiling, I’d say closer to 80%. Including the many changes tot he seating the number would be lower. Soon I will be sharing a great “tour” of what the Chinese was like on Opening Day, put together by one of the foremost Chinese Theatre historians. He has found some amazing photos!