web
counter
 

Aziz Ansari and the Digital IMAX Scam

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (52)



800px-Aziz_Ansari_cc-760381.jpg

The biggest topic in the movie world right now is not Star Trek or any other movie. The biggest topic of discussion right now is the Digital IMAX scam. Asiz Ansari — who was awesome in “‘Scrubs” and pretty much the only reason to watch “Parks and Recreation” — prompted the discussion. Over in Twitterland, he’s kind of a big deal, although stirred up some other controversy a few weeks ago when he and some other folks decided to live-Twitter Crank High Voltage in the movie theater (a dickish thing to do, if you ask me). He wrote about his experience with the Digital IMAX scam over on his blog, and he managed to be his typically amusing self while getting his point across. Read it — it’d gold:

At the AMC theatre this was my experience at guest services:

Aziz: Yes, I’d like my $5 back. I paid $5 extra for an IMAX screen and that’s not nearly as big as what I have known IMAX to be.
Guest Services: I can’t sir. Its IMAX quality picture and sound.
Aziz: But the screen isn’t big, that’s the whole reason I pay $5 more for IMAX.
Guest Services: Well sir, you watched the whole movie, you could have come out and we could have given you tickets to a different one.
Aziz: Why would I do that? I’d leave Star Trek, the movie I wanted to see and you’d give me a ticket for Ghosts of Girlfriends Past? Oh yeah that’s fair! No, you need to give me the $5 back, its the principle of it. Can I see a manager?

Manager: Sir, we can’t refund the money, you saw the whole film.
Aziz: I don’t want $15, I just want $5 cause AMC lied about IMAX.
Manager: Sir, I can give you popcorn and a drink.
Aziz: I don’t want to go home and drink a nasty soda and eat nasty ass popcorn. I want my $5 back. Its not about the money, its the principle of the matter, ITS NOT IMAX.
Manager: Sorry, I can’t do anything.
Aziz: You know what Twitter is? I have 25,000 followers, I’m tell 25,000 people you run fake IMAX’s and that they should boycott AMC.
Manager: I don’t really care sir.
Aziz: Yeah, I wouldn’t care either if I worked here, but you know you are in the wrong! You should give me $5!!
Manager: SIR, I CAN GIVE YOU POPCORN AND A SODA.
Aziz: I DON’T LIKE POPCORN AND I DON’T LIKE SODA, I WANT MY $5!!!
Manager: Ok here’s two free passes.

UPDATE: In addition to this terrible tragedy, there are also terrible things going on in Darfur. Please Google around for more info on how to help there.


Here in Portland, we just got our first IMAX theater last week, so I haven’t actually seen anything on a Digital IMAX. The difference is in size, as Aziz demonstrated:

screencompa.jpg

So, the question is: If the sound and quality are all equal, does size matter (Agent Bedhead says no)? If you’re paying an extra $5, are you paying for the size or the IMAX quality?

I’ll let you all discuss amongst yourselves. I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I’m old fashioned — I still prefer to overpay to see bad movies at a regular movie theater. Ninety percent of what I see is absolute shit, so I certainly don’t need to see a 72 foot pile of it.

But speaking of Twitter: If you’re on it, y’all should follow us. I’m thinking about moving a variation of Eloquent Eloquence over to Twitter, and posting the best comments throughout the week over there (or at least the ones under 140 characters). We gotta keep up with the kids, you know.









Jackman and Weisz Attached to Unbound Captives | Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus Trailer













Comments

Ninety percent of what I see is absolute shit, so I certainly don’t need to see a 72 foot pile of it.

I like to see you sticking with your principles.

I think trying to bullshit extra money out of people by claiming 'IMAX quality' is... yes, bullshit. IMAX was never about anything but screen size. This is like me trying to sell a 'high definition' Slurpee.

In an espresso cup.

Posted by: twig at May 13, 2009 10:21 AM

I don't consider it to be IMAX unless I sit in a reclined seat and the screen wraps around my fucking head so I am forced to decide between looking at Spock on one side or Bones on the other. If they rotate between showing the roller coaster/simulated flying film and regular movies, I'm there.

Posted by: Kballs at May 13, 2009 10:23 AM

Apart from the fact that if he paid to see "star trek" he deserves to lose the money. What the hell happened to the customer is always right?

And what the fuck is that Imax quality BULLSHIT? It's either IMax or it isn't?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at May 13, 2009 10:34 AM

spambot says size matters.

Posted by: gp at May 13, 2009 10:34 AM

Fuck Twitter. Seriously. Jump off that bandwagon. Throwing a revamped Eloquent Eloquence on there isnt' gonna make me join either. I have enough trouble keeping up with Facebook but that is mainly due to my stupid obsession with Mafia Wars.

If it's not a huge screen it's not IMAX and I ain't paying extra. IMAX is scamming out and this is definitely diluting their name. This is the same bullshit as Wii Motion Plus that Nintendo is hwaking to make your controller "fully motion controlled". I'm sorry, I thought that was what I paid $250 for in the first place. I'm not going to pay extra for what should be included in the first place. Hawking an inflated ticket for "pristine picture and sound" without the ginormous screen is ridiculous. It's SUPPOSED to have pristine picture and sound anyway REGARDLESS of where you see it. It's why I spent $12 dollars a ticket instead of waiting for it to come out on Blu Ray from Netflix you stupid greedy fuckers.

Posted by: TylerDFC at May 13, 2009 10:38 AM

From techfaq.com:

The key to the IMAX experience lies in several elements working together in combination:

* The large film format which allows for much better resolutions and higher clarity (the dinosaurs in the IMAX movie T-Rex: Back to the Cretaceous have five times the detail compared to Jurassic Park);
* A six-channel sound system that is separate from the film (conventional movies have the soundtrack integrated within the film strip). IMAX soundtracks are run on a Digital Theater Audio Control (DTAC) system which uses IMAX's proprietary software. The soundtrack is a single uncompressed audio file containing the six channels which are distributed directly to amplifiers, unlike other systems like Dolby Digital which requires a decoder;
* A unique projection system that is specifically designed and custom-built to accommodate the 70mm film stock - and "run" it at the standard 24 frames-per-second. This required a huge machine with a different approach to the conventional 35mm format, as well as more powerful lights to be able to project the film correctly;
* The theater itself which is designed in such a way that viewers are looking at the screen directly so their entire field of vision is engaged.


You either have that, or you ain't seein no mo'fuckin' IMAX.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at May 13, 2009 10:41 AM

Agh! I've been hoping you would revive the EE, but you're thinking of doing it on Twitter? Not right! I refuse to join that mess. It's bad enough I spend too much time on Facebook. I have to try for some semblance of a life!

Posted by: Melissa at May 13, 2009 10:46 AM

If the sound and quality are all equal, does size matter (Agent Bedhead says no)? If you’re paying an extra $5, are you paying for the size or the IMAX quality?

You're paying for IMAX, which is both. They run a big commercial for themselves before the movie starts stating that "IMAX" is the sound and quality and size. The so-called "Digital IMAX" is, like Aziz said, just a nice digital projection. Nice, but no one else charges extra for that. It is, indeed, bullshit. I can watch a Blu-ray movie at home on a small screen...that is NOT why I came to the theater.

Posted by: Jay at May 13, 2009 10:54 AM

As a customer service freak and a supervisor at an IMAX theater, this really pisses me off. IMAX is about the big screen, yes, but it's also about bigger film, meaning a bigger AND CLEARER picture. With a bigger screen, better picture, better sound, and better seating, you get a better experience. Seeing films like The Dark Knight or Star Trek is light years (sorry) better on an IMAX screen.
Also, IMAX theaters have something rare these days: projectionists. Someone's actually paying attention to each print, blowing dust off the plates so it doesn't look huge on the screen and constantly monitoring the film for scratches, instead of moving between 10-16 projectors.
Ansari was kind of being a dick, but if any of my other supervisors told a customer they didn't care about something, I would start helping them clean out their desk. Fucking ridiculous.

Posted by: vikky at May 13, 2009 10:56 AM

Goddammit, Dustin! Stop taunting me with the (not-at-all) latest technologies/social networking crap! I held out on Facebook for as long as I could and then the thought that I was missing out on anything Pajiba-related finally wore down my defenses. (Damn all of you to heck, I say!) Now, I'm FB's bitch. And it is all Pajiba's fault. (The irony? Now I spend less time on this here sight, 'cause I'm always at FB's beck and call.)

I cannot afford to add Twitter into my rotation!

Look people, I'm old. I can't multi-task to save my life. (And for all of you who think you can, there are actual scientific studies that say you're wrong. That's right, WRONG.)

And yes, like FB, I'll eventually cave and sign up for the evil, evil Twitter. Let's see if I can make it until the end of 2009 at least.

Oh, and for the topic at hand, I think the last time I saw something on IMAX was a good 29 years ago, probably. I think it may have been at a museum. So, I don't have a lot to add to the discussion.

Posted by: tamatha at May 13, 2009 11:11 AM

IMAX is only IMAX if you have the whole shebang.

That said there have been a wide variety of IMAX screens I've been subject to. The best was at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City. It was the only one that truly took up the whole field of vision (and was projected on a curved screen). Most of the mall "IMAX" theaters have had a bigger than usual screen, but not the full field of vision screen.

Aziz was kind of a douche though. If he was so outraged he should have complained before he watched the movie. I would bet money it was also playing on a regular screen in the same theater complex. The manager could have refunded the 5 bucks and he could have walked 200 feet to a regular theater to see Star Trek.

Posted by: ed newman at May 13, 2009 11:11 AM

I really don't see how the customer was in the wrong here. He wasn't being rude. What the hell was he supposed to do, take a tub of popcorn and half gallon of soda home? (the popcorn and the soda would have been way more than $5). The idiot ticket jockey should have given him the free passes or his money back immediately or deferred to a higher-up, not try to play the customer for a fool.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at May 13, 2009 11:20 AM

What the hell does IMAX stand for, anyway? I was under the impression that it's "Image Maximum".

Hmmm, "Image Maximum". Which implies picture, right? This seems like common sense to me.

Posted by: Agent Scully at May 13, 2009 11:20 AM

More power to you if that works for, ed. I've found that conventional movies are a nightmare in a planetarium, distorted as all hell. "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" alllllmost worked, but not quite.

Posted by: Jay at May 13, 2009 11:37 AM

The thing is that you get the same effect sitting a few from a normal sized screen at home as you do sitting however far back from a 72 foot screen.

But fuck that shit, my brain doesn't know that and if I tell it it's watching a 72 foot screen it'll enjoy the hell out of it. The first thing I think of when I hear 'IMAX' is a gigantic screen, and if it isn't a gigantic screen anymore why does it still get the name?

Posted by: James at May 13, 2009 11:37 AM

Screen size is only part of it. I gather that these "digital imax" theatres work by overlapping two digital projections, which gives you a slightly better picture than a regular projection, but just over half the resolution of actual imax theatres.

Having said that, one would know immediately on entering an imax-lite theatre that they weren't looking at a six storey high screen, right? So get your money back *before* you watch the whole damn movie!

Posted by: jon29 at May 13, 2009 11:43 AM

Actually, a movie shown in IMAX isn't the same as an IMAX movie, and if Aziz wants to get all nasty about his experience, maybe he should get some info about what he's talking about before he shoots off his stupid face about it.

A proper IMAX movie is filmed with a specific camera that uses 70mm film. In turn, that 70mm film is shown using very specific equipment. Vikky is correct about everything she said concerning how the movie is run and that only specially trained people can run the equipment. It's not just some giant DVD player stuck behind a theater someplace! The IMAX experience is more than just a bigger screen, although that is how a lot of people look at it. It involves the screens (both flat and domed), sound system, projection and picture quality. No IMAX theater can be called "IMAX" unless it follows the specific guidelines by the IMAX Corporation. They do not just patch their name on random screens to make money, because that goes against the company's own policies.

If that little weasel expected to go in and watch Star Trek and it look exactly like "Africa the Serengeti" or "Hail Columbia" then he was out of luck from the outset. Regular feature length films can be formatted to be shown with IMAX equipment, but they are just larger versions of the same movie you see anywhere else, albeit they are shown larger and have the great surround sound. That is why people pay extra to see it in IMAX, a larger screen and wet-your-pants sound systems.

I know I sound very geeky about all of this, but I do graphics for our museum's theater, and are very close with the staff who runs it, and that little shit with the apparent need to talk out of his ass about something he doesn't understand could do some damage to out theater's ticket sales. You wouldn't think so, but it can definitely happen over something as stupid as this.

Also, as someone who has worked customer service for a theater, there are usually policies in place NOT to give people who have sat through an entire movie their money back. Otherwise anyone could enjoy a movie for free whenever they felt like it. I don't see that the Manager was really out of line for not giving in to that little turd, and quite honestly, if Aziz had been all up in my face talking about how many followers on Twitter he had, trying to use that as leverage to get his own way, I'd probably wedge his Blackberry so far up his ass that he'd update his status every time he farted.

I need to type it one more time - IMAX.

Posted by: Tae at May 13, 2009 11:43 AM

If that little weasel expected to go in and watch Star Trek and it look exactly like "Africa the Serengeti" or "Hail Columbia" then he was out of luck from the outset.

Um, no, he expected a big screen. Had a little diagram for it too. No need to split the film/projector hairs.

Posted by: Jay at May 13, 2009 11:46 AM

Pardon me for being naive, but I didn't realize there were theatres passing off regular screens with higher quality film as IMAX (but then the only one I've ever been to was the Ontario Science Centre in Toronto). Thieves! So yeah, size matters. IMAX is a big screen, a huge screen, a "I gotta close my eyes every 3 minutes or so or I'm gonna puke in my lap" screen.

Posted by: Eyvi at May 13, 2009 11:51 AM

I want to state for the record that I don't think the manager was out of line for refusing to issue a refund for a movie a customer watched in its entirety (I wouldn't have done it). I DO think we was out of line for telling Aziz he "didn't really care" and really for maintaining the fallacy that 35mm+35mm somehow equals IMAX.
I guess he's out of line for being an AMC employee.
Tae, where is your theater located?

Posted by: vikky at May 13, 2009 11:53 AM

Regular feature length films can be formatted to be shown with IMAX equipment, but they are just larger versions of the same movie you see anywhere else, albeit they are shown larger and have the great surround sound. That is why people pay extra to see it in IMAX, a larger screen and wet-your-pants sound systems.

Tae, that's exactly what Aziz is saying - the screen wasn't larger, so he didn't feel it was a true IMAX experience. Why do you feel the need to call him a bunch of names when you essentially agree with him?

Posted by: Another Jen at May 13, 2009 12:02 PM

they are just larger versions of the same movie you see anywhere else, albeit they are shown larger and have the great surround sound. That is why people pay extra to see it in IMAX, a larger screen and wet-your-pants sound systems.

Posted by: Tae at May 13, 2009 11:43 AM

------------------------------------------------

Which is precisely what he didn't get.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at May 13, 2009 12:05 PM

Ansari did add another update to this post.
REAL UPDATE: THE TWITTER THING WAS A JOKE YOU ANGRY PEOPLE IN THE COMMENTS THREADS WHO CAME OVER FROM FARK OR WHATEVER, I DIDN’T SERIOUSLY “THREATEN” A DUDE WITH TWITTER. HAHAHAHA. TAKE IT EASY. ALSO, YES, I’M AWARE DARFUR IS A MORE SERIOUS PROBLEM. CHILL THE FUCK OUT!

Posted by: Pinky McLadybits at May 13, 2009 12:06 PM

Also, I would be pissed to pay an extra $5 and not find a true IMAX screen in the theater. However, I would have walked out and had them switch me to the normal screen that cost $5 less. Maybe there was a reason he watched the whole movie. I don't know what it may have been, but maybe he thought the curtains were going to pull waaaaaay back and then once the movie started he just stayed.

Posted by: Pinky McLadybits at May 13, 2009 12:08 PM

One thing you guys need to distinguish is the difference between IMAX and OMNIMAX.

IMAX = big effing screen
OMNIMAX = field-of-vision curved screen

IMAX is NOT projected on the full field-of-vision or curved screen. Omnimax movies are specially formatted to fit the curve (usually limited to space exploration and other educational films) If you go see an IMAX movie on an OMNIMAX screen, everything along the edges is warped and distorted. It doesn't add to the theater-going experience. Quite the opposite.

However, true IMAX should be projected on a mammoth screen. It doesn't matter if you're watching better quality on a smaller screen because you can't appreciate it. It's like buying a Bluray player for the 19" TV you bought in '98. Or even a 19" plasma. Who gives a crap?

If a theater's going to start showing IMAX movies, they've gotta do more than buy a new projector and install a new sound system. They'd better gut a couple of their rooms or make major additions to accommodate. Otherwise they'd better not dare up that ticket price.

So if you're paying upwards of $15 for a movie, don't go to a museum, and don't go to a theater that doesn't have the space. Sadly, most of us are going to have to wait a few years for these opportunities to come closer.

If you DO find a theater showing true IMAX, go. It's amazing.

Posted by: ShagEaredVillain at May 13, 2009 12:19 PM

I real problem here is the fact that IMAX doesn't want to distinguish between "old-school" IMAX (70mm film shot on specific IMAX cameras and run through a projector onto a massive screen) and digital IMAX (35mm film run digitally onto a conventional-sized or slightly larger screen. This article sheds some more light on the differences and the fallacy of branding digital IMAX as IMAX: http://www.lfexaminer.com/20081016.htm

IMAX really does a poor job of marketing and branding themselves. They have a goldmine on their hands but it can't seem to take off.

Posted by: vikky at May 13, 2009 12:32 PM

When I saw Star Trek at the AMC Del Amo IMAX, many of us in the audience were remarking about how the screen looked to be the same size as a regular screen. But the picture was crystal clear and sharp, so we quickly forgot the complaints.

When I exited the theater, I remembered that I had seen The Dark Night in the same exact theater at regular price, and that the screen was the same size.

So, yeah, I'm sure the scam in on. As much as I hate the Bridge with their pay-$2-for-wack-parking or $6-for-valet situation, at least their IMAX is a fucking IMAX.

Posted by: ceejeemcbeegee at May 13, 2009 12:39 PM

The thing is that you get the same effect sitting a few from a normal sized screen at home as you do sitting however far back from a 72 foot screen.

In a very micro-sense, that's partially true, but human eyes and brains operate with perception kinesthesia, meaning the position and relative size of the body in comparison to the image. Even if a tiny image occupies your entire field of view, like holding your cellphone up against your orbital socket, your brain is still well aware that it's a tiny image.

In contrast, when you are confronted with a 72-foot high Romulan bird of prey, your brain knows it's really that big, so it's more impressive, more "real."

Aziz is a bit of a dick, but he's funny as hell and should get a lot of leeway in interacting with a faceless, uncaring corporation like AMC. This happened in California, I believe, and AMC's actions are a pretty clear violation of California's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which prohibits literally any deceptive, misleading or unfair business practice. And I agree with vikky, if an employee under my watch told a client "I don't care," I'd strip the skin off his taint with a wire brush and some battery acid. You do care, motherfucker, unless you want your asshole to become a puppetry access point.

The theater is there for one reason, and one reason only: to deliver movie images to customers in the format advertised. Here, the image was clearly smaller than the official IMAX size. The moment, the second, the nanosecond they failed in their mission, Aziz automatically became right, and the sole possible correct answer was, "Yes, Mr. Customer, how can we make that right for you?" End of discussion.

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at May 13, 2009 12:41 PM

If it's advertised as IMAX, it had damn well be as big as a regular IMAX screen. If it's not that big, don't call it IMAX. Otherwise you're just a bunch of cheats and liars.

Posted by: ChristianH at May 13, 2009 1:08 PM

Digital IMAX is technically IMAX, as the projectors are made and leased out by the IMAX Corporation. Check out the article I linked above -- it mentions the corporation's tenuous grip on truth in advertising.
Basically, it's IMAX without the Image Maximized. Which is to say (at least if you're someone who works in a REAL IMAX theater, with real IMAX projectors and projectionists) stupid and a waste of money.

Posted by: vikky at May 13, 2009 1:15 PM

IMAX = big effing screen
OMNIMAX = field-of-vision curved screen

Posted by: ShagEaredVillain at May 13, 2009 12:19 PM

I did not know that. You would think the Liberty Science Center would have the name OmniMax somewhere but it just lists IMAX and IMAX dome theater.

Jay, my experience with IMAX has been limited to nature films, nothing from Hollywood, so I'm sure I'd have the same reaction as you to the curved screen if there is distortion on the edges.

Posted by: ed newman at May 13, 2009 1:17 PM

I suppose I do have to count myself as lucky for the Mall of Georgia Regal theater, which does have the full-on stadium seating IMAX theater (I like the new "print your ticket at home" service too). I've learned to go in off-hours though, since you've gotta show up really early otherwise to get a decent seat since it's more about vertical placement than distance from the screen. Did I mind seeing "Watchmen" and "Star Trek" before 10 am? Hell no, got to sit where I wanted and fully enjoy it.

Posted by: Jay at May 13, 2009 1:29 PM

I never expected to learn so much or find people on Pajiba with actual IMAX projecting experience.

Pajiba: now with 5% actual content!

Posted by: twig at May 13, 2009 1:37 PM

OK fine, I overreacted. Shoot me. Sorry, sorry, sorry.

Maybe I'm sensitive because my job is partially, and the jobs of many of my friends are fully, dependent by how many tickets get sold for an IMAX show.

Upon further reflection of the matter, I've realize that getting all upset about it is dumb, regardless of how I'm attached to a particular theater brand.

However, I can and will be irritated about this one detail: In my opinion, he's not even really pissed off about the size of the screen. If he was, he wouldn't have stayed for the movie. He's pissed off that he didn't get his way. Now he's screaming fraud of the IMAX corporation because of it and that is going to cause an unpleasant ripple. Had he gotten his money, he wouldn't have ever written his diatribe, because where would be the fun in that?

I still think the guy is an ass, though.

Posted by: Tae at May 13, 2009 2:02 PM

if an employee under my watch told a client "I don't care," I'd strip the skin off his taint with a wire brush and some battery acid. You do care, motherfucker, unless you want your asshole to become a puppetry access point.

Seriously. Thousands of people have been laid off for doing nothing wrong; you really think you're safe because you work at a fucking movie theater? You should be genuinely thankful for each person who comes in and spends $11 on a ticket and the same on snacks; they are the reason you can by the drugs that make you think you somehow owe them nothing.

Posted by: vikky at May 13, 2009 2:09 PM

*gasp*

The knife in my back! Don't you make me join Twitter, Rowles. And I know I totally would. Only for Pajiba. THE THINGS YOU MAKE ME DO.

Also, the IMAX thing is beyond me. The very idea of having one here in Honduras cracks me up. I mean...come on, I think we're still watching movies with hand-cranked projectors over here.

We don't even have digital ticket buying.

*snort*

Posted by: figgy at May 13, 2009 2:26 PM

Does anyone else read the discussion above as this...


Aziz: I sat through an entire movie, and instead of escaping into the story, I decided to bitch and moan about the latest thing that bothers me.
Guest Services: I work in a movie theater, but don't really know anything technical about film, probably because I'm in high school.
Aziz: I want an arbitrary amount of money, so I can feel good about myself. Kinda like Mel Gibson in Payback.
Guest Services: Seriously? It took the whole film to decide this?
Aziz: I don't have any free time to change the things I want to do when I want to do them, but I do have the time to waste your time. Can I see a manager? I'd like to waste his time too.

Manager: Sir, we can’t refund the money, you saw the whole film.
Aziz: I don't want the whole amount, just an amount that I'll never get. Maybe I'll make a chart later to find the exact ratio of dollars to screen size I was ripped off, but $5 sounds like I might be asking too much, or not, to other people. All my arguments go public.
Manager: Sir, I can give you popcorn and a drink.
Aziz: No, that would be an easy solution.
Manager: Sorry, you came at me like a douch, I don't want to help you anymore.
Aziz: I'm popular on a social network site, that's like being an educator or an elected official, except I don't have to offer any skills or expertise, just irrational opinions, like Ashton Kutcher.
Manager: You are annoying.
Aziz: I drive a nicer car, I have more friends. I'm on tv. Kneel before me and give me what I want, how I want it.
Manager: GRRRRR.
Aziz: GRRRRRRR!!!
Manager: Ok here are two free passes. Seriously, fuck off.

Posted by: J Stride at May 13, 2009 2:53 PM

Absolutely, J Stride He has a point, but his stupid argument completely voids it. By watching the whole movie he lost the right to make any complaints about how much money he paid for it.

It's like going to the manager at the end of a terrible movie and demanding your money back because of how much it sucked. Really? You really hope to accomplish anything?

Posted by: figgy at May 13, 2009 3:00 PM

And I highly doubt that the manager said "I don't care". Seems to me like the dude just put that in to make the manager look like a dick, when all he was doing was his job.

Posted by: figgy at May 13, 2009 3:07 PM

The "IMAX" theatre I go to in town does a painfully obnoxious laser-light show before the movie. It is one of the most annoying things to endure in a movie theatre. This isn't the 80s, no one cares about frigging lasers.

The part that really pisses me off is the pre-show boasting that the screen was 6 stories high.

Not only is this thing not a true IMAX screen, they're frigging lying to my damn face. The frigging movie theatre isn't 6 stories high! I know the damn screen isn't 6 stories, why you gotta lie about it.

Posted by: chenry at May 13, 2009 3:11 PM

Jay, thanks for the info on the Mall of Georgia IMAX. My internet search on whether it was true IMAX was frustrating, but you just answered my questions. Off to Buford I go.

Posted by: ed newman at May 13, 2009 4:18 PM

Fuck Twitter. It's just one more notch in the belt of our short attention span society.

Posted by: henchman for hire at May 13, 2009 4:21 PM

I refuse to Twatter. Boycott Twatter now.

Posted by: BWeaves at May 13, 2009 4:50 PM

Just for the record, maybe he couldn't switch out for a ticket to a regular theater because it was opening night and every single showing of Star Trek was sold out.

This really angers me. I saw Watchmen at the same alleged IMAX theater where Aziz went. I bit my tongue because it was opening night, and sans assigned seating I'd been standing in line for too long to raise a fuss. When I walked in the theater, though, I immediately knew I'd gotten screwed.

There are feature films filmed for IMAX that actually exploit the different aspect ratio afforded by the large screen and fill the space accordingly at the appropriate scenes. The sound and picture quality is not the entire IMAX experience.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at May 13, 2009 4:54 PM

Pajiba: now with 5% actual content!
Posted by: twig at May 13, 2009 1:37 PM

Hahahah! twig, I totally thought that right before I read your comment.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at May 13, 2009 5:37 PM

I swear, Aziz has such a punchable face.

Particularly in that picture. God, I just want to beat the unholy hell out of him.

His delivery on that shitty show always seems crappy and off. His voice is also annoying. Really, I think one of the shining points in Observe and Report was Seth Rogen punching that guy.

Yeah.

Posted by: Riley at May 13, 2009 6:38 PM

I just re-read it.

Not for nothing, but the fact that this smarmy little fuck brings up the point that he has (sigh) "followers" on Twitter just makes him 900 times more of a cunt.

I, too, relate to the people who pointed out that he stuck through the whole (horrible) movie, and if he really gave a shit, he would've and SHOULD'VE walked out and get a refund. It's not my fault you think you can complain about something that no one else really has had a problem with. This is the first time I've ever heard of anyone complaining about the quality of an IMAX experience.

All in all, he makes himself sound like a self-important asshat. I would've thrown a drink in his face following that Twitter line he dished out.

I have a tremendous urge to make him suffocate on those two free passes.

What a twat waffle.

Posted by: Riley at May 13, 2009 6:48 PM

As I posted above, Aziz updated his post to let everyone know that he didn't really threaten the guy with Twitter. As such, one should probably take the entire conversation between Aziz and the manager with a grain of salt.

Posted by: Pinky McLadybits at May 13, 2009 6:54 PM

Really, how much better can your "better experience" get before it isn't worth a fuck?

Says someone who still remembers seeing color TV for the first time.

J Stride,

That was awesome. You'd be up for an EE T-shirt except you exceeded the 140 character requirement by about 5,234 characters.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at May 14, 2009 1:38 AM

I am not going on Twitter...I have enough dealings with monosyllabic solipsistic douchebags in other arenas. In the land where Kutcher and Pratt are King...an H bomb is the only remedy.

And I still haven't gotten my XXL shirt for winning EE like 8 months ago....

Posted by: Rubble44 at May 14, 2009 4:39 AM

BTW, I forgot, fuck Aziz Ansari. I don't get the appeal. We clearly agree to disagree Rowles...because he plain sucked out loud on Scrubs (I saved the clip of him getting fired on You Tube and play it from time to time, it soothes me) He's annoying on Parks and Recreation and Human Giant is meh. Good for him that he is doing so well with so little but I don't get it. Oh well, at least there's only like 2 minutes left to go in his 15.

Posted by: Rubble44 at May 14, 2009 4:46 AM

I think the IMAX scam applies in the UK, too. I know my local Odeon doesn't have room for a true IMAX screen, but they are merrily charging extra for it anyway.
I'm going to see 'Star Trek' at the BFI Imax on the South Bank, instead - now that's the real deal.

Posted by: Tarn at May 14, 2009 6:20 AM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time