LATEST NEWS

Harry Potter's IMAX Opening Delayed Two Weeks by Transformers

by
June 8, 2009

Harry Potter / Transformers

This is just not a great year for IMAX. It was recently discovered (by investors, so claims THR) that since IMAX made a contractual arrangement last year to give Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen a full 4 week run in its theaters, the IMAX debut of the new Harry Potter movie will be delayed by two weeks. IMAX made that arrangement with Paramount last year before Warner Brothers moved the release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince from November to July. And since Transformers hits on June 24th, its month-long run won't end until July 22nd, meaning Harry Potter won't show in IMAX until July 29th.

To make matters worse, this new Harry Potter will have 12 minutes of scenes converted to 3D, just like Order of the Phoenix did back in 2007 as well. Half-Blood Prince is set to officially hit theaters on July 15th - but it won't play in IMAX on that day like most were expecting. Actually, it will show in two IMAX screens on the 15th, one in New York and one in Los Angeles, but the rest of the world will have to wait until July 29th to see those 12 minutes in 3D in IMAX. This is yet another issue that IMAX will have to deal with coming off of the attempted boycott by Aziz Ansari due to screen size issues. Will the fans be upset again?

Find more posts: Hype, Movie News, Opinions

Discover more around the web:

Reader Feedback - 23 Comments

1

....Who cares? Does Harry Potter 6 have any scenes shot in IMAX? No. Does 3-D make the movie better? No. I'm perfectly content with seeing it at my local theater and going to IMAX later in the month.

Jonathan on Jun 8, 2009

2

@1 I completely agree. Harry Potter is not an IMAX must movie... in fact hardly any movie ever is.

JL on Jun 8, 2009

3

@2 Avatar will be.

Dean on Jun 8, 2009

4

Why all the mumbo jumbo about IMAX? First it was traditional full screen, then they moved to widescreen, now IMAX format, which is more like full screen. Its pretty rediculous now if you ask me. I dont see too big of a difference than having more space like when we got widescreen as a norm, like PC and TV monitors. Will we soon see IMAX type screen (which is more like full screen) anytime soon? Im content with widescreen for now. IMAX is somewhat of a gimmick still just to get more money out of the consumers. Basically it was a square, then a rectangle from left to right, now rectangle-ish from top to bottom. Its really not that important IMHO. What do you guys think?

Ken Masters on Jun 8, 2009

5

i think thats what warner brothers gets for pushing the release date back and then up pick a freaking date and stick to it!

sevenmarie on Jun 8, 2009

6

At first I was angry about this news, but then I remembered I don't have any "real" Imax screens near me anyway so I won't see the movie like that.

Itri on Jun 8, 2009

7

I'm with the first two. Big deal, suck it up. Harry Potter in IMAX? w00t...only reason I'm watching Transformers in IMAX is for the extra footage. Whether it's worth it or not, luckily my dad wants to see it too. Thanks dad! lol

LSP on Jun 8, 2009

8

Ken, please stop pretending to be an expert on aspect ratios. The whole full screen vs. widescreen thing with TVs came with how part of the picture of was cut from the image. With IMAX, even though it has a similar aspect ratio it is because there is MORE picture on the top and bottom. Anyhow, it is really up in the air whether I will bother with IMAX for Harry Potter. The 12 min of 3D footage doesn't seem worth it (especially since the last film had much more)

Sean Kelly on Jun 8, 2009

9

Ha-Ha! (qoute from Nelson) But seriously, Transformers > Potters. #4 like #8 says, it's a big difference. IMAX = Image Maximum, the projectors are capable of shooting at higher screens with higher quality. The aspect ratio is 4:3 however that's not the point, because the screen is larger than a Widescreen anyway, it really doesn't matter if it's widescreen or not (and eventually we'll probably get IMAX Widescreen, once the theaters are capable of making such large screens. Unfortunately there are only 320 theaters (about 65% of these are in US/Canada - great for you guys though - info from Wikipedia, had to recheck) that are capable of showing IMAX. However the reason why they should keep shooting in IMAX is because it's the best quality and the development has to move on, eventually every theaters will have IMAX, the big movies being shooted/converted to IMAX is just the first few steps.

Felix on Jun 8, 2009

10

@8 I never said I was an expert. So your presumption is idiotic. I dont even know aspect ratio, WS, IMAX stuff etc. I was merely stating my opinion about IMAX screens. If you thought I was an expert based on what I said on my earlier post you must be dumb as a fool.

Ken Masters on Jun 9, 2009

11

If the Transformers IMAX run ends on July 22nd, why does Harry Potter have to wait an extra week to get started on the 29th? Couldn't WB bring in Harry Potter on the 22nd after the Transformers contract expires, delaying the film by only a week instead of two?

Boxoffice Marco on Jun 9, 2009

12

If you think about it, its a perfect marketing ploy. Transformers is going to be huge in IMAX thanks to the specific scenes shot and because of the brand. The last movie did great, this one is sure make twice as much especially in IMAX. Due to this delay, it gives people two weeks to watch Harry Potter(in which they will). After said two weeks, most will probablly see it in IMAX, thus giving a minimum of 30 or so dollars per person. Two showings almost guaranteed. Big marketing plow

Simon on Jun 9, 2009

13

Transformers... Huge! HP.... Huge! And how will this be a bad year for IMAX? They're going to make a boat load of $$$.

K on Jun 9, 2009

14

This is a bad year for IMAX because they're the fucking worst theater company in the world. People see them as scam artists after the whole "IMAX Digital" fiasco, and now they're gonna be angry about not being able to see a movie in IMAX the same day as in a normal theater.

Dr Robotnik on Jun 9, 2009

15

I agree with #12. This is only good news for the franchise dollar wise. People will rush to see the the movie opening weekend and then those same avid fans will rush to see the movie when it opens on Imax 2 weeks later.

Parker on Jun 9, 2009

16

@10 I don't know. I figured you knew what you were talking about when you were going "OMG IMAX is like fullscreen. IT SUCKS!"

Sean Kelly on Jun 9, 2009

17

This doesn't matter to me, since why would I want to see Harry potter when all it's going to do is take me out of the experience with it's 3D sequence and what not, but it's bad news for Imax because it won't be available the week it comes out and potentially like 50% of people who might have seen it in Imax will see it in a traditional theater and not come back for the Imax.

Timothy on Jun 9, 2009

18

Sucks for potter, but its not like fans aren't goin to flock to it on regular screens, on the other side how much more money it Trans2 goin to make now, another win for Micheal Bay.

McKenzie on Jun 9, 2009

19

Prime for life. Potter blows.

CLZ on Jun 9, 2009

20

Ken just stop talking please. It's like saying "Wow medicine is pointless but I'm no expert." There is a huge difference, if you don't know anything about aspect ratio of what our eyes naturally see, then why even list your opinion that has no merit or thought whatsoever.

danielvutran on Jun 9, 2009

21

To me Transformers comes first.

Fisherr on Jun 10, 2009

22

@ 2 Ok Dark Knight had IMAX SCENES SHOT!

PotterPissed on Jun 24, 2009

23

Just so everyone is clear, Imax; especially in the actual Imax screens, is 100% better presentation than 35mm. The picture is much clearer. The screens in the large houses like mine are 50 feet by 60 feet, and the sound is much louder and much more clear compared to 35mm auditoriums. There is nothing better than having your legs shake during an action sequence due to the bass. Ontop of that, with Imax film you get a perfectly still picture (which is impossible with 35mm) and becuase of Imax standards you will never see scratches running across the screen or cigar burns every 20 min. Now lets talk 3d. Imax 3d is more realistic and has minimal ghosting compared with Real D. True, I was not a fan of the HP 3d Sequence but nevertheless, it is still the best you will get for your dollar. Night at the museam in Imax... don't bother. But when a movie like Harry Potter or Dark Knight or Avatar comes into Imax, JUMP ON IT! You will not be able to get the same movie going experiance through any other medium... Just my 2 cents:)

Derek on Jul 8, 2009

Sorry, no commenting is allowed at this time.

FEATURED POSTS

POPULAR COMMENTS

LAST YEAR'S TOP 10

Alex's Top 10 - 2017
1. Call Me By Your...
2. War for Apes
3. Shape of Water
4. Florida Project
5. Dunkirk
6. Jane
7. Foxtrot
8. Faces, Places
9. Never Really Here
10. Thelma
Click Here for Thoughts

Jeremy's Top 10- 2017
1. mother!
2. Lady Bird
3. A Ghost Story
4. The Big Sick
5. Dunkirk
6. Get Out
7. Killing Sacred Deer
8. John Wick 2
9. War for Apes
10. The Beguiled
Click Here for Thoughts

FOLLOW US HERE

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the news posts only, follow this acct:

Add FS to your Feedly updates: click here

OUR FACEBOOK / AD