Please don't do that! Sequels and Remakes you did not see coming... (1 Viewer)

[Neil Middlemiss]

You must mean the Hoyts Entertainment Quarter location, right? That's the only other IMAX screen in the area that IMAX has listed on their location finder site.

The prices I quoted for the currently closed Darling Harbour location were cited from the source I linked to in my post.

I used the word 'renovation' because that's the word that IMAX referred to it as (see IMAX site here: https://www.imax.com/theatres/lg-imax-darling-harbour)

Here's how they referred to that site's current state:

LG IMAX, Darling Harbour

Darling Harbour IMAX is currently closed for renovation and is scheduled to reopen with IMAX Laser in 2019.
​

But back to the other IMAX location and the prices listed for IMAX showings, I checked at the most expensive ticket (for either a daytime or night showing) is $28.50 for an adult (with a 1.50 booking fee). That's too expensive for my blood.

I was curious what a location charging $42 AUD would look like and have to offer, but cannot find that price listed for the IMAX screens in the Sydney area. Again, I'm not necessary suggesting you are wrong, but I cannot find evidence of it. Is it perhaps not an IMAX screen where that $42 is being charged?

 

[Tino]

Yeah. I'd be curious to see a direct link to a theater in Australia charging $42 AUD for a NON IMAX film as claimed above.

 

[cinemiracle]

Yeah. I'd be curious to see a direct link to a theater in Australia charging $42 AUD for a NON IMAX film as claimed above.[/QUOTE

Just check Event cinemas in Sydney and click on the George st (city) complex and then onto Dunkirk and you will see the price as I previously stated. Naturally the prices are cheaper in the suburbs.

 

[cinemiracle]

Yeah. I'd be curious to see a direct link to a theater in Australia charging $42 AUD for a NON IMAX film as claimed above.

The $42 price has been has now been reduced to $39.50 for an adult ticket to see Dunkirk in the City Imax have also reduce their tickets from $42 to a little less. I guess there were too many complaints about the price. At the now demolished Darling Harbour Imax ,prices were $35. That cinema is NOT being renovated as other people have mentioned. It has been completely demolished. I was at the last day's screenings whereby frames of imax films were given away free.I managed to get 50 from many documentary films. I also visited the cinema when it was being demolished and recently saw the hole in the ground where it once stood. A new building is under construction on the site and it will incorporate a new Imax cinema on the same site.

 

[Tino]

IMAX NYC prices are comparable. $32.00 adjusted.

 

[cinemiracle]

IMAX NYC prices are comparable. $32.00 adjusted.

$42 was the original price charged for DUNKIRK in non imax screens in the city centre. Now it has been reduced to $39.50.Much cheaper in the suburbs however.
It used to be that London's West End cinemas had the highest cinema prices in the world but now Sydney seems to have overtaken London.

 

[Tino]

Regardless Dunkirk is worth it imo. Even at $42.00.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Regardless Dunkirk is worth it imo. Even at $42.00.

Not to me, hell, I wouldn't pay NYC prices at $32.00! Furthermore, this is not a knock on Dunkirk, but I wouldn't pay those prices for just about any film at an IMAX theater.

 

[Tino]

For certain films I would. Dunkirk especially since IMAX is the only way one should see it imo.

 

[Robert Crawford]

For certain films I would. Dunkirk especially since IMAX is the only way one should see it imo.

To each his own on how they spend their monies!

 

[TJPC]

Here in Hamilton Ontario, as people over 65, we pay $16.50 for an IMAX showing. Regular price is $18.50. Usually we pay with "Scene" points, so it is free. We see every movie we can in IMAX.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

My assumption is in big cities where the cost to operate there is high this is why the ticket price is so high. Would I pay that much? Depends on the film. I do think that is a high cost for a single showing of a film...particularly because you can usually buy it on blu-ray for less than that. All this does for me is make blu-ray costs look very reasonable even if the blu is $30.00.

However, I can see how a ticket to a movie being over $25.00 would drive people away from going to a movie. I will be in New York city all this week and may see a movie or two while I am there. Probably here:

http://metrograph.com/

As they actually are screening pictures on film believe it or not. I have an invitation to go and they are showing Thief, Jackie Brown, and Tucker The Man and his Dream among others this week...all on 35mm I believe. I would love to catch any of those. Also I may try to see Dunkirk at the Lincoln Center IMAX. Have to see what time permits.

High rents in New York city have killed off many places I used to frequent. Kim's Video is no more and I miss that.

 

[Tino]

To each his own on how they spend their monies!

I wasn't suggesting otherwise.

 

[TJPC]

My assumption is in big cities where the cost to operate there is high this is why the ticket price is so high. Would I pay that much? Depends on the film. I do think that is a high cost for a single showing of a film...particularly because you can usually buy it on blu-ray for less than that. All this does for me is make blu-ray costs look very reasonable even if the blu is $30.00.

However, I can see how a ticket to a movie being over $25.00 would drive people away from going to a movie. I will be in New York city all this week and may see a movie or two while I am there. Probably here:

http://metrograph.com/

As they actually are screening pictures on film believe it or not. I have an invitation to go and they are showing Thief, Jackie Brown, and Tucker The Man and his Dream among others this week...all on 35mm I believe. I would love to catch any of those. Also I may try to see Dunkirk at the Lincoln Center IMAX. Have to see what time permits.

High rents in New York city have killed off many places I used to frequent. Kim's Video is no more and I miss that.

Off topic aside re: your avitar. Didn't Paul Newman die of lung cancer?

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Newman did yes and Steve McQueen also had cancer and is shown smoking in my avatar.

 

[TJPC]

Ha! Sorry! My mistake.
I used to show a 25th anniversary special of Rowen and Martins Laugh-in to my Media Class when I taught high school 10 years ago. At every appearance in the show Dan Rowan, who also died of lung cancer, has a cigar, a pipe, or a cigarette in his hand.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I wasn't suggesting otherwise.

I never said you did, I'm saying that if you're willing to spend that much money for an IMAX showing then I have to respect that as it's your money.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Ha! Sorry! My mistake.
I used to show a 25th anniversary special of Rowen and Martins Laugh-in to my Media Class when I taught high school 10 years ago. At every appearance in the show Dan Rowan, who also died of lung cancer, has a cigar, a pipe, or a cigarette in his hand.

Yes, another habit/obsession that Newman and McQueen shared was they both spent a great deal of time working on and around cars. There are quite a few things from exposure to automobiles and/or work on them that could cause cancer as well. So, not sure if their issues were entirely that they were smokers but that probably did not help.

I don't smoke but I travel quite a bit and I guess that could be hazardous to my health as well.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Let's remember that Newman was heading towards his 84th birthday so it's not like he died young in life like McQueen.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Let's remember that Newman was heading towards his 84th birthday so it's not like he died young in life like McQueen.

This is true and Newman held up pretty well into his 80s remaining quite active.