FanaticalAboutOdeon—Ah yes, I see what you mean regarding signs for both “cinema” and “IMAX.” My guess is this ultimately boils down to Westminster Council—it would perhaps make more sense to have “CINEMA” on the marquee and a high level “IMAX” sign on the front? As it is IIRC permission for the high level IMAX sign (visible when approaching from the West) went to appeal.
Regarding the dilution of IMAX, that’s a difficult one. AFAIK, the company’s finanical situation was, shall we say, not too good as long as they were in the “institutional” market. So, expand with “Hollywood” product… blow-up to 15/70 using their “DMR” process. And then, of course, they needed more venues.
The other problem, of course, is the demise of film as a distribution medium, and the development of increasingly better digital projection.
So, is IMAX Digital on a 60' wide 1.9:1 screen the same as a 15/70 in an “institutional” purpose-built venue? Perhaps not, although “immersiveness” is to an extent a function of auditorium size (or rather depth)—but is it bad? The IMAX Digital projection system is very good and they have their own patented technologies incorporated.
(By the way, I went with a friend for my first trip to the Empire to see the “IMAX with Laser” system—and I was surprised when it seemed they did not noticed the (blatant) difference between it and the previous “IMAX Digital” projection—let alone my laundry list of points!)
In the case of the Empire LS, given that few releases are 1.4:1 anyway, in all technical respects the answer is yes—as the “IMAX with Laser” projection system is the replacement for 15/70 projection in “classic” venues, and the screen width and auditorium depth are all well in line with “classic” IMAX cinemas.
IMAX seem to be sustaining what they’re doing at the moment, with massive expansion in China. There is a real threat from Dolby’s “Dolby Vision” system and more generally that 4K laser projection capable of filling “giant” screens is not exclusive to IMAX (which, again, ties in with the long term prospects for 15/70 as a distribution medium.)
Either way, as long as there are cinemas, IMAX or not, giant screens are here to stay.
In agreement with you on “tiles” and “monotony.” The difficulty is, if we accept the conversion of Empire 1 as a given, then what to do? Basically, I’m looking at it from the perspective of “could I have come up with a better proposal?” On reflection, maybe—perhaps modern acoustic tiles could meet the requirements whilst better retaining the original look.
(As for other theatrical aspects, keep in mind that I complained to GM Stephen Bush about the LED sequencing, after attending a screening on opening day!)
Of course the 1962 auditorium was a great place to watch films, one that I prefered over any other venue. Also, for a long time it had a reputation for its excellent sound system; but there’s no question that the slap/flutter echo was a problem—at times it made for poor dialogue intelligibility. (And why, going back to for instance THX standards, control of reverberation time in auditoria has been a requirement—all the more puzzling how Empire 1 was ever certified, even if the sound was first rate in all other respects.)
(Granted, if Empire 1 were kept, taming it may not have necessitated removing all of the tiles—perhaps just the addition of some absorption. The front of the projection booth would have been one obvious starting point. Having said that, it’s not fully tamed in the IMAX auditorium—but much improved.)
Hopefully this post hasn’t bored everyone to tears!
That being said, that reminds me—here are some links to photos (and accompanying notes) of some restoration work to the Empire’s frontage, carried out in 2007:
The facade is hideous and as I have said before on these pages, whilst I respect the classically informed work of Thomas Lamb, it certainly isn’t to my taste and the facade is the last (visibly) remaining section. The mismatched balcony only serves to make it worse. Better off covering it up again!
That said, the balcony is, as far as I’m aware, only used by the casino as an outdoor section of a bar—so I’m not sure how much of a “copy” of the OLS' balcony it is?
There are many questionable aspects of IMAX’s marketing, but the proof is in the pudding—they do have their own (often patented) technologies and in-house R&D. One has to consider that the IMAX signs alone are effectively worth a substantial sum in terms of advertising—given Westminster Council’s strong presumption of “no adverts.”
IMAX only ever have one auditorium within a multi-screen cinema.
On the subject of “clinicial and soulness”—I’ve often wondered, in a broader and general sense, whether this comes down to the use of old materials/products. For instance, the plaster tiles in Empire 1 were “unique” in the sense that one presumably not find them anywhere else today, but were surely a factory-made product. Stretch fabric wall coverings over acoustic absorption are not “unique”—but certainly technically superior. (Of course, cold cathode lights are “warm” whilst LEDs aren’t—but that’s another story.)
Ian: Thank you for posting links to those nice photos.
“The Hateful Eight” Ultra Panavision presentation required the manufacture of new custom lenses, which can be seen on this page.
I, too, have noticed the “curved credits” issue, but on digital presentations; fine at the top but quite severe at the bottom of the screen—and by “severe” I mean it almost looks like a “smile.”
In one case the two projectors were also misaligned (“Star Trek into Darkness” at the Empire LS) towards the bottom, so when wearing 3D glasses, in addition to the “smile” distortion, two sets of letters could be seen!
As I’ve mentioned, the Empire LS IMPACT screen was even worse on my visit (2D), with barrel distortion—“goldfish bowl”-like distortion. (A major reason why I have not returned.) On the other hand, the Empire LS IMAX appears to be perfect.
There is an article somewhere on the technical problems of the projection rake at the OLS; if I find it I will post a follow-up link.
I usually sit in the front stalls at the OLS—the rear circle is too far away from the screen, and also to get a good stereo spread/imaging from the stage speakers.
Another issue in old/large auditoria, is that the front stereo image is ruined by excessive reflections from the sidewalls. Interestingly, in the video I linked to a few posts ago, it is said that the idea of the “ribbed” walls of the OLS was to diffuse and break up reflections. Just how successful that is/was may be questionable (too small?), but presumably better than nothing—and thus the 1960’s “Zing” treatment would appear to be further misguided. If I’m not mistake, the “flying ladies” restoration incorporates a large amount of absorption, hidden behind fabric.
Looks like paying out for the Royal Circle is in order for my next visit!
On the topic of Atmos and digital projection upgrades, the OLS has, to my knowledge, always been furnished with all the very best equipment and supported the latest formats; it is therefore most disappointing if Odeon are “disinclined” to proceed.
Some remarkable photos of the Empire auditorium block under construction in 1927…
This one in particular puts the Screen 1 conversion into context. As the IMAX screen is positioned slightly past the “kink” in the righthand wall, it can be seen how narrowly it avoids the roof structure, with the middle of the screen behind the truss, and the sides ahead of it.
N.B. I am posting this is a matter of interest and to provide a record on this excellent site, rather than as a value judgement of any particular iteration of the Empire Leicester Square, although it goes without saying that the Coles-designed auditorium must stand as the canonical version.
FanaticalAboutOdeon—Thank you once again for the detailed information.
I’m afraid I’ve never liked the “blue” Odeon corporate theme nor the cut metal signs—bring back the red neon!
davepring—Just wondering whether a custom screen was used for the 2.76:1 presentation of “The Hateful Eight,” which would explain the lack of masking before the main feature?
I hope Odeon press on with the refurbishment. It now needs a technical upgrade, Dolby Cinema (i.e. Christie 6P laser projection and Dolby Atmos) would be ideal (albeit the auditorium may not be up to Dolby’s requirements?)
FanaticalAboutOdeon—I still clearly remember my first visit to Screen 1—and, like you, loved it ever since.
Sadly, we all know that it was no longer commercially viable and (the IMAX screen) is a very good conversion, resulting in what is still a large and comfortable auditorium (about 90ft.x130ft.) and now equipped with perhaps the best projection available today.
It is still very much run as a flagship venue—helpful and friendly staff, glitzy foyer areas, premieres, etc. Of course it’s not the same and I wish the conversion hadn’t happened, but I still find what it has to offer is far above average.
I can understand if one finds the massive IMAX screen to be altogether too overwhelming—I felt weak to my knees after “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”!
Including a photo of the IMPACT auditorium under construction.
The challenges posed by the conversion project are discussed in some further detail than the Cinema Technology Magazine article; to summarise:
The dividing wall is 15x40m and weighs 50 tons (a different figure?)
As Cinema Technology Magazine noted, the dividing wall had to isolated from the floor and is hung from the roof; additional considerations were that Empire had no access under the auditorium floor and it was incapable of carrying the dividing wall’s load. The difficulties in doing so are briefly mentioned (e.g. monitoring roof structure deflections as building work progressed.)
Building of the IMPACT auditorium also had constraints on floor loading and lack of access. The balcony is supported by a 17m long main girder, visible in the second photo on that page.
Including construction photos, plans, historical background on the development of the “Movie Palace” and on the design practices of architects, particularly Thomas W. Lamb.
Under construction (incl. balcony structure) and early interior photos; videos of the ‘Dutchess’ being played, opening day ‘plaque’ reveal, lowering of the safety curtain, and building work; interviews.
Perhaps someone could identify the individuals featured?
December 2015 newsletter posted on the hoarding says that the entire site has now been cleared and pre-piling works are complete.
Basement cinemas or not, the sooner this gaping hole in Leicester Square is plugged the better! With the adjacent 48 Leicester Square rebuild (facade retained) well progressed, the South West corner of the square is presently one big building site.
I spent a pleasant hour or so in the main bar, a comfortable and airy place to seek refuge from the chaos outside—at least earlier in the day!
The interior is a mish-mash; worst of all are the exposed ceilings/services, and bare brick walls—no objection to this, if it’s done right—not when it (particularly in the bar area) reveals the scars left by years of alterations. (The Trocadero is, after all, a labyrinth block of various buildings knocked together.)
Then there’s the “art” (to be charitable) by the entrance staircase…
Nit-picking aside, though, I concur with SethLewis—a very, very nice pre/post-film hangout.
I have now paid a visit to the Empire LS to see “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.”
A few comments on the “IMAX with Laser” system.
As promised, it is capable of resolving excellent levels of details, freedom from pixellation (end credits, for example), and the colour rendition is outstanding—light sabres, for instance, look very “fluorescent” and “neon-like.”
Black levels are good, though not zero level as IMAX implies.
The caveat is that it feels very much like a “1st generation” system—if not quite out of the prototype stage. It must be stressed that most of these are minor issues, but they are enough to be distracting and signal to the brain “this is not a window onto a fictional reality… it is digital projection.”
There appear to be some minor digital image processing artefacts. Furthermore, a slight dithering was visible, manifesting as very fine grain; and I am not sure if the laser speckling issue has been completely resolved.
The “IMAX with Laser” system uses Dolby 3D (!) glasses (due to patent issues.) Before the main feature, sometimes only one projector was in use and putting on the glasses revealed as such as the image appeared to be visible in only one eye. Unfortunately, closing that eye revealed a surprising level of crosstalk in the other eye.
With the 3D glasses on, at times the extremities of the screen exhibited noticeable colour shift with a distinct purple (IIRC) tint; and the image brightness was insufficient.
In a brief discussion with a member of staff after the film, he expressed the view that the glasses aren’t big enough, and this needs to be fixed. Thus, this lends weight to my contention that the system is still a work in progress.
The laser projection system is punishing in revealing the limitations of the source material—and “Star Trek: The Force Awakens” was largely shot on 35mm.
(I did not like the movie.)
“IMAX with Laser” is, in my view, almost there and if/when niggling points are ironed out it will be excellent. I reiterate that I am being ultra-picky (in view of the grandoise promises made by IMAX)—as it stands this is a spectacular moviegoing experience.
Finally, as the full screen width is now filled, not only is the image even more immersive—but a surprising benefit is, when seated in the middle of the auditorium, the design of the IMAX conversion of Screen 1 looks better proportioned and harmonious.
They were in use during my last visit (Screen 7, 2010) and the overall standard of presentation was good. However, the seats were in desperate need of an overhaul.
It seems the presentation standard is now failing to meet the standards one would expect of a (previously) flagship West End venue, with prices to match. I will not return until I hear anything to the contrary.
FanaticalAboutOdeon—Ah yes, I see what you mean regarding signs for both “cinema” and “IMAX.” My guess is this ultimately boils down to Westminster Council—it would perhaps make more sense to have “CINEMA” on the marquee and a high level “IMAX” sign on the front? As it is IIRC permission for the high level IMAX sign (visible when approaching from the West) went to appeal.
Regarding the dilution of IMAX, that’s a difficult one. AFAIK, the company’s finanical situation was, shall we say, not too good as long as they were in the “institutional” market. So, expand with “Hollywood” product… blow-up to 15/70 using their “DMR” process. And then, of course, they needed more venues.
The other problem, of course, is the demise of film as a distribution medium, and the development of increasingly better digital projection.
So, is IMAX Digital on a 60' wide 1.9:1 screen the same as a 15/70 in an “institutional” purpose-built venue? Perhaps not, although “immersiveness” is to an extent a function of auditorium size (or rather depth)—but is it bad? The IMAX Digital projection system is very good and they have their own patented technologies incorporated.
(By the way, I went with a friend for my first trip to the Empire to see the “IMAX with Laser” system—and I was surprised when it seemed they did not noticed the (blatant) difference between it and the previous “IMAX Digital” projection—let alone my laundry list of points!)
In the case of the Empire LS, given that few releases are 1.4:1 anyway, in all technical respects the answer is yes—as the “IMAX with Laser” projection system is the replacement for 15/70 projection in “classic” venues, and the screen width and auditorium depth are all well in line with “classic” IMAX cinemas.
IMAX seem to be sustaining what they’re doing at the moment, with massive expansion in China. There is a real threat from Dolby’s “Dolby Vision” system and more generally that 4K laser projection capable of filling “giant” screens is not exclusive to IMAX (which, again, ties in with the long term prospects for 15/70 as a distribution medium.)
Either way, as long as there are cinemas, IMAX or not, giant screens are here to stay.
In agreement with you on “tiles” and “monotony.” The difficulty is, if we accept the conversion of Empire 1 as a given, then what to do? Basically, I’m looking at it from the perspective of “could I have come up with a better proposal?” On reflection, maybe—perhaps modern acoustic tiles could meet the requirements whilst better retaining the original look.
(As for other theatrical aspects, keep in mind that I complained to GM Stephen Bush about the LED sequencing, after attending a screening on opening day!)
Of course the 1962 auditorium was a great place to watch films, one that I prefered over any other venue. Also, for a long time it had a reputation for its excellent sound system; but there’s no question that the slap/flutter echo was a problem—at times it made for poor dialogue intelligibility. (And why, going back to for instance THX standards, control of reverberation time in auditoria has been a requirement—all the more puzzling how Empire 1 was ever certified, even if the sound was first rate in all other respects.)
(Granted, if Empire 1 were kept, taming it may not have necessitated removing all of the tiles—perhaps just the addition of some absorption. The front of the projection booth would have been one obvious starting point. Having said that, it’s not fully tamed in the IMAX auditorium—but much improved.)
Hopefully this post hasn’t bored everyone to tears!
That being said, that reminds me—here are some links to photos (and accompanying notes) of some restoration work to the Empire’s frontage, carried out in 2007:
Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3
The facade is hideous and as I have said before on these pages, whilst I respect the classically informed work of Thomas Lamb, it certainly isn’t to my taste and the facade is the last (visibly) remaining section. The mismatched balcony only serves to make it worse. Better off covering it up again!
That said, the balcony is, as far as I’m aware, only used by the casino as an outdoor section of a bar—so I’m not sure how much of a “copy” of the OLS' balcony it is?
There are many questionable aspects of IMAX’s marketing, but the proof is in the pudding—they do have their own (often patented) technologies and in-house R&D. One has to consider that the IMAX signs alone are effectively worth a substantial sum in terms of advertising—given Westminster Council’s strong presumption of “no adverts.”
IMAX only ever have one auditorium within a multi-screen cinema.
On the subject of “clinicial and soulness”—I’ve often wondered, in a broader and general sense, whether this comes down to the use of old materials/products. For instance, the plaster tiles in Empire 1 were “unique” in the sense that one presumably not find them anywhere else today, but were surely a factory-made product. Stretch fabric wall coverings over acoustic absorption are not “unique”—but certainly technically superior. (Of course, cold cathode lights are “warm” whilst LEDs aren’t—but that’s another story.)
Ian: Thank you for posting links to those nice photos.
I think this is the “paper” on the OLS projection/screen I referred to in my last post-—really a collection of a few E-mails rather than a paper.
(I probably should post to a different forum… but just in case someone is interested!)
The most relevant part is on the bottom half of page 6—essentially the picture is brighter in the circle than the stalls.
“The Hateful Eight” Ultra Panavision presentation required the manufacture of new custom lenses, which can be seen on this page.
I, too, have noticed the “curved credits” issue, but on digital presentations; fine at the top but quite severe at the bottom of the screen—and by “severe” I mean it almost looks like a “smile.”
In one case the two projectors were also misaligned (“Star Trek into Darkness” at the Empire LS) towards the bottom, so when wearing 3D glasses, in addition to the “smile” distortion, two sets of letters could be seen!
As I’ve mentioned, the Empire LS IMPACT screen was even worse on my visit (2D), with barrel distortion—“goldfish bowl”-like distortion. (A major reason why I have not returned.) On the other hand, the Empire LS IMAX appears to be perfect.
There is an article somewhere on the technical problems of the projection rake at the OLS; if I find it I will post a follow-up link.
I usually sit in the front stalls at the OLS—the rear circle is too far away from the screen, and also to get a good stereo spread/imaging from the stage speakers.
Another issue in old/large auditoria, is that the front stereo image is ruined by excessive reflections from the sidewalls. Interestingly, in the video I linked to a few posts ago, it is said that the idea of the “ribbed” walls of the OLS was to diffuse and break up reflections. Just how successful that is/was may be questionable (too small?), but presumably better than nothing—and thus the 1960’s “Zing” treatment would appear to be further misguided. If I’m not mistake, the “flying ladies” restoration incorporates a large amount of absorption, hidden behind fabric.
Looks like paying out for the Royal Circle is in order for my next visit!
On the topic of Atmos and digital projection upgrades, the OLS has, to my knowledge, always been furnished with all the very best equipment and supported the latest formats; it is therefore most disappointing if Odeon are “disinclined” to proceed.
Some remarkable photos of the Empire auditorium block under construction in 1927…
This one in particular puts the Screen 1 conversion into context. As the IMAX screen is positioned slightly past the “kink” in the righthand wall, it can be seen how narrowly it avoids the roof structure, with the middle of the screen behind the truss, and the sides ahead of it.
More photos:
Steelwork 1 Steelwork 2
It can be seen that the Coles-designed auditorium ceiling follow(s/ed) the shape of the roof, particularly the curved section adjacent to the booth.
The dome of the Lamb-designed auditorium under construction:
Dome 1 Dome 2
N.B. I am posting this is a matter of interest and to provide a record on this excellent site, rather than as a value judgement of any particular iteration of the Empire Leicester Square, although it goes without saying that the Coles-designed auditorium must stand as the canonical version.
FanaticalAboutOdeon—Thank you once again for the detailed information.
I’m afraid I’ve never liked the “blue” Odeon corporate theme nor the cut metal signs—bring back the red neon!
davepring—Just wondering whether a custom screen was used for the 2.76:1 presentation of “The Hateful Eight,” which would explain the lack of masking before the main feature?
I hope Odeon press on with the refurbishment. It now needs a technical upgrade, Dolby Cinema (i.e. Christie 6P laser projection and Dolby Atmos) would be ideal (albeit the auditorium may not be up to Dolby’s requirements?)
FanaticalAboutOdeon—I completely understand what you’re saying and why it’s not for you.
A little confused that you should end up with headache at the Empire IMAX and not elsewhere? The auditorium depth is about the same as the BFI IMAX…
FanaticalAboutOdeon—I still clearly remember my first visit to Screen 1—and, like you, loved it ever since.
Sadly, we all know that it was no longer commercially viable and (the IMAX screen) is a very good conversion, resulting in what is still a large and comfortable auditorium (about 90ft.x130ft.) and now equipped with perhaps the best projection available today.
It is still very much run as a flagship venue—helpful and friendly staff, glitzy foyer areas, premieres, etc. Of course it’s not the same and I wish the conversion hadn’t happened, but I still find what it has to offer is far above average.
I can understand if one finds the massive IMAX screen to be altogether too overwhelming—I felt weak to my knees after “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”!
Finally, I have found pictures of the 1987 house curtains and splay wall neon feature:
House curtains and neon splay wall feature
Neon splay wall feature
The cove lighting can also be seen.
Details and photos of the 2014 Screen 1 Refurbishment.
A few hidden features from the past are revealed.
And on this page, a photo of the refurbished Screen 1. Looks very nice.
Screen 1 conversion details
Including a photo of the IMPACT auditorium under construction.
The challenges posed by the conversion project are discussed in some further detail than the Cinema Technology Magazine article; to summarise:
The dividing wall is 15x40m and weighs 50 tons (a different figure?)
As Cinema Technology Magazine noted, the dividing wall had to isolated from the floor and is hung from the roof; additional considerations were that Empire had no access under the auditorium floor and it was incapable of carrying the dividing wall’s load. The difficulties in doing so are briefly mentioned (e.g. monitoring roof structure deflections as building work progressed.)
Building of the IMPACT auditorium also had constraints on floor loading and lack of access. The balcony is supported by a 17m long main girder, visible in the second photo on that page.
Article on the basement construction of the second auditorium
Lots of demolition photos at the Arthur Lloyd site, including the auditorium block.
Photo of demolition.
Another photo of demolition.
Extensive paper:
All that Glitters: A Memorial to Ottawa’s Capitol Theatre and its Predecessors
Including construction photos, plans, historical background on the development of the “Movie Palace” and on the design practices of architects, particularly Thomas W. Lamb.
Construction photos and plans in this section.
Video
Under construction (incl. balcony structure) and early interior photos; videos of the ‘Dutchess’ being played, opening day ‘plaque’ reveal, lowering of the safety curtain, and building work; interviews.
Perhaps someone could identify the individuals featured?
Video of demolition.
Photo of the current site state uploaded.
December 2015 newsletter posted on the hoarding says that the entire site has now been cleared and pre-piling works are complete.
Basement cinemas or not, the sooner this gaping hole in Leicester Square is plugged the better! With the adjacent 48 Leicester Square rebuild (facade retained) well progressed, the South West corner of the square is presently one big building site.
I spent a pleasant hour or so in the main bar, a comfortable and airy place to seek refuge from the chaos outside—at least earlier in the day!
The interior is a mish-mash; worst of all are the exposed ceilings/services, and bare brick walls—no objection to this, if it’s done right—not when it (particularly in the bar area) reveals the scars left by years of alterations. (The Trocadero is, after all, a labyrinth block of various buildings knocked together.)
Then there’s the “art” (to be charitable) by the entrance staircase…
Nit-picking aside, though, I concur with SethLewis—a very, very nice pre/post-film hangout.
Technical information
Some key points:
Screen 1/Screen 2 are renamed Screen 2/Screen 1.
Screen 1 is fitted with a Dolby Atmos system.
2 largest screens are equipped with 4K projection.
4 screens support RealD 3D.
35mm/70mm capability in Screen 1 (formerly Screen 2), 35mm in Screen 7.
All auditoria retained but completely re-fitted, including increased floor rake in Screen 1 and increased screen sizes in 1 and 2.
Photos – inc. Screen 1
I have now paid a visit to the Empire LS to see “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.”
A few comments on the “IMAX with Laser” system.
As promised, it is capable of resolving excellent levels of details, freedom from pixellation (end credits, for example), and the colour rendition is outstanding—light sabres, for instance, look very “fluorescent” and “neon-like.”
Black levels are good, though not zero level as IMAX implies.
The caveat is that it feels very much like a “1st generation” system—if not quite out of the prototype stage. It must be stressed that most of these are minor issues, but they are enough to be distracting and signal to the brain “this is not a window onto a fictional reality… it is digital projection.”
There appear to be some minor digital image processing artefacts. Furthermore, a slight dithering was visible, manifesting as very fine grain; and I am not sure if the laser speckling issue has been completely resolved.
The “IMAX with Laser” system uses Dolby 3D (!) glasses (due to patent issues.) Before the main feature, sometimes only one projector was in use and putting on the glasses revealed as such as the image appeared to be visible in only one eye. Unfortunately, closing that eye revealed a surprising level of crosstalk in the other eye.
With the 3D glasses on, at times the extremities of the screen exhibited noticeable colour shift with a distinct purple (IIRC) tint; and the image brightness was insufficient.
In a brief discussion with a member of staff after the film, he expressed the view that the glasses aren’t big enough, and this needs to be fixed. Thus, this lends weight to my contention that the system is still a work in progress.
The laser projection system is punishing in revealing the limitations of the source material—and “Star Trek: The Force Awakens” was largely shot on 35mm.
(I did not like the movie.)
“IMAX with Laser” is, in my view, almost there and if/when niggling points are ironed out it will be excellent. I reiterate that I am being ultra-picky (in view of the grandoise promises made by IMAX)—as it stands this is a spectacular moviegoing experience.
Finally, as the full screen width is now filled, not only is the image even more immersive—but a surprising benefit is, when seated in the middle of the auditorium, the design of the IMAX conversion of Screen 1 looks better proportioned and harmonious.
They were in use during my last visit (Screen 7, 2010) and the overall standard of presentation was good. However, the seats were in desperate need of an overhaul.
It seems the presentation standard is now failing to meet the standards one would expect of a (previously) flagship West End venue, with prices to match. I will not return until I hear anything to the contrary.
Do the curtains still work?
An article on the IMAX with Laser install; some technical information.
Article with photos.
In particular, this one of the auditorium.
The additional new IMAX speakers can be seen, and the seats are bear the marque “Pepsi MAX – IMAX.” (Sigh.)
Also, the new laser projectors are visible.
And What Hi-Fi also has a write up with photos and positive comments on the picture quality.
IMAX Laser projector has been installed, the second in the UK.