Did you know there are only 401 Imax theaters in the US? By that I mean, theaters dedicated solely to showing Imax-formatted films. Imax theaters don’t have to follow the same rules of simply showing the latest release and/or whichever film will sell the most tickets. Imax theater owners can make side-deals with studios to exclusively show a certain film and block out dates for weeks at a time to give one film Imax-exclusivity. That’s what will happen this summer with Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer – Universal asked for and received a total three-week exclusive deal for Oppenheimer. Meaning that the big-budget film opening one week before Oppenheimer, Mission Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One, will only be shown in Imax theaters for one week. We heard several weeks ago that Tom Cruise was personally calling Imax theaters and trying to create his own side-deals to encourage the theaters to keep MI7 on Imax for as long as possible. Cruise didn’t get his way.
Paramount’s “Mission: Impossible 7” is only playing on Imax screens for one week, as first reported by Puck, a newsletter that covers the media business, before it has to relinquish all of its showtimes to “Oppenheimer.” That’s despite Cruise making a few calls around town to remind everyone that not even a year ago, “Maverick” earned more than $100 million from Imax alone. By shorting the Imax run of “Dead Reckoning,” he suggests, all involved parties risk losing out on serious coinage.
But long before the oft-delayed “MI” sequel moved to mid-July, Universal had already ironed out a rare agreement for “Oppenehimer” to control Imax’s entire North American footprint for three full weeks. (Directors like Nolan, who use Imax cameras to film their movies, are typically granted a two-week exclusive window.) Greta Gerwig’s star-studded “Barbie,” which also opens on July 21, isn’t playing in Imax at all as a result.
“I feel sad in a way we can’t accommodate all of them. I know ‘Mission: Impossible’ is going to be a really big movie,” Imax CEO Rich Gelfond tells Variety. “Nolan has a special place in Imax’s heart because he uses our cameras and promotes us. It’s not a matter of us saying which we can make more money on. I would hope after ‘Oppenheimer’s’ run, we can bring back ‘Mission.’”
There may be more of these fights brewing in the future. Here’s why: Attendance hasn’t rebounded in pandemic times, but the demand to watch certain movies on the biggest and brightest screens, known in the industry as premium large formats (PLF), has grown exponentially. Lest that sound like spin from PLF operators, there are stats to back up the idea that audiences are buying what they’re selling. Moviegoing is down 33% from 2019, but the market share for Imax, one of the art’s more recognizable forms, is up 50% without adding any new screens, according to the company. On a big-budget tentpole, those enhanced viewing experiences can account for as much as 30-40% of overall box office returns even though there are only about 900 PLF screens in the country. As a result, studios have more at stake in the battle for access to the finite number of screens that can generate outsized ticket sales.
Can I say something controversial? This is so f–king stupid. I understand that everyone in Hollywood wants to get more people into movie theaters and they want to maximize the potential to price-gouge the audience with exorbitant Imax ticket prices, but ENOUGH. People will enjoy MI7 in regular theaters or even at home. Plenty of people will enjoy Oppenheimer in regular theaters too, and I’ll certainly rent it months from now and watch it at home, GASP. I’m sure Imax-affectionados swear by Imax theaters, and good for them – I’m glad they have the time, money and interest. But Jesus H., this is the dumbest, most privileged f–king fight.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Oppenheimer/Universal, Backgrid.
Hot take: IMAX is overrated. Waste of money.
+1. My theater has an IMAX and I don’t want to pay the extra $ for differences I really can’t discern.
Right?? Why pay double for near-vertigo?
There’s a great Aziz Ansari blog about how most IMAX is not real IMAX, which is true. True IMAX is abou 4 stories tall and immersive. It’s awesome to watch movies in. We watched Interstellar in IMAX, and the way Nolan used the IMAX medium to go from being in the small confines of a space ship to expansive worlds are breathtaking. I didn’t even realize I didn’t really even like the movie.
I am 48, live in LA, and I have never seen a movie in Imax, ever.
Tom Cruise should’ve insisted his sh*t be shot using IMAX cameras then. He didn’t, he loses. He cannot argue that filming on cameras designed to be shown on particular screens doesn’t magnify and enhance the viewing experience. The inverse is akin to watching a VHS on an LCD screen. So now his film won’t gross as much as it could have since IMAX charges exorbitant sums and make up a bulk of box office gross for films like these. This is about bragging rights for Cruise and, oh well, he can brag about something else. Like how he “saved the movies” and no one cared about that either.
I couldn’t believe Cruise tried to claim “save the movies” as an excuse. During the pandemic, Cruise kept pushing his “Top Gun:ME” sequel back and back, waiting for when things fully reopened and he could make the maximum amount of money. But Nolan took the gamble and released “Tenet” during the pandemic, helping to keep theaters in business. Nolan “deserves” the consideration of booking Imax over Cruise.
I’ll wait for Oppenheimer to stream on TV — not because of the theatre vs IMAX thing, but because at my age, I can’t sit through a three-hour film without a bathroom break. I know the advance reviews are spectacular, but still …
I won’t see MI7 at all. I realize I’m in the minority, but I’m tired of Tom Cruise. I saw Maverick, but that was for Glen Powell.
At my post pandemic existence, I can’t sit in a room with hundreds of people, a good percentage of whom are coughing and sneezing. That’s a nope from me. But Oppenheimer looks epic.
I have rarely had to deal with that sort of biological threat in a theater because I usually go to an early matinee on a weekday and there are hardly any people there. A couple of times my Mom and I were the only ones there.
Agree with you on Cruise. Totally over him
@ Latte, I have been over Cruise for the last decade. He’s an overrated and has over blown ego that demands privilege and preferences over everyone else.
Cruise pushing his weight around the IMAX contract with Nolan due to pure greediness of Cruise. Cruise losses the greatest wealth for his box office sales, he could care less that it’s simply an issue for his “fans”.
Not planning to see either film. I hate tom cruise and the trailer for Oppenheimer just looked like a boring middle aged guy film, a Matt Damon vehicle, romanticizing the guy who ultimately killed 350,000 innocent civilians, what else do you need to know.
I very much agree. I won’t watch anything with Cruise in it and I’m profoundly uncomfortable with the subject matter of Oppenheimer. We shouldn’t ignore past mistakes but let’s not glorify them.
Watching Scientology’s golden goose try to throw his weight around and fail is beautiful. Action Hobbit needs to understand that watching a 60+ year old man running around in the 10th or whatever installment of a franchise that was at its peak 30 years ago isn’t going to draw in crowds. I know he wants his ego massaged and reassurance that he’s still a hot commodity that brings in the crowds, but he isn’t. Most of his movies lately do well because of his costars not because people are lining up to see Tom Cruise.
Agree. I didn’t watch Maverick, but if I had, it would have been for Val Kilmer. Who, by the way, was much hotter than and a better actor than both Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. They all three came on the scene around the same time, and I believe he should have been the mega star.
Thank you, I loathe him. I didn’t see Maverick and won’t see MI58 or whatever number they’re up to. I’m An Old (46) and I saw the first MI movie on a date. When I was 16. We were worried that the theater wouldn’t sell us (my date was 17) tickets because it was rated R. Tom Cruise is gross and I’m glad he lost. That’s my I’m Petty of the Day. 😂
And YES, Riah!! Val was gorgeous back in the day and by all accounts is a lovely person still. I was Team Ice Man even as an adolescent, lol!
“Action Hobbit” Ahahaha!
YES!!!
This is such a fascinating gamble by a major studio. Nolan asked for the moon when the WB relationship devolved and he was looking for a new studio to make movies for and by golly it seems like he got it. To secure his services they are financing a $100 million+, 3 hour long, R rated, historical biopic, with total IMAX exclusivity in the middle of Summer, and at the cost of their other working relationships. I wonder what success even looks like for them.
Agreed, this (Nolan, 3+ hours, biopic) has none of the hallmarks of a summer blockbuster … the only thing that makes any sense is, “we’ll blow s**t up real big and put it on IMAX”.
How do they hope to sex this up? I haven’t seen trailers and won’t see the movie unless my partner brings it home from the library in a few months, but I’ll bet they’re going for all the mileage they can get out of “i am become death”.
Good luck to them, bless their hearts.
I’ll see neither in IMAX. I hate the volume, it physically hurts. At home where I’m comfortable or bust.
Went to IMAX once. It was way too loud. I was plugging my ears for two hours.
Ultimately this boils down to legal contracts. Universal had already inked a contract with IMAX for the three-week run, so Tommy Lift-Shoes can pout all he wants but he can’t force IMAX to break the contract, and him even trying to induce them to do so could have resulted in legal action had he succeeded. Not to mention that as a business owner, if I had some actor calling me having a tantrum and telling me I should blow off a legal contract I signed, I would actually think twice before doing business with them again. What TC tried to do is shady AF.
@ Izzy, that’s an excellent point to make and I hadn’t thought of the possibility of how harmful this would be for not only Cruise but his insistence that his MI78 be shown for a guarantee of so many weeks. Either way, Cruise looks like a petulant child in the end.
I’ve seen two films in IMAX . The first one was well worth the price. The second was money flushed away.
I am looking forward to Oppenheimer in IMAX….but I’m into WWII and that entire period.
I’d take a Nolan movie over a Cruise movie any day.
No contest. Potential for great writing, strong character development, and captivating plots … or Cruise
This is what is called a first world problem. Everyone will be fine.
LOL! WORD.
Tom Cruise is looking rough.
Got the Mission Impossible box set from the library for this rainy holiday weekend. He looks like such a baby in the first film! We’re the same age, so he looked reasonably old at the time. I now look a good bit younger than he does.
As to IMAX, the screen size really matters. IMAX is intended for enormous screens. They are putting IMAX on the largest multiplex screens. That ain’t worth it. The huge screens are for the right movie.
I would like to never see another movie in the theaters.
Between Covid and bedbugs and shootings and the intense and overwhelming screen size and sound not to mention the prices … I’m good.
The lash movies I wanted to see in the theater were the latest Star Wars and I got over that just fine.
I accidentally saw Dungeons and Dragons in a theater where they used parts of the theater wall as a screen. It wasn’t pleasant and I was so thankful it only happened occasionally.
IMAX movies at the science museums are a bit overwhelming to me so I’ve never tried a an IMAX movie movie. They are so expensive and I like the original way just fine.
I HATE that wrap-around technology! It is too much visual stimulation for me, and since it doesn’t run for the entire film, I found myself dreading the next chase scene and just keeping my eyes closed.
But I love a movie filmed in Imax. It’s such a difference in the big action and sci-fi movies that for me, the price tag is worth it.
Yeah, Cillian Murphy and Chris Nolan for the win.
Cruise will be fine, he’ll spend weeks doing PR.
I know Cruise is handcuffed to Atwell as part of the movie but, my first thought was “that is the closest TC has gotten to a live woman in years.”
I don’t think I’m interested in either film, but I am here for Tom throwing his weight around and LOSING.
I am done with movie theaters.
Too loud, too many annoying people.
Way too expensive.
“Action Hobbit” LOL 👍
Cruise personally calling theaters? HaHaHa
You’d think Tom Cruise would give it a rest at this point, but he seems determined to play the Mister Big until he draws his last breath.
I might go see Oppenheimer in the theaters. It doesn’t necessarily sound like a movie that needs to be seen in IMAX format? It would seem more character driven. But I suspect I’ll wait and watch it from the comfort of my couch.
Tom Cruise thought he could use his celebrity status to get IMAX to change their minds & it failed. Universal got their deal when they finalized Oppenheimer’s release date, Paramount didn’t & MI7’s finalized release date came later. It literally came down to contracts & tbh Nolan has been an IMAX spokesperson for years, of course they’d cater to him.
Agree with everyone on the Imax it is too loud and too much for me. I also am not yet ready to sit with a room full of people and Covid. I will never pay for a Tom Cruise movie ever again. I cannot support cult predators
its so crazy that tom cruise is so stinking rich, yet cannot get a woman to date him to save his life. in the top pic he looks like an abusive boyfriend making his girlfriend leave a party RIGHT THEN even though she was still saying goodbye to everyone
What person in their right mind would become involved with Cruise these days?
Holy cow, he is insane from the CoS involvement. Even the CoS can’t draft someone from inside to date him.
I was completely hot for him from the get go, I’m his age. He broke big in Risky Business, was gorgeous in Top Gun and Cocktail, funny as hell in Tropic Thunder, held the screen with Newman, Nicolson, Hoffman not an easy task, Collateral was very good.
For years I watched his movies and enjoyed his acting, hot guy.
Then the couch jumping and the divorce from Kidman, lost his mind!
And the CoS bs was exposed. Not for all the money in the world would I touch him with a 10′ pole, I can’t see why anyone would. Barking insane.
I do find it fascinating how a guy with his background turned into who he is today. He has spent decades driving himself to keep being a Superstar. And I do think he has a death wish, he intends to keep pushing his own stunts until it kills him bc he has no interior or personal life.
Cillian Murphy will be Tommy Shelby, Peaky Blinders was completely riveting bc of his performance.
Eat something, my dude, he is far too thin.
I’m sure it was to give Oppenheimer a haunted look.
Christian Bale was correct about Tom Cruise, btw.
CB was absolutely spot on about Cruise. I just read the articles pertaining to Cruise and his “performance” on DL. Cruise is a dangerous person and shouldn’t be allowed to fly any aircraft.
I wrote in the last imax post about this. I’m glad it happened and the imax guy said “maybe we can bring it back”. When the movie releases are stale they should bring back a premium format movie. Hopefully this can get the ball rolling.
I understand where tom Is coming from but nolan already had agreements and shot in imax more. Exactly when did this start campaign? I hope it was back when they finalized the dates. I know he didn’t want until now to try and bump nolan. You don’t watch nolan for the story you watch for the film.
Full disclosure I didn’t think his batman was anything special. He created a visually rich film because the story was from the comics. The parts that didn’t come from the comics was clunky and went nowhere. Like hbo “game of thrones”.