I saw A Christmas Carol in IMAX 3D, and was so impressed by it that I saw it again in RealD, the other 3D process in which it is being shown. I'd like to share some observations with you as to the similarities – and differences– that I observed between the two formats.
The similarities: the 3D effect is essentially the same in both formats. That's not to say that there aren't differences in the 3D experience, but the "depth" of the image is as apparent in the RealD format as it is in IMAX. One method won't cause images to "pop out" more than the other will. And the extra "dimension" that the 3D effect imparts to the story is equally real.
The differences:
If your nearby cinema has the film in the IMAX format, it's probably also playing it in RealD, as well as in 35MM "2D". The IMAX ticket will be more expensive than the RealD ticket, and that will be pricier than the 35MM ticket. You do get what you pay for.
The IMAX screen, being so large (70 feet or so across), takes up a larger swath of your vision than the RealD screen will (35 feet wide or so). Because the IMAX screen is so big, the 3D effect is more immersive than it is in RealD. This is most apparent in the film's four "fly-through" scenes (one at the film's opening, and one in each of the three "ghost" sequences). The 3D effect is the same either way, but because your eyes have less "non-screen" area to see around the picture area, you are more "swooped up" in those scenes during the IMAX screening than you are in the RealD showing.
Sonically, no other theatrical experience can quite compete with IMAX, simply because the IMAX sound system has more speakers and more amplifier power than you are likely to find in auditoriums with the digital sound systems used for RealD or 35MM showings. If that is uppermost in importance to you, IMAX is your winner, hands down.
Visually, there are some differences. Because it's film, the IMAX image has a certain amount of "jitter" to it. It manifests itself at the end of the film, during the credit roll. You will see some of that jitter on the screen, as the credits seem to "stagger" their way up the screen. The jitter is always there during the IMAX presentation, of course, not just during the credits. If you have noticed it before when you went to the movies, digital projection provides welcome relief from it.
I saw the film in IMAX early in its run, but had I waited a few weeks to see it, I would expect to see that the print had accumulated some dust and scratches as it ran through the projector again and again; but the RealD screenings, which are rendered from a hard disk, would have none of those defects, even weeks after its opening.
Then, there are the differences between the two 3D technologies, especially as they apply to the glasses worn to see each format.
IMAX 3D relies on "linear" polarization. Its biggest drawback is that the surfaces of the glasses need to remain essentially parallel to the surface of the screen in order for the 3D effect to be optimal. And, the wearer's head needs to remain perfectly level throughout the screening. Tilt your head slightly, or turn away from the screen even a little, and the 3D image will start to "ghost" or produce visible after-images, particularly in areas of high contrast, such as credits against a dark background. Tilt your head too far, and the 3D effect goes away altogether.
This means that your seating choices in the IMAX theatre, as large as it is, are limited. You want to sit dead-center to the image, both laterally and vertically, so that your glasses aren't tilted by you having to look UP or DOWN to see the image. Don't be faked out by the overall size of the screen as you walk into the theatre; this movie is in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, so it will not fill the entire height of the IMAX screen, only its entire width.
If you see the film in IMAX 3D and then see it RealD, the first thing that you are likely to notice is that the IMAX image is a lot brighter than is the RealD image, but if you choose to see it only in RealD, that image won't appear to be "dim".
RealD uses "circular" polarized glasses, and that means you don't have to be as careful where you sit, or how perfectly aligned your glasses are to the screen. Even if you tilt your head as far as you can, the 3D effect won't disappear, and ghosting will be far less obvious.
Is this version of A Christmas Carol, with all of its technological wizardry, worth seeing, compared to any of the other movie or TV versions?
Well, yes, it certainly is; the fantasy that Charles Dickens built into his story practically begs for it. And Jim Carrey acquits himself wonderfully in the role of Ebenezer Scrooge. Yes, you'll spot him - and his trademark facial contortions - beneath all that motion capture. Is it worth the extra bucks to see it in 3D?
Absolutely, if for no other reason than to see how skillfully Robert Zemeckis and his team have manipulated it. The added dimension augments the terror that Scrooge feels as the spirits transport him to the edge and back.
Is it worth spending the even bigger bucks to see it in IMAX 3D instead of RealD?
If you care about such details as I have described here, and you have access to an IMAX theatre, sure. But is it worth driving 150 miles farther than another theatre playing it in RealD?
Nah.
The similarities: the 3D effect is essentially the same in both formats. That's not to say that there aren't differences in the 3D experience, but the "depth" of the image is as apparent in the RealD format as it is in IMAX. One method won't cause images to "pop out" more than the other will. And the extra "dimension" that the 3D effect imparts to the story is equally real.
The differences:
If your nearby cinema has the film in the IMAX format, it's probably also playing it in RealD, as well as in 35MM "2D". The IMAX ticket will be more expensive than the RealD ticket, and that will be pricier than the 35MM ticket. You do get what you pay for.
The IMAX screen, being so large (70 feet or so across), takes up a larger swath of your vision than the RealD screen will (35 feet wide or so). Because the IMAX screen is so big, the 3D effect is more immersive than it is in RealD. This is most apparent in the film's four "fly-through" scenes (one at the film's opening, and one in each of the three "ghost" sequences). The 3D effect is the same either way, but because your eyes have less "non-screen" area to see around the picture area, you are more "swooped up" in those scenes during the IMAX screening than you are in the RealD showing.
Sonically, no other theatrical experience can quite compete with IMAX, simply because the IMAX sound system has more speakers and more amplifier power than you are likely to find in auditoriums with the digital sound systems used for RealD or 35MM showings. If that is uppermost in importance to you, IMAX is your winner, hands down.
Visually, there are some differences. Because it's film, the IMAX image has a certain amount of "jitter" to it. It manifests itself at the end of the film, during the credit roll. You will see some of that jitter on the screen, as the credits seem to "stagger" their way up the screen. The jitter is always there during the IMAX presentation, of course, not just during the credits. If you have noticed it before when you went to the movies, digital projection provides welcome relief from it.
I saw the film in IMAX early in its run, but had I waited a few weeks to see it, I would expect to see that the print had accumulated some dust and scratches as it ran through the projector again and again; but the RealD screenings, which are rendered from a hard disk, would have none of those defects, even weeks after its opening.
Then, there are the differences between the two 3D technologies, especially as they apply to the glasses worn to see each format.
IMAX 3D relies on "linear" polarization. Its biggest drawback is that the surfaces of the glasses need to remain essentially parallel to the surface of the screen in order for the 3D effect to be optimal. And, the wearer's head needs to remain perfectly level throughout the screening. Tilt your head slightly, or turn away from the screen even a little, and the 3D image will start to "ghost" or produce visible after-images, particularly in areas of high contrast, such as credits against a dark background. Tilt your head too far, and the 3D effect goes away altogether.
This means that your seating choices in the IMAX theatre, as large as it is, are limited. You want to sit dead-center to the image, both laterally and vertically, so that your glasses aren't tilted by you having to look UP or DOWN to see the image. Don't be faked out by the overall size of the screen as you walk into the theatre; this movie is in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, so it will not fill the entire height of the IMAX screen, only its entire width.
If you see the film in IMAX 3D and then see it RealD, the first thing that you are likely to notice is that the IMAX image is a lot brighter than is the RealD image, but if you choose to see it only in RealD, that image won't appear to be "dim".
RealD uses "circular" polarized glasses, and that means you don't have to be as careful where you sit, or how perfectly aligned your glasses are to the screen. Even if you tilt your head as far as you can, the 3D effect won't disappear, and ghosting will be far less obvious.
Is this version of A Christmas Carol, with all of its technological wizardry, worth seeing, compared to any of the other movie or TV versions?
Well, yes, it certainly is; the fantasy that Charles Dickens built into his story practically begs for it. And Jim Carrey acquits himself wonderfully in the role of Ebenezer Scrooge. Yes, you'll spot him - and his trademark facial contortions - beneath all that motion capture. Is it worth the extra bucks to see it in 3D?
Absolutely, if for no other reason than to see how skillfully Robert Zemeckis and his team have manipulated it. The added dimension augments the terror that Scrooge feels as the spirits transport him to the edge and back.
Is it worth spending the even bigger bucks to see it in IMAX 3D instead of RealD?
If you care about such details as I have described here, and you have access to an IMAX theatre, sure. But is it worth driving 150 miles farther than another theatre playing it in RealD?
Nah.