If you ask a cinephile, there’s nothing better than Imax 70mm film. So Ryan Coogler’s latest movie, “Sinners,” which was partially shot on Imax film cameras and is being shown in Imax 70mm, has been all the buzz since its Easter weekend debut, when it grossed $63.5 million worldwide, exceeding expectations.
“Sinners” features a refreshingly original plot that is part Jim Crow period piece about two brothers who open a juke joint, part vampire thriller. Starring frequent Coogler collaborator Michael B. Jordan and newcomer Miles Caton, the film received an A CinemaScore — the first ever for a horror movie — and 98% on Rotten Tomatoes.
For many moviegoers, the fervor about the genre-bending film is matched by excitement for Coogler’s technical accomplishments, which follows in the footsteps of Christopher Nolan’s best picture winner, “Oppenheimer.” (While Todd Phillips’ “Joker: Folie à Deux” and Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Part Two” were also recently shown in Imax 70mm, they were shot for Imax digitally.) Ahead of “Sinners’” release, Coogler encouraged audiences to see the film in its intended format, on Imax 70mm screens in 1.43:1 aspect ratio.
But the mandate is harder to meet than it may seem as “Sinners” is screening in Imax 70mm in only eight theaters in the United States and 10 theaters globally: Harkins Arizona Mills 18 & IMAX in Tempe; Regal Irvine Spectrum & IMAX in Irvine; Universal Cinema AMC at CityWalk Hollywood & IMAX in Los Angeles; AMC Metreon 16 & IMAX in San Francisco; AutoNation IMAX Theater in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; IMAX Theatre in the Indiana State Museum in Indianapolis; AMC Lincoln Square 13 & IMAX in New York City; Cinemark Dallas & IMAX in Dallas; Cineplex Cinemas Vaughan & IMAX in Ontario, Canada; and British Film Institute IMAX in London.
The per-screen average for the Imax 70mm locations (excluding London) was about $91,000 over the weekend, according to Jason Allen, head of publicity at Imax.
Advertisement
As for what makes Imax 70mm so special, the film camera is generally considered the highest resolution motion picture camera ever developed. The captured Imax negative has a resolution of 12x18K, according to Imax chief quality officer David Keighley. In comparison, the highest resolution of the average television or movie screen is 4K.
The visual is “absolutely sharp from edge to edge on a 90-foot screen,” said Bill Counter, a theater historian and retired projectionist. “An extraordinary amount of detail is captured.” Simply put, “it’s bigger, it’s sharper, it’s better.”
An Imax 70mm projector.
(Imax)
Advertisement
Adding to the hype, while not the first movie to utilize mixed aspect ratios, “Sinners” is the first film to be shot on both Imax (1.43:1) film and Ultra Panavision 70 (2.76:1). Cinematographer Autumn Durald Arkapaw is the first female director of photography to shoot in Imax film. Ultra Panavision 70 had a resurgence with the release of Quentin Tarantino’s “The Hateful Eight” in 2015. Prior to that, the format hadn’t been used for almost 50 years.
“Sinners” puts Coogler in the same company as renowned filmmakers Nolan, Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg, who have the clout and expertise to shoot on film, said Keighley.
“We’re excited because he’s a young filmmaker and he has done an incredible job with this,” Keighley said. “He’s not just a director that is enamored by the story, he’s a person who is enamored by the technology and believes both of those things together drive people to the theaters.”
Keighley said “Sinners” is one of the most positively received films he’s worked on. And in Dallas, Cinemark added 10 a.m. showings to the movie’s two-week Imax run to meet audience demand, said retired Imax technician and projectionist Patrick Caldwell.
“Sinners’” relatively limited 70mm release — “Oppenheimer” was presented in Imax 70mm in 30 theaters worldwide — came down to a business decision, said Keighley.
Advertisement
Caldwell put it more bluntly: “‘Oppenheimer’ got them going but let’s face it, Ryan Coogler is not Christopher Nolan. Mr. Coogler doesn’t have the name recognition to demand 30 theaters with each print costing upwards of $50,000, not to mention the cost of the equipment. Just the light bulb of the projector is $4,000.”
On the flip side, the limited opportunities to see the film in its intended format “makes it an event and people know they will get a more deluxe experience and they’ll get the entire image,” said Counter.
“Well, how rare is that if you’re a movie nut?” asked Caldwell. “People travel thousands of miles to see that.”
The Times spoke with moviegoers who did just that:
Sean Smrtka, 46
Where do you live? Outside of Cleveland
Advertisement
What theater did you watch the film in? IMAX Theatre in the Indiana State Museum in Indianapolis
Why did you make the trip? The main thought is we only have three actual Imax screens that are remotely accessible — Indianapolis, Grand Rapids and Toronto. I didn’t understand any of it until a few years ago when “Oppenheimer” came out. I grabbed a ticket in Indianapolis, I walked in like, “Wow OK, the screen’s gigantic,” and it just blew my mind how big it was compared to the Imax I know at home. I was completely immersed in it. For the 10-year anniversary in December, I went back out to see “Interstellar.”
People think, “Oh it’s just bigger or there’s more sound,” but the aspect ratio actually changes from scene to scene and it really impacts your viewing experience. I took my dad to see “Sinners” in Indianapolis last Thursday. I got dead-center perfect seats. He walked in, he’s looking around like, “Where’s the screen?” I’m like, “That whole wall is the screen.” The movie opened in a 1.43:1 ratio. He’s just sitting there looking around, you can tell his mind was blown by it. Hearing him talk about it afterward definitely made the five-hour drive worth it.
David Janove, 36
Where do you live? Chicago
What theater did you watch the film in? IMAX Theatre in the Indiana State Museum
Advertisement
Why did you make the trip? I lived in L.A. and Orange County for 17 years and we’re really spoiled there. There’s several Imax theaters — the kind of Imax that is capable of showing the real film, not the laser projection. Chicago had one at Navy Pier, but it shut down during COVID and Chicago doesn’t even have laser projection.
So when a movie was shot, like “Sinners” was and like Christopher Nolan does his, I want to see it in 70mm Imax, and Indianapolis was the closest. I got a $166 plane ticket just for the day — this was [Tuesday] — I flew out at 7 a.m. from Chicago. My Uber driver even was like, “You’re heading to the airport, you don’t need any luggage?” I was like, “I don’t need luggage today.” It’s a short flight — only 35 minutes — and relatively cheap. When I landed, I took an Uber to downtown Indianapolis, got lunch, saw “Sinners” and then literally got a Lyft back to the airport and was back in Chicago at 4 p.m. It’s a little crazy. I still can’t believe that I did that.
I was talking with my girlfriend and my friends about this trip and they were like, “Is it worth it?” and I was like, “Yes, it’s worth it because they only put out a 70mm Imax movie once a year.” When I saw that YouTube video of Ryan Coogler talking about the different aspect ratios, I was like, “This guy is speaking to me.” … I’m glad he and Christopher Nolan are putting their weight behind 70mm Imax. I’m not a purist, but I want these incredible formats to survive.
Anudeep Metuku, 23
Where do you live? Sacramento
What theater did you watch the film in? AMC Metreon 16 & IMAX in San Francisco
Advertisement
Why did you make the trip? As soon as the tickets went live, I made sure to get two tickets [for] April 19, but as the day approached, I came upon some information through Reddit saying Ryan Coogler had been at the Grand Lake Theatre in Oakland on Thursday and that he might be at the Metreon on Friday. So I was contemplating that Friday afternoon if I should make the trip. It was kind of a gamble, but my younger brother, who is also interested in Imax, encouraged me. I was refreshing the page until I got a really good seat and drove two hours straight to San Francisco after work.
Experiencing the film in this format was fantastic, especially knowing that Metreon Imax was Coogler’s “home” Imax. I’d seen videos but never been in an auditorium with a director like that. The energy in the room — everyone was really excited when he came in. He mentioned when he presented the film, pointing to the audience, that he sat in almost the same seat as I did for “Sinners” at the Metreon when he watched “The Dark Knight” in 2008 (the first time Imax 70mm was used in a feature film and not a documentary) and that after that he knew he wanted to shoot [on Imax film]. I also got to see “The Dark Knight” in 2008. We were living in Hyderabad, India, and my dad took me and my little brother to an Imax theater called Prasads. That was me and my brother’s first exposure to 70mm Imax, and ever since, we always tried to catch Imax movies at Grand Theater venues.
Brendan Cauvel, 27
Where are you from? Washington, D.C.
What theater did you watch the film in? AMC Lincoln Square 13 & IMAX in New York City
Why did you make the trip? In high school and college, I was aware that there was this greater format to see the films, but being from the Midwest, I didn’t really have the means. So “Oppenheimer” was the first one that I experienced and I did it for “Dune 2” last year. It was a no-brainer for “Sinners.”
Advertisement
I got friends to come with me; we did a three-person road trip and we didn’t even stay the night. We left D.C. at 5 a.m., got there by 9, saw the movie at 1 p.m., drove back at 4 and got home by 9. It was a full 10-hour workday. We all loved it. I’m going to see it now for the third time within a week.
What’s really special about “Sinners” — [with] everything from the blockbuster horror side, to how they marketed it as a genre film, all the film nerd stuff was sort of the cherry on top.
It’s a skill that Ryan Coogler has in general, his ability as a Black filmmaker to weave in Black stories into movies like “Creed” and a Marvel film with “Black Panther,” and make that angle digestible for people who are not used to going to films that have social commentary. His ability to make that, and now this technical expertise, digestible in a horror genre is really impressive and special. You don’t need to understand that stuff to enjoy it, but for people who understand it, those technical elements add value.
Kunal Nayyar in ‘Christmas Karma’
| Photo Credit: True Bit Entertainment/YouTube
Christmas jumpers are all I can remember of this film. As this reimagining of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol dragged on with sickly-sweet sentimentality and song, my eyes constantly tried to work out whether those snowflakes and reindeer were printed on the jerseys or, if knitted, how complicated the patterns would have been.
Christmas Karma (English)
Director: Gurinder Chadha
Starring: Kunal Nayyar, Leo Suter, Charithra Chandran, Pixie Lott, Danny Dyer, Boy George, Hugh Bonneville, Billy Porter, Eva Longoria, Mia Lomer
Storyline: A miserly businessman learns the true meaning of Christmas when visited by ghosts of Christmas past, present and future
Advertisement
Runtime: 114 minutes
Gurinder Chadha, who gave us the gorgeous Bend it Like Beckham (who wants to make aloo gobi when you can bend the ball like Beckham indeed) has served up an unappetising Bollywood song-and-dance version of Dickens’ famous Christmas story.
A still from the film
| Photo Credit:
True Bit Entertainment/YouTube
A curmudgeonly Indian businessman, Ishaan Sood (Kunal Nayyar), fires his entire staff on Christmas Eve—except his accountant, Bob (Leo Suter)—after catching them partying at the office. Sood’s nephew, Raj (Shubham Saraf) invites him for a Christmas party which he refuses to attend.
He returns home after yelling at some carol singers for making a noise, the shopkeeper (Nitin Ganatra) at the corner for his business decisions and a cabbie (Danny Dyer) for being too cheerful.
His cook-housekeeper, Mrs. Joshi (Shobu Kapoor) tells him to enjoy his dinner in the dark as he has not paid for heat or electricity. He is visited by the spirit of his dead business partner, Marley (Hugh Bonneville), who is in chains with the spirits of all the people he wronged. Marley’s spirit tells Sood that he will be visited by three spirits who will reveal important life lessons.
Advertisement
A still from the film
| Photo Credit:
True Bit Entertainment/YouTube
The Ghost of Christmas Past (Eva Longoria), with Day of the Dead makeup and three mariachis providing musical accompaniment, shows Sood his early, happy days in Uganda as a child and the trauma of being expelled from the country by Idi Amin.
Sood comes to Britain where his father dies of heartbreak and decides the only way out is to earn a lot of money. He meets and falls in love with Bea (Charithra Chandran) but loses her when he chooses paisa over pyaar even though he tries to tell her he is being ruthless only to earn enough to keep her in luxury.
The Ghost of Christmas Present (Billy Porter) shows Bob’s twee house full of Christmas cheer, despite the roast chicken past its sell-by date, and his young son, Tim, bravely smiling despite his illness.
The Ghost of Christmas Future (Boy George, Karma is sure a chameleon!) shows Sood dying alone except for Bob and Mrs. Joshi. He sees the error of his ways and throws much money around as he makes everything alright. He even ends up meeting up with his childhood friend in Uganda.
Apart from the mixed messages (money makes everything alright, let us pray for the NHS but go to Switzerland to get well) and schmaltzy songs, Christmas Karma suffers from weak writing and wooden acting.
Advertisement
Priyanka Chopra’s Hindi rendition of George Michael’s ‘Last Christmas’ runs over the end credits featuring Chadha and the crew, bringing back fond memories of Bina Mistry’s ‘Hot Hot Hot’ from Bend it Like Beckham. Even a sitar version by Anoushka Shankar is to no avail as watching this version of A Christmas Carol ensures bad karma in spades.
President Trump wants a very different kind of CNN if the cable news channel’s parent Warner Bros. Discovery changes hands.
As details emerge on the battle between Netflix and Paramount over control of the historic movie studio and its streaming and TV assets, Trump acknowledged he’s made it clear he wants new ownership and leadership at the network that has been the prime target in his attacks on the mainstream media over the last decade.
“I think the people that have run CNN for the last long period of time are a disgrace,” Trump told reporters Wednesday. “I don’t think they should be entrusted with running CNN any longer. So I think any deal should — it should be guaranteed and certain that CNN is part of it or sold separately.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed Trump’s sentiment Thursday from her lectern after a testy exchange with CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins. “Their ratings have declined, and I think the president rightfully believes that network would benefit from new ownership with respect to this deal,” Leavitt said.
Trump has said he will be “involved” in the government‘s regulatory review of a WBD deal. Injecting the president’s animus toward CNN — which goes back to his presidential campaign in 2016 — into the process has insiders at the network worried that journalistic independence will be sacrificed for the sake of a Warner Bros. Discovery deal.
Advertisement
CNN declined to comment.
A Wall Street Journal report said Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison has signaled to Trump administration officials he would make “sweeping changes” to CNN if his company took control. (A representative for Ellison declined comment.)
Ellison has said he would combine CNN’s newsgathering operations with Paramount’s CBS News, where conservative-friendly Bari Weiss has been installed as editor in chief. Such a move would follow the $16-million settlement Paramount reached with Trump earlier this year resolving a dispute over a “60 Minutes” interview featuring then-Vice President Kamala Harris.
But Trump said he wants to see a new CNN owner even if Netflix prevails. Netflix’s $72 billion offer does not include CNN or WBD’s other basic cable properties. Paramount has countered with a $78 billion offer.
What Trump desires is more favorable news coverage. But pandering to the White House could have a dubious outcome from a business standpoint for the next CNN owner.
Advertisement
The cable news landscape has evolved over the last decade as the country’s politics have become more polarized and tribal.
The trend helped the conservative-leaning Fox News and progressive MS NOW (formerly MSNBC), both of which have seen their audiences grow over that time even as the number of pay-TV homes has declined dramatically.
CNN has tried to stake out the middle ground, although its aggressive coverage of Trump’s first term created a perception it had moved left, especially as more commentary was added to its prime time programs.
CNN already saw the impact of attempting to bring more right-leaning voices to its program under Chris Licht, the executive brought in to run the network in 2022. He was under a mandate from Warner Bros. Discovery Chief Executive David Zaslav, who publicly said the network needed to appeal more to conservative audiences.
The network experienced an immediate exodus of viewers, putting it in third place behind MS NOW. CNN was generating $1.2 billion in profit earlier in the decade. This year, the figure is expected to be in the range of $675 million.
Advertisement
Jon Klein, a digital entrepreneur and former CNN president, said it would be folly for his former network to blatantly court conservatives again.
“You’re not going to convince all those Fox News viewers that suddenly CNN is friendly to them and their way of life,” he said. “These are much older viewers who don’t change their habits so easily. There has been mistrust that has been fostered over many years.”
Klein noted that even upstart right-wing networks that provide unwavering support of Trump — Newsmax and OAN — haven’t made a dent in Fox News’ dominance. MS NOW would be the beneficiary of any rightward shift by CNN, he added.
“It would accelerate the ratings slide and they become completely irrelevant,” said another former CNN executive who did not want to comment publicly.
Fox News does more than provide largely sympathetic coverage and commentary for Trump. Rupert Murdoch’s network has worked at forging a deep connection with viewers, which has made it the ratings leader since 2002.
Advertisement
The lineup of highly paid Fox News personalities is reliably in sync with the audience’s values and the hot-button issues that keep them tuned in. Viewer loyalty has helped the network attract hundreds of new advertisers in recent years, with some integrating patriotic messages into their marketing efforts.
“Fox is an incredibly well-oiled machine,” Klein said.
Klein said CNN and other legacy news organizations are better off focusing on developing an effective digital strategy to insure their future as traditional TV viewing declines, instead of chasing ideological balance.
Attempting to satisfy Trump’s desire for more positive coverage is a slippery slope. While Paramount appointed an ombudsman to CBS News and brought in Weiss — moves aimed at clearing the regulatory path for its merger with Skydance Media — Trump is still lashing out at coverage he doesn’t like.
After a “60 Minutes” interview with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) aired Dec. 7, in which she was highly critical of Trump, the president said the program is “worse” under new ownership.
Advertisement
The only significant move to attract conservative viewers under Weiss is her prime time interview with the widow of slain right-wing activist Charlie Kirk that airs Saturday.
“I think the prevailing wisdom over there is this notion that at least if they stay out of the clutches of Paramount, some rich philanthropist will buy them and they’ll be fine,” said the former CNN executive.
But if Netflix gets WBD without CNN, there is no guarantee it would not end up with a Trump-friendly owner if the network were spun off separately. The rank and file may wish for Laurene Powell Jobs, chair of the Atlantic, but could end up with a deep-pocketed right winger.
CNN Chairman Mark Thompson’s message to the troops is keep calm and carry on. “I know this strategic review has been a period of inevitable uncertainty across CNN and indeed the whole of WBD,” Thompson told staff in a recent memo. “Of course, I can’t promise you that the media attention and noise around the sale of our parent will die down overnight. But I do think the path to the successful transformation of this great news enterprise remains open.”
Trump’s anger toward CNN has become more personal as time has gone on. He has insulted reporters during press briefings and reportedly has told people he wants to see the firing of anchors Erin Burnett and Brianna Keilar.
Advertisement
Oddly enough, it was Burnett’s journalism that provided Trump with video for his most effective commercial of his 2024 campaign.
Burnett conducted the 2020 interview with Kamala Harris where the former vice president expressed her support for providing medical care to prisoners undergoing gender-affirming care. A clip of the segment was used in the commercial that said “Kamala’s for they/them, President Trump is for you.”
An orphaned girl hires her hitman next-door neighbor to kill the monster under her bed. This R-rated action/horror movie mashup has lots of violence but surprisingly little gore. However, there are still many gruesome moments, even if they’re just offscreen. And some language and a strange portrayal of Christian worship come up, too.
