I know what you mean about the audio being loud. It's loud in our IMAX also. Here is my guess: Your IMAX is the smallest screen they could build and still call it IMAX. I know mine is. I'm guessing that they use the same audio amp for every screen size they deploy, with the same settings. So it probably sounds more reasonable on an IMAX screen of a more proper size.

For the record, while I admit it's too loud, I still enjoy it. But then, the loudest movie I've seen on our IMAX screen was Dark Knight.

Already been covered, but...

IMAX: The "IMAX" screen in my city is small. Smaller, it turns out, than the big screens at our local AMC. By quite a margin. And the seats are so close to one another that when a person leans back, his head is in your lap. I will give it points for having a good sound system, but it's really pretty easy to fill such a small room with sound. The hypothetical resolution improvement from the DMR process is something I have never really noticed.

DLP: Far as I know, these screens are still mostly something below even the humble 1080p. Why on earth would I want to watch a movie with truncated resolution? (3d notwithstanding.)

I went with a regular 35mm print, and incidentally saw it on the biggest screens in my city, at the AMC, which sadly doesn't get too many big movies, thanks to some sort of deal Cinemark has with whoever distributes the films.

Meanwhile, RED moves right along with their mystery compression which seems to defy the implied challenge of newer and better codecs - and perhaps reality itself.

Disney are afraid to release Fantasia on Bluray. The format is still too much of an enthusiast's platform for them to get away with another "uncut" censored release. I think I would die laughing if we got to see a 1080p version of that EXTREME closeup of the Centaurette from the DVD release. The resolution went out the window.

Benz, what I think they did was take a pristine film negative and go from there. The digital restoration techniques employed by Disney are second to none, from what I can tell. You would be gobsmacked if you ever got to see how the True Life Adventures series turned out. And for animated features, they even do a bit of cheating, by doing things like re-rendering scrolling backgrounds after they've been remastered. As far as the film goes, trust me on this: Unless we're talking about 8mm, film has more than enough resolution to justify a 1080p transfer. Check out Star Trek in HD. Those were 16mm films.

Since the glasses are tinted, is the screen made to be overly bright, to compensate, or is the whole 3d experience unavoidably dark?

Somebody needs to do an article which outlines the following: 1) What 3d technologies exist (from the red/blue glasses to wearing two small TVs on your face), 2) which theater-based technology gives the most satisfying experience (red/blue glasses being at one end of that spectrum), and 3) which technology is likely to be installed at one's local theater when Avatar rolls out.

My two cents. For anyone who's hanging on to analog tapes of all sorts (VHS, Hi8, etc.), s-video is most probably the best possible video option they have. If any argument could be made about the potential prematurity of s-video's demise, it's this: There still isn't any satisfactory means for people with such tapes to digitally store them for posterity and play back the results.

Analog tapes are, of course, technically lossless / raw. ANY form of lossy compression reduces the quality. And this means that if one wishes to create a hypothetically ideal digital rendition of an analog tape, the minimum file size will be about 30GB per hour, at over 60 megabits per second. It would be a stretch to say that the average consumer has ample options for the playback of that kind of media.

The list doesn't include:

The Final Countdown
Blue Man Group

These are two I've been keeping my eye on. Final Countdown was supposed to be out last week but all retailers indicate Nov 4th. Blue Man Group was delayed by months but, again, is slated for the 4th.

The real milestone, I would say, is when it has 1000 titles that aren't encoded as MPEG-2. A pie in the sky milestone would be the day when each of the extant MPEG-2 titles (Robocop, Commando, etc.) are replaced with proper iterations.

As interesting as this multi-feed concept may sound, who in their right mind would pass on the unexpurgated gold which Fox News promises to be on the 4th? Me, I've already secured a bona-fide theater-style popcorn machine.

This actually sounds pretty nice. But me, I plan to stay fixed on Fox News with my bag o' popcorn. I just don't feel that the other channels will be able to provide the same entertainment level.