'Odyssey' IMAX Tickets Fetch 300,000 Won as Screen Quota Looms

Christopher Nolan's "Odyssey" is racing toward 10 million admissions in South Korea, and the surrounding IMAX frenzy is complicating the math for theater operators. As sellouts pile up day after day, cinemas must decide how long to keep the film in IMAX and whether to hand over premium screens to upcoming second-half releases to meet the screen quota.

The year-end lineup includes major titles slated for IMAX, such as "Dune: Part Three" and "Avengers: Doomsday." But it is hard to guarantee that these films will draw as much premium-screen demand as "Odyssey" before they open. For theaters, it is not an easy choice between sticking with a film that is drawing crowds now and leaving space open for future box-office prospects.

Against this backdrop, reports that tickets for "Odyssey" at the "Yongsan IMAX" — known as "Yong-A-Mek" — were trading at around 300,000 won have drawn attention. The entire film was shot with IMAX film cameras, it is a Christopher Nolan work, and above all, word of mouth that it is "a film that must be seen in a theater" has drawn audiences to IMAX screens.

Korea's IMAX theaters operate at 27 CGV locations. But screen sizes and other features vary by venue, and among them the Yongsan IMAX is known to have the country's largest IMAX screen. That is why an unusually large number of moviegoers seek out the Yongsan venue even among IMAX theaters. Scalped tickets carrying premiums have appeared on secondhand trading platforms, and the Korean Film Council has begun monitoring the practice after receiving related tips.

IMAX ticketing has also hit its highest level of the year. Cumulative admissions for "Odyssey" reached about 7.1 million as of the 24th, of which about 710,000 were IMAX admissions. That means roughly one in 10 of all moviegoers chose IMAX — a figure considerably higher than the 2.6% IMAX viewing share for "Spider-Man: Brand New Day" and the 3.2% for "Hope."

But it is not only admissions that make the IMAX performance stand out. In terms of revenue, the presence of premium screens grows even larger. As of the 21st, IMAX revenue for "Odyssey" reached about 12.7 billion won ($8.8 million). Standard-screen admissions totaled about 6.01 million, more than eight times IMAX admissions, but revenue came to about 60.6 billion won ($42 million).

By admissions, IMAX accounts for only 10% of the total, but it makes up about 17% of revenue. This is of course because ticket prices for premium screens such as IMAX are higher than for standard screens. But this is precisely what matters for theaters. If a film with guaranteed box-office success occupies a premium screen that generates substantial revenue with a small number of viewers, it is hard to end the run easily.

In the end, the IMAX success of "Odyssey" goes beyond simply "many people are watching it." With confirmed audience demand and premium screens with high ticket prices generating substantial revenue, it is a card theaters find harder to give up. Because the entire film was made in IMAX and IMAX theaters themselves are scarce, the box-office momentum is accelerating. Reactions such as "What if I'm the only one who misses it?" and "If I'm going to watch it, I'll watch it in IMAX" are actually emerging.

But an unexpected problem arises here. Even if theaters want to continue the run of "Odyssey," the screen quota could hold them back.

Here is the situation. Under the current enforcement decree of the Promotion of the Motion Pictures and Video Products Act, movie theaters must show Korean films on at least one-fifth of their annual screening days. For a theater operating 365 days a year, that is a minimum of 73 days. Premium screens are no exception.

For the Yongsan IMAX, Korean films had been shown on 35 days as of the 21st. It must fill 38 more. To be counted as a Korean-film screening day, every showing that day must be filled with Korean films.

The problem is the second half of the year. At year-end, major titles expected to screen in IMAX open one after another, including "Dune: Part Three" and "Avengers: Doomsday."

Continuing to show "Odyssey" would inevitably cut the Yongsan IMAX screening chances for the second-half blockbusters. Yet pulling "Odyssey" now is also a burden for theaters, because they would have to set aside a film with confirmed audience demand and gamble on the box-office success of films that have not yet opened.

In particular, premium screens, unlike standard ones, have limited seating and are few in number. No matter how many people flock to them, premium screens cannot be expanded indefinitely. That is why both theaters and distributors face complicated calculations over which films get how much of the limited space.

In the end, the issue is not "when to pull 'Odyssey.'" It is how to reconcile the premium-screen demand visible right now with the box-office potential of films yet to open.

Moreover, "Odyssey" differs in the nature of its premium-screen demand from typical foreign blockbusters. Because the entire film was shot with IMAX film cameras and made on the premise of a giant screen, a strong perception has formed that "it should be seen in IMAX if possible." Apart from the film's own success, the IMAX format itself has become an important reason to watch the movie.

Against this backdrop, the old problem of the screen quota has resurfaced.

In fact, this is not the first controversy over applying the screen quota to premium screens. In 2021, controversy arose when "Nothing Serious," a Korean film produced in 2D digital, was booked at the Yongsan IMAX instead of "Dune," which had high IMAX demand. Critics said the programming was done to meet the screen quota rather than to serve the films audiences wanted.

So why was the screen quota created in the first place?

Let us take a brief journey back in time.

The roots of the screen quota go back to 1966. A mandatory domestic-film screening system was introduced through a revised film law that year and took effect in 1967. The starting point was simple: to prevent foreign films, such as Hollywood movies, from encroaching on the domestic market, and to secure a minimum space for Korean films to meet audiences in theaters. At the time, the level required screening six or more Korean films a year and showing Korean films for a total of 90 or more days.

But the screen quota has never been a system that stayed the same.

In 1970, the mandatory screening days were instead cut to 30. Later, as Korean films' audience share fell, the requirement was strengthened again in 1973 to at least one-third of annual screening days, or 121 days. In 1985, it was expanded to at least two-fifths of annual screening days, or 146 days.

Each time market conditions changed, the system moved along with them.

The debate over the screen quota grew in earnest in the late 1990s.

During negotiations for the Korea-U.S. investment treaty in 1998, the film industry pushed back strongly when the United States demanded a reduction in the screen quota. Because Korean films' competitiveness was not as high as it is today, there was deep anxiety in the industry that if the screen quota collapsed, Korean films could lose their place in theaters.

Among the film figures who took to the streets then was actor Ahn Sung-ki, who has since died. Hundreds of film figures took part in a December 1998 rally in Gwanghwamun, Seoul, opposing the reduction of the screen quota. Many actors and directors who represented Korean film at the time spoke with one voice.

Looking back, actor Ahn Sung-ki's presence at the time is quite symbolic. He was then co-chairman of the film industry's committee to defend the screen quota, and he staged a one-man protest and did his utmost to protect Korean film.

An actor who had journeyed alongside the history of Korean film took to the streets, saying that the minimum space for Korean films to survive in theaters had to be protected. At the time, the screen quota was not a simple screening-day regulation for film figures. It was a matter of guaranteeing a "place" where Korean films could meet audiences, and culture was not a simple matter of trade.

"Culture is not an object of trade but an object of exchange." (actor Ahn Sung-ki)

Then, in 2006, another major change arrived.

Han Duck-soo, then deputy prime minister and finance and economy minister, announced in January 2006 that the screen quota would be cut in half, from 146 days to 73, effective July. It was the result of partly accepting the U.S. side's demands ahead of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations. The current 73-day system has been in force since July 2006.

Looking back now, much has changed.

Amid the efforts of the film figures who cried out to defend the screen quota, Korean films went on to grow their presence in the global film market. Directors recognized worldwide emerged, including Im Kwon-taek, Park Chan-wook, Bong Joon-ho, Lee Chang-dong and Hong Sang-soo, and Korean films moved into the center of international film festivals such as Cannes, Berlin and Venice.

Of course, one cannot say Korean films grew on the screen quota alone. Countless factors worked together, including expanded industry investment, changes in the production system, the abilities of directors and actors, and the choices of audiences. Even so, considering why film figures at the time tried so hard to protect the screen quota helps make the reason for its existence a little clearer.

So what about Korean film now? The standing of Korean film has risen beyond comparison with the past, but the Korean film industry itself is again in difficulty. Theater admissions plunged after the COVID-19 pandemic, and with shrinking investment and a falling number of productions compounding the situation, the Korean film market faces a crisis different from before.

That is why the argument to abolish the screen quota also needs to be viewed cautiously. There is concern that screening opportunities could shrink further, especially for Korean films made for premium screens such as IMAX or 4DX, which require production costs and technical capability. Some counter that abolishing the screen quota could ultimately worsen the concentration of foreign films on premium screens.

So is the answer one of two choices, abolition or preservation?

I think what is needed now is instead a discussion of how to adjust the system to fit the current film market.

One representative option that can be raised is calculating the screen quota by "cinema" rather than by "screen."

At present, a single screen must independently meet the mandatory Korean-film screening days. Changing this to a whole-cinema basis would allow flexible operation, such as increasing Korean-film screenings on standard screens instead of reducing them on premium screens. It is a way to operate premium screens, where audience demand concentrates, according to market conditions while still meeting the mandatory Korean-film screening days across the whole cinema.

Of course, this is not a perfect solution either. There is concern that Korean films could have less room on premium screens, and that screening opportunities for Korean films made with IMAX or 4DX in mind could instead shrink.

In that sense, the Yongsan IMAX success of "Odyssey" does not stop at the premium-screen box-office record of one particular film.

It shows the point where the films audiences want, the system theaters must uphold, and the policy goal of protecting Korean film collide.

In the era when the screen quota was created, it was important for Korean films to secure a minimum screening space to compete with foreign films. Now the standing of Korean film has changed, and theaters have gained various types of premium screens that did not exist in the past, such as IMAX, 4DX and Dolby.

If so, is applying a system that has been maintained for more than 20 years unchanged really a fitting approach for today's film market? This is not to say the screen quota should be scrapped. The system's purpose of protecting Korean film must be upheld. But as the film market and audience choices have changed, cannot the method change as well?

What the current film market needs may not be scrapping the screen quota, but taking another look at the system now that the times have changed.

Yeon Seung's Entertainment Talk

Each week, this column picks the hottest issues and most talked-about content in the entertainment industry. From new updates on actors and K-pop artists to hit works and trends in film, drama, over-the-top (OTT) services and K-pop, it unpacks entertainment news that is too good to pass by in an easy and engaging way.