Space Needle urged to show feature films on Washington’s biggest IMAX screen 34%

By Margo Vansynghel46% The Seattle Times54%

8/2/2026, 3:09:04 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Recency Bias, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 17.7% saturation with 128 hits. Analysis detected 722 faulty-reasoning hits from 724 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.7% and a BS Rank of 34% (18,494 of 27,683 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 66.80% of the article peer group.

Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” has been in theaters for only two weeks, and it’s already been an epic journey, shattering box office expectations and selling out screenings worldwide. 
Across the country, people are clamoring to see the film on the biggest screens possible, ideally in IMAX, an immersive, taller film format with a high level of detail. 
But Washington film fans can’t see the movie on the biggest IMAX screen in the state. 
That’s because IMAX at the Center  the former Boeing IMAX Theater  is showing only documentaries right now. 
That’s what the Seattle Film Commission pointed out in a public letter sent Wednesday to the new owners of IMAX at the Center, the owners of the Space Needle, as they urged the company to resume showing feature films. 
“The Seattle Film Commission is saddened by yet another beloved theater being lost  in this case, new ownership by Space Needle prioritizing IMAX documentary films over features,” the advisory board established by the city of Seattle wrote in a letter addressed to the theater’s new owner, the company behind the Space Needle and Chihuly Garden and Glass. 
The company purchased part of Seattle’s Pacific Science Center for $17.25 million earlier this spring, including the then-Boeing IMAX Theater. 
While the 373-seat theater still is showing short documentaries, including ones about artist Dale Chihuly and NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope, feature films currently are not part of the plan, Space Needle public relations director Amy Cunningham said this spring before the theater’s reopening in late May. 
Cunningham confirmed receipt of the film commission’s letter but didn’t provide comment Thursday afternoon. 
“We strongly encourage Space Needle to consider the value of the screen beyond documentary shorts,” commission members wrote in the letter. 
Seattle’s filmgoers, visitors to Seattle Center and anyone who loves watching film at an “epic scale” have proved that value, the letter argues further: “We hope Space Needle considers the role they have in that cultural conversation, as stewards of one of the region’s most prized venues.” 
The commission, which consists of industry professionals, has no legal power but makes recommendations to the city on policies and programs on the economic development of Seattle’s film industry. 
The letter  signed by the 10 sitting members of the commission  urged the Space Needle to commit to maintaining regular theatrical film programming, partnering with experienced film programmers, and engaging with Seattle’s film community, educational institutions, distributors and cultural organizations to develop a sustainable vision for the theater’s future. 
IMAX is a type of “premium” film format favored by cinephiles and many directors because it’s designed for optimal and immersive viewing with larger-than-average screens, often multiple stories high, high-resolution imagery and unique stadium seating. 
While many theaters may use the IMAX moniker, including in the Seattle area, IMAX at the Center is the only one locally that has a dual 4K Laser projection system paired with a 60-foot-tall, 80-foot-wide, 1.43:1 aspect ratio screen, allowing it to display full-frame, uncropped and high-resolution features filmed for IMAX, like “Dune 2” or “The Odyssey.” 
(It does not, however, show 70mm films, which offer detailed texture.) 
IMAX 70mm is the format Nolan has said best suits the movie. 
Washingtonians, however, have to go on their own adventures  to California or Vancouver, B.C.  to see the movie in IMAX 70mm. 
“The Odyssey” already is a mega hit: On Wednesday, the film surpassed $700 million at the global box office, becoming the fourth-highest-grossing movie of the year after less than two weeks in theaters. 
So far, IMAX showings contributed $140 million of the film’s global ticket sales, Variety reported. 
But big hits don’t necessarily equal profitability. 
While blockbusters like “Dune 2” or “Oppenheimer” were well attended at PacSci’s IMAX theaters, data provided by the nonprofit earlier this year showed that overall, revenue for its IMAX theaters had been declining due to decreasing attendance and increasing overhead costs. 
Theater expenses were exceeding revenue. 
Amid a wider movie theater industry contraction, studios and distributors have instituted terms that make it increasingly difficult for theaters  especially single-screen ones  to run a profit. 
PacSci, hoping to stabilize amid financial headwinds, sold the then-Boeing IMAX Theater (as well as other parts of its property) to the Space Needle in March. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 3.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Margo Vansynghel: 3.6%The Columbian: 3.5%Availability Heuristic4.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 4.0%Margo Vansynghel: 1.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Hindsight Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 6.9%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 5.4%Margo Vansynghel: 3.3%The Columbian: 0.9%Loss Aversion5.4%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 1.8%The Columbian: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%Margo Vansynghel: 0.9%The Columbian: 2.7%Optimism Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 13.7%Margo Vansynghel: 6.8%The Columbian: 9.4%Negativity Bias13.7%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Margo Vansynghel: 1.6%The Columbian: 0.5%In-Group Bias6.5%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Margo Vansynghel: 3.2%The Columbian: 1.3%Halo Effect4.8%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.4%Margo Vansynghel: 2.1%The Columbian: 1.3%Recency Bias8.4%This article: 7.9%Margo Vansynghel: 2.0%The Columbian: 0.4%Primacy Effect7.9%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.7%Margo Vansynghel: 1.3%The Columbian: 3.2%Appeal to Authority3.7%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 1.6%The Columbian: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 1.6%The Columbian: 3.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 2.0%The Columbian: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 17.7%Margo Vansynghel: 10.4%The Columbian: 5.0%Appeal to Emotion17.7%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.7%The Columbian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.0%Margo Vansynghel: 1.0%The Columbian: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.5%Margo Vansynghel: 0.4%The Columbian: 0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.5%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.6%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 2.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 8.0%Margo Vansynghel: 4.0%The Columbian: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection8.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 2.0%The Columbian: 5.6%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 6.5%Margo Vansynghel: 1.6%The Columbian: 1.0%Indoctrination6.5%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Margo Vansynghel: 0.0%The Columbian: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

724 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers38%attributed speech447writer words
49%flagged-word coverage
216 attributed words78% of attributed speech79% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Quote-first Misdirection+26.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Seattle Film Commission: 26.9%26.9%Indoctrination+21.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Seattle Film Commission: 21.8%21.8%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.