|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: DCIP actually does something (maybe?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clint Koch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1435
From: San Luis Obispo, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 10-24-2008 06:23 PM
back on topic...
http://www.dcinematoday.com/dc/extURLs.aspx?id=330
Regal CEO says digital upgrade may be delayed.
Calling it one of the worst credit markets he has seen in years, Regal Entertainment Group CEO Mike Campbell said Thursday a $1 billion industry digital upgrade could be delayed.
"We believe, and JP Morgan believes, that it will get financed once the market returns to something that is reasonably normal," Campbell said. "We're going to continue to put together the pieces behind the scenes to be in a position to react."
The news, which sent shares of the company down nearly 19 percent, came as the Knoxville-based company, which is the nation's largest movie theater operator, reported that profits declined 46 percent in the third quarter.
Net income totaled $31.6 million, or 21 cents per share, compared to last year's third-quarter profit of $58 million, or 36 cents per share. Diluted earnings per share were 21 cents for the third quarter of 2008, compared to 36 cents for third-quarter 2007.
Third-quarter 2008 revenues were up 1 percent to $757.6 million compared to last year.
Digital Cinema Implementation Partners, a joint venture of Regal, Cinemark and AMC Entertainment, was formed to roll out cinema digital technology to theaters nationwide.
On Oct. 1, DCIP announced it had signed long-term digital deployment agreements for digital cinema upgrade with 20th Century Fox, Walt Disney Motion Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios and Lions Gate Films. DCIP is currently in discussion with the last two major studios, Sony and Warner Brothers.
"We are excited about the conversion to digital projection because of the incremental margin opportunities provided by 3-D and alternative content," Campbell told analysts in an earnings call.
A key element to Regal's strategy in the next several years, he said, will be "to provide enhanced theatergoing experiences."
That includes 3-D, an expanded base of IMAX theaters and the potential for special events like the Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus concert film last year. A similar concert film featuring the pop singing group Jonas Brothers will debut in early 2009.
Campbell said there are a total of 40 3-D films announced for release over the next several years, and Regal is installing its first digital IMAX system this month.
"We are pleased with the studios' commitment to this premium content, which also allows us to price at a premium compared to our existing 2-D ticket prices," he said.
Regal also benefited from recently acquired Consolidated Theaters, which generated cash flows that were slightly ahead of company expectations.
"We're not recession-proof, but history shows we're as recession-resistant as any business out there," Campbell said. "This is a very difficult market for everybody. At Regal, it's business as usual. We've had a good year as an industry."
Campbell pointed to last year's record third quarter resulting from a string of blockbusters. This quarter, he said, was relatively flat, and up 13 percent to 15 percent as an industry.
Regal also will benefit this year from a 53rd accounting week, which contributed an additional 10.2 million attendees and approximately $40 million of adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) the last time it occurred, in 2003.
Campbell said he was encouraged by a strong start to the fourth-quarter box office and is optimistic about the upcoming film slate, which includes Disney's "High School Musical 3," "Saw V," "Quantum of Solace" and the next 3-D animated film from Disney, called "Bolt," featuring the voices of John Travolta and Miley Cyrus.
The company also declared a cash dividend of 30 cents.
Regal Entertainment Group operates 6,782 screens in 551 locations in 39 states and the District of Columbia.
Business writer Carly Harrington may be reached at
| IP: Logged
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 10-28-2008 07:38 PM
quote: Bruce Hansen
I think that one of the main reasons, is that most 3D movies are made just to show off 3D effects, and the movie itself sucks. At first people will go to see this, because it's new and different; but will stop going when the 3D new-ness has worn off, and they figure out that there is nothing to the movies themselves. It sounds like to studios are betting a lot on something that is not going to last.
True - going back to the old two machine interlock when running 3D back in the 1950's? How long did that last even though the mechanical setup in tying the two machines together with either an actual drive shaft or toothed belt syncing the two projectors together was a chore in itself....You still had to wear glasses (anaglyph).
Then, we go into the early 70's and a touch in the early 80's with the return of 3D - only this time getting away from the two machine interlock and having the images doubled in one frame using special lenses, mirrors and the silver screen.....You still had to wear glasses (this time either anaglyph or polarized...)
..and most of these films that were done in 3D were pretty bad - only a small handful managed to be remembered as classics.
Now, we're into the digital age. This time, of the Digital 3D releases, even though with CGI technology,they can still be forgotten.
Once again, IMO is that why Hollyrock is heading towards the digital 3D fad once again is that this time, as did back in the early 50's when TV came out, is to get the people out to the movies-to witness the magic of it all.
Plus, instead of fighting the home medium as the studios did in the past, but this time, the studios are "playing ball" in seeing it as a huge alternatve form of revenue with DVD and BR releases of the same film that can be presented in 3D for home viewing on people's huge 1080i,96sq.in. plasma or LCD monitors, only being reduced to the cheaper anaglyph format for home viewing.
It might be a fad, but it's a fad that must be needed for survival now in this digital age.
As for what Louis mentions on "without glasses" -- about the only way that 3D could work without glasses it to make it rear projection with sections of light shining though layered LCD panels (like lindicular imagery) and each panel having its separate picture information and a form of "icing on top of the cake" on the front of this screen to blend the layers into one image.
For front projection on a flat screen is the weak spot in this 3D world since there is no depth where the sections of light can fall upon where we have to depend on glasses to 'trick' us into seeing depth.
-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 10-28-2008 11:14 PM
Just your usual couple of quick corrections.
Most of the movies shown in the fifties in 3D were shown with polarized dual projection setups. Thus, polarized glasses (transparent grey), not anaglyph (red/blue-or-green).
And although indeed the primary way of home video 3D delivery has been anaglyphic, many movies have been released on DVD on other systems (i.e. field-sequential, to be watched with electronic glasses).
And there is no need to make LCD (or even plasma) TV's to deliver 3D in anaglyphic form only. There are plenty of LCD monitors in the market that are capable of showing 3D in suitable polarized form, thereby needing polarized glasses, (like the Zalman ZM-M220W, i.e.) or field-sequential (mostly DLP retro projection based or high refresh plasma/LCDs) or even autostereoscopically (no need for glasses, like the Philips 42" 3D6C01).
Many 3D home solutions are not developed into fully home-tv friendly products only because there is little/no demand for them until much more 3D media is available and a suitable 3D standard for home content delivery is agreed upon. But Sharp, JVC and many others have shown prototypes for years proving that they are more than ready to hit the market with convenient and effective home 3D solutions.
There is no doubt that the second the 3D content is there and the demand arises, the manufacturers will be ready with large, nice, high resolution 3D flat panel displays that will only need simple, good looking and well designed polarized glasses or, perhaps, even no glasses at all (although no-glasses solutions are not practical for current stereo movie content, really).
[ 10-29-2008, 01:40 AM: Message edited by: Julio Roberto ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 10-29-2008 10:01 PM
I believe this or a similar one was the first VCR I owned back in prehistoric times:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/SVR_video_recorder.jpg
then I got some video 2000 model, similar to this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Vr2020.jpg
It was cool how you could flip the tape over, like an audio cassette, and record another tons of hours on the other side (I think some tapes did 8 hours recording total, didn't they?)
Then the VHS vs Beta war passed by and we all had to move on to the winner.
I also believe that the 3D thing, in its current form, will also be somewhat of a fad. It won't be mainstream for a long time, probably. As many here have said before, until all TV's are 3D glasses-free and almost all cameras are 3D no-questions-asked (RED company has some nice stuff), it probably won't really happen for a while.
This time around may be a longer lasting fad as 3D is (or could be) a cheap add-on to just about any digital device, so sure enough some smart pants in hollywood is going to want to make some bucks with SAW 3D, or Journey to the center of your eye II, or re-release a converted Star Wars trilogy, etc.
Anybody remembers IMAX 3D anymore? Great quality, integrated 3D cameras, so-so 3D (a lot of ghosting) and little commercial appeal. The fad lasted long, but it finally perished once more. Main reason? Expensive as hell exhibition costs. We won't talk about production.
There is some bussines to be done, but a lot of it depends on the quick adoption of quality digital 3D by the theaters. At the rate it is happening, and for good reasons, a lot of 3D is going to be cancelled.
At current prices and quality (darkish image, ghosting, color redention, 2k, etc) it likely won't happen and we'll probably be talking only of somewhat limited releases of a handful of titles that would bring EXTRA revenue (i.e. a movie that, w/o 3D, wouldn't really do nearly as much bussiness, like a re-release Star Wars or a Journey to the Center 2, or a SAW 2D part XXI).
Cameron's Avatar will probably be big with or without the 3D. As would most animated releases.
But there is a 3D incentive in "Hooter's Sorority Girls vs the Zombies". Nobody will go to that in 2D, but turn it into "Hooter's Sorority Girls vs the Zombies 3D" with lots of stuff thrown out of the screen and hmmmm .... what fun!
It's clear what this market needs. A round of 4K, great quality, $30k, no-compromise and no-royalties 3D ready projectors NOW. Then Hollywood and exhibitors can make some extra bucks off the stuff. And who knows, maybe it will stick and will initiate a wider transition into 3D.
But only the few and unwise (or forced) will go for a 2K, darkish, royalties crippled, expensive digital 3D only to be superseeded by a $2000 3D tv next year (Hyundai already retails a 46" one in Japan as a TV channel, for the nth time since the 80's, is trying to make a living out of 3D content material).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic