|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: My Bloody Valentine 3D
|
Matt Fields
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 545
From: Ohio, United States
Registered: Jun 2005
|
posted 01-21-2009 09:11 AM
I just put in a Dolby 3D system and MBV 3D was my first feature. First off, having 3D really increased attendance. I probably doubled my gross because of the 3D.
I have had zero problems getting the glasses returned and no complaints about having to return them. We are the first theatre around here with 3D so no precedent was set.
The Dolby system made a lot of sense for me. I work at the theatre personally, so I don't have to depend on employees to get the glasses back for the most part. Our lobby is rather small so it would be hard for people to sneak out. Just tell people when they buy their tickets and again before the movie starts that they need to return the glasses.
Secondly, I wasn't using an auditorium with a large screen. I have side movable masking with a scope picture of 27ft. Not sure what the flat is, but it is smaller then that. Because of the smaller screen, I could get plenty of light. I have a ZX running the 30-SD bulb, installed higher quality port glass, and put in a new Harkness 1.8 screen. The picture to my eyes, even with the glasses on, is plenty bright.
Having Real D looking over my shoulder and charging me licensing fees for the rest of my life made zero sense. Dolby was much cheaper to own and operate in the long run for me.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 01-26-2009 02:13 PM
And after its second weekend, Bloody Valentine has proven that 3D business is not all that was meant to be.
It opened at number 3 in a weekend w/o a lot of competition. Actually, the public rated it the movie they liked the most of all the ones that opened that weekend, including #1 Mall Cop. It did about the same business as number 4 Notorious (also rated R like Valentine) in spite of opening in more and better theaters and having the 3-D premium ticket $$$ attached.
During it's entire first week it grossed $30.5m in 2,534 theaters ($11k per screen). Notorious did $27.6m in 1.638 ($16k per screen). Gran Torino, number 2 that week, almost tied doing over $10k per screen too in 2,972 screens (it was Torino's 6th week). Mall cop did $14k per screen.
So per-screen it basically either tied or did worse than the top 4 in spite of being the most liked movie, having other R rated films in the list, not having any direct strong horror competition and Gran Torino being there for 6 weeks.
This 3D film probably also have many forced contracts in many theaters for many weeks on their top auditoriums as per Real-D etc, further pushing the "false" attendance numbers.
Now Valentine slipped to number 6th for the weekend, and did even less than school for dogs or slumdog millionarie, which after 11 weeks and only 1,411 screens, did about twice as much per screen than Valentine. The average per screen in its second week for Valentine at 2,534 screens: $3,966.
And we all know that a lot of people went just for the 3D and found out they liked the movie a bit more than expected. When (if ever) "all movies" are in 3D (or many-a-month) and all competing theaters in an area get a 3D screen too, then the 3D novelty will wear out very quick and I think we'll see attendance being pretty much what they have always been.
Perhaps a tad more and even quite a bit more for certain genres, but not the "2, 3 times the gross of 2D" that is being touted. That may (or may not) be the truth today. But just wait until 3D is common place and soon we'll see the real figures.
And 3D costs more to exhibit in electricity, lamps, royalties, glasses, screen, maintenance and hardware, so it's only natural that they gross more if real profits are to remain the same.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999
|
posted 01-31-2009 11:35 AM
OMG, what a stink bomb! I saw 1hr. of this show last night in Yonkers (I was working on a server problem, and needed to make sure it was playing okay - not that I would've normally watched this movie). I couldn't help but roar with laughter when the kid's eye popped out. I'm sorry, I thought he was playing a trick on the girl with a Halloween gag eye or something... since his head and body did not MOVE like someone had just delivered BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA! It was funny. The eye just shot out. Kid being goofy says, "Hey, look at this!" (Sproiiiingg!) And then back in. (Swwwwwwip!) Total absence of kinetics. Pause for laugh. Ha-ha!! I want that trick.
Oh, he was getting killed? Sorry. (blush)
Needless to say, a great party gag was turned to hokieness by intent, loses the movie's credibility, and it was right at the beginning. Not good. (I'm not being difficult; any premise can be made believeable, but the movie has to cooperate.)
So, it went from there.
I did enjoy the naked chick, though. She was pretty hot. I couldn't determine if it was a "long scene" though, as I have no reference with these kinds of movies, but it could've been on much longer and been fine with me.
Did the mistake have to do with the angle of the home video camera? The guy was shooting the front of the bed, but the police copy showed the front door and window.
I doubt I'll ever see this movie all the way through, it is my least-favorite genre. The use of loud audio cues to "scare" the audience is a cheap, tawdry device on the level of a deus ex machina ending, and no match for a suspenseful STORY (read: Hitchcock). I'll watch experimental films and music videos before I intentionally watch one of these turds.
[edit] Ooops.. I made a mistake myself, in spelling! ![[Wink]](wink.gif) [ 02-02-2009, 10:08 PM: Message edited by: Tim Reed ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 01-31-2009 01:57 PM
Not that I disagree with your review (at all ... I also digged the naked chik), but out of the 10 top current films at the BO last two weeks (Valentine was #6 up til Thursday), only 3 (Oscar material Torino, Slumdog and Benjamin at #9) score higher points in critics from the public.
That gives you an idea of how little competition this movie actually has.
Only one opening in Valentine's 2nd week, Underworld, did any direct competition. And it sort of bombed, opening only #2 and hanging in there w/o much acclaim by public or critic (i.e. Rottentomatoes scores Valentine a 5,9 and Underworld only a 3,2).
Underworld was cliché as hell, but it was a much higher production value than Valentine which was just as cliché + deus ex machina. Plus 3D gimmicki as hell and copycat of other movies.
That was up til this weekend, of course. New openings have pushed Valentine to #9.
| 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.
|