my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Could 3-D hurt grosses sometimes? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Could 3-D hurt grosses sometimes? Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-04-2008 02:13 AM                        I read somewhere that they (Disney) are saying basically, "thank heavens the movie was in 3-D because that's where most of the money was made." Look Disney dudes, how many places was that the ONLY choice? And I still bet some people stayed home because of the 3-D. They can't even envision that it probably would have done just as well, or maybe would have done better, if it wasn't a 3-D film.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 12-04-2008 02:29 AM                        Unfortunately it's something that's difficult to measure. We don't have 3D and never even mentioned 3D. But I was less than impressed with the gross for Bolt. However, we only had a small handful of customers asking if it was in 3D or asking for their 3D glasses. And I wonder if the general public knew we didn't have 3D, if they didn't know it was in 3D in some places, or if they might just think 3D is now a term being used for CGI animation. And of course we have no way to quantify how many people completely stayed away because of 3D. While the performance of Beverly Hills Chihuahua and Madagascar 2 seem to indicate families are more than willing to come to family movies, I also wonder if Bolt is an indication they are only willing to go to so many in a period of time. From the standpoint of the actual movie, I don't see a reason for Bolt to have only made $68 million in 12 days. I feel like there is some other reason why it hasn't made well over $100 million. Whether that reason is family budgets, 3D, or the fact it will be on DVD in 4-5 months.  |  IP: Logged Tyler Potts Expert Film Handler Posts: 159 From: Anderson, SC, USA Registered: Sep 2008 posted 12-04-2008 12:40 PM                       Went and saw it in 3D this week (first time seeing a 3D movie). I was not really impressed, I saw Transformers at this theatre in digital 2D and it was crisp and amazing. But with Bolt 3D, the image seemed much darker than our theatre's 2D presentation. It took me a while to get used to 3D and get rid of my headache. I kept trying to focus on foreground or background images that were meant to add depth of field but it was straining. It was a new experience if I just went dead in the head and not really focus on anything I was able to experience it. Although I felt like one of the humans from Wall-E.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-04-2008 12:53 PM                        That's what kind of sucks about 3D, you can't focus on what you want like you can in real life.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 12-07-2008 04:22 PM                        3-D probably means more to Hollywood-suits than it does to the "ticket-buying-public." Louis  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-07-2008 07:08 PM                     Called "needed protection to the suits." - gotta find a way to keep people coming out to the big screen since home cinemas are on the massive upswing (back to the fear of the TV invasion of the early '50s) and this time, this competition is for real (along with it didn't help the circuits having booth clowns ruining presentations and circuits losing revenue due to tix refunds, unsatisfied customer satisfactions and lost reputations. It could sound more like a "Band-AID" fix in going the easy route with digital conversions instead of the more complex and accurate booth training-which in a way would be tons cheaper that heading to the digital world) where the studios are faced with the choice of budget cuts of post-productions. But, as long as this "fad" is making money and has been more easier to produce and present to the public using the digital means, I do believe that 3D will be with us as an 'option' for the public to choose what to see and to enjoy. Right now, home 3D presentation is still limited to the anaglyph (green/blue - red) glasses. Thus, it could be safe to say that Digital 3D (in any resolution that comes out) has a very good buffer in the market over the home theatre market. But agree with Mark G.: not everyone sees 3D the same, nor some don't care about the "wow" factor with the process. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-07-2008 07:41 PM                     quote: Jack Ondracek On a multi-projector system, I wonder why you wouldn't want this kind of capability. No need for that in a single projector installation as they can't get out of sync... ditto for a 2 projector digital 3-D system.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 12-08-2008 12:47 AM                        quote: Mark Gulbrandsen No need for that in a single projector installation as they can't get out of sync... ditto for a 2 projector digital 3-D system Right... this was definitely back in the 3-projector-plus-sound Cinerama days.  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 12-08-2008 01:38 AM                     Regarding frame advance controls with a dual-strip system: such a device was invented by Polaroid in 1953. It came too little too late, but you see them around very rarely. I have one installed in my booth. It will correct shutters that are out of phase up to one frame out of sync. Any more and you're better off stopping the show, as your guess as to how many frames your are out is as good as anyone else. I will reiterate what I said in another thread: 3-D is STILL hurting peoples eyes. Do not believe the jargon Disney or RealD is throwing at you. Do research for yourself regarding past 3-D presentations and why history is repeating itself again. It's true that the system for projecting 3-D film has increased, but the problem is not with the projection anymore, it's with the photography! You can show these films any way you want, it's not going to change the fact that in this day and age, everyone thinks they know everything and no one in Hollywood is hiring consultants for these films (unlike in the 1950s, where almost none of the 50 3-D features they produced was photographed poorly). For any of you who are running 3-D, I urge you to do some reading up on the basic principles behind 3-D photography, a science that was perfected over a hundred years ago. If you are unfamiliar with the terms "stereo window," "parallax," or "point of convergence," look them up. Why are people turning away from 3-D? It's not because of the glasses, but mark my words, that's what everyone who doesn't understand 3-D is going to say. Again, I also emphasize that bigger is not better in 3-D. The bigger your screen is in ratio to how far your first row is, you're going to be cutting off several rows worth of possible 3-D viewing.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-08-2008 06:37 AM                     Jack, don't discount the glasses as a reason. I know I personally don't like that aspect of it and I'm sure there are others. All of the negatives add up. Steve  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 12-08-2008 06:51 AM                        Theatres are already getting calls: "Do I have to wear the damn glasses to watch_______film?" This is hurting even "normal" films. My post above was not entirely clear: I think it matters MORE that a film is 3D to the suits than to the people. No education was ever "sent" to the public at large. Remember there are new people in the marketplace every 7 years. Louis  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-08-2008 07:26 AM                    quote: Mark Gulbrandsen No need for that in a single projector installation as they can't get out of sync You're half right. Single projector systems are out of sync by design. It's funny to me... having the eyes not in perfect sync was regarded as bad showmanship in the 50s. And bad showmanship is widely regarded as one of the "problems" with dual strip 35mm in the 50s that lead to people having headaches. That's why the Polaroid device Jack is referring to was invented, so that particular problem could be fixed while the show was running. Now the DLP single projector setup has the eyes out of phase on purpose, and all of a sudden everyone is fine with it. I don't get it. I guess it's yet another example of the "it's good enough" mentality this industry has been taking for a while now.  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 12-08-2008 09:46 AM                     quote: Steve Guttag Jack, don't discount the glasses as a reason. I know I personally don't like that aspect of it and I'm sure there are others. Steve, I agree that WEARING the glasses can be a nuisance-- on the other hand, most people wear sunglasses for extended amounts of time... what's the difference? My point is that there's no scientific magic behind the glasses that give people eye-strain. That's what they said in the '50s to promote CinemaScope, it was what was pushed when the '80s films were dying, and I'm sure it is the non-sense that will be spewed by technically ignorant people in the next couple of years. There was an interesting study done in the '50s, by the way, about what people thought of the glasses (back when they were cardboard and much more uncomfortable). Of about 10,500 people polled coming out of 3-D movies, 58.2% of the total reported discomfort and 41.8% no discomfort from the fit of the glasses. However, 82.2% said they'd return for another 3-D film, while 17.2% said they would not (and .6% undecided). While these figures were taken over fifty years ago, I'm sure they'd hold up about the same today.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 12-08-2008 11:20 AM                     Can any business afford to piss off 17.2% of the customers?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-08-2008 01:38 PM                     quote: Bill Enos Can any business afford to piss off 17.2% of the customers? Course not. They'd better revamp their customer satisfaction procedures real quick in whatever that business offers to the public... AND what's interesting here is that it isn't the businesses fault of this percentage of dissatisfied patrons - the business didn't drag those customers in..they volunteered to walk in on their own. They probably returned when a regular movie was playing. Also, using figures that were used 50 yrs ago isn't really fair to use in this day and age since the process used back then (two machine interlock that had to be modified mechanically to be in sync, using carbon arc where each lamp didn't put out the same "color" of light all the time, et.al. ) is totally different as it is now. Like going to a carnival: don't blame the carnival if the new ride they've got made you sick.... It's simply a fad that isn't for everyone. But the younger people (whom this format is really targeted to since the attendance numbers showing who attends movies nowdays) really like it.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.