Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Could 3-D hurt grosses sometimes?

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

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

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 12-08-2008 04:26 PM

quote: Jack Theakston
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?

Comfortable glasses that make you feel better (by not squinting) vs. uncomfortable glasses that give you a headache, maybe?

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-08-2008 05:26 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
uncomfortable glasses that give you a headache, maybe?

I remember in the early 80's when 3D had a small revival with a few features and different formats. One of them that Columbia used was a horizontal split frame double image using a split lens element that would merge the two images in a "poor mans" scope picture and the glasses were the polarized variety. Movie was "Spacehunters in the Forbidden Zone"

Big thing that the projectionist had to be careful of is his framing. For if he was 180* off when theading the reels, the imagery was horrible to look at-like if it was pulling your eyeballs out of the sockets-unless you turned your glasses upside down.

Yes, we that are commonly called "four eyes", do have that bit of uncomfortability of wearing ill-fitting glasses over our prescription glasses why it looks like the Dolby system's glasses are made large enough to go over our prescription glasses.

| IP: Logged

Julie Lucero
Film Handler

Posts: 37
From: Valencia, California, USA
Registered: Sep 2008

posted 12-08-2008 10:21 PM

quote: asked several days ago
Does anyone know in how many theaters BOLT is playing, and how many of those are the 3-D presentations?

Anyone know? Anyone? Bueller...? Bueller...? Bueller...? Frye...?

EDIT: Never mind! After some searching, I found the answer on another forum.

quote: Fans of Showmanship
Disney reported that "Bolt" opened in about 3,600 theaters, 982 of which were in 3-D. The various boxoffice figure resources reported "Bolt" in its first weekend did 39% of its business in the 3-D houses. In other words, about 25% of the bookings accounted for about 40% of the gross, suggesting audiences gravitated toward the 3-D showings. (Most of the theaters showing it in 3-D also were showing it in 2-D on other screens in their complex.)

A list of the theaters showing BOLT in 3-D is posted here.

[ 12-10-2008, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: Julie Lucero ]

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-08-2008 10:46 PM

quote:
about 25% of the bookings accounted for about 40% of the gross, suggesting audiences gravitated toward the 3-D showings.

I don't think that really means anything. Of course, if you have a bunch of kids dragging the parents, the kids are going to head for the 3-D.

The bigger question is, how would the movie have done released in 2-D only? I think it would have done just the same, or maybe a little less due to the 3-D surcharge not being charged. But I think they would have seen the same, or a few more, butts in the seats.

Unfortunately there's no way to know. Out of the hundreds of people who saw the movie here, no one complained that it was not in 3-D...not even any kids.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-08-2008 11:10 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
no one complained that it was not in 3-D...not even any kids.

You're lucky on that one and best leave it at that.

People over here that know all about digital with the 3D format will attend a cinema that doesn't have 3D, but just regular 35mm projection, inquire that if the show IS in 3D, and find out that it isn't, will leave and head to that house that is playing 3D.

3D is kinda of a cult over here along with people hunting for values.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 12-08-2008 11:22 PM

I don't think it was necessary to quote all of the locations. It just makes for a lengthy scroll.

Remember that they squeeze the public for more $$$ for those 3D showings, so a higher gross only means they charged more for 3D. If the prices were equal, I'd say 25% of the screens accounted for about 25% of the gross. Man, why didn't they charge more for digital sound ticket prices? Oh, I guess 3D is "special".

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 12-09-2008 02:20 AM

quote:
about 25% of the bookings accounted for about 40% of the gross

You have to remember that with the average film, 20-25% of all the bookings account for about 60-70% of the gross.

I can't remember where I saw this*, but for the opening weekend of 300, The Metreon in San Francisco did about $300,000. The average national average was $22,000. My theatre was very busy that weekend, but we didn't even come close to the $22,000 average.

Another example: November 3 2006, Borat opened in 837 theatres with an average of $31,607. The following weekend it more than tripled the theatre count to 2566 and only made $1.8 million more than the previous weekend - and the average fell to $11,017.

Even if you assume those original 837 theatres were down 50%, they still accounted for about $13 million out of $28 million.

While I don't have anything to back this up, I would assume that the majority of theatres playing 3D movies are among the same theatres that would get prints at the 800 theatre threshold - and therefore account for the majority of the gross anyways.

*I thought the number for the opening weekend of 300 at the Metreon came from NATO of California's Previews, but I couldn't find it in the digital editions.

| IP: Logged

Julie Lucero
Film Handler

Posts: 37
From: Valencia, California, USA
Registered: Sep 2008

posted 12-09-2008 11:43 AM

quote: Justin Hamaker
for the opening weekend of 300, The Metreon in San Francisco did about $300,000. The average national average was $22,000.

Well, naturally, the Metreon would have an above-average gross for "300" since they had it in IMAX with an inflated ticket price.

| IP: Logged

Julie Lucero
Film Handler

Posts: 37
From: Valencia, California, USA
Registered: Sep 2008

posted 12-10-2008 07:50 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
I don't think it was necessary to quote all of the locations. It just makes for a lengthy scroll.

Sorry about that! I've gone back and edited the post, eliminating the list and instead simply linking to it.

I had thought others might have thought as I did how fascinating it is to see such a list for the entire country laid out in front of them, especially since there were a lot more 3-D showings than I expected.

quote: Joe Redifer
Remember that they squeeze the public for more $$$ for those 3D showings, so a higher gross only means they charged more for 3D.

That's probably true to an extent. To what extent we'll never know, but I agree with the writer that I quoted that the higher gross does suggest that at least some moviegoers deliberately chose to attend the 3-D version.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Out of the hundreds of people who saw the movie here, no one complained that it was not in 3-D...not even any kids.

Could that be because you're in the middle of nowhere, and maybe the majority of your local moviegoers had no idea BOLT was available in other markets in 3-D?

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-10-2008 08:30 PM

quote: Julie Lucero
Could that be because you're in the middle of nowhere, and maybe the majority of your local moviegoers had no idea BOLT was available in other markets in 3-D?

Not even the case since it was adv in all the medias of the 3D availability. It's simply not the need yet in Mike's market area.

For "BOLT", along with Billings, the nearest city next to Mike having Carmike over there prob having the optional 3D showings since Carmike is all digital.

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 12-10-2008 09:13 PM

FWIW, while chatting with the manager at one of my theatres last week, he said Bolt in 3D was outselling the 2D 35mm version at his location 2:1.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-11-2008 10:36 AM

quote: Julie Lucero
Could that be because you're in the middle of nowhere, and maybe the majority of your local moviegoers had no idea BOLT was available in other markets in 3-D?

No. We are only an 80-minute drive from the biggest city in the state where there are several Carmike 3-D screens. When Journey to the Center of the Earth was out, we had a lot of questions as to whether we'd be playing it in 3-D. On Bolt, hardly any. I don't know if that was because people have come to know that we don't have 3-D, or if they just didn't care about the 3-D. Probably a little of both.

| IP: Logged

Tyler Potts
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 159
From: Anderson, SC, USA
Registered: Sep 2008

posted 12-11-2008 10:43 AM

Journey was marketed as a straight up 3D movie. I remember the trailer thinking, "oh great, this'll be fun to explain to people." Bolt, and the trailers on Bolt, are smart in that they promote the movie, then at the end mention, "...also in 3D."

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.