|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: The decline of 3D
|
|
|
|
|
Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 08-30-2017 04:18 PM
I think the failure of 3D channels says more about cable and satellite than it does 3D- as much as I love 3D (I've bought nearly EVERY 3D Blu-Ray that's come out so far), I STILL would not have subscribed to cable or satellite to get their 3D offerings. I heard the ESPN channel was especially half-assed, as they only covered a few games in 3D and then showed them over and over, charging extra for the privilege of course.
I did buy a new 75-inch LG TV with 3D when I heard they were dropping it; it will be the last TV I ever buy if none in the future can display it. It has a far better and brighter 3D picture than the Sharp TV I had before (I sold that one) and uses cheap polarized glasses that fit easily over my regular ones and are even light enough to see my phone and stuff with them on, though usually during a movie at home the phones go unanswered until it's over.
Someone really does need to make another movie in 3D that REALLY takes advantage of it without being gimmicky. It seems that a prominent filmmaker could push for it ONLY being shown in 3D in theaters as well. (When a 3D movie is shown in 2D, is there a separate 2D file of the movie that is played, or is there a button that "turns off" the 3D like the Mono button on a Dolby film sound processor? If it's the former, they could simply not provide a 2D file.) It'll have to be someone other than James Cameron too, as his Avatar sequel keeps getting pushed back and lots of people now think it was a stupid movie anyways despite being one of the all-time highest grossing (I never saw it until I got the 3D Blu-Ray.) The best 3D movies I've seen at home have still been the classics like House of Wax- a common complaint I've heard about the current crop is that they don't exploit 3D enough, calling it "2 1/2 D" as nothing ever comes out of the screen. Of course if they did do that, others would call it a shameless gimmick.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dennis Benjamin
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1445
From: Denton, MD
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 08-31-2017 06:25 AM
Speaking of Avatar, I have a true story that happened regarding that film. I have told this story before, but can't remember if I told it on here:
If you remember, when the film Avatar was intially released, it was only on digital screens and I believe, only in 3D. The theatre I managed was in a college town, so I had a lot of patrons not willing to pay the upcharge, and therefore it did not do great business the first two weeks of release.
Two weeks after opening, we finally received a 2D 35mm print of the movie. So we were finally playing the film at a "regular" price and business had an uptick.
I came into the theatre for an evening shift, I believe it was the Friday night we started playing it in 2D and I walked past the doorman's stand and witnessed an usher giving 3D glasses to a patron who was seeing the 2D show in the 35mm auditorium. I immediately asked the usher what the hell was he doing. He remarked that all the patrons in that theatre (#4) had come out to request the glasses. I told him that show was only in 2D and he said that he told people that, but that they all came out and demanded the glasses anyways.
I then walked into the auditorium and indeed saw all the patrons sitting in their seats wearing the glasses (over 100 people!). I decided to let it go and see how many people complained afterwards.
I stood at the theatre entrance with the 3D glasses collections box at the end of the show. Not one single patron remarked about the fact that the movie was not in 3D. As a matter of fact some commented on how good the 3D effects were.
I was floored....
That is a true story...
I've never been a big advocate of 3D since.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justin Hamaker
Film God
Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 08-31-2017 03:21 PM
quote: Jesse Skeen
3D should never have been treated as an "add-on" either- either a movie is in 3D, or it isn't. Separate 2D showings of 3D movies are the same as showing a color movie in black and white, or playing a surround track in mono.
Jessie, that's really the problem. Here have only been a handful of movies which were conceived and filmed as 3D. In most cases the 3D was added as an afterthought in order to capture the higher ticket prices. I agree that watching a good 3D movie can be quite the experience. Gravity and Life of Pi come to mind as two of the best true 3D movies. I'm sure Avatar was as well, but I saw the 3D in a long narrow auditorium where I was quite a distance from the screen, so I wasn't particularly impressed.
I disagree about the notion that watching a "3D" movie in 2D is comparable to watching a colorized version of a black and white movie. Any 3D movie in the last 10 years was produced with the full knowledge the movie would be watched in 2D by the majority of the audience. And the lack of 3D exclusive engagements means the film was never intended to be seen in 3D.
quote: Rusty Gordon
When you consider that the most reliable patron is single and of school age and dating age, exhibition has priced them out--or at least reduced moviegoing frequency to just tentpoles.
My experience is that seniors are actually the most reliable audience today. Teenagers only seem to show up in large numbers to the tent-pole pictures. And I don't think it's a money issue. From what I've observed, many teenagers have more than enough money to spend. Whenever we do a private showing for school groups, I'm amazed at how much money the kids have to spend - and this applies to kids as young as 10 on up through high school.
Although the price of a movie ticket may seem steep, it's still generally in line with the minimum wage. I know this isn't true in all areas, but even if it's twice the price of minimum wage it's still within the budget of many teens.
What I believe has cannibalized the teen audience is the volume of choices. Game systems, smart phones, streaming services, illegal downloads, and so forth. Add to that the fact that teens today don't seem to give a lick about whether they are watching on a 40 foot movie screen or a 5 inch smart phone.
On the other hand, the majority of our regular customers are senior citizens or older adults. We have a handful of families which come on a regular bases, and the teens turn out for movies like Annabelle. But the seniors are the most reliable based of customers on a week to week basis. To a certain extent I think that's what hurt this summer - not enough content which is of interest to seniors.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
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
Printer-friendly view of this topic