This is topic The Opposite of 3D in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=002404

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-05-2010, 07:55 AM:
 
I just noticed the local Carmike theatres are advertising the non-3D versions of 3D movies as 2D?

Are other chains doing this? Or is this just some idiotic marketing gimmick from Carmike. The local Rave does not advertise as 2D.

Are we headed to the point where all non-3D movies are sold as 2D?
 

---

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 08-05-2010, 09:45 AM:
 
3D is being pushed so heavily in advertising that customers have begun assuming it is showing in 3D everywhere. When a title has a 3D version, I have been specifying 2D on my movieline and on the poster cases for over a year and all theatres should do the same for the convenience of their customers.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-05-2010, 11:06 AM:
 
I've seen "2D" listed at other theaters. IMHO, it's a good move to distinguish the difference. Some people think 3D is great and are willing to pay the premium for it. A backlash is occurring with other customers and they're seeking 2D versions. Our local Carmike theater got a few complaints about no 2D version of Toy Story 3 being available. Obviously some people want 2D instead of 3D.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 08-05-2010, 01:37 PM:
 
I should start complaining about no film being available at these all DLP theaters.
 

---

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 08-06-2010, 12:34 PM:
 
I think because of the way the advertising for these movies pushes the 3D, if you were only to list the title of the movie i.e "Toy Story 3" customers would automatically assume that they are getting the 3D version.

When the first couple of 3D films came out (before my place had 3D installed), we were showing 2D versions and just listing the title of the movie...complaints came a plenty.
 

---

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 08-06-2010, 01:23 PM:
 
We get the same complaints. All of the posters, trailers and promo materials push the 3D, but also state in really tiny letters "also available in theatres and Imax".

I've taken my poster images I use for our website and airbrushed out the 3D references and added a "35mm 2D Presentation" tag somewhere on the poster. Until they make marketing materials for the 75% of screens that don't have 3D, I guess we have to be creative.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-06-2010, 01:37 PM:
 
Or just SAY it is 3D, give them some neutral gray glasses and let them be so disappointed with the "3D" effects they will bad mouth 3D to all of their friends and you won't ever have to upgrade
 

---

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 08-07-2010, 04:28 PM:
 
What's up with the new Saw movie being called Saw 3D (Instead of Saw VII 3D)

Are customers going to think it's a 3D re-issue of the first one. Presumably the DVD/Blueray release with have to call it Saw VII.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 08-08-2010, 03:01 AM:
 
I think everyone has lost track of how many Saw movies there are anyway, so it probably doesn't matter. Saw has basically turned into a serial with a new chapter appearing every Halloween.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-08-2010, 07:16 AM:
 
Here in the NY market, they are running most 3D film ads with the "in 3D and 2D" tags, with 2D as prominant as the 3D font.
 

---

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 08-08-2010, 05:45 PM:
 
Well Martin, all non-3D films ARE 2D (width and height without the depth of 3D). I agree that's it's a good idea to post a 3D film as 2D if that's the way it's being run.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-09-2010, 08:19 AM:
 
I think I'll start promoting my films as
"In Authentic 2- D!!!!"
or "Two Dimensions for the Price of One!!"

 

---

Posted by Richard C. Wolfe (Member # 431) on 08-09-2010, 01:56 PM:
 

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

Or just SAY it is 3D, give them some neutral gray glasses and let them be so disappointed with the "3D" effects they will bad mouth 3D to all of their friends and you won't ever have to upgrade

---

Martin... I love that, it's a great idea!

Being that I am a 2nd run theatre, still using that out dated antiquated 35mm film equipment, and can't show 3D films in 3D, I always advertise those films are in 2D. In fact I think that actually helps my business. A good example is Shrek 4 which was disapointing to most, but it was the best Shrek of all of them for me. In fact it is my 2nd highest grossing film this year.

I now place in my ads: Shown in 2D, No Glasses, No Headaches, and NO high prices!

It seems to help... what more can I say.

I'm tempted to say: 3D, if you don't get a headache from the picture, you will from the price!
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 08-09-2010, 02:16 PM:
 
"The Opposite of 3D????"

Just put the glasses on backwards! Louis
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 08-09-2010, 02:16 PM:
 
Are you implying everyone will either get a headache or a ticket price shock from watching a 3-D movie, Richard? I have enjoyed many of those wonderful 30D movies in the fifties and some of the current ones and never got a headache. I have refused to see many of the recent ones because they did not appeal to my taste because they were animated and suited more for children. Even STEP UP 3-D that just opened this weekend was geared to young adults but I saw it and throughly enjoyed because of the excellent 3-D and it was live action. I have no problem paying extra to see a movie in 3-D if it is done right and entertaining like STEP UP 3-D and AVATAR

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 08-09-2010, 02:19 PM:
 
Good one, Richard.

We have been doing similar advertising:

IN 2D NO GLASSES NO EXTRA CHARGE

I learned this trick by poring over some theater ads from the fifties. The poorer theaters that couldn't afford 3D would actually advertise how NO SPECIAL GLASSES (were) NEEDED to see a 2D version of a 3D film.

We did actually run 3D for a time, but the lawsuits were starting to pile up from people whose eyes had popped out of their heads during the viewing of a 3D film, even though we warned them going in that the studios' advertising clearly stated that said films were in EYE POPPING 3D!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 08-09-2010, 03:45 PM:
 

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa

---

I have no problem paying extra to see a movie in 3-D if it is done right and entertaining like STEP UP 3-D and AVATAR

---

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa

---

Are you implying everyone will either get a headache or a ticket price shock from watching a 3-D movie, Richard?

---

No, not at all... but some will, and as a theatre that can't offer the 3D experience it behoves me to advertise in such a way as to entice those that don't want 3D or it's absurd pricing.

I personally don't get headaches from 3D, but I do refuse to pay the price. I don't need to see a film in 3D to enjoy it. I did go to see Avatar in 3D (but I didn't pay to see it), and it was excellent, but when I played it in 2D it was just as enjoyable.

There is absolutely no problem with you, or anyone else that wants to... to pay whatever amount they want, to enjoy a movie in whatever format they want. Not everyone likes the same things or can afford the same things... so it's good that there are different versions available.

It only makes sense that each theatre advertises their product in such a way as to attract the audience that wants to see the version they are exhibiting.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-09-2010, 11:40 PM:
 
I'll consider paying extra to see a movie in 3D if it was natively rendered or photographed in 3D. I absolutely will not pay the premium to see 2D to 3D faked conversions. They're a waste of time and money for everyone involved. The movie studios shouldn't be doing the conversions and the customers should know better than to pay for that crap.

Is Tron Legacy actually being shot in twin camera 3D, or is it just a phony baloney 2D/3D conversion? It's too bad they couldn't shoot the movie in Super Panavision 70 like the original 1982 film. I already know the final Harry Potter installments are mere conversions so I won't waste my money on a 3D show.
 

---

Posted by Justin B. Martin (Member # 5817) on 08-10-2010, 04:17 AM:
 
Tron: Legacy is real 3D, no conversion.

If we're playing a 3D film in 2D we always -- ALWAYS -- have the box office cashiers ask the customer if they're aware the film is not in 3D just to be sure. I wish the kiosks you can purchase from could ask the same question.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-10-2010, 07:57 AM:
 
When we did a retrospective -- The Great Romantic Musicals -- and we couldn't get a 4trk mag print of a title what was originally released in stereo (mags were the first to be sent off to the buzz-saw), we would ALWAYS post a notice at the BO stating that the film is not in stereo. Same thing with those films where the studio could only give us the shorter, hacked-up edited version like FIDDLER ON THE ROOF.

You save yourself an awful lot of grief if you are up-front with your patrons, plus it's just truth in advertizing -- some would even call it ethics. LIEMAX learned that lesson the hard way.

Robert -- even 20th Century Fox took your approach when they released THE ROBE -- the first film released in CinemaScope. On the 1-sheets, it had the logo "in CinemaScope" in a font as big as the film title (a practice at the time that lasted for awhile)but under CinemaScope, it also said, [i]The Miracle You See Without Glasses[i].

I remember this like it was yesterday because I was a kid who had seen three or four 3D movies only a few months before and I thought 3D was the most incredible thing I had ever seen on a movie screen. Then sitting watching the curtains open wider and wider as THE ROBE began, yes, I was impressed with the extra width but that lasted all of 30 seconds until disappointment and the anger of being taken set in.

I was shocked to find out that CinemaScope WASN'T 3D without glasses at all, which is what I thought the poster was saying. Clever marketing people at Fox....the bastards.

I kept whispering to my mother, "But mom, it's NOT IN 3D" and "This is a gip" (the 50s equivilant of "this sucks). The poor woman finally had to tell me to shut up and watch the movie or she was going to smack me right there in the theatre. I shut up, but I was NOT a happy pup!
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 08-10-2010, 09:20 AM:
 
[/IMG]
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-10-2010, 09:56 AM:
 
Cool, Robert - thanks for the ad.

See, even there they've got "with out glasses," "reaches out to encompass you" and the word "dimentional" in the same ad. They knew what they were doing.

I was just a kid, and I was duped!
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 08-10-2010, 01:20 PM:
 
Yes, it is curious that Fox chose that angle to promote CinemaScope. As if a wider screen and stereophonic sound wasn't enough. I guess "IT'S THE POOR MAN'S CINERAMA" didn't go over too well in the marketing meeting.
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 08-10-2010, 10:38 PM:
 

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

The real test will be if you, or anyone, will pay an up charge for "Jackass 3D"

---

The previous digital 3D I've seen, I saw for free. For Jackass 3D, I will gladly pay the extra.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-10-2010, 10:47 PM:
 
Ah youth!
 

---

Posted by Geena Phillips (Member # 3726) on 08-10-2010, 11:23 PM:
 
I'm 42. So there. Nyah.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-10-2010, 11:36 PM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

See, even there they've got "with out glasses," "reaches out to encompass you" and the word "dimentional" in the same ad. They knew what they were doing.

---

quote:

---

The big project, however, will be the complete remodeling of the front or stage end of the theatre, in preparation for the installation of a wide panoramic screen, which will be 30 feet wide and 16 feet high - just about twice the width of the present theatre screen, which is 14 x 16 feet. This screen, when installed, will accommodate regular motion pictures, as now projected, and also the new Cinemascope method of projection, wherein the illusion of three dimensions, height, width and depth will be realistically placed before the audience without the use of colored glasses or anything other than normal vision. It is the last word in the new three dimension method of presenting motion pictures - the same method as was employed at the initial and phenomenal showing of "The Robe," which has been widely acclaimed the world over. Two and one half times as much subject matter is projected on the new wide screens as is seen on the ordinary movie screen. Incidentally "The Robe" will be presented by the Roxy late next spring.

---

There is a legal term for this -- it's called puffery and it's part of showmanship, has been for over 100 years.
 

---

Posted by Ky Boyd (Member # 23) on 09-02-2010, 03:56 AM:
 
I keep telling people we should start a 1-D revolution - for a $3 upcharge we'll sell you a re-usable eye patch. Gives new meaning to the term pirate movies!
 

---

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 09-03-2010, 01:54 PM:
 
....and a sigle ear plug so you just get Mono sound.
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 09-03-2010, 04:57 PM:
 
Put the lens in backwards and project a single point of light and advertise NO D
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-03-2010, 05:26 PM:
 
How about no show at all, and we advertise 2 hours of peace and quiet for $5.00.

Some people might actually like that!
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 09-06-2010, 07:13 PM:
 
Hahaha!
 

---

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 09-13-2010, 06:16 AM:
 
There is an event at the media museum in Bradford.

Stephen Fry reading from his new book being beamed live via satelite. It's titled "Stephen Fry Live: The Fry Chronicles in Figure-Hugging 2D"

-----------------------------
Live from the Royal Festival Hall, this special event marks the publication of Stephen Fry’s new volume of autobiography The Fry Chronicles. Stephen will be beamed, direct via satellite, into Pictureville to give an exclusive preview of his hilarious, frank and uncompromising new book.

Book now for this unique opportunity to see the multi-award-winning comedian, actor, presenter, director and writer perform live – in glorious figure-hugging 2D!
-------------------------

Original Artical
 

---

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 09-13-2010, 06:40 PM:
 
Vue cinemas in this country mark their 3D performances with '3D' on their website and self-service kiosks. 2D performances just have the film title. For example, you might see "Toy Story 3 3D" and "Toy Story 3" as separate films. However, since the '3D' marker is part of the movie title and in the same font, people may well miss it!

Far better would be to make a small but prominent 'in 3D' graphic and place it next to the movie title. That way, people would easily be able to see which performances were in 3D. If someone is stupid enough to assume that 3D movies are released ONLY in 3D, and don't look for the '3D' marker on the movie, they deserve what they get
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 09-15-2010, 09:57 PM:
 

quote:

---

How about no show at all, and we advertise 2 hours of peace and quiet for $5.00.

Some people might actually like that!

---

Nah...someone's phone will no doubt ring.
 

---