Some moviegoers believe that digital 3D is a fad, while many of the biggest filmmakers in Hollywood would be quick to disagree. Movie theaters are betting big on cinema’s digital 3D future, retrofitting many of their theaters with digital projection. And why not? The financial statistics so far have shown that moviegoers are seeking out 3D screens, which often get 5-10 times more ticket sales per screen than 35mm theaters. Oh, and did we mention that 3D screens usually charge 30% more than the average 35mm presentation? All this you probably know. But did you know that the per screen average of 3D movies is in a decline?
Genres play a huge part in how well 3D movies will do in my opinion. (The Kid's movies will always do worse, etc)
And as for comments, is this guy retarded?
I can't believe I'm saying this because I'm a fan of progress and technical awesomeness, but I think Digital 3D is a fad. I certainly don't want it, it adds nothing, makes the picture darker and I don't want to wear the glasses.
Make up your own opinions, don't believe B.S! Especally when its about a human and spread with the intent of ruing that persons life.
3D is the Future of Viewing Tech, you see in 3D naturally so how can it not be something you want on your screens?!
UndeadD3vi1 wrote:I only meant that specific comment, the guy said 3D does nothing at all. (Impossible unless you've lost a eye right?)
You've got to remember that something like 10% of people can't perceive 3D. He could be one of those people.
as I've mentioned in previous posts, I propose a way that will make it 100%- through a sort of "cleansing" if you will.
though if that isn't done, another way to service those degenerate monoscopers that can't see 3d would be to introduce 3d->2d glasses, with lenses polarized equally at, say 45%- that way they can at least watch the movie and not stand out and be beaten
What is interesting is that each of these films had their own plus and minuses contributing to their numbers. Number of screens, length of time in the box office, choice of movie audience, economic downturn, etc.
I will be interested to see how the trend rides out.
I saw a preview of battle for terra in s3d at infocomm, I think it will be the best 3d film yet as far as s3d adding to the experience - I think you guys are really gonna like the s3d action sequences. Transformers and star trek would have been great in s3d too. WallE would have been great in s3d. Perhaps only certain movies gain a lot with s3d. Star Wars in s3d, everyone wants to see that no? I think the big market for s3d will be porn for the home computer geek, and sports programs like nascar car racing, and airplane racing. Maybe some scifi tv shows like battlestar galactica. I would like discovery and science channel programs in s3d.
Neil wrote:I will be interested to see how the trend rides out.
I think its pretty clear that there is just more demand for live-action 3D then there is for animated 3D kids movies. It may be that the target demographic for 3D movies is a slightly older crowd (teen-20's) who are probably more interested in seeing action flicks, horror, R-rated movies, etc. Based on this I think you will see a big spike in that graph when The Final Destination comes out next month.
This is a very interesting article and subject matter.
I can't believe the numbers for Ice Age 3D. I would have thought they be much higher just because it is a returning known successful franchise. I want to go see it, but I have not yet. Why? Because I don't want to drive an hour to a larger city just to see a 3D movie and then pay an extra $3-5 per ticket on top of the cost of gas. And I am a person who loves all things 3D. Its just too much hassle.
When I say to my friends, "hey lets go see xzy-movie in 3D they look at me like I'm retarded. Why don't we just go to the mall and see it. It will be much easier to justify the cost and i think the "nerdyness" will be easier to overcome when more theaters start adopting 3D formats. Rumor has it that our local mall will have a 3D projector by Christmas. Perhaps in time for Avatar
Welder wrote:I heard that Ice Age 3, had the same numbers as Transformers in it's second week...
I'm sure the transformers number was large for the second week, so the ice age movie must have been also...
I can't believe that My bloody valentine made THAT much more than any of the other movies... But could be true
The graph is showing the ratio of 3D sales to 2D sales. Not the total box office gross. In terms of the amount of money actually made I think it was the least of the 5 movies listed. Its a bit deceiving that way. So My Bloody Valentine did 7 times better in 3D than in 2D, while Ice Age was about an even split.
I have said this before and I’ll say it again; I can’t stand 3D at the movies. I want to like it and I try. But every time I come out of the theater disappointed.
It’s dark and blurry. I find my self spending so much time fiddling with the glasses that I feel less immersed than if it was just in 2D.
Maybe my theater is doing it wrong.
Definitely it will get better faster if we support it now. And I do support it. But it still sucks as of right now.
I guess I am spoiled. One screen per eye is the only 3D solution I am comfortable with.
As for the 10% who can’t see S-3D, they CAN see depth in real life. At least the ones I know can.
