|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: More of the same: not enough 3D screens
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 03-20-2009 09:26 AM
Studios and distributors complaining about the same old: not enough 3D screens for their movies.
Well, if they ever decide to do something about it, like seriously helping pay for the 3D equipment, we'll be all ears.
http://www.thewrap.com/article/1813
quote:
DreamWorks’ big-budget bet, “Monsters vs. Aliens,” has faced one hurdle after another -- including a whipping from the blogosphere over its extravagant Superbowl ad in January. But now comes the worst news yet: Fewer than half of the theaters that were supposed to be ready for digital 3D projection will be ready by the movie’s release on March 27.
....
But the question now is whether enough screens will ever be ready in time not only for “Monsters” but for the ever-lengthening slate of 3D movies already in production over the next couple of years.
Here’s the key reason for the slowdown: Installing digital cinema installation required for 3D can cost $100,000 per screen. These installations are typically financed using a virtual print fee (VPF) model -- meaning that the studios pay an agreed fee per screen, per movie, to offset exhibitors' costs.
The studios have been covering their part of the cost. The theater-owners’ portion of the financing has needed to come through venture capital financing, which has dried up since the catastrophic news on Wall Street.
The funding is being implemented through companies acting as middlemen in the process, such as Cinedigm (formerly AccessIT) and Digital Cinema Integration Partners, a joint venture owned by AMC Entertainment, Cinemark and Regal Entertainment Group, which represents over 14,000 screens in North America.
It makes me mad when they compare AccessIT, a true "middleman", with DCI Partners, which is basically a direct preferential VPF agreement with the powerhouses (AMC, Cinemark, Regal) of the USA.
quote:
Adding 3D technology is yet another layer of sophistication -- and cost. The latest figures suggest that there are roughly 2,000 3D-ready screens in 1,320 theaters.
Lionsgate recently released Patrick Lussier’s “My Bloody Valentine 3D,” which opened wide and included 1,033 3D ready screens, resulted in box office topping $50 million -- and the ratio of the 3D versus 2D revenue was 6:1.
The film’s budget was $16 million, which also demonstrated that 3D is becoming more accessible to a wider range of filmmakers.
$16m budget for Valentine 3D makes the producers/distributors rich. And converting a 10 screens multiplex to digital with a 3D screen or two would cost about $1m and leave the owner with nice bills for future upgrades, maintenance and glasses to clean for a half a $3 surcharge.
Hmmmm. How about if the good Valentine people TRULY offered to PAY for part of the cost and savings in striking/licensing/delivering/warehousing/destroying film prints instead of complaining that the film had to be pulled out when Coraline opened because there aren't enough 3D screens to cover them both?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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