Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Is 3D already dying? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Author Topic: Is 3D already dying?
Ian Parfrey
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1049
From: Imbil Australia 26 deg 27' 42.66" S 152 deg 42' 23.40" E
Registered: Feb 2009


 - posted 07-22-2010 04:30 PM      Profile for Ian Parfrey   Email Ian Parfrey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The title says it all.

According to Gizmodo, and I have little reason to doubt the figures quoted, there appears to be a declining trend in 3D B.O receipts.

...and proof positive that the general concensus here on Film-Tech was not too far off the mark.

Gizmodo article on the decline in 3D boxoffice.

Earlier today I reported on the unlikelihood that the next Batman movie will be in 3D. But is that a fluke or part of a trend? If box office numbers are any indication, it's definitely the latter.

Since the high-water mark of Avatar, where 71% of the revenue came from 3D screenings, numbers for big-budget 3D movies have plummeted to less than 50%.

Obviously Avatar was a unique case in that it was basically sold as a 3D "experience," so if you saw it in 2D you were missing out. But then three months later the animated How to Train Your Dragon pulled in 68% of its revenue from 3D screens, hardly a significant drop-off.

Fast forward a mere four months and you have Despicable Me, another 3D animated kids movie, pulling in 45% of its revenue from 3D screens. As you can see by The Wrap's chart below, it's a pretty clear trend.

What's this mean? It means that now that people have had a chance to experience 3D in theaters, they're opting to spend $10 on a 2D screening rather than $15 on a 3D screening when given the option.

It's not great news for Hollywood studios that have sunk boatloads of money into 3D cameras and tech, but it's much, much worse news for consumer electronics companies such as Sony and Panasonic who are betting the farm on people wanting to upgrade two-year-old HDTVs to 3D HDTVs. But if Hollywood finds that making 3D movies isn't as profitable as they thought, they'll stop doing it. And without that content, no one will have any reason to buy a 3D TV.

Sucks for them, but it's good news for consumers who are voting with their wallets. No more inflated ticket prices and no need to buy a new TV for a feature no one ever really wanted? Sounds good to me. [The Wrap via Ebert]

What I would like to find out is, if this trend continues what kind of effect this would have on the digital rollout seeing 3D was a major hook in getting exhibs to convert.

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 07-22-2010 05:08 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've discussed the 3D issue with people where I work. Everybody agrees that digital 3D can be an interesting gimmick and maybe even add to the movie experience in a very few cases (Avatar). But in general, people increasingly mention paying extra for 3D as a waste. Clash of the Titans has been brought up in the context of "What the hell was the point of doing fake 3D for that movie, except to make us pay more?". There's a greater awareness developing of 3D Done Right vs. 3D Done Wrong.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Frese
Master Film Handler

Posts: 465
From: Holts Summit, MO
Registered: Jun 2007


 - posted 07-22-2010 08:00 PM      Profile for Mike Frese   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Frese   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am not ready to say that 3d is dying yet. Pricing has to be kept reasonable but Real3d $.50 per ticket will keep that problem around for a while.

Another thing to keep in mind regarding Despicable Me was that Disney demanded and got 4 week commitments for Toy Story 3 in 3d. So many single 3d screen venues were stuck running a 4th week of Toy Story 3 in 3d and running Despicable Me in 2d.

According to another forum the 3d locations were as follows for the week of July 9:

* Despicable Me: ~1,551 3D screens
* Toy Story 3: ~2,100 3D screens
* Airbender: ~1,606 3D screens

The buzz on Airbender's 3d was negative before it came out. Most people knew that TS3 story would be great and the 3d was an afterthought.

 |  IP: Logged

John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 889
From: Freehold, NJ, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 07-22-2010 10:26 PM      Profile for John T. Hendrickson, Jr   Email John T. Hendrickson, Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not convinced that Disney's tying up screens is the problem. We have a 3D and a 2D of Dispicable Me. Guess which one is attracting more attendance? Yep, 2D in a 55-45 percent split.

With Toy Story, we had one 3D and two 2D. Percentages there were even more dramatic, about 60-40 in favor of 2D. Not good, even if you were to argue that with two prints of 2D vs. only one 3D, the 2D would do better with more showtimes.

I don't know about other venues, but initially 3D outdrew the 2D fare by a wide margin. As time goes on (with the exception of Avatar), we are seeing a reduction in 3D attendance and an increase in 2D to the point where 2D is doing more business.

I have never been a 3D fan. I predicted that the bloom would come off the rose. It seems that people are going to be very selective as to what they will pay extra money for in order to watch a film in 3D.

I'm sure the distributors are getting nervous, and rightly so. They have jumped into the 3D fad, looking for maximum profit. They could end up with egg on their face. It's about product. Either it's good or it isn't. As the old saying goes: "You can't shine [bs]

 |  IP: Logged

Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 07-23-2010 12:09 AM      Profile for Chad Souder   Email Chad Souder   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
3D is not dying, it's simply dropping to a predictable level. Families coming to animated movies aren't as willing to spend the extra money for their whole group, but people are aware of the potential for awesomeness that 3D has, thanks largely to Avatar. Remember, Avatar started off horribly slow. I think our midnight show had around 20 people. The only buzz was amongst geeks. Then word got around that it was amazing and people came from everywhere. That will happen again, when someone else puts together another visually spectacular movie.

Regarding Batman, Nolan said he didn't want to do 3D only because of the gimmick. If he felt it brought something necessary to a movie, he would consider it. I can't see how it would add anything of value since he's proven he can do very well without.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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


 - posted 07-23-2010 03:09 AM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think the industry is making a mistake by having too many 3Ds. If the format was restricted to, say, one title a year per studio, then it would be more of an "event" (especially if the movie was any good) and there wouldn't be as much of a logjam of product.

We're already compiling a nice list of 3Ds we will probably skip, with "Airbender" sitting at the #1 position. I'm also hoping to pass over any "conversions" since they are apparently always going to suck.

 |  IP: Logged

Manny Montes
Master Film Handler

Posts: 270
From: United States
Registered: Feb 2010


 - posted 07-23-2010 05:21 AM      Profile for Manny Montes   Email Manny Montes   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
eh, I don't think 3D is dying, its really a bit drastic to say that already. It's just becoming less of a big deal and dropping to "predictable levels" as someone else put it. Not every movie needs to be seen in 3D plus look at the films that are playing now, they are comparing the 3D/2D split of AVATAR, which is considered a movie that has to be seen in 3D with splits from movies that aren't really marketed as a huge 3D event. Yeah, you COULD see despicable me in 3D, but with toy story hogging a 3D screen with its 4 week booking, is 3D that huge of a deal to wait for? Not for most families, and the $3.50 extra isn't helping it either.

I think 3D isn't going to "die out" despite many on here wanting it to, 3D is here to stay, it may die down though, or at least that's what I hope, hollywood is putting out too much 3D garbage right now. I wouldn't mind a WELL DONE 3D movie, i think it's just becoming too much of a gimmick because hollywood is making it that way. It can really add a level of immersion into a film.

 |  IP: Logged

Jonathan M. Crist
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 531
From: Hershey, PA, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 07-23-2010 09:46 AM      Profile for Jonathan M. Crist   Email Jonathan M. Crist   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What I have never understood as a practical matter is why the proliferation of 3D cartoons for little children (e.g. Shrek, Toy Story 3, Despicable Me).

For example my wife's friend runs a large day care center. She will sometime take a group of children to a matinee show. She is not going to pay an additional 3 to 5 dollars a ticket for each member of the group (mostly 4 and 5 year olds) who really aren't old enough to appreciate the 3D anyway.

I am sure many parents feel the same way.

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 퍼항시, 경상푹도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007


 - posted 07-23-2010 09:59 AM      Profile for Chris Slycord   Email Chris Slycord   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm pretty sure most parents don't have 30 children, though. [Wink]

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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


 - posted 07-23-2010 10:16 AM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The way the kids' glasses look when we get them back, there's NO WAY the kids are enjoying the 3D effects as the film makers intended.

We have a few pairs of glasses that we modified for little kids -- we attached some tie straps to help them stay on -- and they always come back completely smeared with gunk. But, people insist that the kids love the 3D so who are we to argue?

 |  IP: Logged

John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 889
From: Freehold, NJ, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 07-23-2010 07:11 PM      Profile for John T. Hendrickson, Jr   Email John T. Hendrickson, Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
So, if it is going to drop to "predictable levels", just what are those levels? Once that is established, the next question becomes: "Are those levels economically sustainable in order for exchbitors to make a profit/"

No argument about Avatar- it was a success. But I have to ask how many Avitars are needed for exhibitors to make a go of it? I stand by what I said in my previous post:

"It seems that people are going to be very selective as to what they will pay extra money for in order to watch a film in 3D."

Therefore, will there be enough good product to justify the expense?

 |  IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 07-23-2010 08:43 PM      Profile for Bruce Hansen   Email Bruce Hansen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Look at history. 3D has come and GONE several times. There is an old saying: those that do not learn from history, are doomed to repete it. 3D is nothing more than a gimmic, and people tire of gimmics.

BTW, I thought that Avatar was not a very good MOVIE. The story line was very thin, and down right stupid in places.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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


 - posted 07-24-2010 01:19 AM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well...if it has worked as a gimmick multiple times in the past, who's to say it won't work as a gimmick again?

 |  IP: Logged

Phil Blake
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 558
From: esperance western australia
Registered: Nov 2003


 - posted 07-24-2010 04:01 AM      Profile for Phil Blake   Author's Homepage   Email Phil Blake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I would have to disagree , i think 3d is going to be like any other shows , people will pay the money and come a good one and happy to pay more , but serve up a crappy 3d show and they will stay away.

Since wwe started with 3D people have become to expect it ,complaining that we are not showing everything in 3D , bit hard when we only have 1 unit.

 |  IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005


 - posted 07-24-2010 06:37 AM      Profile for Louis Bornwasser   Author's Homepage   Email Louis Bornwasser   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tou are all correct. At the starting point it was 80% 3D/20% 2D if given a choice. Now about 50/50. Louisville area. Louis

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.