Tuesday, December 18, 2012

The Moving View Master

... ain't what it used to be.

Hollywood isn't seeing as much green in 3-D re-releases as it had hoped.

Considered an easy new revenue source after the 3-D re-release of Walt Disney Studios' "The Lion King" popped out of the screen and grossed nearly $100 million last year, most such follow-ups have landed with a thud in 2012.

Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" and "Finding Nemo" were both disappointments, grossing $47.6 million and $40.7 million, respectively, in the U.S. and Canada.

At the risk of ticking off various movie execs (and James Cameron), I must say that the overall underwhelmingness of theatrical 3-D (at the box office and otherwise) doesn't surprise me.

If the dimensional viewing experience went for the same ticket price as the flat-screen version, then maybe it would have a bit of added value, and would pull extra fannies -- and accompanying eyes -- into theater seats.

Maybe.

But to pay a couple of extra bucks to wear the goggles and squint at a dimmer screen? For the moving View Master experience?

Count me out. I see lots of newer animated features, but since Toy Story 3 when younger son demanded to know, "WHY are we watching this in 3-D" and I had no compelling answer, I seek out the non 3-D versions of the latest movies.

Call me a Luddite.

6 comments:

Celshader said...

It might be worth seeing THE HOBBIT in 48Fps at least once. So far most of my friends did not like the 48Fps experience. As for me, I adjusted more quickly to it the second time I saw it in 48Fps. Compared to the 24Fps version that I saw, the 48Fps details looked extra-sharp and the camera moves had no strobing.

Floyd Norman said...

3D is dead...again.

F. Kousac said...

FYI, 48 FPS does absolutely nothing to help or make 3D better. The projection and glasses of 3D still dim the image up to 30%. You're paying more money for less quality.

Kenneth Elliott said...

48 FPS will soon be called the next 3D, once the hype wears off. Hollywood should just concentrate on making better movies than gimmicks. Hobbit was too long, poorly paced, had too many characters who didn't contribute to the plot, (which had no ending,) and no 3D or 48 FPS could improve these things

Celshader said...

F. Kousac and Kenneth Elliot, did you get a chance to see THE HOBBIT in 48Fps 3D? So far I have seen this film at the AMC 16 in Burbank twice at 48Fps IMAX 3D and once at 24Fps RealD.

The IMAX 3D glasses did not dim the image by 30%. Mayyyyyybe five or ten percent, but not 30%. I do plan to watch a 2D screening of THE HOBBIT just to see what it looks like in 2D, but the dimming effect of the IMAX 3D glasses were not that bad.

tangerine8 said...

Ever since those crappy slashers and action movies, 3D became a joke.

Site Meter