Thursday, September 20, 2007

3-D vs. 3-D

This came across my computer screen yesterday; I link to it now. Apparently DreamWorks Animation is steering clear of big Jim Cameron:

Backing off from a showdown in the 3-D corral, DreamWorks Animation is moving Paramount's 2009 release date for the 3-D animated feature "Monsters vs. Aliens" to March 27, 2009. The date change avoids a head-to-head collision with James Cameron's "Avatar," from Fox, that would have had the films fighting over the nation's growing number of digital 3-D screens...

Had "Monsters" stuck to its proposed May release, "I saw more and more problems splitting the market for 3-D right at the time when it will be becoming the most exciting thing in moviegoing," Katzenberg told The Reporter. "Instead of splitting the market, I want to see it get launched in the best possible way."

Katzenberg predicted that there would be 5,000-8,000 3-D screens available domestically by the time "Monsters" rolls out in 2009. While a 2-D version of the film also will play in smaller markets, the majority of its U.S. dates will use the new 3-D technologies...

DreamWorks, of course, is banking on 3-D animated features to give a shot in the arm to box offices grosses both here and around the world. And maybe they will. Of course, over time, as three-dimensional entertainment becomes ubiquitous, the shots might become less potent.

It will also be useful if the 3-D films coming our way are also, you know, good.


Anonymous said...

Stereo visuals makes the stories better, for sure. And the bothersome glasses make the image brighter and more appealing. But Stereoscopic movies have yet to prove themselves at the box office. I don't know if it's just another passing fad, but there has yet to be a stereoscopic film that was worth the headache.

Anonymous said...

"Stereo visuals makes the stories better"?

Site Meter