|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: RealD and Cinemark to Roll Out 1,500 3D Screens
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 07-26-2011 08:13 PM
I didn't mean to sound negative in my previous comment, but I've talked to friends and other people that I know on movies that they've witnessed in digital ...
... and their basic reply when I mentioned to them that they witnessed a digital movie was, "Oh, okey.. it was nice."
I pulled another test with a movie that we've played in both 35mm and digital: A friend of mine watched the one in 35mm and I asked him on how the presentation was in which his response was "an excellent presentation" - being of sound light and focus. Interesting is that the next week he brings his family to watch the digital version of the same movie and after I asked him how that digital presentation was, his answer was really no different as with the 35mm one.
Thus, it's can be apparent that the common movie goer isn't that all impressed with the presentation technology that we beind the machine and units are ... and where I came up with that comment.
It could be the studio's fault in this where they really pushed all of the wide screen excitment advertising that was present in the golden age of 50's and 60's so the people can look forward to a "roadshow' type of presentation - just the sheer excitement in attending a movie (where, personally, I looked forward to make that 3 plus hour drive to SLC to catch movies in 70mm and excellent magnetic sound compared to the blah mono sound associated with 35mm presentations on shoebox sized screens..).
If studios managed to have some sort of advertising to promote digital presentations and revamp the excitement in going to a movie, then maybe the digital conversion could muster in more tix sales.
Now, it's the 3D thing to bring that excitment back, but unfortunately, not all are that excited about it due to personal preferences and budgets.
-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-26-2011 09:18 PM
It's mostly about the economy; Blumberg just reported today that in Brooklyn, we are to be doing very well compared to the rest of the country with unemployment down, housing rebounding (actually, we didn't go into the tailspin as much of the rest of the country did), so here at the local 14-plex which I watch closely, the Movies at Sheepshead Bay, they are doing very well with 3D. Just the opposite, in fact of your experience in Freehold. They are running only one 2D house and two 3D screens, one an IMAX. At the 10:50pm on a Sunday night this week after HP was out in its second week, it was still pulling in nearly full houses in both the 3D rooms and only half a house in 2D.
No one is going to really be able to determine the appetite for 3D accurately until it is on a level playing field in terms of ticket pricing. Or, when we finally get into a healthy economy where the surcharge becomes so insignificant as to not statistically make a difference. In a poor economy, especially in poorer areas where a lot of people are watching their wallets, just looking at the numbers doesn't give you an accurate picture of 3D's appeal or lack thereof.
The 3D haters have been saying 3D was a "fad" now for nearly a decade yet the number of 3D releases doesn't seem to deminish year by year and this so-called fad has outlasted the first 3D "craze" of the 50s by three times in years as well as in 3D feature output and certainly in quality of both 3D technical presentation and all-around high quality productions. Most of the 50s 3D films were "B" pictures. Today they are up for Oscars. If 3D has sustained since the first IMAX 3D films starting around 1994 thru the present digital 3D films since 2005, when does it become NOT a fad like scope has become not a fadm but just a way of making a movie? A little over only half the films are made in scope, but that doesn't cause people to say it's a fad.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Peter Howard
Film Handler
Posts: 44
From: Forster, NSW, Australia
Registered: Dec 2005
|
posted 08-04-2011 01:13 PM
quote: Phil Ranucci
3D is a mechanism to get theaters converted to digital.
Absolutely, the studio's almighty Trojan Horse! Funny thing is, they've almost sent that horse to the glue factory by making 3D so ubiquitous.
As 3D struggles, the incentive to convert for me is far, far less. Thirty-five mm is still working just fine, and i'm not using my 2K NEC for anything other than occasional 3D content. We refuse to play 2D content digitally, because i've not been offered a proper VPF yet, and because running costs on a 2K digital projector are about 4x that of a 35mm machine. They can continue to supply me 35mm for the forseeable future on almost everything thank you very much.
Next step from the studios will be to threaten the end of 35mm prints, but it's going to be one brave studio that actually walks the walk and steps away from 35mm when so many theaters around the world are still 35mm and still making said studios a healthy profit on each film print.
I suspect in the end they're going to accept just converting most, probably cutting their worldwide 35mm print order by two-thirds in the process, but 35mm will remain for some time yet.
| 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