my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » For Transformers 3 (only), Which version sold more tickets? 2D or 3D? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: For Transformers 3 (only), Which version sold more tickets? 2D or 3D? Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-29-2011 12:17 PM                     Okay...Transformers 3 has been billed as a "watershed" movie to determine the outlook of 3D. While I doubt that any one film can make/break a technology, Transformers was designed for 3D from the ground up like Avatar was. The director, Michael Bay claimed that 3D was the way he intended it to be seen and it was composed with 3D in mind. The target audience should be in a sweet spot for 3D viewers. It is smack dab in the middle of the busy season for theatres (and coming into a holiday weekend). In short, it has a lot going for it, 3D wise. The two managers I've asked about the Tuesday night showings that had both 2D and 3D version playing essentially at the same time had similar results.... 2D outsold 3D as well as out-grossed. What are your findings (particularly from those that run theatres)? What would be good exit poll would be to ask those that saw the film in 3D if they would have seen it in 2D if that was the only format. This would go to show if 3D actually generates new sales versus just shifting the sales to a different format. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 06-29-2011 12:29 PM                     A midnight showing on tues night in a complex had six screens total, but with only one 3D screen.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Althaus Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: Bedford, TX Registered: Dec 2008 posted 06-29-2011 12:31 PM                     5 3D shows, 2 2D shows..... 2D had a slight edge in attendance (53%), and 3D had a slight edge in gross (53%)  |  IP: Logged John T. Hendrickson, Jr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 889 From: Freehold, NJ, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 06-29-2011 02:30 PM                     Just about 50-50 on gross, but the 2D did better attendance wise. That included the 9PM and midnight shows combined. Turnout was not great. For all the hype of the 9:00PM show in 3D, we had three screens ready to go, but only needed one. At midnight, the 2D pickerd up significantly. Guess it could be argued that most of the 3D crowd came out early. Of course, this film was hyped bigtime by the studio. But then, what did they expect? The last one was not good, so did the suits think 3D was going to save this one? I'm sure it will do decent business domestically, but all in all, not off to a good start. Perhaps the public is sick of having 3D rammed down their throats. It's for damned sure exhibitors are.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-29-2011 04:32 PM                        Going by Jonathan's example, it sounds like it would be more profitable to have 2 2D screens and make nearly the same amount as 5 3D screens. That's simple (very simple) economics. 2D wins (so far).  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-29-2011 04:41 PM                     To make matters worse, it cost more to put on the 3D performance and took more money out of the customer's pocket before they got to the concession stand. So, from an exhibitor's standpoint, 3D seems to be not only not generating more revenue, it is taking it away. Clearly we don't have a statistically significant sample but the trend is undeniable. This is a movie that should have done good 3D numbers. The next "big" 3D movie is supposed to be Harry Potter but I don't think it would be. It is a conversion from 2D, it would be the only 3D version in the whole series and the those that are into HP are going to see it in any "D" that it is showing. This is why I'm most curious about Transformers...it is a prime 3D movie and not even just some kids cartoon. Keep the reports coming in!  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 06-29-2011 05:25 PM                     ..and heard that Fandango sales for HPVII:Pt2 is around 5 to 1 on 2D sales against 3D sales...or even more.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-29-2011 08:52 PM                        I wonder: When people are choosing 2D over 3D, what is their main reason for that choice? Is it the brightness, the price or the glasses? Or is it just a combo of all three? What kind of feedback is everyone getting? Here, we don't really hear any price objections but a few people mention the glasses being uncomfortable. So far nobody has said the picture is too dim. (I however prefer to watch the brighter 2D picture and I think I'd choose the 2D version of just about anything if I was buying a ticket. But then, I'm over 50.) Something else: Why in the world doesn't somebody come out with CLIP-ON 3D glasses for those millions of people who wear glasses?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-29-2011 09:31 PM                     Mike, if you haven't checked out Dolby's latest glasses, they are AWESOME for people with glasses! Finally someone designed a pair of 3D glasses to keep the "second" pair of glasses off of the tip edge of the viewer's nose. They are very comfortable. Of course, they are still 3D. Steve - without exception every theater I have asked running similar showtimes and 2D vs 3D screens said the 2D sold more tickets and brought in more revenue (even when taking the 3D surcharge into account).  |  IP: Logged Frank Cox Film God Posts: 2234 From: Melville Saskatchewan Canada Registered: Apr 2011 posted 06-29-2011 09:52 PM                        Perhaps it's just the novelty factor as 3D is still new in this area but I have had exactly zero complaints or "grouses" about the 3D movies here. On the contrary, I have people asking about what the next 3D movie will be, and I have people who seem to come only to the 3D movies.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Althaus Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: Bedford, TX Registered: Dec 2008 posted 06-29-2011 09:56 PM                     Todays stats..... equal amount of 2d and 3d shows 2d had 59 % of the attendance 3d had 51% of the gross, a very slight edge Our final 3d show would of had more if it had been in a larger auditorium  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-29-2011 10:17 PM                        Brad - thanks, that's good to know. I did check out those glasses at CinemaCon but didn't realize they work so well with regular glasses. I wish there was a trade-in value on the old glasses.  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 06-30-2011 01:37 AM                     My personal theory on the HP 2D/3D thing is the 2D screens for the midnight show will sell out first but the 3D won't be far behind, making the 3D gross for the midnight premier 'unfairly' high (unfair because given unlimited 3D seats and unlimited 2D seats its my belief the majority of HP fans would choose 2D). As for Transformers, 2D is solidly outperforming 3D here, might have to move a 2D print up to a bigger house tomorrow and a 3D print down.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 06-30-2011 04:48 AM                        quote: Mike Blakesley I wonder: When people are choosing 2D over 3D, what is their main reason for that choice? Is it the brightness, the price or the glasses? This question assumes that if these three issues were remedied, 100% of patrons would prefer 3D over 2D. Maybe some feel that 3D is a gimmick, that it is distracting or just kind of lame. Maybe it makes some nauseous or gives them headaches. Maybe so many poorly produced 3D movies have turned them off. Could be countless reasons.  |  IP: Logged Matt Fields Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 545 From: Ohio, United States Registered: Jun 2005 posted 06-30-2011 09:26 AM                     Buyer beware on the new Dolby 3D glasses, they do not last nearly as long as the glass lens model (lenses get damaged more easily). They do seem to be more comfortable to most people though.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.