- Image by PhOtOnQuAnTiQuE via Flickr
3D is the future of cinema apparently. I’m not clear exactly when that decision was made, but it seems that Hollywood has made up its mind. In the last couple of years we’ve had more and more movies coming out in 3D, a trend which has culminated with Avatar.
And now there is news that Blu-Ray movies will start coming out in 3D as well so we can experience this in the comfort of our own homes. My question is why?
I don’t mean to dismiss the technical achievement of Avatar, which is clearly substantial, but I can’t help feeling that the move to 3D is driven entirely by money, not storytelling or artistic merit.
There are several reasons why 3D movies are not a good idea currently:
- There are at least 4 competing 3D standards
- Most cinemas are not capable of playing 3D movies
- Shooting a movie in 3D requires special techniques or it is more distracting than anything else
- Not everyone is capable of viewing movies in 3D
So with all those problems, why is Hollywood (and the rest of the entertainment industry) pushing so hard for 3D? Well it comes down to money of course. A large part of the entertainment dollar has been siphoned away from cinemas by DVDs, TV and the internet. 3D was something that these outlets couldn’t offer. It gave people a reason to spend $15 or so on the movie ticket and associated snacks. It fed into the idea of movie going as an experience.
Money is also the reason you can now by 3D enabled television sets. People have spent thousands of dollars on big screen TVs and the electronics companies need a big feature in order to persuade them to upgrade again. 3D is the feature they’ve picked.
We are repeatedly told that this is what the viewers want. But do they? In 2008 only 1,400 of the 30,000 screens in the US could actually show 3D movies. In June 2009 there were estimated to be only 5,000 3D screens worldwide.
Avatar is held up as the pinnacle of 3D movie making and it’s been a huge financial success despite the considerable cost. But is that because of the 3D? Well look at the numbers. In the US Avatar has raked in $352,111,000.00 with an average of 3,461 theaters. But most of those theaters will have shown it on multiple screens. Wikipedia reports that it played on some 2,200 3D screens for its midnight showing, and made only $3,537,000.00. The majority of Avatar’s box office came from people viewing this “3D” movie on non-3D screens.
It seems to me that the 3D trend is being driven entirely by companies, not by consumer demand. People don’t hate 3D, but they don’t really want it either. Am I wrong?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Focus on the Action to Avoid Headaches During 3D Movies [Movies] (lifehacker.com)
- Avatar | Quick Review (rubbishcorp.com)
- Blue Streak: Avatar Passes $1 Billion Mark Worldwide (wired.com)
- Avatar’s success is a godsend for 3-D vendors at the Consumer Electronics Show (venturebeat.com)
- ‘Avatar’ Tops Record Week as Hollywood Closes 2009 (Update1) (businessweek.com)
- Avatar Is An Epic Success (screenrant.com)
Yes. You’re wrong.
I have a feeling you may be a little biased on this one.
More seriously I don’t think that the success of Avatar had much to do with it being in 3D. Most people watching Avatar have seen it in 2D and when people buy it on DVD and Blu-Ray the overwhelming majority will proceed to watch it in 2D.
3D as currently implemented is a hack at best.
Yes I am biased to be sure. However, there is some points to be made here.
Sure, many people will be seeing AVATAR in 2D and there is nothing wrong
with that. But from what I hear, 75% of the revenue is coming from 3D, led
by IMAX. Actually I want people to see AVATAR in 2D first and then hear that
it is so much better in 3D that they go a second time. This is happening in
droves. Repeat business is through the roof and I can guarantee you it is 3D
that folks will be seeing their second and subsequent shows in, not 2D. Why?
Because the 3D version is much better. It is that simple. I have seen both
and the difference is amazing.
Your timing regarding 3D home entertainment couldn’t be better. With CES
2010 opening up in Vegas — you will hear about the exploding 3D home
entertainment market and how big companies (Sony for example) are betting
the bank on S3D. Sure they can watch AVATAR in 2D at home. But they can and
will have the option, this year, of watching it in 3D. It is now just a
question of family budgets vs. the cost. That’s all.
So 3D as a hack? Hardly. Blu-ray has their 3D specification. HDMI has
theirs. It is happening THIS year. No hack. Heck there isn’t even going to
be a format war. They have all agreed to agree. Take that one to the bank.
Cinematic 3D choices? Good for the industry. RealD is big in America, Xpand
does well in Europe. No bother! The average consumer doesn’t care.
I am amazed there are still some world is flat types out there
I hate 3D, period. Hate it. The brightness is like 1/4 of the 2D. I have to constantly squint to make out the dark areas. Also, I am 1-eye nearsighted.
Because I’m 1-eye, I never wear glasses because I always forget since I see perfect every morning I wake up. After 20 years, I don’t wear glasses at all. So to watch 3D, I have to fish out my old glasses, just wearing that alone gives me nausea. Since I promised 3 of the missionary kids to watch Avatar in 3D, I went ahead since I already enjoyed the 2D immensely prior. I had the worst 2.5hrs of pain, nausea, dark, dark movie experiences ever. The only thing I remember is when he came out of the water, for a brief couple of seconds, I said Wow, that’s cool in 3D.
I would never watch 3D ever again. I’m a big 3D fan because in the late 1990’s, I have a special adapter that can stereo vision out and split left and right eye using i-Glasses technology. I still got bunch of those videos from the late 90’s of 3D home videos I recorded. So I am just as big of a techno geek fan as anyone out there.
So I hope I give in just how horrible these experiences are. Watching my home brewed 3D videos on CRT monitor was so much comfortable to watch because I can sit up close to the TV without having to wear normal glasses, just the 3D glasses. In the theatre because of the distance, I don’t have a choice not to wear the normal glasses. If I get contact lens, I might consider it but it’s big inconvenience and the cost involved to get the contacts just for these movies and paying premium while you’re at it at the box office.
My 0.02.
Ok — didn’t know you had a personal issue with 3D. I know some do but not
many.
I believe there will always be a 2D counterpart to 3D releases.
On brightness, no, it is more like 3/5 as bright. Light is lost as it is
split between the eyes, but then the brain merges the images together and
some brightness is re-attained. Projection companies are working on that
issue right now and hope to have the situation solved soon.
Would prescription 3D glasses help in your case? I am not exactly sure about
what condition you are describing.
World is flat???! No, we’re just not suckers!
How’s that 3D tv market a year later?
Excellent 3DTV market thanks. 2011 is set to explode.
I see, you’re not suckers. Congratulations on that. You probably have headphones with only one side working right? Good, good for you.
I completely agree with you. Today was my second attempt to see Avatar to no avail. Tried the 3D after everyone said how good it was but I didn’t want to see it in 3D because of the past experience I had watching coraline in 3D. I saw Coraline in 2D originally and it felt like it was 3D because of the digital graphics. I personally didn’t think the 3D version had anything to offer except a headache. The two other people who saw it with me agreed. Now I tried to see avatar and theaters ACTUALLY don’t have it in 2D! Seriously? I am not able to see the movie of the century in the theater because they don’t want to show it in 2D???? So…If this trend continues, I am never going to a theater again. I may even just throw my tv out if they start making it for the home too. I think it’s all about money and to me it’s worthless.
My friend and i tried the 3D version against our own judgement but we only lasted 5 minutes. We left and got our money back
I cant speak for everyone, but I am one of those people that does not want 3D. I have not had a single good experience with it. Not that my experiences with it were ‘bad’, but i found that the difficulty of maintaining a clear picture and actually seeing what was happening was not worth the minimal 3D effect. In fact, after recently watching a movie in 3D, i found that I had not ‘experienced’ any of it because I spent the whole time just trying to make sense of the image. I was also extremely disappointed that this very cute little movie was only being shown in 2D at a couple of very inconvenient times. All I want is the choice to see it in 2D.
I couldn’t agree more on this one. Wanting to see a film in 3D baffles me. I’ve tried it a few times but, not only is it annoying to have to wear the glasses — over my own glasses as I cannot wear contacts anymore — but the picture quality is degraded as a result of the whole process.
And is 3D really that important? When people watch plain old 2D films are they confused when one person moves behind another person in 2D space? I think not.
Some have compared the move to 3D to the move from Black and White to Color movies but color actually does convey more information: Meaningful information. While 3D does technically provide more information to the brain, it’s considerably less significant than the color information as our brains are already capable of reconstructing a faux-3D landscape in our minds from the clues in the normal 2D picture.
I was quite literally having this discussion at lunch today with a co-worker. He was excited that his new Blu-Ray player would be firmware updatable to 3D and a little downbeat that his new TV was not suitable for 3D playback. He’s utterly convinced that 3D television will be in everyone’s home is a few years, but he couldn’t explain why anyone would want it.
I told him, “the day all TV goes 3D (at least in its present incarnation) is the day I’ll finally turn off the TV forever.” Perhaps I’m being a luddite, but this seems entirely a manufactured fad by the industry without any real demand from the public.
This article got some points but on my personal point of view I’m not convinced to don’t try 3D TVs. Everyone wants innovation and new gadgets but that doesn’t mean it is perfect.
This article got some points but on my personal point of view I’m not convinced to don’t try 3D TVs. Everyone wants innovation and new gadgets but that doesn’t mean it is perfect.
Your wrong. I love 3D. it’s awesome (most of the time.) and if I could afford it I would deffinately buy a 3D TV good move from the different industries I think.
and has come far from those blue and red glasses that hurt your eyes.… well mine anyway =)
when i see 3 d , most of the times i expect shitty movie
avatar was succesfull cos the story was good
You are right! 3D is crap and gives me a headache. It also spoils the picture with ghosting, strobing, unfocused objects, dimness, color loss, etc. It strains your eyes trying to focus on the perceived location of 3D-rendered objects, and the screen which is the only place the images are actually in focus. It is a crappy technology, bad for your eyes (even to the point of giving some people seizures), and spoils the movie so much that it is no fun to watch it anymore. Too bad that children are targeted by the media to “want” 3D. They will suffer later from the vision problems.
I can’t stand the 3D movies, all they do is irritate my eyes from the first minute until the end. They start to water and I am constantly taking off the glasses and missing parts of the film. I have never felt sick from them, but they are extremely unpleasent and my eyes straight up hurt. I think the idea of 3d is great, but I’m just not lucky enough to be able to watch them. I’ve seen people say they went with groups of people that had no problem watching the films, and never have seen anyone complain. At the same time though I’ve went with a group and our discussion after the film is how much our eyes were irritated after the film rather then discussing the film itself.
You said it in a nutshell mate. The quality of these films is sub-standard at best. The whole 3D element detracts from your viewing pleasure. Everyday it would seem more and more films suffer from this plauge. Trust me, I use the word “suffer” carefully as I believe storyline, acting and direction have all gone out of the window. Producers are resting on the laurals of objects flying out of the screen in a fuzzy manor as the primary source of entertainment.
I agree. I can’t stand 3D. It gives me a headache, the glasses are the most uncomfortable thing to wear and the brightness/ clarity goes to shi*. I can’t even take my 4 year old daughter because the glasses drive her nuts. My family and I used to watch every animation that came out and now we can’t watch any of them because there all 3D. I hope this changes soon. I miss going to the movies.
I have deliberately avoided going to these 3-D movies trying to discourage this trend, especially being it costs more. But, the industry seems to be determined to push it anyway. I applauded when the latest Harry Potter movie said they wouldn’t have a 3-D version. But, I think they are going to win this war, just like Sony won the HD war.
3D at home sucks. The picture is not as good and who wants to wear those glasses? I heard that the only reason for 3D is that they can not be copied at all in the real world. Forget the 3D
I am so tired of 3D movies that I now stay away from them unless it’s an absolute block buster. It makes my eyes water and the Glasses are a constant bother.
Another problem is that those once pristine glasses that came out during Avatar are now scratchy, that distracts from the experience big time.
I am praying for this 3D fad to die soon.
At the time Avatar came out my local cinema didn’t support 3D so I got to see the movie without it. I do think that film is HIGHLY overrated but it’s far from a bad movie.
Now however my local cinema has 3D so I’ve not been to it ever since.
Witch is a shame as I used to go to the cinema allot.
I personally think that it cheapens the experience.
Producers seem to rely solely on 3D & CGI now, who cares about acting talent & story when you can just wow people with another spectacle.
I love the Resident Evil movies & I had been waiting for the new one for a while, then I find that it’s in 3D, their as like three scenes in the trailer alone where something get’s thrown at the screen. Needless to say I was pissed, still am.
This is fabulous news. Thanks for sharing with us.
Very insightful and interesting article. Thanks for the post.
I agree completely and here are about 3000 other people that feel as we do. They HATE 3D movies to the point where they’re boycotting them. http://www.facebook.com/pages/I-Hate-3D-Movies/343236901687