Box office reports deliver more bad news for 3D movies

[Justin_Massoud]

Box office reports deliver more bad news for 3D movies.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2011/06/hvnZ8J.jpg[/newsimage]The performance of 3D movies over the typically busy Memorial Day weekend did little to counter recent arguments that they were becoming too big a focus for filmmakers and theaters despite consumers clearly not feeling the same way. If anything, some believe the less-than-stellar numbers put up by both new and previously released 3D films may speak to a growing ambivalence to the format by theatergoers who either dislike the attached premium price or are clued in to Hollywood's less-than-honest 2D-to-3D conversion process. Or perhaps it's a combination of both.


Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/latest-box-office-reports-deliver-more-bad-news-for-3d-movies-45957/](http://www.myce.com/news/latest-box-office-reports-deliver-more-bad-news-for-3d-movies-45957/)


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

[ivid]

When they are comparing the 2D vs. 3D versions of these movies, its not clear how many 2D vs. 3D showings there are out there. Is it 50/50 ? I for one had to see Thor in 3D because the local cinema wasn’t showing it in 2D.
Even though I wanted to see it in 2D because it was a 3D conversion, the 3D was actually pretty good and didn’t bother me like I thought it would.

I would have insisted on seeing it in 3D from the beginning if it had been shot in 3D.

[olddancer]

2D, 3D doesn’t matter! Garbage is Garbage! That seems to be all that is coming out of Hollywierd in the last decade. The Studio’s are going to have to realise that there are actually some people out there smarter than their Pet Rock’s. Admittedly we are not in the majority, but we’re the ones with the money.

[samlar]

3d have come out every 20 years or so since i was a kid and never lasted very long even though the movie companies said they were the future. I would never pay extra for a movie in 3d. Besides I used to five years ago go to a movie every month or so now I am lucky to go to one a year cost to much and the popcorn and pepsi also cost more than I am willing to pay.

[mikey1923]

know you why we download movies from the net

[samlar]

downloading for the net can get you in trouble the place you get them from will not protect your ip address and the law could come after you. I will stick with netflex.

[coolcolors]

[QUOTE=samlar;2590827]downloading for the net can get you in trouble the place you get them from will not protect your ip address and the law could come after you. I will stick with netflex.[/QUOTE]

I think people are more smarter then we think…sure there are those that will stick their neck in the hangman but there are plenty savvy that know what they are doing already. “Where there is a way there is a will”

[coolcolors]

[QUOTE=mikey1923;2590812]know you why we download movies from the net[/QUOTE]

I think most if not all know about that already…

[coolcolors]

[QUOTE=samlar;2590777]3d have come out every 20 years or so since i was a kid and never lasted very long even though the movie companies said they were the future. I would never pay extra for a movie in 3d. Besides I used to five years ago go to a movie every month or so now I am lucky to go to one a year cost to much and the popcorn and pepsi also cost more than I am willing to pay.[/QUOTE]

That died out for me like 10 years ago… not… . The studios did this to themselves and forced the theaters to overcharge us and thus what comes around goes around. Overcharge people and they stop coming it’s simple math.

[Jeffrey_P]

[QUOTE=Justin_Massoud;2590686]Box office reports deliver more bad news for 3D movies.

[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2011/06/hvnZ8J.jpg[/newsimage]The performance of 3D movies over the typically busy Memorial Day weekend did little to counter recent arguments that they were becoming too big a focus for filmmakers and theaters despite consumers clearly not feeling the same way. If anything, some believe the less-than-stellar numbers put up by both new and previously released 3D films may speak to a growing ambivalence to the format by theatergoers who either dislike the attached premium price or are clued in to Hollywood's less-than-honest 2D-to-3D conversion process. Or perhaps it's a combination of both.


Read the full article here: http://www.myce.com/news/latest-box-office-reports-deliver-more-bad-news-for-3d-movies-45957/


Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.[/QUOTE]

There is no way we consumers should be charged a $3.00-$5.00 premium on a 3D movie.

Avatar sucked in 3D. A good percentage of 3D movies have been converted from 2D in the first place.
The best 3D I’ve ever seen was MJ’s Capt. Eo at Disneyland.
Jeff

[silver30]

Hopefully 3D dies off. Most movies dont need 3D. Pirates or Thor did not need 3D. When 3D is added, they charge an extra $4.00.

[Mary_Cahill]

Once upon a time (like during and after WWII) Hollywood knew that the public needed to be “entertained”. We live hectic lives and need to “forget”; to be “transported” out of ourselves and into a magical place - as depicted in that memorable scene in The Green Mile. Those days are so much a thing of the past.

Now, big corporations, like Hollywood studios, hire psychologists and psychiatrists to learn how to get past our natural resistances and manipulate those extra dollars out of our pockets. We’re just cows down the shoot to big business - lambs to be fleeced any way they can.

And, when we tire of “being fleeced”, they call it “disinterest” - is that what it is? Really? “Disinterest” ??? I would think it might be better labeled “Lesson learned”!