Slate magazine: Has 3-D run its course?

jayn_j

Press On Regardless
Original poster
Supporting Founder
Sep 29, 2003
11,099
4,287
Sheboygan, WI
Is 3-D dead in the water? A box-office analysis. - By Daniel Engber - Slate Magazine

The Slate article is making the point that the public is now bored with 3-D and becoming more and more likely to go to the 2-D version and save the $$.

The reason I post is the very interesting graph that they include that shows a steadily decreasing percentage of new titles' revenues from the 3-D version over time this year. The graphs show a large percentage dropoff, although the last two releases (Step Up and Pirahna) have bucked that trend. The problem with that graph is that both movies were comparative flops, so a high percentage of 3-D viewership doesn't really help the overall numbers.

I am standing by earlier statements that this is just another revival of 3-D being the next great thing, just as it has been every 6-10 years since 1953.
 
rehash of a rehash, of a rehashed story. Same story comes out with more titles added. Since Avatar, none of the movies have been that good. People aren't interested whether a movie is 3D or not. It has to be quality. Get some quality movies going. Less tickets are actually being sold than in the past even though total revenue is up slightly, contributed to higher prices. Look for quality movies. HP should do well in November.

S~
 
As long as there are no sacrifices in the 2D presentation - they should try. One day it will catch on!

I believe computer screen resolution fell victim of the hidef revolution.
The resolution was steadily increasing since the EGA to VGA jump. Now, having switched to widescreen and reached 1920x1080 it practically stalled.
The few sets with higher resolution are at least 5x as much in $$$.

Diogen.
 
Those titles that were released in 3D did much higher gross than the studios predicted. Those that should have done well in 3D and were only shown in 2D did much worse. ie. "Dispicable me" predicted to do 15million the first week. Second week did 30 million (first 70 million) went against a move that the directer asked to be shot in 3D and was turned down by Disney which did 7.5 million. although was predicted to do much higher:D
 
The other movie was "The Scorcerer's Apprentice" Premiered same week 2 days only at 7million. Did 15 mill second week. Despicable 70 mill, 30mill.:D (old age memory ain't to good.
 
I suspect the tailing off is more a function of having a big kick-off splash of movies and then not releasing anything substantial for months. The problem is just like any other medium that comes to market: you get a killer app and then the follow-up seems like it takes forever and it turns out to be more of the same or not as good.
 
I read an article that said there are about 60 3D movies that will be released or will start filming in the next 2 years which could average about 2 1/2 3D movies per month.
 
I won't pay to see 3D unless the reviews for the film are stellar and the reviews of the 3D is avatar quality. I still regret going to see Toy Story 3 in 3D.

Let it die.
 
For the first time in a long time I feel like the majority: 3D excitement went down after seeing it...
U.S. Consumers Show High Interest in 3DTV, but Cite Some Concerns | Nielsen Wire

3dtv_11.jpg


Diogen.
 
Eventually I suspect all TVs will have 3D. It will become a marketing checkbox, but I doubt most people will pay for the glasses and such to actually use their 3D TV.
 
Eventually I suspect all TVs will have 3D. It will become a marketing checkbox, but I doubt most people will pay for the glasses and such to actually use their 3D TV.

It's like a lot of home receivers, even at the low price level, have the option for satellite radio, but not many (including me) are wanting to use it. Just don't see the added benefit of subscribing to it.

Ghpr13:)
 
Once a television comes out on the market that has 3D built in without the need of glasses, it will become a bit more popular.
 

PS3 Streaming

ipazzport handheld keyboard

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)