SlashFilm:
3D movies might soon be 3-dead.
3D box office revenues have taken a steep dive, with box office sales at their lowest level in eight years. It may finally be time to say sayonara to those bulky tinted glasses.
A report by the Motion Picture Association of America finds that box office revenues for 3D films in the U.S. and Canada have fallen 18% in 2017 to $1.3 billion, Variety reports. That’s the worst showing for 3D movies in eight years. In 2010, 3D movies sold $2.2. billion in revenue — nearly double the amount generated in 2017.
To answer the headline – yes and not soon enough. There’s only been one 3D film I’ve ever thought was worth the money – Avatar. I haven’t bothered to go see a movie in 3D in five years.
I’m okay being wrong here, but I actually do enjoy movies in 3D. Avatar, certainly, was one of the greatest examples of this technology, but even at home I like that I own a passive 3D TV. I play games, watch movies (both good and bad) in the format. What I’ve never liked was the amount of premium over a normal movie it required. All of that being said, I look forward to VR cinema too…which may put me in the wrong camp again. 🙂
If you’ve ever suffered through Gravity in 2D you’d take that back, Shawn.
Moreover, my experience is that for most films really intended for 3D – the big blockbusters – they’re improving in using it well.
A few years ago I saw an exhibit of movie camera technology at the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens. About 3 days after the first really practical movie camera hit the market around 1890 rolling black-and-white film people got to work figuring out how to use it to make color movies. About 5 days after that they started trying to make 3D images. Ever since it seems that 3D has run in waves of about 25 years as a new generation of directors and cinematographers “discovers” 3D, gushes about the ‘fantastic advances in technology since [the last failed wave of 3D 25 years ago]’, shoots a bunch of 3D movies most of which are terrible, and then everyone heaves a sigh of relief when it goes away. Until 25 years later…
I hate 3D because it’s almost always Depth of Field gone wrong. It only works if you are watching the precise objects on the screen the director intends you to look at, but if you are someone like me who actually scours the background for info, it just makes your head ache as you try to focus on images which are usually still in focus, but are deliberately skewed to create the 3D effect. Especially Avatar. If you want to see 3D done right, watch Scorsese’s Hugo. IMO, that’s the only film that has used both 3D and Depth of Field to actually made the whole technology worthwhile (and it’s still gorgeous in 2D). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSTnmEEotCQ
I agree completely! I hated Avatar in 3D! I remember being annoyed by the fact that foliage was in my way, blocking me from seeing something in the background. Our brains are perfectly capable of filling in the depth of a “flat” image. I have never watched a movie and thought that all things on the screen were at the exact same location because it wasn’t in 3D. The entire concept of 3D for a feature-length film is ridiculous.
I do enjoy 3D for attractions at places like Disney World, but those last 15 minutes or less and are purposely immersive with characters and objects coming into the audience.
I wish. 3D and AVX is still their “go-to” move for mid-tier movies (ie, non-blockbusters, that are released on a non-blockbuster weekend). Cineplex ALWAYS jams them on opening weekend as AVX and/or 3D only, with maybe the afternoon show being in “normal” mode, just to pump up the revenue numbers.
Then sadly Shawn, you never saw “Hugo” in 3D. It’s what you get when a master filmmaker takes time to plan every single shot of his film around the technology. It wasn’t tacked on as a way to grab a few bucks more from theater goers, it was integral to the storytelling.
That said, since virtually no other “3D” films are created that way, and instead are simply post converted profit generators, it can’t die soon enough.
Seems to be a bunch of people tripping over themselves to agree with the “can’t die soon enough.” Nobody forced any of you guys to see any movie in 3D, so your animosity is just childish. Some of us enjoyed them.
3D movies are a fad. They died in the 50’s and they died in the 80’s. Why? Because every new generation thinks it’s cool until they realize how unnatural it is to watch a 2 hour movie with glasses on.
If memory serves, Gravity was SHOT in 3-D. Which makes it an exception to most 3-D enhanced films.
The live action footage was shot in 2D and converted to 3D; the CG VFX, which comprises the lion’s share of the movie, was “stereo rendered”, meaning it’s 3D native.
I ONLY watch movies in 3D in theaters. IMO it adds so much more to the experience. Cineramma in Seattle stopped showing 3D movies and I haven’t been there since.
Gravity in IMAX 3D laser projection is probably the best movie experience I’ve ever had.
The price is higher for XD and 3D, so I don’t watch.
I am “attend the first showing for the cheapest price” guy.
3D is good when the movie was shot with 3D in mind. Movies that add 3D as an afterthought tend to have too much weirdness going on to be truly enjoyable.
I’m not a movie goer. I maybe hit the movies once a year. But the last 5 or 6 movies I’ve seen have all been IMAX 3d movies. Then again, I think the last 5 or 6 movies have all been Star Wars movies, and that Metallica 3D flick (which was terrible but the 3D concert footage was amazing!). So I really think there’s a place for it, but like any art form, it’s not meant for everything.
One issue is that most movies I’ve seen recently that had 3D releases have gimmicky 3D shots (i.e. things coming right at camera) so it is affecting the film making even if you don’t choose to see a 3D screening.
3D has never been a reason for me to go see a film; I prefer to not be distracted by the need to actively control my lazy eye, thanks. And I can’t imagine it would’ve made Avatar seem more original.
Ah. Got it. Because we don’t like something you did like, we’re “childish”. Makes perfect sense. God forbid you allow someone to have a different opinion than you.
The 3D thing has actually reduced my desire to go to the theatre. The format hurts my eyes and darkens the screen… so it destroys the one thing I would go to the theatre for: superior A/V experience. It can’t be superior if I hate the V in A/V. So I just wait for stuff to come out on iTunes.
Ready Player One was the best 3D I’ve seen. It was very well done and I felt added to the film. After the first few minutes, I forgot it was in 3D, and was just watching the story. After leaving the theater, I realized how well it was done.
The problem isn’t 3D; it’s people not using it properly.
Yes, they try to. Some mid-tier movies, they ONLY show them in 3d. Only if they happen to stay around for a couple of weeks (ie, they picked a good spot between blockbusters), then they will flip to a regular showing. But some they just stop showing…
I bloody well hope so. I don’t get out to movies much, so sometimes a movie has been in theatres for a month before I get to see it. Often the only screenings available when I can go are in 3D. It’s frustrating having to choose between paying extra for a worse theatre experience or waiting to see a movie on TV that I really want to see on a big screen.
Are you serious? Have you been to see a major blockbuster at a multiplex in the last few years? All the good screens, and virtually all the best showings, are only in 3D. There is one small screen, off to the side, with 4 showings (always sold out), reserved for non-3D. This is not done to enhance your experience. This is done solely to make an extra $5 on each ticket sold
Does anybody remember 3d in the 80s?
Whenever someone was pointing a gun etc at the screen you just knew that something was coming straight to you. And that’s about as creative and high tech 3d was back then.
Sadly, some 3d films these days aren’t that different. Some use the effect as an afterthought. As such, it’s not worth the premium price ticket.
Sure, the glasses have got better but the quality of some 3d films hasn’t than back in the day of the cheap cardboard ones.