Is Digital 3-D The Future of the Theatre?

[Soulquarian MiceChatter Find all posts View Profile Close Soulquarian]

I, like many of you, saw Nightmare Before Christmas in Digital 3-D. Despite the fact that I own the film on DVD and UMD, I still payed $10 to see it in the theater as a direct result of how impressed I was with Chicken Little in Disney Digital 3-D.

I must say, I enjoyed it a lot. The use of 3D to enhance the film rather than cheese it up is incredibly effective. You really feel like you're in the film. This and sitting in the "sweet spot" of a theater creates a fantastic movie viewing experience...

So why don't studios and theaters jump on this? It's no secret that the theater industry is losing a lot of money. The consumer has so many ways to get content. Online, DVD, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, etc, all give us ways to get our fix. With theatrical windows shrinking, more and more people are opting to wait for DVD releases rather than put up with the theater experience.

When the television first came out, everyone was convinced that the end of the movie theater was near. As a result, theaters developed wide screen and surround sound formats that allowed for an experience people couldn't get in their homes. They were back in business. It's obvious that something needs to be done now to counteract the lack of consumer interest.

I would definitely go to the theater to see films in digital 3D. Can you imagine Star Wars in Digital 3D? Or Saving Private Ryan? By not using 3D as a gimmick, we get a meaty portion of enhancement. Every showing of Nightmare was sold out at my local theater, despite the fact that probably everyone in the place owns at least one copy.

Would you go to the theater more if they showed more films in Digital 3D?

[Doofy Member Find all posts View Profile Close Doofy]

Re: Is Digital 3-D The Future of the Theatre?

I would absolutly. I loved NBC 3D. I was so happy that they didn't have pumpkins flying out of the screen.

I would pay to see Star Wars and most any action movie in this format.

[FrumiousBoojum Huh? Find all posts View Profile Close FrumiousBoojum]

Re: Is Digital 3-D The Future of the Theatre?

They need a LOT of work on conversions before I'll pay to see every old film that I love in 3D. While NBC wasn't the rush job that Superman was, it still suffered from a LOT of common mistakes in conversions. 3D needs 2 or more cameras!

Theaters don't have long before the 3D thing is gone again, though. The big problem: 3D television. Without glasses. The first consumer grade models and network broadcasts are to be done within the next couple of years.

So, what's next with the 60 year old TV vs. Theater battle? Well, if things go as normal, 3D will become a fad of the past yet again, movies will be flat again. Just like it was in 1983 and 1853. The only differnce, this time, we're not seeing a bunch of 3D for the sake of 3D. (Instead, we're seeing rather lazy 3D: CG toons and conversions. Anything to prevent the use of more than one camera.) The theaters most likely will continue to try to be "innovative" through TV broadcasts of football games on the really big screen. And if it's not that, they'll look into the past to see what other fads they can revive. Silent film? Terr-o-vision? Skelerama? (If it didn't make a lasting success for William Castle, will it be better when somebody else does it?)

I'm a fan of 3D. I just have fears that a 3D overload will once again create a distaste to the average movie goer when such films are no longer a must-see event but, instead it's just the norm (much like the CGI toon fad).

[Soulquarian MiceChatter Find all posts View Profile Close Soulquarian]

Re: Is Digital 3-D The Future of the Theatre?

They need a LOT of work on conversions before I'll pay to see every old film that I love in 3D. While NBC wasn't the rush job that Superman was, it still suffered from a LOT of common mistakes in conversions. 3D needs 2 or more cameras!

Superman is different from Digital 3D. In fact, Disney Digital 3D is the only 3D experience I like. IMAX 3D is nowhere near as good, and theme park 3D attractions aren't that great either.

It was easier for me to focus on things coming out of the screen. I didn't feel as much eye strain, and the images were a lot sharper.

I'm a fan of 3D. I just have fears that a 3D overload will once again create a distaste to the average movie goer when such films are no longer a must-see event but, instead it's just the norm (much like the CGI toon fad).

That's true of anything though. If Studios used 3D as another tool to create an immersable experience, I don't see why it would be a bad. I love seeing CG movies that are well done, and the same goes for a 3D movie. I hate Chicken Little, but I was so impressed with the 3D presentation that I went to see Nightmare as soon as I could.

[FrumiousBoojum Huh? Find all posts View Profile Close FrumiousBoojum]

Re: Is Digital 3-D The Future of the Theatre?

Superman is different from Digital 3D. In fact, Disney Digital 3D is the only 3D experience I like. IMAX 3D is nowhere near as good, and theme park 3D attractions aren't that great either.

That's because IMAX 3D is one of the worse systems out there (but not as bad as the Spy Kids anaglyph). IMAX screens are not made for 3D in mind. It doesn't matter if it's digital or not, polarized movies are always the best way to view a 3D movie with glasses.

Of course, the Real-D system is just the greatest of any polarized system.