Saturday, October 30, 2010 at 11:32AM 'Conan' Release Date Set
The new Conan reboot will be leaping off the screen at us on August 19th, 2011. Less than a year away. And it seems it's being released in 3D. Now while I'm not sure I'll be catching this one in 3D (though I would like to see Rose McGowan in 3D), I'll admit I'm a bit curious to see how it will turn out. However, that's not why I'm reporting this news about the release date.
Imagine this coming at you in 3D!It seems that release date is being held by two other 3D movies, Fright Night 3D and Spy Kids 4: All the Time in the World. Final Destination 5 releases in 3D one week after these three movies too. While none are in direct competition for Conan, I have to say that's a lot of 3D in a short amount of time.
I know a lot of us are in opposition to this 3D boom the film industry is in. Some movies truly benefit from it, such as Avatar and Alice in Wonderland, but most movies seem to use it as a gimmick to charge more for tickets. So what I'm wondering is, is this boom of 3D releaes mean it's here to stay, or will it oversaturate the market and dry itself out?
We already know some blockbusters are staying away from 3D, such as Christopher Nolan's next Batman film. I'd really like to stop hearing about 3D, but as long as you can convert a movie for 3D effects and charge 50% more for a ticket, I don't see it going away anytime soon.
Reader Comments (5)
I don't mind that 3D is an option as long as they offer 2D for those who want to pay the regular $9 - $10 for the movie.
They DO need to work out something on pricing, but I'm sure the market will find it's way AS 3D RELEASES BECOME MORE PREVALENT. 3D is the fullfilment of what the industry has been talking about since the 90's in terms of there being "tiers" of movie releases. This was also sort of that way in the 50's when you had so-called "A" and "B" movies. The top "tier" will have a premium exhibition as well as a premium price. The others less so. Right now they're creating that top tier and seeing what the response is. That's why it's important here this past year that they've seen the response to lesser efforts at 3D exhibition and they're working to advance them. Because what they're NOT going to do for long, is charge that premium price for an inferior product. Then you've got directors like Nolan, who are working in OTHER premium exhibition formats to see what the response is to those. Since his movie is such a highly anticipated sequel to such a successful previous movie, it makes a GREAT control in the experiment.
Ultimately they really WANT to see the end of 2D, because 2D is commonplace in an age where you can watch a movie on your cell phone. There's nothing that makes the theatrical experience stand out and FOR PEOPLE TO SEE MOVIES IN A THEATER. They make box office from butts in seats. Sure they do a lot from home video, but they're not going to do that if there's no theatrical success to start it off. AND THEN, there's the bootleggers - the biggest reason for switching to the format because it will stop the free hemorhaging of profits caused by them.
And I think the biggest whiners about 3D.
J.Bradley,
I do agree about the pricing. Hopefully more movies in 3D = lower ticket prices, but they'll likely stay high as long as people are paying them. I'd be curious to see how 3D movies fare between 2D and 3D ticket sales. I'll have to research that one later.
There's just a huge difference between movies converted to 3D versus filmed in 3D. I'm all for the end of 2D as long as 3D quality becomes worth it. But with all the conversions to 3D it feels more like Hollywood is trying to get more money instead of upping the quality of it's films. There's a huge difference between Avatar and Clash of the TItans. Right now it feels like a gimmick. Hopefully, like you said, it irons itself out.
You also bring up an interesting point about the bootleggers. Unless they get their hands on screening DVDs or find some fancy way to film 3D screens, that would put a huge cramp on pirated videos, which again I am all for.
I'll have to research that one later.
Ask and ye shall receive. The two most comprehensive articles on the economic trends of 3D can be found here and here. They use slightly different methodologies but they both agree that 3D has become increasingly less profitable over the past few years (at least in terms of opening weekend gross), with the decline accelerating since early 2009 to the point that many recent films (including billionaire Toy Story 3!) are actually costing themselves money compared to what they would make if they were only released in 2D.
The last few years have been about the introduction of 3D. '010 will be remembered as the year about quality of the product - native versus converted. The NEXT few years will really be about proliferation and profit. One thing that's not factored into ALL the data in the charts in those articles is how 3D movies lift the performance of movies IN GENERAL, against other forms of entertainment media - which it now competes with. THAT'S the whole point of the introduction of 3D in this time - to get people AWAY from the screens - wherever and whenever they're watching them - and into theaters to watch the screen THERE.
Here's a twist though - ironically, I think it's going to be TV that actually get's people more acclimated to 3D than theatrical movies. Admittedly though, that's something that'll take a decade to play out.
The thing is - anybody that thinks this some "Bwana Devil" craze and it'll go away in a couple of years is whistling in the graveyard. It may take a little longer to adapt to than the switch from silent to sound movies but here in a decade we'll have a clearer view of how there was an era of movies before and after 3D.