Walking into advance screenings of movies, you can sometimes hear audible groans from the critics as we walk in. No, it's not just our arthritis: It's the sight of 3-D goggles being handed out by publicists at the door.
Now it appears the audience is catching up with us: The 3-D fad is dying, and I couldn't be happier if you told me Kevin Hart was retiring.
Newly-released figures for 2014 indicate that just 27 percent of filmgoers sprang for the 3-D option at even a single movie, the entire year. And that figure is in free-fall: 52 percent of moviegoers saw at least one 3-D theatrical release as recently as 2010.
However, last year also saw the largest number of 3-D releases yet — 47 — since the fad was re-resurrected a decade or so ago.
"How to Train Your Dragon 2″ saw just 32 percent of its opening-weekend ticket sales go to the 3-D version.Photo: DreamWorks Animation
As it did in the '50s and again in the '80s, the 3-D fad is losing its hold. And good riddance: 3-D releases charge up to $4.50 extra for the privilege of having to wear bulky plastic spectacles (even more annoying when you already wear glasses) and squint through the murk that usually comes with the 3-D "upconversion." (Most movies are not shot in 3-D but merely have the effect recreated in a slapdash way in postproduction, which is why most 3-D flicks do not look as good as the truly spectacular "Avatar.")
Audiences, especially audiences for kids' movies, at which the vast majority of ticket buyers are opting for the 2-D versions, have figured out that the 3-D effect isn't worth the extra bucks. Once you've seen a couple of dozen 3-D films, you get so acclimated to the gimmick that it becomes utterly without value. A couple of weeks after I've seen the latest 3-D release, I can't even remember which version I saw — although, like most critics, I make a point to see the 2-D version if it's offered.
Hollywood became alarmed by the drop in 3-D ticket sales in the summer of 2013, when moviegoers wised up and refused to pay extra for another dimension of "World War Z" or "The Great Gatsby" (even though the sparkling latter was actually a rare example of a movie worth seeing in 3-D). The success of "Gravity" (another dazzling exception to the rule that 3-D is a waste of money) rekindled interest in the format later that year, and studios invested heavily in conning audiences into seeing the 3-D versions of "Godzilla" and "The Amazing Spider-Man 2," but sales then began to sag again last year.
"Maleficent" banked just 21 percent of its opening-weekend ticket sales from 3-D.Photo: Frank Connor/Disney
If people really preferred to see movies in 3-D, we'd all have 3-D TVs by now. Do you know a single person who has one? As recently as 2012, 3-D TV was said to be the next big must-have gizmo. Now it's already a joke. The manufacturers are now pushing smart TVs (which actually are worth the extra $50 or $100) and 4K super-duper high-def (call me skeptical on the necessity of that, at least for now).
Sure, 3-D movies will struggle on for a few more years, but theater owners aren't stupid. When the rooms showing the 3-D versions are mostly empty and the ones showing the 2-D print are just about full, they'll put 2-D films in both.
Goodbye, 3-D movies. At least you outlasted Sensurround and Smell-O-Vision.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
The 3-D fad is dying — and this film critic couldn’t be happier
Dengan url
http://solusiagarsehat.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-3-d-fad-is-dying-and-this-film.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
The 3-D fad is dying — and this film critic couldn’t be happier
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
The 3-D fad is dying — and this film critic couldn’t be happier
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar