John Carter 3D rant.

[amalthia]

I was reading the New York Times today and they had yet another article about how the movie didn't so great this weekend at the box office. I found it interesting that they mentioned all this behind the scenes stuff for what went wrong with the movie but they didn't once bring up that many people refuse to watch movies in 3D.

I know for myself I didn't get to see the movie until Sunday afternoon at 4pm because they only had 2 non-3D showings this weekend 4pm and the other at 10pm. On Friday night there was no way I could make the 4pm or the 10pm showing. I couldn't stay up until midnight because I had early morning plans on Saturday. Sunday was the soonest we could see it. I can tell you the showing I went to was sold out. I can't help but think if they saved their money and skipped 3D Disney would have made more money on this movie. I don't know how much 3D costs to put on a movie but I kind of want to tell the studio people to save their money and spend it on marketing, other special effects, or better writers. Or just pocket the money and produce something else with it. Whatever they spent is far too much if it is keeping people from seeing their movie.

I know I'm not the only one that detests 3D. My husband I both got headaches last time we tried a 3D movie and the 3D costs five dollars more on top of an already expensive ticket. For a Disney movie you would think the people in charge would expect parents to bring kids to watch the movie, but they don't ask how is a family supposed to afford 3D prices??? It cost me and my husband 20 dollars to see a matinee movie. I imagine for a family of four that would be 40 and that's without popcorn or drinks.

For once, I would like to see an article that points to 3D as the main reason people didn't see the movie. Because it's been proven time and again that people will pay to watch crap *cough* Transformers *cough.* Quality isn't the reason for why people aren't seeing the movie.

To be fair John Carter was a lot of fun to watch and I thought a good family movie. It was just really frustrating that they only had two available showtimes for people who did not want to see the movie in 3D. I imagine there were other people who could not make either of those two showtimes and decided to wait till next weekend or wait until the movie is out on DVD.

Comments

[noturbaby]

I so agree. Give the money to better writers or better editors. 3D gives me a headache, too, and usually it doesn't add to the story or the enjoyment of the film.
It's such a gimmick and I hope it's a fad that Hollywood gets over soon.

[amalthia]

I hope they get over this 3D thing sooner rather than later myself.

[sakana17]

Just gotta say: hear, hear! I agree completely about 3D! I want to see John Carter (it looks like fun eyecandy) but only a non-3D showing, so I'm waiting for the opportunity.

[amalthia]

I never did get to see Fright Night at the movies because they never did show a non-3D showing of it. :(

[ane]

In the theater I saw it at on Friday there was a 2-D showing at 5:30 and a 3-D showing at 9. That was it, only two showings on opening night-- very strange. We didn't realize that the 9pm showing was 3D until we got there so even though we didn't want to see it in 3D we did anyway. It was definitely a movie that there was really no reason to have a 3D version.

[amalthia]

That is weird to only have two showtimes for a Disney movie on opening weekend. My husband gets too sick from 3D so last we went only to find out they only had 3D we turned around and went right back home.

[bikitchi]

I actually like 3D but I believe it's not the right... medium? for every movie. It's best with computer animation or heavy SFX like Toy Story 3 or Avatar or even certain sequences of John Carter but also highly dependent on how the director takes it. Coraline and Alice in Wonderland were rather useless in 3D.

I watched John Carter this past weekend and we were lucky enough that the 2D version we were watching crapped out on us. I say lucky because they upgraded our theatre to the IMAX 3D version and handed out 2 passes to everyone (and a 3rd for people that would rather not watch it in 3D). I hadn't bothered going to a 3D show for it b/c it wasn't something I was overly excited to pay IMAX/3D prices about but all the sequences with the Tharks in 3D were +150%. They looked even more amazing. It wasn't gimmicky, just a really beautiful sense of depth.

I don't believe all movies should be in 3D but I can see the merit with some movies. They're getting better especially with the Red Epic cameras that they use side-by-side (with mirrors) to help create the depth by mimicking the distance between 'eyes'.

tl:dr - 3D can be great but it's best at 'immersive' opposed to 'pop' (when things 'fly' out at you, etc)

[bikitchi]

I meant to say that I hadn't bought a ticket for the 3D show but stayed happily for the 3D upgrade.

[amalthia]

I saw Avatar in 3D and you're right it does work better if it's immersive instead of having objects popping out of the screen. Just wish I didn't get headaches from the 3D. I'm glad you had the chance to see it in 3D because depending on the director and what they do with it some of the effects can be impressive. :) I was wondering how the ships would have looked in 3D.