Some of the predictions are really bad.

The 3D Scam:

http://gizmodo.com/5493832/the-movie-st ... e=true&s=i

That's LOLtastic.

The industry in general's definitely overembracing 3D, to their detriment. Too much product for the available screens and, overall, too much too fast for consumers. "See it in 3D" as a theatrical selling point is already losing its luster and by the time 15, 20, 35 films have based their ad campaigns on it, it will be as enticing as Smell-O-Vision.

And 3D televisions, in this economy, with many people already nervous to even invest in a Blu-ray player, are going to overwhelm/annoy consumers. I don't see them catching on in the near future, not at all.

2010 will do to 3D what 2006 did for computer animation. Same old story. They'll overuse the format, oversaturate the market, milk the rush-factor, get their money fast, but it'll backfire in the long run with the inflation of the genre. The novelty will wear out, the fad will pass, and after a few flops supply and demand will balance each other. Soon it'll come down to 5-6 major hits and a few smaller ones. People won't overpay for every fucking film that is just about the same in 2D.

But did we get less CG animated films since 2006? I don't think so.

What exactly has been the mainstream reaction to polarized 3D?

Because as far as I can tell, the reaction has been decidedly mixed. So far I haven't met even one single person who thinks that 3D is "better" than 2D. Most people who like it seem to treat it as a fun diversion, but for them it's already starting to lose its initial fresh appeal.

Then there is a big amount of people who don't like it, because it disorients them. Polarized 3D is hardly flawless, and has obvious problems with tracing effects, flickering, focusing problems when you cut to a new shot, etc. And these problems are the same regardless of the theatre, as they are part of the polarizing technology. To put it simply: The more there is action and movement on the screen, the worse it looks on 3D. The more static the frame is and the longer shots you use, the better it looks.

I wouldn't use Avatar as the proof of the appeal of 3D, as Avatar would have been a tremendously appealing film to mainstream audiences even as 2D. Alice works as a better example, but I suspect that even as a 2D film it would have easily done over 200 million, and I suspect it greatly benefited from being the first major 3D movie after Avatar.

The higher ticket prizes of course help at the moment, but when for example all of your big summer movies are in 3D, the audience simply can't afford to watch them. It's much easier to pay extra for 2-3 movies a year, but much harder to pay extra for 2-3 movies a month.

Do we have a new generation of kids out there who think that 2D sucks and 3D is the way to go? I guess it's possible. Members of the board who still attend school/university might have a better idea of that.

Or are even the kids kinda mixed about the technology? Thinking that it made Avatar better, but Final Destination 4 not so much? Do they think that Hangover 2 will be improved if it's in 3D, and when it hits the theaters will they actually pay extra to see it in 3D, when they could just check out the 2D version and use the rest of their money elsewhere?

Funny how there's so much talk on the internet about people having problems with 3D yet the results are painting a totally different picture, the masses are willing to spend more to watch a movie in 3D. Why? Because they prefere it to 2D, that's why.

The masses are often sheep to hype, but then they get wise.

I'm not referring to people in internet, I'm referring to non-internet people I know. But obviously since I've personally talked about the issue only with around 20-30 people over the last 12 months or so, it's a very limited pool of opinions. This is exactly why I'm asking others to tell about other mainstream reactions.

Obviously 3D right now has novelty appeal to it, and since there are still only a few 3D movies around, it's not yet a fiscal issue to audiences to pay more. But it WILL be a fiscal issue once we get more and more 3D movies, if the ticket prize for 3D remains noticeably higher than 2D. Also the novelty factor of 3D will be lower and lower with each 3D movie that comes out.

If the ticket prizes for 3D come down, the bump we are seeing with 3D movies right now will disappear, they will generate just as much money as 2D movies.

If the 3D ticket prizes remain higher and the audience will have less chances of watching movies in 2D, some people will simply choose to go to movies less often because they can't afford it. Also the people who simply don't like the visual aesthetic of 3D choose to wait for DVD. That's two portions of the audience that theaters are likely to lose to some degree.

Actually we did. We're back on the level of around 5 major releases, which seems to be the norm for the market. Plus there are few smaller films with low budgets.

Two more conversions, this time from Fox:

CHRONICLES OF NARNIA 3
GULLIVER'S TRAVELS

The problem is the masses have no choice. They're like sheep to the slaughter, suckered into IMAX and the superior visuals that it provided which makes going back to non-IMAX standard 2D appear a huge step down. Now all IMAX screens are filled with 3D movies to gain the upcharge, screens dedicated to 2D IMAX simply don't exist anymore, and thus the sheep are forced down the path to 3D.

Given the option of 2D IMAX vs 3D IMAX, you'd be shocked at how many people forgo 3D, but the fact is, it's not an option. 3D is being thrust onto the public, and as much as I despise that fact, it will continue to succeed in theaters. Will it catch on in the home market? I don't think so.

And at least at a lot of theatres over here it is not even a choice between normal 2D and normal 3D (i.e. not IMAX). Many theatres just get a 3D copy and that's all. So you either watch the film in 3D or you don't watch it at all.

Besides The Hangover 2, which other upcoming movies are going to be filmed in 3D cameras rather than get converted in post-production? I really like the potential of The Hangover 2 being in 3D, they can capture the "drunken" feeling in a unique way onscreen and there could be some shock gags that work the best in 3D.

I was thinking more of psychedelic imagery and camera effects haha, can probably live without the vomit and penis 3d gags.

You don't know. You can't know. No, the few people you know are not representative.

You just gave someone the idea to give Exorcist the 3D treatment.

I would be surprised if we didn't.

Confirmed:

1. The Cabin in the Woods
2. Priest
3. Drive Angry
4. Mars Needs Moms!
5. Sucker Punch
6. Rio
7. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
8. The Hangover 2
9. Kung Fu Panda: The Kaboom of Doom
10. The Green Lantern
11. Cars 2
12. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II
13. Cowboys & Aliens
14. The Smurfs
15. Underworld 4
16. Puss In Boots
17. Happy Feet 2
18. Alvin and the Chipmunks 3D
19. The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn
20. The Bear and the Bow
21. Beauty and the Beast 3D

Pending confirmation: Thor, Captain America, Transformers 3.

And that's more than a year in advance for most of them. We'll surely more than double the number as we get closer.

The golden goose will be dead by year's end.

I think the studios know it, but if their competitors are cashing in, why not jump for a piece of the pie?
Sure it means you get less but if your competitor does too then who's complaining?

Anyhow the studios are stupid greedy motherfuckas and we all see it clear as day.
The audiences will desert it very soon I'm betting on it.
Clash will speed everything up because of how shitty it looks in 3D.
Fuck Alan Horn and his 3D is the future BS.
I can't wait for 3D cancellations/retractions because next year there won't be anymore boost.

Re: Animation in 2006, there has been a noticeable decline Lecter. Firstly most are majors now and those who aren't are probably very late to the table i.e. Happily N'Ever After/Alpha and Omega since it takes 4 years to complete and if production goes wrong delays can spiral out of hand. The only one I can think of surviving 06 was Sony and of course Happy Feet's production company Animal Logic since LOTG:OOGH is made by it, where are the people who made the rest?

Add to this a few people I know. Who else is in, guys?

Actually according to BOM there are only 180 IMAX screens so WTF is this conversation about?

There is no choice between 2D or 3D IMAX when the population available to them is so fucking small.

It doesn't even matter.

Add the just confirmed Spy Kids 4: All the Time in the World to my 2011 3D list.

Any prediction as to how soon before a 3D movie will win BP Oscar? Of all the BP winners in the past I think only ROTK, Gladiator and Titanic could've pulled off a 3D release. I think there is enough awards discrimination against 3D such that if Gladiator were in 3D it might've end up losing to Traffic; however, Titanic and ROTK would've still won even as 3D.

The Jury Is Out On 3-D Conversions

Stupid studios honchos are running 3D into the ground!