3D movie technology, as it stands, is a load of go-nowhere rubbish. If Hollywood thinks that the tech will convince moviegoers to leave the comfort of their homes, filled with HDTVs and Blu-ray (or upscaled DVDs), it’s got another thing coming.
Basically, Hollywood recognizes that home entertainment options—HDTV, Blu-ray, streaming Netflix, playing Fallout 3 in 1080p with a Dolby Digital setup, etc.—are just as satisfying as going to the movie theater; some would say that home entertainment is MUCH better than going to the movie theater. (Hah! You want me to leave my warm house, drive/subway to the theater that has uncomfortable, non-stadium seats, sticky floors, loud teenagers who are more interesting in texting their friends that watching the movie? Sure, that’ll happen.) So, in order to save the theater business Hollywood has turned to 3D, investing millions of dollars with the hope that it’ll get John and Jane Doe out of the house. It hasn’t, and it won’t.
Neither the movie studios nor the movie theaters want to pay for the upgrades. (It costs about $100,000 to upgrade the standard movie theater to a 3D one.) To pay for this amazing moviegoing experience, theaters will charge a premium for the ticket, as much as $25. (Oh, sure, a family of four is gonna spend $100+ to see a two-hour cartoon.) Never mind that 3D can be described as nothing more than a gimmick, and one that Scott here, who recently saw Bolt in 3D, adds “nothing to the show.”
All this to say, no, Hollywood, not too many people are going to spend $arm and $leg to see your terrible films in “3D.” We got mouths to feed; besides, “24” is back on TV, and it’s broadcast in high-def. Looks great on the big, shiny LCD in the living room.