3D films and cinema charges...

underpants

I don't know if anyone has seen a 3D movie yet but it's a pretty interesting development and a reason to go to the cinema rather than wait for a DVD release.
But this post is about the additional fee for seeing a 3D movie. I'm based in Dublin and I've noticed that cinemas are charging betwen 2.20 and 2.50 extra if a film is in 3D!!

One cinema, Movies @ Dundrum (AFAIK the first 3D cinema in dublin?), is the only place NOT charging any additional fee. the way it should be!

I know that cinemas must supply glasses but that's not a high cost and 3D films are all digital films which require no reel changes so that's obviously cost saving!
Shouldn't cinemas be embracing this technology and using it to try draw people in? instead they're (mostly) using to slap on extra charges for the privilege of watching a film in 3D!

Mr.Lizard

I think Mark Kermode was banging on about this in his podcast saying cinemas should not be allowed to charge extra for 3D. Cinemas positions is that the increased price is required to cover the cost of extra equipment needed to screen the films. His retort was "well in that case should we be paying extra for surround sound vs stereo or pay extra to sit on a chair rather than on the floor" etc .

Movie producers don't care about 'immersing' moviegoers with the 3d or the benefits of exploring this technology. The sole reason they are bringing out all these movies of late is to counter piracy (it's the same logic as when they brought out 3d in the 50's ie to get people away from watching tv and go back to the theatres, and again in the 1980's - this time to counter the advent of home video VHS/betamax). As such they have a bit of a nerve charging people extra for the privilage when it is an entirely self-serving (not to mention unimaginative) scam.

My own hope is that this gimmick falls flat on it's face and quickly fails finanically before we have to suffer the *real* marquee summer blockbusters with this needless coat of paint slapped all over them.

caff

dont think you pay extra in cineworld if you have a card though, one way around it

Predalien

The equipment needed costs over €100,000 per screen and the glasses aren't cheap either, plus the distributors charge extra. But i would agree that the price is a bit too much, €12 or thereabouts is too much to see a film, no way I'd buy any popcorn or food if I'm payin that much just to see the film.

BlitzKrieg

I don't know if anyone has seen a 3D movie yet but it's a pretty interesting development and a reason to go to the cinema

I've gone to a few 3D films by now (just back from Monsters vs Aliens, making it a total of 5 now) and I have come to the personal conclusion that I dont like 3D on my films and would rather not have the development. Actually will probably stop going to any new disney/dreamworks etc animated films if they are all in 3D as I rather watch them in 2D.


On the whole it costing extra, meh the cinema gets an oppurtunity to put something on that you cant simply wait for the dvd for the same experiance of course they are gonna try and suck you dry.

johnny_ultimate

Yeah I've seen a few of them at this stage (Monsters vs Aliens this week was pretty dull) and I really don't think there is any benefit to the film itself through being in 3D. In fact, apart from the occasional 'wow the audience moment' (ping pong ball in MvA for example) the only thing 3d really adds is a notable sense of depth - something like the big white prison in MvA looks quite a bit more vast with the extra dimension.

But for the most part it is a gimmick, and unless some talented film-maker comes along and actually appropriates 3d for some kind of artistic merit, it shall remain a gimmick. And with every upcoming animation seemingly embracing it - at Waveriders today saw trailers for THREE upcoming 3d films - Hollywood seems to be pushing it hard. If anyone can pull it off I hope it's Pixar with Up or Toy Story 3. If they can't do it, can't think of who will.

BlitzKrieg

James Cameron is my make or break solution for 3D with his upcoming Avatar

If he cant make something worthwhile out of it then its not worth bothering with it at all.

grimm2005

I don't dislike 3D but it doesn't really affect my enjoyment of a film either way. Nothing in the 4 3D films i've seen so far have wowed me too much but it can be a nice novelty, just not essential.

Regarding the cinema prices, it is a bit of a steep price increase depending on where you go. I don't think covering the cost of equipment is a great excuse cos they show certain 2D films with digital projectors at times and surely it's only natural that the old style projectors will eventually be phased out in favour of digital projectors.
I think it's fair that they ask for a small charge on the glasses but I reckon they should allow people who have kept their glasses to reuse them on future films and only pay the standard ticket price.

As a previous poster said, 3D films are covered under cineworlds unlimited card so if your on that, thats one way to avoid the cost

HomeAccount

3D glasses generally cost around €40 each. I would assume most cinemas would order 200+ of these.

The film may be digital, but they still need to invest in those mammoth projectors - costing around €100,000 each. There's a small glass spinning orb that basically is what makes it 3D - this costs around €10,000 alone.

They would also need to invest in new glass washers, as every single pair of glasses needs to be washed after each screening. There have been cases around the world where people have caught eye infections, so hygiene is paramount.

So charging extra for 3D can be somewhat justified when you know how much a cinema has invested to get it.

johnny_ultimate

HomeAccount wrote: »

3D glasses generally cost around €40 each. I would assume most cinemas would order 200+ of these.

The film may be digital, but they still need to invest in those mammoth projectors - costing around €100,000 each. There's a small glass spinning orb that basically is what makes it 3D - this costs around €10,000 alone.

They would also need to invest in new glass washers, as every single pair of glasses needs to be washed after each screening. There have been cases around the world where people have caught eye infections, so hygiene is paramount.

So charging extra for 3D can be somewhat justified when you know how much a cinema has invested to get it.

All 3D glasses are disposable now, so you're basically paying two euro for a pair of new glasses (which you can bring home, although I have yet to see any benefit in actually bringing them home since I doubt any cinema would let you away with reusing an old pair when they can recharge the premium)

BopNiblets

Craps, does Cineworld make you buy another pair? Going to see Monsters vs Aliens 3D soon but I kept my glasses from Bolt 3D (Rhino FTW!)

Brimmy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

James Cameron is my make or break solution for 3D with his upcoming Avatar

If he cant make something worthwhile out of it then its not worth bothering with it at all.

This. Especially seeing as he said he'll never make another film in 2D.

cine-man

Earlier this year I watched My Bloody Valentine 3D at Cineworld and it cost €15.60 (approx 50% more); this week I was in watching MvA's and it now costs €12 (with the new pricing structure they charge a €2.00 3D surcharge no matter what ticket you buy).

I think as more 3D films are released and more cinemas have 3D the cost will come down for tickets; also I think the cinema chains are probably still trying to work out the pricing level for these types of films as its still quite a new development.

There are 2 different systems of 3D available in cinemas; there is RealD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_D_Cinema) and Dolby 3-D (http://www.dolby.com/professional/motion_picture/solutions_d3ddc.html). Both of these systems require specialist digital projectors; for RealD you also need to replace the white screen with a special silver one which helps with the quality of the 3D image; and for Dolby 3-D you also need the cleaning equipment and extra staff to manage the returnable glasses.

Cineworld has RealD with the diposable glasses (http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/REALD.JPG&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:REALD.JPG&usg=__vMoa13tfF4vh56lvanb0ImVTLik=&h=2112&w=2816&sz=1000&hl=en&start=5&um=1&tbnid=2U1LmkOagNBQnM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dreald%2Bglasses%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1), and as far as I know the only cinema to have Dolby 3-D is the IMC in Dun Laoghaire, which has the returnable glasses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14oAs6W5DQ8).

In my opinion the RealD glasses are better, they are always clean and sealed in a bag and I have never had a problem with the picture quality. I have only used the Dolby 3-D glasses once but they were dirty with small scratches on the lenses, and I kept getting reflections on the lenses in the corners of my eyes throughout the film.

The bog problem with 3D films so far has been the lack of quality product; like a previous poster has said AVATAR should be the 1st good film using this technology.

ixoy

Don't the distributors pay for the disposable glasses? I seem to recall this because one company is getting a bit of flack in the US for charging the cinemas for the glasses for the next production (struggling to recall which 3D movie it is).

johnny_ultimate

cine-man wrote: »

Cineworld has RealD with the diposable glasses (http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/REALD.JPG&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:REALD.JPG&usg=__vMoa13tfF4vh56lvanb0ImVTLik=&h=2112&w=2816&sz=1000&hl=en&start=5&um=1&tbnid=2U1LmkOagNBQnM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dreald%2Bglasses%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1), and as far as I know the only cinema to have Dolby 3-D is the IMC in Dun Laoghaire, which has the returnable glasses (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14oAs6W5DQ8).

IMC are definitely on disposable now - more or less my local cinema and the last few 3d films I've seen there have been in 'Real D'. Think we may have had to give them back for Beowulf a while ago though..

But yeah Avatar could be interesting, and should at least be a little more ambitious than Cameron's last 3d attempt (that Titanic documentary which brought out the annoying side of Bill Paxton).

unreggd

Its just pure greed

If ye get the "give-backs" yer not costin them anything. If they wanna show 3D, its their respons. to get the glasses

and the paper ones should only cost a few extra cent

There's no way they can justify the extra 3 euro, esp when 9/10 euro is already a rip to see a reg film

It does me head in when services get pricier with NO improvement in service

[Yes mr Dublin bus, im aiming my death-stare at u!! :mad:]