The Wasteland 12.17.08: The Stupidity of 3D Movies

Posted by Dave Schilling on 12.17.2008

Welcome to The Wasteland (aka Hollywood), where good ideas go to die and your weekly look at all things "Industry" in LA. This week, the stupidity of 3D movies.

Lord knows there are enough "insider" columns and blogs about the entertainment industry. Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood Daily, Defamer and Patrick Goldstein's Big Picture at Latimes.com and many more. You may ask yourself, "what makes this column any different? Simple...

THIS:



You think you'll see that sort of content in Peter Bart's column in Variety? Unfortunately, they aren't quite *that* desperate over there.

In addition to woefully inappropriate non-sequitur pictures of Batman in compromising positions, you will also get news and opinion about Hollywood from someone who has no reason to be uppity or self-important because...

A) I am not important

&

B) I hate myself

I am just a guy who lives in Los Angeles with a few minor contacts. If I had a Roledex, I think the guy sweeping up popcorn at the Arclight would be in there somewhere. As you can tell, none of this will stop me from making inside references to LA.

With that said, on with the schadenfreude!

Another Reason the LA Times Sucks

Besides being owned by a bankrupt company, the Los Angeles Times also has the distinction of being a horrible newspaper and website. I dare you to try reading Patrick Goldstein's "Big Picture" blog. From ripping on people for the harmless pastime of Oscar handicapping to being friends with Brett Ratner, Patrick can be counted on to do or say something absolutely bizarre on a semi-regular basis. Granted, that can be pretty entertaining, but I digress...

Today was a remarkably myopic column about the newest circular firing squad-esque idea to squeeze its way out of the studio system. 3D. I could babble on for hours about how much I hated Beowulf, how gimmicks have never worked in film (Sensurround? Smell-o-Vision? Chris O'Donnell?) and the annoying glasses, but I won't. It's all been said. What is never considered when writers try to posit why people are not coming out to the movies is the cost.

Goldstein mentions in his blog that Jeffery Katzenberg advocates for the expansion of 3D movie theaters throughout the country. It seems that Katz thinks that people will pay an extra $5 for the honor of seeing a movie in 3D. He also thinks that ALL movies will be in 3D one day. To Goldstein's credit, he calls Katz on his bullshit. As he says, no one will care about seeing The Reader in 3D, no matter how good Kate Winslett looks in a tub.

What he also does is give the studios yet another pass on the question of why ticket sales are dropping year to year. The excuse is always the same: "People would rather stay at home and [insert new fangled techie pastime here]!" It all sounds like a proper theory until you actually go to a movie. I saw Milk at The Landmark Theater in Westwood. I spent $13 on my ticket, plus parking. I won't lie. This makes me an idiot. I paid $13 to see a movie once, with no ability to pause it or rewatch later. I am captive in a little room, with one chance to see everything, even if I have to use the bathroom. For an extra $5-7 (or the price of parking) for the DVD in 3 months. I get to watch the movie as many times as I want. I don't have to abuse my bladder just to make sure I catch all of the 2nd act. No one will talk during the film unless I let them. I can fast-forward through all the scenes with Diego Luna. What am I doing at a movie theater?

I don't hate Patrick Goldstein for being unwilling to state the obvious, but it is frustrating. No one with a voice in Hollywood would dare advocate for lower ticket prices. It's heresy. People in the film industry don't see themselves as making a product, like GM or Apple. They make a "cultural institution." Movies are a major part of our culture, but that doesn't mean everyone is going to drop extra money for 3D, Dolby Digital or stadium seating. Some people would rather save their money, especially now. It's just that the theatrical window is becoming less and less attractive to a certain segment of our country. I personally skip plenty of movies I want to see because of the price. I am certain a lot of people do too. I am also certain that a large portion of that potential audience ends up pirating the film off the internet. iTunes turned the tide on music piracy because the difference between $0.99 and free isn't that huge. Sorry Hollywood, but the difference between $13-15 and free is huge.

This hurts the studios, but only to a point. DVD, Blu Ray, downloads, pay cable and TV syndication are all ancillary revenue streams for them to off-set the negative cost of a failed theatrical run. The only ancilliary revenue theater owners have is stale popcorn and cheap wine (if you're lucky). I don't think the studios give a damn if the movie-going experience dies. They will always have some place to show their shlock. What will Mann's or UA or Regal do? They will go out of business. Their only hope is the gimmick. IMAX, 3D and appealing to upscale consumers. A movie theater will be as much of a niche as an opera house when you price the middle class out of the equation. That's a niche business some companies won't be able afford to be in. George Lucas, james Cameron, Jeffery Katzenberg and the rest rail against theaters who won't convert their auditoriums to Digital projection or 3D or IMAX fast enough. None of them are paying the millions of dollars these conversions will cost. If these gimmicks become the norm, how many theater chains will we lose? I don't even want to know.

The film industry doesn't seem to exist on the standards of supply and demand or basic capitalist theory. In Hollywood, demand falls, so the studios release more movies that cost more money and then charge even more for you to go. If the demand falls and doesn't stop falling, it should be pretty clear that people are starting to revolt against prices they can't afford? It's certainly not the quality of the movies that keep people away. If it was, Adam Sandler's career would be dead in the water. I might see an Adam Sandler movie in theaters if it only cost $7. I'd probably buy an American car if it cost $10,000 too. Lower ticket prices, advertise the change and watch attendance go up. It's so simple that even a studio executive should be able to understand.