Filed under: Editorials

Hey Jeffrey Katzenburg! No One Gives a Shit about 3D!

Katzenburg's ego goes 3D!

Monsters vs. Aliens

Poor old Jeffrey Katzenburg over there at DreamWorks. The poor fella has a whole slew of 3D movies set to come out soon and there aren’t enough theaters for him to show them in… at least by his count. Here’s the deal as I see it.

Studios have turned to the gimmick of 3D movies to try and get folks into the theaters. You see, they aren’t making good enough films so they need to find another way to get you to spend $100 to take the family out for stale popcorn, bathtub sized Cokes and two hours of mediocre filmmaking. The strange thing is that DreamWorks exec Jeffrey Katzenburg feels that theater owners should just jump through hoops to make him happy. What a life that must be, “Hey, I just made this whatchamacallit and I want you to change your business so you can show it. Scratch that… I demand you change it and if you don’t I am going to cry about it in the pages of Variety!”

Nice. Is that job available on Monster?

Katzenburg is quoted in Variety saying:

In the last 30 days, things have not progressed as well as I had hoped, expected and, quite frankly, been committed to, by all the parties involved,” Katzenberg said in response to an analyst’s question. “It’s ongoing as we speak literally now, but in terms of getting the big three (exhibitors: Regal, Cinemark and AMC) on board and actively moving forward, I feel as though things have dragged along, and it’s been pretty disappointing.”

I don’t know what his rush is. Do you ever hear anyone say, “I hear they are gonna make more movies in 3D! Those are so great. Did you hear about Monsters vs. Aliens?” Nope, you haven’t heard anyone say that. I would also wager to guess that you haven’t even discussed New Line’s Journey to the Center of the Earth, a title that I recently received an email about telling me that the “3D” that used to be at the end of the title has been removed because it is also going to be available on 2D screens. Tip for New Line: No one cares.

Of course this year isn’t the year of the 3D takeover. Next year is when we get DreamWorks’ Monsters vs. Aliens, Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, Pixar’s Up, Disney’s A Christmas Carol in freaky Zemeckis mo-cap animation and the only 3D film anyone will really care about, James Cameron’s Avatar in December. The kicker being, of course, Avatar isn’t even a DreamWorks release!

As of right now there are 1,000 theaters equipped with the technology to show these films. The goal is to have 5,000 and according to Katzenburg, “If these guys don’t get their act together very quickly in the next 30 days, they’re not going to be able to achieve that goal… Every week that goes by, it’ll be several hundred less screens that manage to be rolled out in the time frame.”

If you are wondering why 5,000 and not just 3,500 or so, it’s because sooner or later these bad boys are going to run right into one another. Disney’s A Christmas Carol is set to release on November 6, 2009 and if you don’t think the Mouse is going to keep that one in theaters through Christmas you are crazy. However, what is going to happen when Fox unleashes Cameron’s first film in 12 years on December 18? Yeah, Avatar is going to be demanding as many theaters as possible… and guess what… it’s going to get ‘em. If the hype around the Titanic director’s latest film is any indication it is going to be a must see, and a film theater owners are going to want in their houses.

I really don’t think 3D will ever take hold of audiences… that is unless someone hires Johnny Chung Lee. Check out the video below and see how you can turn your Nintendo Wii into a 3D Monster!

Click Here to add an
Avatar to Your Account
Post #1
Gravatar

You are WAY off base. I could barely read the title let alone the content - I was laughing so hard…

The world is no longer flat guys. Really, its time for you to wake up - I mean you run a movie blog! Shouldn’t you be aware of the massive changes that are taking place right now in your own industry? Wow. Really I am amazed.

Well, I guess from your point of view you better pick up the phone and also call Steve Jobs. Yeah - that guy is outta touch huh? Little things like iTunes, iPod and the iPhone were just lucky flukes - he really knows nothing. Sure he is leading both Pixar and Disney into ONLY PRODUCING 3D ANIMATIONS FROM NOW ON AS WELL. My God guys. Whats it take to swipe that friggin’ "gimmick" word out of your mouth and replace it with - "Oh yeah - I like this; its great for everyone". Which it is.

I’m done here. If I see anything further on Rope of Silicon bad mouthing what is saving Hollywood and making theater going enjoyable again I think I’ll puke. Ignorance is one thing - spreading it around like manure is another.

Jim Dorey
MarketSaw
3D Movies and Technology

- jimdorey
( May 1st, 2008 | 8:44 am )
Reply to this comment
Post #2
Gravatar

Well, apparently you are excited about 3D. However, coming from someone that writes for a "3D Movies and Technology" website I don’t think I can consider you an unbiased source. I am still yet to hear the public outcry for a technology that is hardly new. A gimmick is what 3d is at the moment and until it adds substance to a film that is all it will continue to be.

- bradbrevet
( May 1st, 2008 | 12:13 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #3
Gravatar

Since your article is so blatantly just trying to get comments from those who are reasonable about the advent of good 3D, I will oblige with a comment and at the same time get some traffic for myself.

Today, it is impossible that there could be a single person with any knowledge of the progression of the Digital Cinema roll out and 3D, who would have the opinion that you do. The cinemas and studios have created a "partnership" in bringing digital and 3D content to the cinema, in a win-win fashion. Katzenberg was not the first to jump on the opportunity, he is very vocal about the cinemas, living up to their end of the bargain and he should be. Digital cinema, like digital TV is just better and enables all kinds of opportunties for making money (for everyone).

Your article makes you look very ignorant.

Larry Pace
DVn Visionary
http://www.DarbeeVision.com

- lpace1
( May 1st, 2008 | 12:57 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #4
Gravatar

As a kid, I remember wanting to watch a 3D movie - was very cool. As a semi-grownup, I stay far away from the theaters when 3D is involved. I’ve seen the movies that have hit the streets lately, and I am not impressed.

Start with the non-technical problems: wearing 3D glasses IS NOT what I call "entertaining" when I go to a theater. I wear glasses already, so that right there is a problem; however, even when I was wearing contacts it was a problem. Let’s not forget the "gross" factor of sharing germs from show to show [you can't tell me those items are disenfected all the time].

So, on to the technical problems [well, I wish I was technical enough to go into depth]: the new flat-screen televisions may be capable of giving you a "looks like 3D" feel, but is anyone going to want to wear the glasses at home to watch a movie - just for that limited effect? I don’t think so. Is everyone going to invest in another new TV or HD versions of 3D glasses? I don’t think so.

One more thing… Give me the title of a movie, past or present, that has made any profit due to its release in 3D? I can’t think of anything mainstream. Terminator 3-D or Shrek 4-D come to mind, but wait, those are "rides/shows" at amusement parks.=;

- melsgirl
( May 1st, 2008 | 1:26 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #5
Gravatar

Larry, you have brought nothing to the table other than calling me ignorant, which doesn’t really do anything for your argument. You are also, yet another, biased opinion.

On top of that… it didn’t take long for someone to have the opinion I do and then point out some of the exact same problems with 3D as I do.

Don’t get me wrong, if a 3D movie is cool, fun and entertaining I will prop the film up as much as I feel necessary. However, I have yet to be moved by a 3D film and 3D has never, in my opinion, made a movie better.

- bradbrevet
( May 1st, 2008 | 1:53 pm )
Reply to this comment
Post #6
Gravatar

So the choice is cheer 3-D or you’re ignorant? I would much rather see money devoted to better seats, better concessions, hell just about anything else besides 3-D. Meet the Robinsons was a solid flick, but not due to 3-D. The writing was solid and the jokes were fresh. Actually, that goes for every movie. People and businesses that hide behind technology are the same guys who told us laser discs were something that we needed to adopt post haste. Not appreciating 3-D doesn’t make one a Luddite, it makes one a person with an opinion on what he/she likes. Instead of focusing on 3-D perhaps studios should again focus on what people actually want: better stories. Sheesh.

- Laremy
( May 1st, 2008 | 2:00 pm )
Reply to this comment
Leave Your Feedback
(required)
(will not be shown) (required)
ADVERTISEMENT
How do you feel about the Cuban revolutionary?
'Ballast,' 'Frozen River' and 'Rachel' still look strong independently
Better get out there and get one last theatrical experience
'Ballast,' 'Frozen River' and 'Rachel Getting Married' lead the way with six noms
Goes to show the influence the fanboys and girls have on the Internet
Preparing to sum it all up...
The director shuffle on meaningless movies
Wanted, Narnia, Step Brothers and Casablanca lead off the week
Turn your brain off and enjoy
It's a miracle I am still awake to talk about it
ADVERTISEMENT
Yup, he actually likes it... a lot I would say
'Kung Fu Panda' leads the way with 17, nine for 'Bolt' and eight for 'WALL-E'
Feeling an urge to at least say something
Ahhhh, gotta like that word - 'cerebral'
I can't get on board with this thinking
'Benjamin Button' gets the international shaft
A director is possibly named...
Live from the set of Malta... well... not really live...
Jack's back and while the prequel ain't much there's still hope
Crazy makes for a fun film, but not necessarily a good one
Four Christmases pulls a slight upset...
Front loaded weekends are hard to follow-up
Will the guest stars outshine the lead?
It's a feast of post-holiday pictures
Van Damme can certainly play himself, but is that where it ends?