New "Star Trek." 3D was done as a "post conversion."

[RichA]

CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[nick]

On May 16, 7:14 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

According to the IMDb:

Budget:
$185,000,000 (estimated)

[moviePig]

Except for 47 RONIN and HOBBIT, 2013's remaining live action 3D is
post-conversion. I fear it's becoming less of a cost saver than it is
a low-hanging revenue enhancer. I.e., the auditoriums are there, and
people will pay ...so why not send our perfectly ordinary print to the
drugstore and have them make a cardboard-cutout version?

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com

[RichA]

On May 16, 8:00 pm, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:

And they pocketed an extra $10M by being CHEAP.

[nick]

It's funny how things have evolved. After Avatar, we had the post-
conversion cash-ins Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans, and
everyone thought once the cash-ins had worked their way through the
production system, everything would be proper 3D. But it's gone in
the other direction. (By the way, when did they move the release of
The Hobbit back up again? I thought it was going to be released next
year but now it has a December 13, 2013 release date.)

Speaking of Star Trek, our local Regal has 8 of 18 screens devoted to
Star Trek, four in flat, and four in 3D. Hollywood has no qualms
anymore about cannibalizing its own audience, cutting Iron Man 3 and
The Great Gatsby off at the knees so quickly, giving them also-ran
status after a week or two. Star Trek could have the biggest opening
of all time but by Monday, people will be sitting in mostly empty
theaters watching it since they're going to be spread out over so many
screens.

[moviePig]

On May 17, 8:05 am, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 16, 10:34 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 8:00 pm, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 16, 7:14 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > > According to the IMDb:
>
> > > Budget:
> > >  $185,000,000 (estimated)
>
> > Except for 47 RONIN and HOBBIT, 2013's remaining live action 3D is
> > post-conversion.  I fear it's becoming less of a cost saver than it is
> > a low-hanging revenue enhancer.  I.e., the auditoriums are there, and
> > people will pay ...so why not send our perfectly ordinary print to the
> > drugstore and have them make a cardboard-cutout version?
>
> It's funny how things have evolved.  After Avatar, we had the post-
> conversion cash-ins Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans, and
> everyone thought once the cash-ins had worked their way through the
> production system, everything would be proper 3D.  But it's gone in
> the other direction.  (By the way, when did they move the release of
> The Hobbit back up again?  I thought it was going to be released next
> year but now it has a December 13, 2013 release date.)

I don't recall ever hearing *other* than this year ...with Part III in
2014.

Re 3D, there may yet be one or two technical "revolutions" in the
offing: 1) a successful matriculation to the home market, and/or 2) a
proliferation of cameras/competence in Hollywood's ranks. Regardless,
fwiw, I think 3D still has cachet to support high-profile efforts by
high-profile directors and projects ...for a while, anyway.

> Speaking of Star Trek, our local Regal has 8 of 18 screens devoted to
> Star Trek, four in flat, and  four in 3D.  Hollywood has no qualms
> anymore about cannibalizing its own audience, cutting Iron Man 3 and
> The Great Gatsby off at the knees so quickly, giving them also-ran
> status after a week or two.  Star Trek could have the biggest opening
> of all time but by Monday, people will be sitting in mostly empty
> theaters watching it since they're going to be spread out over so many
> screens.

But do you think that people like me would ultimately "give in" and
see IRON MAN 3? There was a time when I might well have, but it was
before Netflix and Redbox and libraries and on-demand and ...

[nick]

This year the blockbuster season literally appears to be a blockbuster
season. If you don't want to go see the blockbuster of the week,, you
ain't goin' to the movies, which is why while normally Mud is
something I wouldn't go see, I'm hoping it holds out long enough for
an alternative to seeing some undesired biggie (like, uh, Hangover
3). But aside from Pacific Rim and maybe Superman, there's not much
more to look forward to, though on the on-demand front, Berberian
Sound Studio is premiering in a few weeks.

[BTR1701]

In article
<e36fbf1a-d461-4130...@s18g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,

I'd rather watch it in a nearly-empty theater. Less people means less
cell phones lighting up every few minutes, less people coming in late
and crawling over you, less teenagers chatting and giggling, etc.