The $175m flop so bad it could end the 3D boom

[marmar]

from the Independent UK:



At cinemas in Hollywood and beyond, children have been watching a big-budget 3D animated feature called Mars Needs Moms. Most will have been happy enough with the film, produced by Robert Zemeckis (who ranks as a pioneer of digital 3D film-making along with James Cameron).

Wearing their "RealD" spectacles, viewers munch popcorn as they watch a far-fetched yarn about Milo, a nine-year-old who doesn't eat his broccoli and whose mother ends up being kidnapped by Martians. What these children don't realise is that the film is at the centre of a ferocious debate about 3D ticket pricing that threatens to derail 3D film-making altogether.

To put it bluntly, Mars Needs Moms has been a mega-flop. The film cost about $175m (£110m) to make and market – yet grossed less than $7m on its opening weekend in the US.

Worldwide box-office receipts were given an almighty boost in 2009-10 with the success of Cameron's Avatar. In its wake, studios and independents started cranking out 3D films in their dozens (or converting 2D films to 3D in post-production). Cinemas rushed to install digital 3D systems and exhibitors raised ticket prices for 3D films by up to 40 per cent. Industry analysts calculated that 3D was adding, on average, 20 per cent to a film's theatrical takings. ..............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/the-175m-flop-so-bad-it-could-end-the-3d-boom-2247778.html

[Codeine]

1. Cannot happen soon enough.

A pox on gimmicks.

[onehandle]

2. God, it looks awful.

3D is Satan.

[DainBramaged]

3. My Daughter can't go to 3D movies, affects her like sea sickness does most people

And since the 3D boom in home entertainment is still a couple (if not more) years away, you can't enjoy 3D at home, Blu-Ray is not selling as well as they hoped (no one I know thinks the extra features are worth the extra price) converting older movies to Blu Ray doesn't work well (think about coloring old black & white films) and the movie industry is down almost 15% at the box office over last year because the movies just aren't very good and the premium price of 3D isn't worth it.


I imagine Avatar was amazing in 3D, but one eye isn't enough to appreciate it.

[tammywammy]

11. I like Avatar in 3D

I thought Alice in Wonderland in 3D was just for the extra money. I didn't see the point of it.

My cousin bought a 3D tv and I just thought "why?"

[DainBramaged]

14. The problem with 3D hardware will be the lack of software

and even incompatible 3D formatting. On a TV, the image is projected, so any flaw is instantly noticeable. Films are projected, and the noise, lack of brightness and contrast, hide the flaws.


On edit, when do the studios start producing software? This year, next year, when there are 10,000 TV's out here? 100,000?

He should have bought Ipads to resell.......

[tammywammy]

19. I still have tube televisions, I'm definitely not one to jump on new technology

LOL! I have been contemplating buying a flat screen tv for my living room, but only because the 32-inch takes up so much space in my small room. Even then I'm a bit hard-pressed justifying it to myself, since the current tv works.

[DainBramaged]

28. I use a 24" 1080P monitor/TV on my desk

and it was $229 on sale at Newegg last year........great computer monitor and great HD TV. Now all I have to do is find the time to stay home and get satellite installed since my cable is GONE GONE GONE.

[tammywammy]

31. I use a laptop at home

I'm going to get a nice 22"-24" monitor for it eventually. (Eventually is a word I use a lot about house stuff.) Remodeling my study is next on the list of stuff, so I'm waiting until that's done...plus I'll have a much bigger desk than what I use now.

[DJ13]

18. Most of the problems with home adoption of new tech is the price

Companies are no longer content to amortize the R&D over several years in order to keep the initial costs low, they want to recoup the expense in the first couple of years, which creates $3,000 (and up) initial prices on the new 3D TVs, and a lost opportunity that a new market can be created.

[DainBramaged]

24. Very true

Back in the day when I worked for the Japanese electronics industry, 3-5 years was normal for amortization, even longer regarding the LCD TV's since work began in the early 1990's on that technology (plasma initially won because of a lack of reliable LCD's and now LED's are the better, brighter, and longer lasting alternative, along with lower power consumption).

SSD hard drives are a stubborn newer technology for computers, they began nearly 5 years ago as memory chips stacked in a PCI-E frame, wicked fast but even more prohibitively expensive.

As With the HD/Blu-Ray war the 3D war will be interesting, but it also may never make it to the point where it will be a worthwhile consumer product.

Two important industry variables, memory pricing and demand for rapid response electronics supporting memory intensive data, has many wondering if there might be new movement in the long-standing debate over solid-state drives (SSDs) versus hard disk drives (HDDs). The debate looks to have shifted somewhat though. With the simultaneous increase in cloud services, perhaps the better question now is, will either drive type be the answer for the intensive feature demands of the next generation of devices (from smart wireless devices (SWDs) to corporate computing solutions)?

The latest SSD-HDD question
The data storage device question itself appears simple enough on the surface: will 2011 finally see the long-foretold shift from HDD to SSD? Why would now seem more likely than any other time? Simple, tablets and smart phones are leading devices for consumer electronics (CE), and they are both based on NAND flash solutions for rapid boot up, low latency, power efficiency, and multimedia streaming data accessibility, to name a few leading features. These features, coupled with anticipated lowered price points for SSDs (long a major hurdle for more widespread SSD adoption), all seem to point to SSD as the next generation data storage solution, finally. Right?

Well, on the surface the answer to the SSD v. HDD questions seems to be at least a hedged 'yes' favoring SSDs. After all, given the new market opportunities from popular SWDs and next generation NAND production architectures, pricing is forecasted to come down for SSDs (cf. this article on 20nm migration forecasted to improve SSD pricing and adoption by 150%). Yet the general market consensus is not roundly supporting 2011 as the breakout year for SSDs. If this isn't SSD's time, when will it be? The likely (and honest) answer is a mixed bag.
http://www.smithweb.com/en/20101215664/marketwatch-quarterly/the-spin-on-data-is-there-new-movement-in-the-ssd-hdd-tug-of-war

[DJ13]

36. Thanks for that link, very interesting stuff!

:hi:

[Booster]

20. Man, you're right about movies not being very good. This past

year I watched Julia Robert's "Duplicity" and some God awful movie Sandra Bullock made and all I could say to myself was I can't believe they actually read these scripts and said "yeah, that's a movie I'd like to do". Everytime we rent a movie we always end up saying "glad I didn't pay to see that movie". What's up with that? Where are the great writers of today? Come on, people, UP YOUR GAME.

[melm00se]

46. you think we have bad movies

now?

Go back and look at the b-movies of the late 40's and 50's.

there is plenty of dreck floating around.

[Liberal_in_LA]

22. I feel for your daughter. I can only tolerate so much of it. IMAX movies are the worst with

swooping thru the sky. :puke:

[WinkyDink]

4. 3-D is about to wreak havoc with children's eyesight.

[jacquelope]

5. Hooray for Mars Needs Moms bombing badly!!!

Not so big a hooray for the potential demise of 3D. It's a great technology hobbled by piss poor implementation.

[JHB]

6. Studio executives have the memory (and follow-the-crowd instincts)...

...of lemmings.

This pattern has been repeated over and over, but the still do it every time.

[Avant Guardian]

7. Now it will shift to porn

Cant wait. lol

[Electric Monk]

12. Will? Has.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20037517-1.html

[sakabatou]

8. The movie's plot sounds stupid anyway.

[Electric Monk]

9. I don't think the problem with Mars Eats Moms was the 3D, it was the script writing and animation.

3D will go on.

[annabanana]

10. Damn! I MISSED it!. .

Never caught a single 3D flick (this time around).

Was it more "realistic" than the '50's 3D? Did you get the same headaches?

[JackintheGreen]

17. Yes, it's better

Not sure I'd say "realistic," but I don't get the headaches I did even with "Jaws 3-D" in 80-whatever it was. And it's not exactly next-gen 3D, but one of the most amazing films I ever saw was Nightmare Before Christmas in 3D. No that was a good use of technology.

Still it's a gimmick, and I would hate to it go mainstream

[DonCoquixote]

13. One bomb

Will not kill a trend,especially since the number of 3-d blockbusters is in the dozens, separate from anything involving avatar. I welcome 3-d as it is a reason to ACTUALLY GO OUT to the cinema.

[Nye Bevan]

15. 3D does not add *anything* to my enjoyment of most movies

and having to wear those glasses is annoying.

"Toy Story 3" for example is no more enjoyable in 3D than in 2D. The novelty wears off very quickly.

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Mars Needs Moms just sounds bad.

3D was great in Avatar, because it was used skillfully to support an actual story. The story and skill are what matters, not the tools used. But the money folks run for the box o' tricks thinking they can sell a surprise twice and other foolish things.

[fishwax]

30. agreed n/t

[Liberal_in_LA]

21. "mars needs moms" looked stupid from the commercials

[tammywammy]

23. I don't even remember seeing commercials for it

The premise just sounds stupid.

[Liberal_in_LA]

26. consider yourself lucky

[Nevernose]

38. As if it were aimed at 12 year old boys

And not particularly sophisticated 12 year old boys, either. In fact, I'm often accused by my wife and daughter of being a 12 year old boy in disguise, and this movie wouldn't have entertained me at any age. And this is coming from a guy that not only owns the blu-ray of transformers, but happily saw it in the theater -- twice (I like explosions, what can I say?).

[Ilsa]

45. I completely agree. The premise was horrible. And then

top off a bad movie with a 3D -induced headache? No thanks.

[Motown_Johnny]

25. this just proves that a crappy 3D movie will flop just like any other crappy movie

no biggie

[howaboutme]

27. I hope Hollywood goes broke on it

It is a worthless absurd concept. They run an overpaid propaganda machine that generally benefits only their own overpaid studios, actresses/actors while the public is being hosed and deflected from the reality of the world, and of the politicians that are shafting them.

[DainBramaged]

29. Hollywood creates tens of thousands of UNION JOBS

and for that alone the I hope it succeeds....

[howaboutme]

34. I wish no one ill will

but I'm not a big fan of a relatively small handful of people and their producers, directors and studios making a financial killing for "playing pretend", while hard working Americans doing real work are doing with much less.

There has become a huge discrepancy in this issue of "worth" to society of people, and I put as an example those Japanese at high risk working to save the nuclear plants versus Wall Street deal makers and Hollywood stars. The latter two in my opinion are a load on society not a benefit, and yet they've figured out how to spin the system so their club gets millions while others get thousands. Fxxk em.

[DainBramaged]

35. Hmmmm

Hollywood provides escape from the mundane lives we all face. If you don't think the workers in Hollywood don't work hard, maybe you've been watching too much FAUX news? And I guess we should eliminate all sports so that you can dictate how we should lead our lives? Working for corporations till we die?


You do begrudge them.


Goodbye.

[howaboutme]

37. Fantasy is good. Being ripped off is bad.

I agree that a little fantasy is good. What I don't like is seeing these people put their greedy hooks into millions of average Americans and Wal-Mart workers and others by conniving with politicians for subsidies. Taxpayers are forced to build their stadiums and subsidize their movies and then bail them out when they screw up, and when they should be bankrupt. In reality most of them do nothing of significant worth to society. They play and we pay and the game is rigged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

What we need to do is initiate a 90% marginal tax on all of these overpaid schmucks such as Sheen, Lohan, NFL players, Goldman, AIG. If our impotent gutless bribed leaders can't come up with a legitimate way to limit or legitimatize their compensation, then tax them so that they do provide worth to society. Instead this over-compensation allows them to buy our politicians.

[True Earthling]

55. delete

[Heywood J]

49. Hollywood also calls legitimate consumers thieves.

They claim the right to inspect and control your hardware, prohibiting you from exercising choice over something you bought. Each generation of this is worse than the one before. Their industry associations want to do away with your rights. Still think they should succeed?

[DainBramaged]

51. Hmmm, sounds like another anti-Union excuse to me.........

If you think your right to copy movies takes precedence over Union jobs, complain to someone else......... or get the right software

[Heywood J]

53. Y'know, I don't copy movies.

Hence why I reject being treated like a pirate when I buy a legitimate disc. But I guess that's somehow "anti-union" to you. Whatever.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raine]

32. I'm subject to migraine headaches no way would

I go to a 3D movie. Anyway I don't like the look of the few I've seen at places Disneyland, I usually just take the glasses off.

[Dappleganger]

33. We can't afford to go see 3D movies.

We can afford to pay for $5 Sunday tickets at our local theater and use free popcorn coupons as we did today.

[global1]

39. Timing Is Everything And The Timing For The Intro Of 3D Was Bad......

it coincided with the downturn in the economy and most people just don't have the disposable income to go out and buy a new 3D TV let alone go to the theater and see a 3D pic.

And besides if you watch the Best Buy commercials - 4D is just around the corner.

The point being is that technology is moving so fast now that as soon as you purchase a new technology a newer technology is right around the corner. That's why Best Buy has their new Future-Proof promotion going with their buy back program.

This all points back to what I've been saying - as the corporations target the middle class and make them poorer by the day - the very people that they rely on to purchase what they are pushing won't be able to afford it. The corps are shooting themselves in the foot.

Anyone ready for iPad 3?

[DiverDave]

40. 3-D?

It sucks.
I have to wear those goofy looking glasses?
Hell, I'd lose them in a week, then where would I be?

[NYC Liberal]

43. Yeah and they're not cheap either.

Plus for the 3D TVs, you'd have to buy a pair for everyone who watches.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. Little Kids aren't going to want to see a movie about mom being kidnapped.

I mean, duh.

[NYC Liberal]

42. Going from "regular" TV to HDTV actually improved things.

3D? I don't get the point. I really don't. It's a gimmick, and it's certainly not new. It's been around for decades.

Whenever a movie I want to see comes out in 3D, I always find a theater that is playing it in 2D. And if I can't find one then I just don't go see it.

[Fumesucker]

44. 3D TV is far more about sports than it is movies or shows..

Sports fans are the ones that are going to be buying the big 3D TV screens in quantity, there is no one more addicted to bigger, sharper, brighter, better than sports fans.

The technology already seems pretty decent for sports, it will only get better and cheaper. The 3D wave may be a bit slower than predicted but it will eventually get here and sooner or later take over the market.

Try to find a new 19" CRT type TV now..

[AngryAmish]

47. I have a lazy eye, thus poor depth perception

3D gives me headaches and makes me sleepy.

[originalpckelly]

48. It's one of the worst fads to hit cinema, since, well, 3D.

:P

Um, yeah, it's not all that great. It's not like it's really 3D, it always looks weird, it's like some kind of pop-up book.

What you really need is something like a moving hologram, but unfortunately it's nearly impossible to film a moving object like that, because motions destroy the hologram. There have been primitive attempts at movies, but none have been crystal clear like they would have to be.

[Heywood J]

50. If I wanted to watch something in 3D, I'd go to a live theater.

Where I don't have to wear stupid glasses or be searched because the industry thinks I might steal their precious remade, reformulated dreck. The plots are generally better too.

[Juche]

52. 3d movies are awesome

I haven't seen many but my uncle has a 3d tv and the movie monsters vs aliens, and that was cool to watch. I've never seen one in theaters though.

Mars needs moms just seems like a bad concept for a movie independent of it being in 3d.

[backscatter712]

54. 3d will always look fake and cause headaches for this reason

Even though you might get stereoscopic images - one image for your left eye and one for your right eye, that might be showing you an image that's 10 feet from you, you're looking at a screen, and focusing on a screen that's 50 feet from you (I'm talking about the environment in the theater.)

Since depth-perception tells you something's at one distance, but the focusing is set to view things clearly at a different distance, your visual sense will always be trying to deal with that conflict, and that takes more focus than it usually would to look at an object.

The result will always be headaches for at least some of the crowd, and the effects will always look "fake" for that reason.

[True Earthling]

56. 3D taxes the brain with too much visual information...

The story/plot becomes secondary as your brain struggles to make sense of what it's seeing. Very distracting.

[Lucian]

58. Why pay expensive prices for a crappy movie...

when you can buy it when it comes out on video for about the same price?

And I can proudly say that I haven't contributed a dime to this 3D movie crap. I have never even seen Avatar and I haven't lost sleep over it.