Jeffrey Katzenberg weighs in on 3D's "heartbreaking" decline

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,327
8,510
693
Silverdale, WA
#1
Sure Jeffrey. It's totally everyone else's fault that you want to charge $5 extra so people can get headaches from wearing glasses and staring at a blurry screen for 2 hours. I'm glad the public is shunning this shit. Until we get holodecks, I'm done with 3-D

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) – There has been an alarming dip in 3D grosses at the domestic box office this summer. The trouble started with Disney's "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides." For the first time, a majority of the audience opted to see a studio 3D picture in 2D. It happened again a week later with DreamWorks Animation's "Kung Fu Panda 2."

Without naming names, DWA chief Jeffrey Katzenberg, 60, says too many 3D movies from other companies have been more show than substance, leaving the consumer feeling betrayed.

The early ambassador for 3D opened up to The Hollywood Reporter about his concerns, and why he remains committed to the technology.

The Hollywood Reporter: Why do you think the number of moviegoers seeing films in 3D is declining rapidly in the U.S.?

Jeffrey Katzenberg: "I think 3D is right smack in the middle of its terrible twos. We have disappointed our audience multiple times now, and because of that I think there is genuine distrust -- whereas a year and a half ago, there was genuine excitement, enthusiasm and reward for the first group of 3D films that actually delivered a quality experience. Now that's been seriously undermined.

"It's not in any fashion, shape or form the demise of 3D, but until there are 3D experiences that exceed people's expectations, it's going to stay challenged." He predicts that Michael Bay's "Transformers: Dark of the Moon" will do just that.

"It's really heartbreaking to see what has been the single greatest opportunity that has happened to the film business in over a decade being harmed. The audience has spoken, and they have spoken really loudly."

THR: Do 3D tickets cost too much, especially for families?

Katzenberg: "Here's the thing: We are giving our audience a choice. We didn't take a plane and convert it to all first class. To people who say there is price pressure, or price sensitivity, even in the family market, I say, 'OK, that's why we have continued to support a 2D format and made sure that the 2D movie we're delivering today is better than the movie we delivered two years or three years ago.'

"Quite frankly, there's no industry in the world that doesn't attempt to move up the customer to a premium experience. I don't care whether you make shoes or wine or iced tea or cars, everybody tries to create multiple price points. So why shouldn't we be in the same business of offering our customers a premium experience at a premium price -- as long as we deliver them a premium value? If we cheat them, which is what has happened now too many times, then they'll walk away from it."

THR: Does international box office make up for the soft 3D market in the U.S.?

Katzenberg: "There is unprecedented growth going on. Here's a staggering statistic: We opened 'Kung Fu Panda 2' in 5,500 theaters, 4,000 of which were 3D. So in China, we had more 3D theaters than we had in North America. In international markets, 65 percent of the gross, or more, is coming from 3D screens."

THR: Do you have any plans to change your 3D strategy at DreamWorks Animation?

Katzenberg: "We're not the problem. We have made five films now in 3D and have built this amazing reservoir of knowledge and tools. Nobody else has made five 3D movies back to back. You can see the quality of the experience increasing with every film. The cost has gone down significantly for us the last three years, and there is still meaningful, incremental profit to us, even though the size of our audience has narrowed. On every account for us, 3D is a win. It's not nearly as big a win as it should be, and it's certainly not the win it was headed toward being, and that's really heartbreaking to me because we have managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory as only Hollywood can do.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110611/film_nm/us_jeffreykatzenberg_qa

I guess Mr. Katzenberg will have to console himself with his swimming pool of money and solid gold rocket car.....
 

TheDrip

I'm bi-winning.
Jan 9, 2006
5,051
3
228
#3
Apparently this kike hasn't heard of the word "gimmick".

Not to mention that I can't recall a movie that has been released during this new flood of 3D that had anything going for it other than simply being in 3D.
 

Stormrider666

Hell is home.
Mar 19, 2005
28,037
2,765
673
Bronx, NY
#5
Apparently this kike hasn't heard of the word "gimmick".

Not to mention that I can't recall a movie that has been released during this new flood of 3D that had anything going for it other than simply being in 3D.
The funny and sad thing is that Hollywood has been trying the gimmick for at least 50 years.
 

weeniewawa

it's a man, baby!!!
May 21, 2005
12,076
1,267
593
Hell,California
#6
this may be the last gimmick to get people back into the theatres

money is tight and no one wants to spend the extra to see movies in 3D when they can netflix it or bit torrent it

Apple or Amazon could drive a stake into the theatres if they do some deal to show movies right out of the studios
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#7
Apple or Amazon could drive a stake into the theatres if they do some deal to show movies right out of the studios
Not just yet, the studios are still too beholden to the theater owners. There's going to come a tipping point though when the studios just tell the theater owners to fuck off, they'll only be loyal until they can make more money with streaming services and cable/satellite On Demand type services.
 

Stig

Wackbag's New Favorite Heel
Jul 26, 2005
80,680
4,436
558
NH
#9
The biggest problem with 3D isn't even the poor quality of the movies. Since they first started trying this, the movies have always been dragged down by distracting zoom shots and shit flying at the camera. Having the bad guy thrust a spear at your face doesn't make a better story.
They're just aggravating to watch.
 

MayrMeninoCrash

Liberal Psycopath
Dec 9, 2004
24,327
8,510
693
Silverdale, WA
#10
The biggest problem with 3D isn't even the poor quality of the movies. Since they first started trying this, the movies have always been dragged down by distracting zoom shots and shit flying at the camera. Having the bad guy thrust a spear at your face doesn't make a better story.
They're just aggravating to watch.
This. We watched the newest Resident Evil last night and you could basically see the gimmick shots they added for the "3D" in the movie. Slow motion breaking glass, bullets flying at you Matrix-style, etc. Didn't add anything to my moviegoing experience or advance the plotline at all.

Speaking of gimmicks, I checked the website to our nearby theater, and found that they now offer this for certain movies. Only $10 extra.
 

Stig

Wackbag's New Favorite Heel
Jul 26, 2005
80,680
4,436
558
NH
#11
Speaking of gimmicks, I checked the website to our nearby theater, and found that they now offer this for certain movies. Only $10 extra.
Just what the movie theater industry needs: A drink-spilling machine.
 

jsc315

AnalCunt
Dec 8, 2004
2,022
50
313
Evergreen Park,IL
#13
There never was a increase. The studios forced this on everyone and no one wants it especially for the increased price tickets go for. Fucking greedy cunts! Fuck these theaters. They over charge for ever fucking thing and cry and whine they are loosing money and raise prices more and expect people to flock to it? For the most part these theaters suck ass and are horrible and shitty. I can buy a huge TV an amazing 5.1 or 7. 1 surround sound system and Blu-ray player and have a much better experience then what the Theater can only dream of doing.

That and also shitty quality 3D just tacked on at the last min. to just try and get people in the seats, and then the people realizing it really just looks worse with the 3D effect added on to it. If you are going to do it right go all the way, dont do a half assed job and expect people to pay more for it. I'm so glad the consumers for once see through this shit and hope this whole gimmick goes away soon because I'm so very tired of it already.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#14
The only two movies I've seen in the new era of 3D where I felt the 3D added something to the mix were Avatar (which was terrible, but the 3D was great) and Tron Legacy (which had a linear graphic style that lent itself to 3D). I just don't think 3D brings enough to every movie to make it worth being "the next big thing" in cinema.
 

SKEPTIC

Those who believe in telekinetics, raise my hand.
May 12, 2007
3,181
1,870
488
1060 W. Addison St., Chicago, Illinois, 60613
#15
The funny and sad thing is that Hollywood has been trying the gimmick for at least 50 years.
This.

Welcome to 1955, Mr. Katzenberg.

[video=youtube;V0xggnsKOyM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0xggnsKOyM[/video]