UPDATE: Broadcast Nets Expand Nightly News For Tornado … 
Cannes: Weinstein Co Acquires Keanu-Reese Sci-Fi Pic … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’ Up … 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Wolverine’ 
Ric Robertson Taking Paid Summer Hiatus From Movie Academy … 
‘The Big C’ Finale Airs On Showtime Tonight 
Obama Scandals Bring MSNBC 7-Year Low While Fox News Rises 
Season Finale Of CBS’ ‘Mike & Molly’ … 
Ang Lee Departs FX Pilot ‘Tyrant’ 
DreamWorks Eyes January For ‘Glimmer’ And Dylan … 
Warner Bros TV & ‘Smallville’ Co-Creators … 
How Many Times Does Seth MacFarlane Have To Say No To The … 
UPFRONTS 2013: TV Spinoffs’ Almost Perfect Year 
OSCARS: Animated Feature Rule Change 
Cannes: Relativity Sets ‘Hunger Games’ Liam … 
Cannes: Park Chan-wook’s ‘Sympathy For Mr. … 
Cannes: Stanley Weiser To Script ‘Three Graves … 
Yahoo CEO Foresees Big Opportunities To Sell Ads On Tumblr 
Disney, Lucasfilm Animation Prep ‘Star Wars … 
Cannes: Deadline Crashes Palais Forum With Costa Gavras, … 
Hammond On Cannes: Sun Comes Out As Parties, Deals And … 
Men In Black 3 opens Friday and it’ll be on plenty of 3D screens despite disagreement between exhibitors and Sony Pictures Entertainment over who should pay for 3D glasses. Movie studios have been footing the bill for the glasses but Sony’s announcement last year that it would end payments with the release of MIB3 rankled major exhibitors. As discussions continue neither side is budging — at least publicly. Sony is keeping quiet but Bloomberg reports that executives from Regal Cinemas and 
Cinemark have said they won’t give in, and the National Association of Theatre Owners indicates nothing has changed on either side. The movie is obviously booked into theaters in 3D and 2D because as the saying goes, the show must go on. So will that surcharge for 3D tickets, which theaters and studios split as they do regular ticket prices. Meanwhile negotiations continue although Sony has already made clear it doesn’t intend to continue paying for the glasses indefinitely.
‘Men In Black 3′ Arrives As Sony, Cinemas Still At Odds Over Who Pays For 3D Glasses
-
Marketplace
News/Opinion Poll
Loading ...Box Office Poll
Loading ...
Solution: End 3D movies.
99% of all 3D movies are post-converted and not shot in 3D. It’s a ploy to get a few extra bucks from the common movie-goer.
Fortunately, it looks like all of the 3D conversions for 2012 have been released, and the rest of the year will bring only films shot stereoscopically.
Spiderman and Madagascar are 3D
I’m not so sure I even want to see this movie in 1D after the last one! 3D really just kinda sucks except as a gimmick. It frankly works best when used ridiculously in a movie that you don’t mind seeing dark and blurry like “Piranha 3D” or “My Bloody Valentine 3D”. Unless crap is going to fly out of the screen directly at you, I just don’t see the allure of paying even more than the already overpriced ticket to see most movies looking WORSE than if I had I paid less. 3D always diminishes my experience rather than enhances it. After seeing “Hugo” in 3D and wishing the whole time that I was seeing it in 2D, I now go out of my way to find the best theater here in L.A. showing new films in 2D. “The Avengers” in 2D was amazing. I plan to do the same for “Prometheus” and every other 3D movie coming out this summer.
Richard, you’re preaching to the choir. Unless it’s a super special event movie like “Avatar” paying extra to get dizzy and nauseous watching a mediocre movie is not for me.
The problem with 3D is that the focus is too narrow. The human eye changes its depth perception regularly, even when attempting to focus on one object. When a 3D movie puts something in focus, it removes the other things from focus, so our natural process is disrupted, as we attempt to shift depths and cannot. This problem also occurs in 2D movies, especially in chaotic scenes or when camera-work has intentionally blurred moving objects. The problem is that human vision is very complex, and there isn’t much of a market to improve the theater’s use of it, just incentives to profit from existing technology.
All the firings @ Sony N.A. are starting to show. If the Majors do not act in concert, then Sony will have to continue per industry standard. What are they going to do? Withhold their next release? File suit against their exhibitors? And I agree with Dan & Richard: 3D is a price ploy 99% of the time.
Hey Sony, got your foot in the sights OK?
Good, now, ready, aim…
Make the glasses look like the ones they wear when they neuralize people and I’d pay a few bucks for them. Otherwise I’m seeing it in 2D anyway.
3D is fine, once in a blue moon with the kids, but it’s simply too expensive to justify beyond that. and don’t even get me started on IMAX.
i just saw the Avengers in IMAX at an AMC in Jersey; $32 for two adults. ridiculous. you’d think at that price it would’ve included a large popcorn & 2 small sodas. a #2 pencil, for christ’s sake. something.
and yet these f*ing idiots have the nerve to complain about attendance or argue about who’s going to pay for 3D glasses?
couldnt agree more. Havent seen a movie in 3d in ages. Dont miss it at all.
Why is this movie not coming out in July? Is Will Smith trying to re-invent himself as the ” Memorial Day” guy? This movie looks awful, I can’t believe it even got made.
Actually, it’s the best film out of the trilogy. The conversion was done painstakingly, and looks great.
Serious question here – did you see an early screening of the film or do you have a stake in its success (you, your company, your friend or client worked on the film)?
These kinds of OTT comments are usually dismissed as being written by plants – so a little more info might earn some respect…
Would you believe even if they said they weren’t plants?
This probably sounds incredibly naive but why can’t the studios and the exhibitors split the costs for the glasses 50-50? Only seems fair.
The studios won’t have any leverage unless they have product that is worthy of the surcharge.
This film does not fall under that category.
After Avengers (with subpar 3D to begin with) what else is there?
The Hobbit?
So, you’ve seen it? LOL. Right, you haven’t.
Also, it’s tracking incredibly well. Stay mad.
How about we skip 3D all togather and go back to makeing movies that don’t suck
I used to be a huge 3D fan. Then came the “let’s make this 2D a 3D”. And now we have the “who pays for the glasses” wars.
The 3D just doesn’t do enough for me to justify the cost. Do what you want studios, I (and many) aren’t gonna see it in 3D anyway. And the way audiences act in movies, I am so over going to the theater. Let’s ramp up VOD please.
I can’t agree with you more about audiences. I was at a movie last night at the Century City AMC, and a cell phone rang super loud in the middle of the movie. Then my head almost exploded with a lady answered the phone and had a two minute conversation. Completely took me out of the movie. What is wrong with people?
You COULD HAVE asked her to put down her phone and stop talking, or take it to the manager. More theaters are realizing this problem, and are trying to stamp out people who call or text in a theater. What is wrong with you? I can’t believe a lot of moviegoers are just ignoring this problem.
As for the 3D debacle, studios and exhibs should split the costs 50/50. If Sony wants to phase out paying for 3D glasses, they have to do it gradually, they can’t just dump it on a whim.
Well at least Sony isn’t being greedy. I’d hate to see a studio acting that way.
tack on another $1 to ticket price…problem solved
Nice to see King Will finally dethroned — this looks like blahhhhhhh.
Nothing would make me happier then to see this kill most 3D movies. Ask anyone who wears glasses -to see- wearing a second pair of glasses over glasses is annoying as all hell; it darkens up the movie and I can’t think of any film where I thought it really added anything to the narrative. I may see MiB3 (though the plot looks terrible) but if I do, I’d prefer to see it on a 4k screen in 2d, thank you.
You do realize that no one is forcing you to watch 3D– they do offer the same movie in 2D….
Except for when some theatres offer 3D only with certain movies.
Let people buy and keep their own glasses that they can re-use. #done
Sony must have nuts the size of the Death Star to think it can play hard ball in this situation when their share price is so bad.
Cinema owners should call their bluff and see what happens…..
If Sony is stupid enough to release this film in 3D, then supply the glasses to the theaters to [then] give to their patrons as they’re making enough money on this film as it is and will make up plenty of it through ticket sales and such. Get with it, Sony! Or the theaters don’t have to show the film at all or just present a 2D version of it.
The studios are making the movies that require 3D glasses…the studios should pay for ‘em. If the movies weren’t developed, financed, and distributed by the studios there would be no need for the glasses. This would be like selling a car without a steering wheel. This scrap probably just means that the cost will be transferred to the consumer…like batteries for toys…except they’re already paying a premium at the box office for the movie without the glasses already. It would be nice for the exhibitors to give on concession stand prices; it’s probably mostly kids trying to make a nice date who are buying anyway. It used to be that you would buy a nice dinner to try to get lucky. Now for the same money that would buy a nice dinner you buy a “combo” that are virtually impossible for two people to even finish.
This isn’t a discussion if there should be 3D or not — it’s about theaters or movie studios paying for the glasses —
Given they have jacked up the prices whoever profits from the 4 dollar + surcharge should pay for the glasses.
I know they are recycling them now so will the cost go down to buy the glasses?
Of course the price won’t go down. If you recycle the glasses, they then only have to send them to be cleaned instead of manufacturing another pair. The cost goes down, we pay the same and their profit goes up.
I just assumed the glasses were a (small) part of the reason for charging $4 dollars more per ticket. If not, what do we pay extra for? The budget of the movie doesn’t effect the ticket price. With how much they overcharge for tickets you’d think at least one of these corporations would be willing to supply the dollar store quality glasses.
Cinemas have upgraded their equipment so they can project 3D and they had to pay for that from their own pocket — so these glasses are an issue.
3D is the biggest ripoff in the history of motion pictures. I never see anything in 3D because it’s not worth the extra cost and I don’t like how it looks. Katzenberg and Cameron should pay for the glasses they think everything should be 3D let them pay the costs.
Here the cinemas charge $1 & then (i know this is hard) you keep them & reuse them. If you want to.
The problem is that theaters’ business model never benefits the customer. It’s always charge us more and/or give us less.
If the movie industry weren’t so greedy, they would charge people a one-time fee for the glasses and then allow people to see other 3D movies with the same glasses and then just charge an additional $1 for the 3D movie itself. That way, the $1 is pure profit instead of being money that pays for the glasses. Plus, more people would be willing to pay $1 than $3 to $4 more per 3D movie and get yet another pair of glasses they don’t need.