The 3D version of “Dune” has far less viewing experience than 2D, and Chinese audiences are fed up with “3D blockbuster”

After watching a movie, I will collect the ticket stubs. Looking at the ticket stubs accumulated in the past few years, I found that I hadn't watched a 3D movie in a long time.

Probably after watching the 3D version of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in 2016, I accidentally fell asleep halfway because the brightness was too dark, and I made up my mind to watch the 2D version in addition to the native 3D movies.

The recent fire in the sci-fi movie "Dune" has once again set off a discussion about the dispute between 2D and 3D movies.

Some fans have reported that the 3D version and the 2D version of "Dune" are almost two movies. In addition to the brightness of the former, there is almost no 3D effect, and the viewing experience is very bad.

The important reason is that "Dune" was shot in IMAX 2D mode throughout the entire process, and then converted to a 3D version. The 2D version is a 4K source, and the 3D version has a resolution of only 2K, so the IMAX 2D version is the best.

Dennis Villeneuve, the director of Dune, also mentioned in an interview with Harper’s Bazaar last month that he hopes that more audiences can experience the film in IMAX 2D instead of 3D. A gadget".

▲ IMAX has a larger frame

In 2017, when the science fiction film "Blade Runner 2049", also directed by Dennis Villeneuve, was released in China, it also triggered discussions about IMAX 2D and 3D. The film’s photographer Roger Diggins also once I have recommended fans to watch IMAX 2D instead of the 3D version with discounted colors and details.

However, according to the "Variety" report, the initial release plan of "Dune" in China was only the converted IMAX 3D instead of IMAX 2D. After receiving criticism from a large number of audiences, China Film, which was responsible for the distribution, contacted Legend Cinemas and asked to speed up the review of the 2D version. , So that the 2D version can be released.

What makes movie fans even more dissatisfied is that they find that some theaters have only 3D versions available. They are either forced to endure the terrible experience of low-brightness and low-quality 3D, or they can only go to theaters farther away to watch the movie.

"Please give us the right to watch 2D movies, let 3D serve movies, not let movies serve 3D!”

"Sand Dune" is like a fuse, detonating Chinese audiences' long-standing grievances about "Special 3D". Netizens have posted on Weibo, Douban and other platforms to boycott the 3D version.

"3D blockbuster" from hug to boycott

In 2010, I first read in the newspapers "Avatar" about how to revolutionize 3D movie technology. The mainstream argument at that time was that "Avatar" opened the "Pandora's Box" of the film industry, and 3D movies will develop rapidly. And then cannibalize the 2D movie market.

Twelve years after it was released, the newspapers of that year have become blocks of 6.1-inch and 9.7-inch LCD screens. When it comes to "revolutionary" 3D movies, all we can think of is "Avatar".

▲ Data source: MPAA

Looking at the global movie market, 3D movies have begun to show signs of weak growth, while the 2D movie market has begun to rejuvenate, and the box office gap between the two is gradually shrinking.

After "Avatar", the 3D movie market is actually full of visual masterpieces such as "The Fantasy Drifting of Junior Pi" and "Titanic Remake".

But now when it comes to 3D movies, people’s impressions are no longer the blue giants and Bengal tigers coming out of the screen, but the inferior 3D glasses that need to be purchased at their own expense, the dark pictures with black eyes, and the average price. The fare is 3-5 yuan.

When 3D movies were just emerging, it was not easy for consumers to choose more expensive 3D movies. In current terms, this is a consumption upgrade, but consumers at the time had not developed a consumption concept of 3D viewing.

In 2012, China introduced 14 new 3D and IMAX movies. This is the best market education in the 3D movie market after "Avatar". In the concept of mass consumers, 3D has begun to equate with "blockbuster movies."

When consumers with a simple consumer view of "expensive is good" finally recognized the value of 3D movies and bought tickets to enter the venue. After watching them, they found that the so-called 3D is actually the same as the 3D effect that has not been opened after the home TV is turned on once. What a difference.

However, the film industry has become stunned by this sporadic consumer trend. Whether it is police films, romance films or cartoons, they have begun to convert to 3D movies and increase their ticket prices.

The proliferation of 3D movies directly affects the audience’s viewing experience: in the past, you can watch it when you buy a ticket, but now you still need to buy high-priced 3D glasses at your own expense; the original bright picture is almost invisible after being weakened by the lens. , Watching a 3D movie becomes uncomfortable to spend money to buy.

Some cinema professionals revealed that the reason why 3D movies look much darker than 2D movies is not only because the light is blocked by the grating-type 3D glasses, but also related to the cinema projectors.

3D movies in general theaters may use 4200W or 6500W xenon lamps. The price of the former is about 8000 yuan and the service life is 1200 hours. The latter is priced at about 10,000 yuan and has a service life of 500 hours. In order to save the cost of projection, the theater may use a lower brightness xenon lamp for projection.

Movies are technology and entertainment; they are art and business.

Distribution companies are keen to convert 3D movies in order to increase box office returns, which is understandable in business; in order to save costs, cinemas reduce the brightness of 3D projectors and extend the service life, there is currently no standard to restrict this behavior; however, they want to avoid pitfalls. The audience cannot choose 2D movies, which has become the last pot of cold water to extinguish the enthusiasm of watching movies.

Starting from "Avatar", the 3D film education that lasted for more than ten years has finally become a "money-making" routine. It is not difficult to understand why the senior movie fans who were after advanced visual technology turned their guns and became 2D movies. The most loyal supporter.

Boycott all "late 3D" movies? Don’t be overly aggressive

In fact, the discussion about true and false 3D has never stopped since the 3D movie fire.

Five years ago, people complained about "The Bourne Shadow 5" became the vomiting "Overlap 5". Five years later, people are still worried about whether Daniel Craig's last 007 movie will become a later 3D conversion. The worst one.

The experience of watching movies with hurting eyes again and again has made fans talk about "turning". It has become the consensus of this part of consumers not to look at non-2D and IMAX 3D.

In most people’s perception, 3D movies with the best stereoscopic effect should use professional 3D cameras throughout the process, and the left and right eyes are simulated through two cameras, so that the parallax effect produced is the most real and natural, and the 3D effects simulated in the later stage are all Just fooling people.

But in fact, in the 3D film industry, shooting with a traditional camera and then converting 3D images is an indispensable part of making a 3D movie. Even some movies that promote the use of native 3D cameras require post-transformation of some shots.

There are many reasons for this. For example, the size of a 3D camera is too large to take shots in a small space; some lenses with changeable environments can hardly guarantee that two images are available at the same time, and can only take a single angle of view, and so on.

Therefore, it is not rigorous to judge the quality of 3D effects by using native shooting or post-production conversion. It has the greatest impact on the final stereoscopic visual effect, and it is the level of post-production craftsmanship.

And most of the effects of converting 3D movies are not satisfactory. A large part of the reason is that excellent post-production conversion needs to overcome many difficulties, and its cost (especially time cost) is too high.

▲ Middle: William Sherak, CEO of Stereo D

"Titanic Remake" should be the most successful case of a 2D to 3D movie. FXGuide has interviewed Stereo D, the company responsible for 95% of the post-production of the film. The latter has participated in "Avatar", "Captain America", "Thor", etc. Film post-production.

In an interview, William Sherak, CEO of Stereo D, shared the secret of this old movie shot in 1997 that impressed Cameron and went out of the flat screen: 297,000 frames, frame by frame, no secret weapon, no magic Button.

▲ To make a simple picture, you need to analyze the depth of the object's picture and make it into a picture with poor vision

There are two figures behind the excellent conversion work of "Titanic" worth mentioning-a total of $18 million was spent, and about 60 weeks.

In contrast, the domestic mainstream 3D conversion cost is about 5 million yuan, and the conversion period is often only a few weeks in order to be screened as early as possible.

It is not difficult to understand why most of the so-called "3D movies" only have the title and subtitles with three-dimensional effects. 3D conversion is like putting a dazzling logo on the poster, which can attract the audience into the theater and achieve the goal. NS.

▲ "The Bournemouth 5", which has received rave reviews because of "Special 3D"

The rough post-production and cutting-edge screenings made the market excessively consuming the audience's patience for 3D movies.

The end of the game is that consumers spontaneously boycott 3D movies, and the long-outstanding 2D movies have received a word-of-mouth publicity by mistake.

When will the low-level conversion of 3D movies stop? Five years ago, "Overlapping Shadows" failed to awaken the audience, and "Dark Hill" five years later did not necessarily allow the audience to keep their eyes open and distinguish between true and false 3D.

Nowadays, if you want to watch a good movie, consumers need to know the differences between the various standards, and then go to platforms such as Xiaohongshu to collect theater viewing guides.

Watching a movie, or being optimistic about a movie, has become a subject. With a certain threshold, this is not a good thing for a huge theater chain.

As online high-quality viewing becomes more and more convenient, the general offline audio-visual experience cannot be differentiated, or even worse, the reasons why consumers are still willing to choose movie theaters to watch movies will become lackluster.

In order to increase box office revenue and accomplish business goals, it rejects 2D and over-emphasizes 3D movies. In the end, the movie theater may not only be forced out of consumers, but also the big screen itself.

Stop talking nonsense.

#Welcome to follow Aifaner's official WeChat account: Aifaner (WeChat ID: ifanr), more exciting content will be provided to you as soon as possible.

Ai Faner | Original link · View comments · Sina Weibo