Detailed in The Hollywood Reporter this week, attendance of 3D versions of films is dropping due to exceedingly high ticket prices and a lack of interest from the average American family. For example, the percentage of revenue that comes from 3D versions of Pixar films has fallen dramatically over the last two years. When Toy Story 3 was released, the opening weekend box office take was over sixty percent 3D viewings and the 3D revenue from the entire run was responsible for 56 percent of all revenue. Moving ahead in time, 3D revenue from the opening weekend of Cars 2 was 40 percent of the total revenue. Even more recently, 3D viewings during the opening weekend of Brave only accounted for 32 percent of all revenue.
Beyond Pixar, Dreamworks Animation is seeing a similar trend. 3D viewings of Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted only accounted for 38 percent of the revenue collected during the opening weekend. Likely one of the main contributing factors, families are losing interest in 3D movies due to rising ticket prices.
At the AMC River East 21 in Chicago, the cost to view Ice Age: Continental Drift in 3D during a Saturday matinee runs $52 for the average family of four. Prices vary across the United States as well. At the AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 in New York City, the same viewing is $65. At the AMC Studio 30 in Kansas, the price would be about $44. If a family of four chooses the 2D version of the film instead, they will reduce the total cost by 25 to 40 percent depending on the theater.
According to a 2011 study of theatrical market statistics conducted by the MPAA, box office revenue from 3D movies dropped by $400 million between 2010 and 2011. Despite the number of digital 3D screens in the United States increasing by 50 percent and the number of 3D films released increasing by nearly 75 percent, movies studios took in 18 percent less revenue than 2010. However, domestic revenue during 2012 is at an all time high. This is being supported by attendance of 2D movies such as action blockbusters like The Avengers and The Hunger Games as well as comedies like Ted and 21 Jump Street.
For the moment, it appears that the movie industry is relying on extreme fans of comic book films and action movies to prop up 3D ticket sales in the United States. In addition, studios are having better luck with 3D in markets such as China, Brazil and Russia. The release of the next three Avatar films is also expected to be a boon for 3D technology as 3D revenue from that box office release topped 85 percent of all revenue.
However, the first Avatar sequel won’t be released until 2014 and the draining interest in 3D films at the box office is already having an impact on the sales of 3D televisions. According to a recent study conducted by the NPD, only 14 percent of U.S. consumers consider 3D to be a vital feature that will motivate them to upgrade their existing HDTV in the next six months. Even more recent, DirecTV announced plans to scale back on 3D content development due to a general lack of interest from subscribers.
Got nothing to do with having to wear glasses. It’s simple economics. Here in the UK the only pure 3D channel is owned by Sky and they require you to take the FULL subscription package for all channels. That works out at a staggering $101 per month. How the hell do they expect 3D TV to take off if they price us all out of the market?
3D films at the cinema here run an average $14 per adult ticket. Given that not all films look great in 3D and many are simply converted from 2D I can’t say that’s particularly good value for money. So if they are looking to really boost the 3D market just make it cheaper and it’s job done!
I will only pay extra to see large screen IMAX 3D. Otherwise, standard 2D is good enough for me.
“Lack of Interest” should be interpreted as “too expensive.”
I really love 3D at the movies and at home. I watch 3D content daily at home and love it!
I think it is the expense, more than anything, that is keeping people from investing in 3D. I have a 51″ Samsung 3D plasma tv. If you price the exact same tv without the 3D capability the tv cost is cut in half. Why would someone that wants to purchase a large screen tv pay almost a $1000 when they can have the same tv sans 3D for between $500 and $600? Its simple economics, I think.
For me, paying extra was worth it. The Olympics coming up are going to be broadcast in 3D. If you haven’t seen sports in 3D (as in ESPN3D) then you don’t know what you are missing.
For those unwilling to pay the extra premium or are so terribly burdened by having to wear glasses then you just miss out.
I’ve seen several recent 3D movies releases in 2D and 3D and, for my money, the 3D version delivers a much more intense experience.
So, I don’t think it is that people aren’t interested, they just don’t like having to fork over $15 for a movie they can see in 2D for six bucks. Same with televisions.
I hope that the market will even out and 3D becomes a standard rather than a premium option on tvs.
“So, I don’t think it is that people aren’t interested, they just don’t like having to fork over $15 for a movie they can see in 2D for six bucks. Same with televisions.”
I wish the standard ticket prices for my area was only $6. I have to pay $10.50 per ticket just to watch a standard 2D movie. And the movie industry wonders why ticket sales are down across the country.
Make the sets Bigger..Faster..Brighter…Cheaper with 4 FREE pair of glasses…THEN..and ONLY THEN will 3D take off like woldfire
Also, 3D should only be reserved for special movies where it truly makes a difference. Not every movie needs to be produced in 3D. They took a good thing and ran it into the ground.
yeah… this was always assumed to be a fad. Until 3d without glasses becomes more mainstream, it wont take off.