Do you remember When was the 3D going to be the salvation of cinema, the great technological revolution that was going to take it to compete with internet and videos seen through mobile? Even ye shall keep the glasses that you gave when you were to see ‘Avatar’? Don’t worry, the Hollywood studios have also preferred to forget it.
In fact, the second advent of the 3D has finished being more of a failure than anything else, and the film industry is still looking for the technological trick that allows you to * attract new viewers to the rooms *, remove them from their homes where they can see whatever they want thanks to the numerous services of VOD in * streaming * available. Can virtual reality be a that new trick? And what lessons has to learn Hollywood failed 3D adventure?
Rise and fall of the 3D
Last summer, during the Convention CineEurope, Jeffrey Katzenberg, outgoing head of DreamWorks Animation, said directly that “Unfortunately, screwed it with the 3D. It was an opportunity for the industry that might have changed the situation”. But where, exactly, the Hollywood studios bugged her? Katzenberg believes that the problem was in the artistic side; were too many films whose interest lay exclusively in 3D, instead of using it as a means to tell an interesting story.
According to Nampabuyer, tape as ‘Avatar’ or ‘Life of Pi’ managed to convince viewers that I deserved to pay more to see them in 3D because it added a plus to their creative strengths, turned them into a much more immersive experience, which is also how sold eventually ‘Gravity’. Since the middle of the last decade, movie theaters were adapted to this technology was going to assume the great revolution, until, by 2015, there were 74.561 rooms with technology 3D around the world.
However, and as you pointed out at its Variety, the collection of films in that format only represented 20% of the total box office in that year, staying in $ 7,800 million. Has interest in 3D lost the public only for creative reasons? On the website Den of Geek, specializing in genre cinema, they pointed one more technological reason, indicating that the projectors of the rooms, although they had adapted to the new format, maintained objectives that obscured and faded images. “The 3D movies are very dark,” is a common complaint from viewers.
Hollywood already tried the 3D in the 50 and 80, and neither succeeded in any of the two occasions
There is another factor which, perhaps, adds to the above to explain why the 3D has not curdled as expected. According to The Wrap, indicated in the full format, between 2006 and 2011 fever, entries in United States prices surged 4% annually, from 6.55 to 7.92 dollars. The 3D movies cost extra to be added to the price. Between 2009 and 2011, 60% of the box office of a film released at the same time in 2D and 3D came second format. That percentage had been reduced to 30% currently. Can all the factors mentioned above have influenced in that less interest?
In addition, should take into account that Hollywood has already tried on two other occasions shoot 3D as “Savior” of the cinema television (in the 50s) and cable (in the 80s). None of the twice gelled among the public.
The next technological revolution
Three-dimensional movies have failed to take hold as expected, studies to follow and desperate looking for ways to attract viewers, especially to the younger, to the rooms, which can be new technological trick that try? They might be among the High Frame Rate, or HFR, images of high frequency. I.e., which are recorded to one step more than the 24 frames per second usual. The idea behind the HFR is blurring the barrier between film and spectator, making this much more real.
High Frame Rate
That’s what Peter Jackson was looking for when he shot the first part of ‘The hobbit’ a 48 fps HFR, and 3D. It was intended that the viewer felt in Middle-Earth, which had an experience of total immersion. However, what generated was rejection; Paradoxically, it was the feeling of being too real or a cheap TV show.
That setback of Jackson has not discouraged other directors to experiment with one HFR even greater, as the 120 fps that Ang Lee has shot ‘Billy Lynn’s long halftime walk’. It is a step which is already available in some sports video cameras and smartphones, but had not used in the film so far. It is remarkable that reading, which used 3D as a tool at the service of the story in ‘Life of Pi’, opt for these 120 fps in an adult drama, and not in an action movie (although you have combat scenes).
The first commentary on the tape, which opens on November 11 in the United States, are running that can be revolutionary technology, especially in the hyper-reality of the battle scenes, but it has the disadvantage that There are only four cinemas in the world equipped with projectors at 120 fps. The film is also shot in 4K and 3D, and other new technological options available to Hollywood are those 4K.
4,000 pixels of horizontal resolution are the evolution of the Full HD, and being introduced quickly in the domestic formats. Increasingly there are more televisions 4K, DVDs and Blu-Ray are edited more and online content platforms also include that resolution for some titles in its catalogue, like Netflix, or will do so shortly. And the digital conversion of theaters has done that throughout the world, 10,000 rooms with projectors there are 4K-ready laser.
Films are seen with greater clarity and quality is not lost to be projected on large screens, or after many passes, but they realize viewers that are watching a tape in 4 K? Is it enough to attract people back to cinemas?
What happens with virtual reality?
The HFR, the 4K, big screens, even the 3D looking all the same: offer the Viewer a similar film sensation, It creates be within it, not simply watching it “” across the screen. That is the objective pursued with all these technological innovations, giving the viewer something that can’t get in the living room, with your tablet or your TV that occupies the entire wall. What is the role, then, virtual reality?
In 1992 it was premiered ‘Grass cutter’, which then was advertised as the first virtual reality film in history. In reality, it included some scenes in which we saw the virtual world in which its protagonist (the same trick of ‘Virtuosity’, of 1995) was introduced, but viewers could not experience this world. And it is that the “problem” of the VR, in this case, is that it is an individual experience.
Glasses are needed to “enter” into the film, and that we can do it at home. Technology, however, is moving in that direction, and their use in advertising, theme parks or to offer extra content of series television (or small independent miniseries), He could perfectly finish used to make films more in the sense that we understand as such.
It is true that technological means to record and video ride VR exist, but are not always prepared for the narrative requirements of a film, for example. Roberto Romero, co-founder of the Spanish company Future Lighthouse, explained in the presentation of the VR episode of ‘The Ministry of time’ that is a sector that must be constantly, develop new tools in which the narrative of a project is dictating the technology to turn it into reality:
“The narrative challenges are not any impediment, are technicians. Because, narratively, we already have imagined us how will be the virtual reality narrative within twenty years. “We know what they want to tell, we have an idea of how we count it, but to this day, there are many things that do not technically exist”.
At the moment, what is thinking is installation, in the halls of cinemas, a “station” of virtual reality that allows viewers to enjoy extra content of the film to see, or small short films. The experience of going to the movies can be, well, a bit different, more like a theme park.
The digitisation of the film is already a fact, and although 3D has not finished curdling definitively among the public, still looking other technological “tricks” that would justify leaving home, buy a ticket and enter a room.