Quote:

---

So is the eventual transition to immersive 3D going to help or hurt theaters? The next elite cinema experience will be using 3D rigs like Oculus. But will it be sitting at home watching, or will it be sitting in a space with other people while wearing a headset for $15 instead of buying your own rig?

Immersive 3D won't be your home option if you're watching reruns of 30 Rock while doing the dishes, but to watch the next Star Wars or MI or whatever? That's probably a "plugged in" experience.

---

So the next version of 3D will be the one that sticks?

It's sticking in gaming. Tons of resources being put I to it by the AAA studios.

AliasMan02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

https://www.thedailybeast.com/filmmaker-steven-soderbergh-on-hbo-max-the-death-of-cinema-and-vibing-with-meryl-streep

---

So is the eventual transition to immersive 3D going to help or hurt theaters? The next elite cinema experience will be using 3D rigs like Oculus. But will it be sitting at home watching, or will it be sitting in a space with other people while wearing a headset for $15 instead of buying your own rig?

Immersive 3D won't be your home option if you're watching reruns of 30 Rock while doing the dishes, but to watch the next Star Wars or MI or whatever? That's probably a "plugged in" experience.

---

I re-read this entire article, thinking I missed some mention of "immersive 3D." That said, A) I don't think there will ever be any kind of out-in-public, in-the-same-space, Oculus 3D experience. I think that will remain an at-home activity, and increasingly grow in that space, as it gets cheaper and cheaper to own/experience. But B) I also don't see it as something that explicitly competes with theaters either, and I definitely don't see it taking over blockbuster filmmaking. They're two completely different experiences, as different as playing a sport and watching a movie. I'm not saying more and more blockbuster franchises won't *also* have some kind of Oculus 3D gaming component, but the beauty of movies and television, in their current form, for the majority of today's viewing audiences, is the passive nature of the experience. We can just sit and watch. Yes, our minds and imaginations are engaged, but the last thing I and so many others want to do is participate in some kind choose-your-own-adventure version of a movie where we have to interact with sh*t and walk around and explore. I'm not saying I won't want to do that every so often, from home. But there will always be an audience who simply wants to stand back and observe and appreciate the Mona Lisa. I don't need to be inside the painting with her. The beauty of the experience is getting to just sit back and revel at it.

TCTTS said:

---

AliasMan02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

https://www.thedailybeast.com/filmmaker-steven-soderbergh-on-hbo-max-the-death-of-cinema-and-vibing-with-meryl-streep

---

So is the eventual transition to immersive 3D going to help or hurt theaters? The next elite cinema experience will be using 3D rigs like Oculus. But will it be sitting at home watching, or will it be sitting in a space with other people while wearing a headset for $15 instead of buying your own rig?

Immersive 3D won't be your home option if you're watching reruns of 30 Rock while doing the dishes, but to watch the next Star Wars or MI or whatever? That's probably a "plugged in" experience.

---

I re-read this entire article, thinking I missed some mention of "immersive 3D." That said, A) I don't think there will ever be any kind of out-in-public, in-the-same-space, Oculus 3D experience. I think that will remain an at-home activity, and increasingly grow in that space, as it gets cheaper and cheaper to own/experience. But B) I also don't see it as something that explicitly competes with theaters either, and I definitely don't see it taking over blockbuster filmmaking. They're two completely different experiences, as different as playing a sport and watching a movie. I'm not saying more and more blockbuster franchises won't *also* have some kind of Oculus 3D gaming component, but the beauty of movies and television, in their current form, for the majority of today's viewing audiences, is the passive nature of the experience. We can just sit and watch. Yes, our minds and imaginations are engaged, but the last thing I and so many others want to do is participate in some kind choose-your-own-adventure version of a movie where we have to interact with sh*t and walk around and explore. I'm not saying I won't want to do that every so often, from home. But there will always be an audience who simply wants to stand back and observe and appreciate the Mona Lisa. I don't need to be inside the painting with her. The beauty of the experience is getting to just sit back and revel at it.

---

I agree with this, but I could also see a movie theatre app being released where you can watch movies in a virtual theatre along with either strangers or your friends, depending on your settings. I believe they are already trying to do this with sports games, selling you a virtual seat.

Whether that idea cuts into a movie theater's market share or not is another thing entirely of course.

Yeah, I could see this as well, and I'd actually participate in something like that. As long as I can just sit and enjoy the movie, be from an actual theater or a virtual one, I'm good.

https://www.thewrap.com/warner-bros-streaming-move-talent-producer-money/

TCTTS said:

---

Yeah, I could see this as well, and I'd actually participate in something like that. As long as I can just sit and enjoy the movie, be from an actual theater or a virtual one, I'm good.

---

Back in the before times, I used the **** out of my samsung headset to watch movies on planes.

If you can't see the seat 2 inches from your face, the seat isn't 2 feet from your face.

It really made those cross country coach flights a lot more bearable

fig96 said:

---

YNWA_AG said:

---

---

This is where I see some of the complications on the HBO plan. If WB wasn't the sole financier of these projects I can totally understand others taking issue with them deciding to release a project on their own platform the same day as theaters.

Also, if they did this without letting others (Legendary in this case) know...wow. Lawyers are gonna have a field day with this one.

---

Yeah, the more reports that come out, and people who talk, it's becoming increasingly clear that WB told no one about their plans before announcing them. I guess they figured it was better to beg for forgiveness than ask permission. Either way, it's apparently going to cost WB a fortune to make up for all the box office percentage back-end points so many directors/actors had already negotiated, and I could see more individuals and companies like Legendary attempting to stand in their way. At this point, I'll be surprised if WB pulls this off as intended, without have to walk back at least a couple of movies.

how can anyone justify a massive budget when you're being placed on a platform and competing against all other IP that exists within that service?

Dune will also be competing against Friends for casual streaming interest.

Why is Lebron James on that tweet?

Space Jam 2. Summer 2021.

TCTTS said:

---

Yeah, I could see this as well, and I'd actually participate in something like that. As long as I can just sit and enjoy the movie, be from an actual theater or a virtual one, I'm good.

---

The concept would be really cool. Since there are no size limitations, you could make every screen larger than even an IMAX. You would just need to get the sound quality of the headset speakers up.

TCTTS said:

---

AliasMan02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

https://www.thedailybeast.com/filmmaker-steven-soderbergh-on-hbo-max-the-death-of-cinema-and-vibing-with-meryl-streep

---

So is the eventual transition to immersive 3D going to help or hurt theaters? The next elite cinema experience will be using 3D rigs like Oculus. But will it be sitting at home watching, or will it be sitting in a space with other people while wearing a headset for $15 instead of buying your own rig?

Immersive 3D won't be your home option if you're watching reruns of 30 Rock while doing the dishes, but to watch the next Star Wars or MI or whatever? That's probably a "plugged in" experience.

---

I re-read this entire article, thinking I missed some mention of "immersive 3D." That said, A) I don't think there will ever be any kind of out-in-public, in-the-same-space, Oculus 3D experience. I think that will remain an at-home activity, and increasingly grow in that space, as it gets cheaper and cheaper to own/experience. But B) I also don't see it as something that explicitly competes with theaters either, and I definitely don't see it taking over blockbuster filmmaking. They're two completely different experiences, as different as playing a sport and watching a movie. I'm not saying more and more blockbuster franchises won't *also* have some kind of Oculus 3D gaming component, but the beauty of movies and television, in their current form, for the majority of today's viewing audiences, is the passive nature of the experience. We can just sit and watch. Yes, our minds and imaginations are engaged, but the last thing I and so many others want to do is participate in some kind choose-your-own-adventure version of a movie where we have to interact with sh*t and walk around and explore. I'm not saying I won't want to do that every so often, from home. But there will always be an audience who simply wants to stand back and observe and appreciate the Mona Lisa. I don't need to be inside the painting with her. The beauty of the experience is getting to just sit back and revel at it.

---

A few theaters recently explored ventures with immersive 3D experiences, such as "The Void". The immersive experience "facility" was built into the theaters and customers could pay around $30 for a ticket. One experience was set-up for a run of a few weeks to a few months based on Star Wards, Ghost Busters, etc. These didn't exactly take off, but they are slowly dying in the pandemic.

The immersive experience is a bit more price sensitive as there's a cost for the content rights, building the content, immersive "equipment" (you pull an actual lever in the 3D experience and it opens a door, etc.), employees, etc. I agree there's never going to be direct competition between movies and immersive. There will be a market if they start filming full movies with the technology in mind, but we aren't there yet.

There was one at highland park that looked interesting. It was more of a VR zoo that you could walk through.

My brother works in the space and it is crazy how far the technology has come since he started 20+ years ago.

One of my clients who makes a very old school product (building supplies) has really embraced VR/AR. When I first saw how much money they were dumping into the tech I was shocked. Then I saw what they were doing with.

From vendor training to installation videos to sales tools and even new commercial products, it was really impressive.

Instead of relying on a 2-d stick figure or a shutting photograph with circles and arrows, Imagine being able to zoom in a rotate a 3-d model of the thing you are trying to build/fix.

Duncan Idaho said:

---

There was one at highland park that looked interesting. It was more of a VR zoo that you could walk through.

My brother works in the space and it is crazy how far the technology has come since he started 20+ years ago.

One of my clients who makes a very old school product (building supplies) has really embraced VR/AR. When I first saw how much money they were dumping into the tech I was shocked. Then I saw what they were doing with.

From vendor training to installation videos to sales tools and even new commercial products, it was really impressive.

Instead of relying on a 2-d stick figure or a shutting photograph with circles and arrows, Imagine being able to zoom in a rotate a 3-d model of the thing you are trying to build/fix.

---

Yeah, and when you take it to the next step, which is a 3-d projection in real space, then you are just living like Tony Stark and Jarvis.

On a serious note, that is absolutely incredible. Imagine learning how to build a car, for example, and all you have to do is touch each individual part to get it blown up with installation details and part numbers.

Duncan Idaho said:

---

There was one at highland park that looked interesting. It was more of a VR zoo that you could walk through.

My brother works in the space and it is crazy how far the technology has come since he started 20+ years ago.

One of my clients who makes a very old school product (building supplies) has really embraced VR/AR. When I first saw how much money they were dumping into the tech I was shocked. Then I saw what they were doing with.

From vendor training to installation videos to sales tools and even new commercial products, it was really impressive.

Instead of relying on a 2-d stick figure or a shutting photograph with circles and arrows, Imagine being able to zoom in a rotate a 3-d model of the thing you are trying to build/fix.

---

I've recently sorta pivoted in my career from structural engineering to engineering automation... Basically running our 3D modeling and data delivery for giant mega-projects. The VR/AR stuff is absolutely legit and well on its way in practical fields. And it's so cheap for the end user. SOOO cheap.

I know one guy who's project is setting up VR dry runs for the astronauts on the ISS. Basically all that stuff they used to practice in the pool at NASA...now they do in space.

Need to fix something on the exterior? Ok run this sim until you can do it without any errors in this amount of time.

Seriously. I'm afraid this is going to cost WB quite a few valuable relationships, Nolan potentially among them.

New prediction: this whole scheme by WB never actually comes to fruition. That THR article underlines just how bad this entire ploy has backfired for WB in epic, disastrous fashion.

I really could use a take on this from the Ari, Turtle, and Drama.

I'd love to know/understand the corporate plan for these streaming services.

If my household is paying ten bucks a month for a studio's affiliated streaming service, is that more money (and more reliable money at that) than they could have gotten from us at the movie theater over the span of a normal year?

TCTTS said:

---

Holy sh*t, Nolan going straight up scorched earth on WB...

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/christopher-nolan-rips-hbo-max-as-worst-streaming-service-denounces-warner-bros-plan

---

I think it's pretty entertaining that Nolan is coming down hard on them. But another interesting aspect of this is that the one big movie they tried to release in theaters didn't do well. And my understanding is the main reason they did it was to appease Nolan. Seems like they can't win.

TCTTS said:

---

Holy sh*t, Nolan going straight up scorched earth on WB...

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/christopher-nolan-rips-hbo-max-as-worst-streaming-service-denounces-warner-bros-plan

---

lol... that's a pretty good quote. Meanwhile the execs at Tubi are high fiving.

Fantastic piece from Drew...

https://drewmcweeny.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-hbo-max-and-the-alleged

YES. This is 100% how I feel about it.

To me it seems like the artists aren't living in reality when it comes to preferring a certain way for their films to be seen, and the theaters and studios are increasingly trying to fit a square peg into a round hole with releases. WB definitely didn't handle this situation well, but the change its going to bring about I think will be good in the end.