AMC adding upwards of 1,500 3D screens in North America

by Darren Murph posted Mar 29th 2009 at 3:41PM

Remember when seeing a movie was simple? You just strolled in, paid one low price for a ticket, and you saw the flick. No worrying over which theaters had 4K projectors, which had DTS sound or which had 3D support. As cinemas across the nation continue to leap on the three-dee bandwagon, RealD and AMC Entertainment has just linked up in order to bring up to 1,500 3D screens across Canada and the US. We're told that the rollout is already underway, with more and more screens getting equipped each month. All told, this will bring RealD's 3D network to nearly 8,000 total committed screens worldwide with approximately 2,600 RealD 3D screens installed today. Excited? No?

Filed under: Industry, Misc, Other formats

Tags: 3d, 3d cinema, 3d theater, 3dCinema, 3dTheater, AMC, business, cinema, industry, partner, partnership, realD, theater

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Neutral

Asterra @ Mar 29th 2009 3:50PM

Since the glasses are tinted, is the screen made to be overly bright, to compensate, or is the whole 3d experience unavoidably dark?

Somebody needs to do an article which outlines the following: 1) What 3d technologies exist (from the red/blue glasses to wearing two small TVs on your face), 2) which theater-based technology gives the most satisfying experience (red/blue glasses being at one end of that spectrum), and 3) which technology is likely to be installed at one's local theater when Avatar rolls out.

Neutral

TJ @ Mar 29th 2009 4:03PM

I just saw "Monsters vs. Aliens" in 3D on a RealD screen last night. This is the third movie I've seen this way (Coraline and My Bloody Valentine), and I think it made the best use of the technology so far.

I'll be happy once the movies feel like they can get away from gee-whiz effects (in the opening scene of "Monsters", a guy is hitting one of those paddle with rubber-banded ball at the screen. Things like that are great for proving the tech, but are already starting to feel a little tired. Fortunately, "Monsters" got that out of the way really quickly, and settled into using 3D to actually improve the movie experience.

Asterra, I haven't seen anything other than RealD (that seems to be all that's available in my area), but it definately gives a satisfying experience, and doesn't really darken the screen very much.

Neutral

Ken @ Mar 29th 2009 4:31PM

The benefit of this is:

RealD = digital projection

While film can be good, good luck with that in a mass market theater with out of focus optics, messed up prints, and whatever other problems exist (or can be created).

Neutral

squiggleslash @ Mar 29th 2009 8:51PM

Is the future of cinema watching going to be having to wear uncomfortable vision-impairing glasses for a dubious sense of 3D where nothing seems to be the right size then?

Because if it is, then I can't see myself ever going to the cinema again once "3D" takes over. Hopefully this is a fad, and it'll die faster than it did in the 1950s.

Neutral

j.pickens @ Mar 29th 2009 10:02PM

squiggleslash, have you been to a RealD 3D movie?
I have found them to be very well done, with the 3D being far superior to the Imax 3d shown previously with film.
The precision of the digital projectors pretty much solved the 3D problems, in my opinion.

Coraline in 3D was simply amazing, both due to the projector technology, and the stop-motion animation.

I haven't seen a RealD live action film yet, all have been animations.

And the glasses are polarized, not red-blue, and not very dark at all.
The brightness was adequate.

Neutral

squiggleslash @ Mar 30th 2009 7:53AM

OK, so they may or may not have fixed the size ratio issue. But that still leaves all the other issues with 3D, most notably the vision impairing uncomfortable glasses.

And what's the payback for the rather high price of 3D? A gimmick that barely adds anything at all to the viewing experience even if properly done.

3D is an awful idea. It's unnecessary and makes the movie watching experience objectively less pleasant. I can't understand why everyone's in a headlong rush to get it going.

Neutral

El perron @ Mar 30th 2009 2:07AM

Monster vs Aliens = Dolby 3D - Glasses are a little heavy and uncomfortable, they make the screen darker but the 3D effects are more noticeable, Expensive glasses theater workers keep track of the glasses so you cant take them home.

Coraline = Digital 3D - Very light glasses; you wont notice you have them on, the screen doesn't go as dark as Dolby 3D glasses, the 3D effects are not as interactive as Dolby 3D, sometimes you forget that the movie is in 3D. Not as expensive so you can recycle then on you way out or take em home.

Neutral

cypherx @ Mar 30th 2009 7:37AM

To be honest, 3D in the theaters is the only thing that's going to get me back out there again. $40 for two people to see one movie with overpriced food/drink is too much. Make that a 3D experience that you could never get at home, then it's a whole new argument.

If it's not 3D, I'll just watch it at home on my HDTV when it comes out.

You hear that AMC, Fox, Regal, and all you other movie cinemas? You want me out there? Innovate and do stuff to get me out there!

Neutral

Adrian @ Mar 30th 2009 9:03AM

IMAX DIGITAL 3D is the best ive seen

Instead of typical Imax film projectors, they use digital, the screen is like 1/3 of the size but its still bigger than the biggest conventional 35mm film.

From wat ive seen (as a former projectionist) we had both RealD and IMAX DIGITAL 3D out our cinema and the IMAX DIGITAL 3D was far more superior. The Imax Digital projectors r 2 Christie projectors running together where as Real D just uses the 1. U need the 2 to produce a image bright enough wen ur wearing the tinted polarized glasses.

Neutral

ryaninc @ Mar 30th 2009 9:23AM

We saw Monsters vs. Aliens in 3D last night and it was the first 3D movie I've seen. I often get headaches from glasses (even sunglasses sometimes) so I was worried about how the 3D glasses would work. I was very pleasantly surprised! Not only did the glasses not hurt my eyes at all, but they seriously added to the experience of the movie. When the movie was over, I turned to my wife and said, "I can see why 3D is catching on." She readily agreed. I think we will definitely try to see future movies in 3D if possible.

Weekly Webcomic Wrapup is preparing to enter the fray Left 4 Dead 2 pre-loading now available through Steam Dragon Age: Origins gets patched, tool set released	Windows 7 already bigger than Snow Leopard and Linux combined You spend more time on MSN Messenger than ANYTHING else Mozilla Jetpack contest winner harnesses GPU power to process data
Yes, the Apple Store is ~~down~~ up Worm rickrolls unsecured jailbroken iPhones via SSH Heads Up: Update your Apple TV to 3.0.1 ASAP, says Apple	Trade #4: PowerShares DWA Emerging Markets Technical Leaders Portfolio (PIE) Six top trades for the rest of 2009 Earnings highlights: CBS, Comcast, News Corp., Time Warner, UBS, Viacom ...
Reminder: Watch the first episode of Halo Legends today Homemade Fallout 3 Shishkebab, make 'em now before the apocalypse Gears of War 2 celebrates first anniversary with triple XP	REPORT: Lutz to step in as interim Opel chairman VIDEO: Mind the pole, please Gordon Murray working on EV version of city car?
Assassin's Creed novel announced Edited Left 4 Dead 2 PC has better performance? Splinter Cell: Conviction novel out now	Ryan Moats Earns Texans' Starting Job Bucs Legend Excited to Christen Team's Ring of Honor Broncos Sign Veteran CB Ty Law