New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

“You have no clue what you're talking about. 3D box office revenues are in steady decline, and the writer offers up valid points for why that is happening. Any idiot can tell you that the format is beginning to fade already, and for four main reasons...

1. It's too expensive.
2. The 3D effects are either gimmicky or poorly utilized.
3. The movies themselves are mediocre or terrible.
4. It's too expensive.

Avatar made loads of cash because it was a great film that used 3D perfectly. The studios think that this new wave of 3D will equal more money, but they are forgetting that they still need a GOOD MOVIE FIRST. 3D is a fad dude, and it's wearing out.”

Now, I’m very often told that I have no clue what I’m talking about, and very often, that’s accurate, so I tend to defend myself when it isn’t. I had no interest in trying to convince another Avatar fan why that movie is garbage, so I just decided to focus on the issues he had concerning the points I had made. I took this as a perfect opportunity to expound in detail on why every 3-D alarmist is wrong, stupid, and a worse person than I am. I responded, in length, with the message below:

Dustin, thank you for responding to my post. I feel that civil, reasonable discourse on the internet is incredibly difficult in a world of flame wars and 140 character responses, and I feel like this is a far superior way to actually discuss these issues.

I think it’s interesting that you titled your message “read that 3D article again” considering that at no point in your message did you reference anything that Mr. Roane wrote in his article. All you did was restate the same buzz points that everybody makes to claim that any aspect of pop culture they don’t like is dying. Also, this is kind of awkward, but did you realize that points one and four are actually the… oh, I see what you did there. Clever, Dustin.

My original response to Mr. Roane’s article was fairly brief, because I doubted anyone would want to read an essay in the comments section of a website, but I’m glad that your response has given me an excuse to write a more lengthy dissertation on why, sadly, 3-D is not dying. That’s right, I hate 3-D just as much as you and Mr. Roane do. If I had my say, 3-D would die along with Zack Snyder movies, all things Twilight related, and the cast of Jersey Shore. But just because I hate them doesn’t mean they’re going anywhere.

So I decided to reread Mr. Roane’s article, as you advised, and I think that while he does slip in the occasional piece of insight, most likely by accident, I stand by my initial assessment that it is “statistic-manipulating, conclusion-leaping, reality-ignoring garbage.” Statistics involving money are very easy to manipulate, especially with numbers as big and confusing as box office receipts. Even people who pay attention get confused, as evidenced by the debate when Superman Returns was released concerning whether it was a flop or a hit. So while Mr. Roane may know what he’s talking about when it comes to the relationship between business and politics in Europe and the Middle East (and going to kitroane.com proves his expansive knowledge), his grasp on domestic box-office in the film industry is shaky… at best.

Continued:       1       2       3       4       5