Movies – “A Christmas Carol” A Story Hollywood Really Doesn’t Want to Hear

Hey, kids, what do you call a movie that grosses $30 million in a weekend?

If you said a hit, you’re wrong! Because that’s what “A Christmas Carol” pulled in this weekend…against a budget of $180 million.

My first question is why a movie with, what, five actors, created mostly in a computer, costs $200 million in the first place. My second question is why anybody, and I mean ANYBODY, at Disney or in Hollywood was remotely surprised by this result.

People hate motion capture. There has literally not been a single motion-capture movie, be it cuddly Christmas movie (“The Polar Express”) or violent action flick (“Beowulf”) that broke even in theaters. True, “Polar Express” and “Monster House” came close, but didn’t quite do it: they still had to make their money back on DVD sales. They’ve been hits (well, except “Beowulf”, but three out of four isn’t bad), but not hits at the level they need to be.

The other part that Hollywood doesn’t want to hear is that people don’t like 3D. Fox REALLY doesn’t want to hear that because, well, they have “Avatar” coming up the week before Christmas, and that failing would hurt. But it’s true. Of the major 3D releases, yes, the 3D has made a lot of money, but it hasn’t pushed any movies over the top. By all accounts, “A Christmas Carol” makes interesting use of 3D, but not many people seem to actually care about it.

I’m thinking the litmus test is really going to be “Avatar” for both 3D and motion-capture. If James Cameron can’t save this technology, Hollywood will probably largely walk away. No pressure or anything.


5 Responses to “Movies – “A Christmas Carol” A Story Hollywood Really Doesn’t Want to Hear”

  1. Sam Says:

    On the other hand, while I enjoy the Final Destination movies as guilty pleasures, the 3D was the only thing that made the new one worthwhile in theaters. Guts flying AT you? Yes please!

    • seitzeeing Says:

      3D’s best application has always been horror movies: check out the ’50s “House of Wax”, probably the best use of the idea ever.

  2. Frank Schreiber Says:

    We took the grandson to see “A Christmas Carol” in 3D, and we all enjoyed it. I think that 3D adds to the experience. I’m amazed at what they are able to do with computers…”motion capture” etc. The movie people are apparently trying to innovate, and some of this stuff is interesting….especially when you are in the mode of taking the grandson to the latest kids movie. I kind of enjoy watching most of it!

  3. Shaun Scovil Says:

    And now that Avatar has been a HUGE success, we’re going to see a ton of 3D movies in production! 20 are slated for release this year, and all of the major TV manufacturers unveiled 3D TVs at CES. Television stations are going 3D and video games are sure to take advantage of the technology…

    • seitzeeing Says:

      You pay a premium for that, though, and there’s limited content. Also, quite frankly, I seriously doubt “Avatar” has created any more real demand for 3D. It was the movie you HAD to see in 3D, but Hollywood is not going to be able to create that another twenty times.

      Also ask yourself how often you want to put on special glasses just to watch TV or play games.

      My bet is that 3D doesn’t take over like people think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: