Interview Interview with Twilight Time: Nick Redman on who they are, their business model and more. (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford

Good luck to them for trying as 3D isn't doing too good right now. I'll be done after buying my second 3D display for my main HT to replace my HD DLP display. Just about everybody I have talked to outside of this forum have little interest in 3D and are currently very safisfied with their current HD displays. IMO, 4K won't catch on enough to drive future sales.

I'm not saying it will. I'm saying that I think the industry will try to market it. May never get past the stage of a few high-end panel offerings. And, I may be dead wrong.

 

[Richard V]

Well, they (the manufacturers) are going to have to come up with something to sell us after 3D, so if not 4K, what might it be?

Laser TV, which is actually already out, but limited to Mitsubishi. I remember about 3-4 yrs ago, that was the big hype. I saw one at my local high end HT store. I was UNimpressed, didn't see any significant difference from LCD/plasma, but maybe they will try to revive the hype.

 

[TravisR]

HDTV took almost two decades to become the new standard so I think it's going to be a long time before they can convince people to upgrade again.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Quote: I don't think that's going to stop them. Selling products by hyping a "feature" has never been a problem for the industry. People are easily convinced to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on boutique interconnects that offer no measurable improvement over wire that's a fraction of the cost.  

OH it wouldn't surprise me that the release a 4k system. And it will sell to the same crowd who buy wooden knobs for their tube amps, and draw a line around the outside of their CDs with a green felt pen, because it makes it sound better. But I doubt it will be anything like a main stream product. If people can see a difference they won't buy it. Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

3D suffers from multiple companies pushing competing and incompatible standards, a small number of titles, and the misfortune of hitting the market during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. I'm not saying that 4K would fool the informed, but name another technology 5-6 years out that's going drive new panel sales. The only two I can think of are OLED and thin film displays.

3d suffers from a lack of interest. In fact the box office for 3d features is way down also when compared with the flat version of the same film. 3D is a fad now just as it was in the 50's and the 80s. Its hung on a little longer because some quality films were made in the process. But it seems the general audience is losing interest. In fact it wouldn't surprise me at all if 3D is only a small part of the box office for The Hobbit. I read an interesting thing right after Christmas. The manufacturers have found that the equipment that is selling best, are the ones with services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and the like built in. In surveys they found that people just aren't interested in 3D which was generally regarded as a gimmick. What they really want is content, and wireless connectivity. People want to be able to send content from their PC or Ipad to their TVs. Also lots of people have bought a new TV in the last 2 or 3 years, and are really not interested in buying a new one for a while. Its one of the reasons that you are now seeing 52" plasma TVs for $1500 and under. Doug

 

[Alan Tully]

OH it wouldn't surprise me that the release a 4k system. And it will sell to the same crowd who buy wooden knobs for their tube amps, and draw a line around the outside of their CDs with a green felt pen, because it makes it sound better. But I doubt it will be anything like a main stream product. If people can see a difference they won't buy it. Doug

Oh I remember those days, I remember the expensive hi-fi shops selling the green markers (I also remember being told to put my CD's in the freezer for a day or two, & they'd sound a lot better then!). People with money will buy 4k, not that they would notice any difference. A couple of years ago my sister was going on about her Sky HD, how good it looked. When I finally got round to seeing it, I wasn't impressed, & it turned out there was some fault & she wasn't seeing HD at all! Oh, & 3D is a gimmick, I'm glad to see it failing. I can't think of a single good movie where it would add anything.

 

[TravisR]

Oh, & 3D is a gimmick, I'm glad to see it failing. I can't think of a single good movie where it would add anything.

Hugo. The movie is great and the 3-D is used effectively and bolsters what's onscreen without having things shoot out at the audience.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by TravisR


Hugo. The movie is great and the 3-D is used effectively and bolsters what's onscreen without having things shoot out at the audience.

I agree, people need to stop making the mistake that all 3D films are the same and are nothing more than a gimmick.







Crawdaddy

 

[Matt Hough]

I can say without doubt that for myself, I enjoyed Megamind, How to Train Your Dragon, and Monsters Vs. Aliens tremendously more in 3D than in 2D. I'd also add Coraline to that list. Yes, all CG animated films, but all gained in their 3D incarnations.


Is 3D going to make a stinker like The Green Hornet better? Nope. Nothing could save it. And I didn't find any of the Toy Story films gaining all that much in 3D, so not all CG films gain in the process.


But the process can be effectively and imaginatively used to enhance films. It's but one tool in a filmmakers' arsenal if he chooses to use it. I look forward to seeing Hugo in 3D to see what an artist like Martin Scorsese does with this particular brush in his hand.

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce


3d suffers from a lack of interest. In fact the box office for 3d features is way down also when compared with the flat version of the same film .
3D is a fad now just as it was in the 50's and the 80s. Its hung on a little longer because some quality films were made in the process. But it seems the general audience is losing interest. In fact it wouldn't surprise me at all if 3D is only a small part of the box office for The Hobbit.
Doug

The lack of interest is from the lack of decent films, except for Hugo, Tin Tin and Avatar. The Lion King 3D out performed the 2D version not only in gross, but attendance this fall. It will be interesting to see what Star Wars I and Titanic can do. 3D can not survive on Piranha, The Darkest Hour, and the horror genre, nor can it come into it's on with just action films. 2011 has been the worse grossing year since the late 1990's and that is due to the lack of films that interest people, the poor economy and for the first time ever, people do not see going to the movies as a cheap entertainment option.

The 3D works well with the family and animated films, but the distributors and exhibitors have priced that part of the business to see the 2D versions. 3D would again out gross the 2D version if the price was lowered or "heaven forbid" the same. Today's audience just does not see the value in the up charge with the movies released in 3D


3D in theatres is here to stay, there are over 30 films this year that will be released in 3D and as long as one or two of these films does 3D business there will always be more in the pipeline. By the end of next year there will be more 3D films during this "fad" than there were in the 50's.

Is it a gimmick, yes it is, and so was Cinemascope, THX and Dolby Surround. But they, and I really think 3D is, are gimmicks that enhance the enjoyment of going to the movies.

 

[dpippel]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

OH it wouldn't surprise me that the release a 4k system. And it will sell to the same crowd who buy wooden knobs for their tube amps, and draw a line around the outside of their CDs with a green felt pen, because it makes it sound better.
But I doubt it will be anything like a main stream product. If people can see a difference they won't buy it.
Doug

Again, I'm not saying that I think it will become a mainstream product. I'm saying that the industry will try to market and sell it.

 

[dpippel]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

3d suffers from a lack of interest. In fact the box office for 3d features is way down also when compared with the flat version of the same film.
3D is a fad now just as it was in the 50's and the 80s. Its hung on a little longer because some quality films were made in the process. But it seems the general audience is losing interest. In fact it wouldn't surprise me at all if 3D is only a small part of the box office for The Hobbit.
I read an interesting thing right after Christmas. The manufacturers have found that the equipment that is selling best, are the ones with services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and the like built in. In surveys they found that people just aren't interested in 3D which was generally regarded as a gimmick. What they really want is content, and wireless connectivity. People want to be able to send content from their PC or Ipad to their TVs. Also lots of people have bought a new TV in the last 2 or 3 years, and are really not interested in buying a new one for a while. Its one of the reasons that you are now seeing 52" plasma TVs for $1500 and under.
Doug

Among the problems I listed for 3D and the fad aspect that you mention, I think the two biggest stumbling blocks for the technology lie elsewhere. Number one (as has already been mentioned) is a lack of good films. A crappy movie is just as crappy in 3D as it is in 2D. In addition, many 3D films are post-production conversions that are technically deficient. If the audience isn't wowed by their 3D experience they'll walk out of the theater dissatisfied. The other big problem is that theaters charge a premium for 3D presentations. Ticket prices for 2D movies are high enough for most people, and I think that a large percentage of the movie-going public just aren't willing to pay $5 more for 3D. If ticket prices were the same I'd bet that 3D would be more popular.

 

[TravisR]

Ticket prices for 2D movies are high enough for most people, and I think that a large percentage of the movie-going public just aren't willing to pay $5 more for 3D. If ticket prices were the same I'd bet that 3D would be more popular.

I can appreciate that theaters had to upgrade equipment and that cost them alot of money but I'd be shocked that after charging $3 or $4 more for every ticket that has been sold to those screens for the last two years if they haven't recouped their investment yet and couldn't afford to drop the price to the same as a 2-D feature. I realize that they don't get all $4 of the 3-D surcharge but after this long, it's pretty obvious that greed is why prices are still as high as they are. And yet somehow, the theaters will have the guts to whine about lower ticket sales when people can't or don't want to spend so much money to go to a movie.

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by TravisR But everyone is just too greedy and that greed will not kill 3D, but stifle it's growth.

 

[Richard--W]

... and while Twilight Time looks into The Westerner, Noon Wine and some of those foreign-made documentaries about Peckinpah, they might want to inquire into the availability of The Deadly Companions (1961). This was Peckinpah's first feature, much in the spirit of The Westerner TV series, with Brian Keith playing a similar character, if not the same character under a different name. The film was independently financed by Maureen O'Hara's brother, I understand, and took full advantage of Old Tucson Studio's western town and neighboring park. The film was distributed by various companies in different countries. Pathe distributed it in the USA. An HD transfer has been struck and released in Japan and Germany, I understand. But all USA editions are pan & scan on cheap budget labels and look like crap. Its very proliferation in PD hell means the film is well-liked and that consumers are interested in buying a decent transfer. On Blu-ray.

 

[PaulaJ]

Wandering far off the blu-ray Twilight Time beaten path... According to the 50 Westerns from the 50s website, a widescreen anamorphic version of The Deadly Companions is on the way from VCI. No release date, though. http://fiftieswesterns.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/post-50s-westerns-dvd-news-70-the-deadly-companions-1961/ Not too long ago I read a really great post detailing the production history of this film but dang, I can NOT remember where, so no link. ;(

 

[John Hodson]

There's a very nice R2 DVD out there which I detailed here a while back; it was interesting to compare this film with an episode from The Westerner.

 

[Jeff_HR]

In all seriousness, I am as a big a collector of physical media--Blu-ray, DVD, books, CDs, vinyl, laserdiscs, VHS--as anyone, but if I completely put the kibosh on streaming, there are so many "not-on-DVD "/ "not-on-home video" titles that I would completely miss out on.

For the satellite &/or Cable enabled persons with DVRs, there are Hi-Def channels such as TMC, Showtime, HBO, etc that allow you to record all you can eat for a monthly charge. And it won't self destruct like PPV films usually do. I use this as a source for films not on physical media, such as one of my Favorite films - "The Devil's Disciple" starring B Lancaster. I believe Streaming is/will become a PPV type situation. If I want over a period of time view a film 20 times, I REFUSE to pay for it 20 times.

 

[TravisR]

I believe Streaming is/will become a PPV type situation. If I want over a period of time view a film 20 times, I REFUSE to pay for it 20 times.

Your refusal and the refusal of nearly ever other person in the world is why the studios will never ever be able to charge for every viewing. I have no doubt that they'd love to charge you and every person that was watching it with you for every viewing but after more than 30 years of people owning copies of movies, the studios are always going to have to offer the consumer a copy that they pay for once and can watch whenever they want.

 

[Richard--W]

Wandering far off the blu-ray Twilight Time beaten path... According to the 50 Westerns from the 50s website, a widescreen anamorphic version of The Deadly Companions is on the way from VCI. No release date, though. http://fiftieswesterns.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/post-50s-westerns-dvd-news-70-the-deadly-companions-1961/ Not too long ago I read a really great post detailing the production history of this film but dang, I can NOT remember where, so no link. ;(

Thanks for drawing my attention to this impending release. You never know with VCI. Sometimes they release high-end transfers (Ride In the Whirlwind and The Shooting, for example), but other times they release muck (the 1970 Jane Eyre being the most recent disappointment). Still other times they release mid-range quality transfers (A Christmas Carol). My expectations are not high. I heard about the production history from Charles Fitzsimon's UPM and accountant. He'd become a producer by the time I worked for him. O'Hara controlled the production, creatively and financially, through her brother Fitzsimons. They hired Peckinpah because they thought he would bring something new and original to the western, but they wouldn't let him rewrite the script or do a lot of the things he wanted. It's interesting though, a good B western from the early sixties which shows off Old Tucson rising out of its adobe origin. Anyhow, if The Deadly Companions has found an authorized distributor on home video, hopefully Twilight Time will look into the possibility of releasing the aforementioned Peckinpah titles, The Westerner series, Noon Wine TV special, the Mike Siegel documentary, and the other documentaries about Peckinpah that haven't been on home video before. After producing An Album In Montage and various featurettes and commentaries on Peckinpah films, Nick Redman is just the producer to tie up these loose ends on the director's career.