The Amazing Spider-Man SONY stops paying for 3D glasses...what does this mean?

[Spiderman6592]

I don't think it's going to be flooding with FPOV sequences. Marc Webb has stated that there are very specific moments in the film where it kicks in.


And Chaseter, it's a good question that I can't answer. But they must not like what they see in 3D sales right now. There weren't very many prominent, if any all, shot in 3D films this year. Transformers was the only one I think, and I think even half of that was post converted. Port converted 3D films ruined the idea of it all to make an extra buck.


Also, I don't think they're worried about a huge decrease in 3D sales for TASM. As you said, it's immensely popular and as I said, anyone willing to shell out 15 dollars on a movie ticket is likely to dish out that extra two bucks.

Also, wasn't there a rumor about Sony going bankrupt. Maybe this has something to do with it?

 

[Mace Bloodstone]

I not planning on seeing this in 3D anyway, I don't have ADD.

 

[Spiderman6592]

lol what does having ADD have to do with seeing a movie in 3D?

 

[Mysterioman]

It was shot in 3D...so you would be an idiot if you didn't see it in 3D. THAT, or 3D just hurts your eyes. I'm seeing it in IMAX 3D. OH NO! MY MONEY!!!

 

[VenomSpawn]

Imax is the only place near me that has 3D movies.

 

[Liam_H]

Just because it was shot in 3D doesn't mean you have to go see it in 3D.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ That's very true. Though, the price of 3D as it is now is bad either way.

 

[The Sage]

I was debating closing this thread until I saw the last several posts. Keep it clean and civil in here, folks.

 

[Spiderman6592]

We resolved it on our own for the most part I believe.

 

[chaseter]

I plan on kicking kittens and puppies later so...

I really think this is going to hurt the movie more than help it. Sony is betting that they will make more after cutting out the cost of 3D glasses, $5-$10 million per the article. That is chump change when the movie + marketing costs over $200 million.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Probably right. I don't think it will end up hurting the movie too, too bad though.

 

[chaseter]

What they should have done, and I will admit that I was a sucker for the Potter 3D glasses, is have special limited edition Peter Parker 3D glasses. Make them look exactly like the glasses Andrew wears as Peter Parker.

Maybe Sony is going bankrupt...if I can come up with a simple and cheap marketing strategy then well

 

[Godzilla2014]

What they should have done, and I will admit that I was a sucker for the Potter 3D glasses, is have special limited edition Peter Parker 3D glasses. Make them look exactly like the glasses Andrew wears as Peter Parker.

Maybe Sony is going bankrupt...if I can come up with a simple and cheap marketing strategy then well

The ones that he'll stop wearing after he receives his spider-powers (in other words: What we're paying to see)?

 

[VenomSpawn]

That would be awesome!

 

[Liam_H]

Are Peter Parker's glasses that iconic that people will pay extra for that? It would still be nice but I don't think its as relevant to PP than Potter's glasses.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Are Peter Parker's glasses that iconic that people will pay extra for that? It would still be nice but I don't think its as relevant to PP than Potter's glasses.

They're useless once the good stuff starts happening, that's what makes them iconic!

 

[chaseter]

It's an easy marketing gimmick. For Cap they had red white and blue glasses. For Shrek I think they had green glasses. For Potter they had Potter glasses. What does Sony do? They stop paying for glasses for movies that they want you to see in 3D.

Now tell me, how many of you wouldn't think it was cool that you get Peter Parker 3D glasses? Or heck, even red and blue glasses would be cool with web designs on them.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Peter Parker glasses would have been cool. Pop out the lenses and wear 'em around hahaha

 

[Godzilla2014]

Peter Parker glasses would have been cool. Pop out the lenses and wear 'em around hahaha

No, they wouldn't. Their whole purpose is to be uncool, a stereotypical an archetypical mark of the nerd. I doubt I'd be interested in a pair of Peter Parker BCGs.

 

[Spiderman6592]

You kidding? Peter Parker style glasses are extraordinarily popular. Look around, the "hipster" movement has started to own the whole cool-nerd look. Not saying I like it, or am one, but to say they're uncool is way off base.

 

[Godzilla2014]

You kidding? Peter Parker style glasses are extraordinarily popular. Look around, the "hipster" movement has started to own the whole cool-nerd look. Not saying I like it, or am one, but to say they're uncool is way off base.

They're designed to BCGs. That's what they meant back then, and that's what they mean now.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Sorry, BCGs?

 

[Godzilla2014]

Sorry, BCGs?

Birth Control Glasses. The term originated in the military, referring to the thick-framed (for durability) glasses issued to GIs with vision problems. The thick frame makes isn't very attractive, hence one isn't likely to have sex while wearing them, hence the term "Birth Control Glasses".

 

[Spiderman6592]

One of the first images when googling "birth control glasses". I can name plenty of women that would have this man's child.

And the ones in the movie aren't really even all that nerdy. Fairly commonplace these days actually...

 

[Godzilla2014]

One of the first images when googling "birth control glasses". I can name plenty of women that would have this man's child.

In no part due to the glasses.

And the ones in the movie aren't really even all that nerdy. Fairly commonplace these days actually...

The whole point of Peter Parker wearing glasses, since the beginning in 1962, was to put a sign on him signifying his nerd status in bright neon lights.
[YT]N9qYF9DZPdw[/YT]
In Hollywood, nerds wear glasses. That's it.