> Information taken from Brandon Gray'shttp://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/
>
> 8 The Nightmare Before Christmas in 3-D $5,330,101 564 $9,450 $5,330,101
> 24 The Ten Commandments $478,910 830 $577 $478,910
> 29 30 Ratatouille $340,588 -12.5%% 366 -27 $930 $204,907,550
> 42 36 The Simpsons Movie $134,862 -25.4%% 194 -29 $695 $182,705,963
> 124 101 Paprika $906 -74.9%% 4 -3 $226 $881,302
>
> Good Heavens. The Lord sure was not with "The Ten Commandments" this
> week. 8-0 :-). The Pharoah's troops didn't get crushed by the Red Sea as badly
> as this movie got crushed by the boxoffice. :-) I've never seen a first week
> per theater average that was THIS low.
> Hmm. Then again, this must've been a really cheap movie to make. Who
> knows, even this much might've made it profitable.
>
> The Lord's favor was with "The Nightmare Before Christmas" this weekend,
> taking in an impressive $9450 PTA. Or is that number inflated by more
> expensive tickets?
> ...

> Good Heavens. The Lord sure was not with "The Ten Commandments" this
> week. 8-0 :-). The Pharoah's troops didn't get crushed by the Red Sea as
> badly
> as this movie got crushed by the boxoffice. :-) I've never seen a first week
> per theater average that was THIS low.
> Hmm. Then again, this must've been a really cheap movie to make. Who
> knows, even this much might've made it profitable.

>
> Yeah, tickets around here were almost $10 each! I would have loved to
> see it in 3D if it hadn't been so much. It's a great movie, even
> without the 3D qualities!
>

> "Kitsune" yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193454130.366547.122450@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>

>> Yeah, tickets around here were almost $10 each! I would have loved to
>> see it in 3D if it hadn't been so much. It's a great movie, even
>> without the 3D qualities!

>
> We pay about $13 for regular movie tickets, so $10 is cheap.

> The extra charge is for the glasses which you get to keep. Maybe if
> they offered to buy them back, or let you bring your own, they could
> drop the price. At any rate, it's worth it. The new version of 3D
> lets you tilt your head, etc. with no blurring, because of its
> circular polarization. I'll be going to anything 3D for a while.
> Incidentally, many of the previews were in 3D, including "Bee Movie"
> and a Brendan Fraser movie (can't remember the title). I wonder if
> that means the movies themselves will be 3D?
>

> It would be nice to see a good 3D revival. With digital it's almost as easy
> to shoot 3D today as it was in the past. However, I suspect there could be
> some digital trickery involved to create artificial 3D. For instance, I
> don't know if The Nightmare Before Christmas was shot in 3D or if it's been
> digitally enhanced to appear as 3D.

> Patrick Joseph Mc Namara wrote:

>> It would be nice to see a good 3D revival. With digital it's almost as
>> easy to shoot 3D today as it was in the past. However, I suspect there
>> could be some digital trickery involved to create artificial 3D. For
>> instance, I don't know if The Nightmare Before Christmas was shot in
>> 3D or if it's been digitally enhanced to appear as 3D.

>
> If they saved their work, they should be able to run a new copy of the
> movie with camera viewpoints the right distance apart. I'm thinking,
> though, that they digitally enhanced it in some way as you suggest.