Spy Kids 3-D was commercially successful in theaters using anaglyph paper glasses in 2003. The DVD did not sell or rent well, due to video retailers not wanting to deal with the paper glasses. The Polar Express, in 2004, used the superior IMAX polarized method for 3D. That film made $62 million in fewer than 90 theaters over two holiday seasons. It earned 14 times as much as the 2D version of the film, per screen, which is "un-precedented". A second, anaglyph film, 2005 by Robert Rodriguez, The Adventures of Shark Boy & Lava Girl failed to recover investment by many millions. The film had been processed in a highly "desaturated" 3D style, which was not very appealing. Disney released their 2005 Chicken Little in about 84 theaters, in digital polarized 3D. It earned nearly 3 times the gross of the much wider 2D release. 6 new films were slated for 3D release in 2006. They include Monster House, portions of the IMAX version of Superman Returns, The Ant Bully, Open Season, The Nightmare Before Christmas (converted to 3D), Fly Me to the Moon, all in polarized 3D. Anaglyph may have more applicability in the home market, should this crop of polarized 3D films prove commercially viable in theaters. At this point, anaglyph offers the only practical method for wide distribution of 3D home DVDs, or HD broadcasting in 3D, without costly electronic glasses.
- Polarized lenses have no electronics in them. It's the screen which is the difference. The viewpoint has to have both polarizations over the same area, and CRT, LCD, any standard "screen" technology has no capability to have variably polarized images over the same area. It's not due to anything the movie-makers are or are not doing. Monitors simply do not have the capability that theaters use to show 3d movies.
- This is solved and can be archived.--Fluffystar (talk) 10:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)