3D/4D Theaters in Zoos

perceptron

perceptron

Member
This recent stroy about the Louisville Zoo adding a 4D theater raised some questions for me. For those unacquainted, the use of the 4D moniker refers to added sensory elements (being squirted with water, having a smell introduced into the theater, etc).

I have no idea if this is a trend globally, but it seems several zoos in the US are adding 3D/4D theaters to show short films, usually for about $5 a head. The story mentions that the NY Aquarium and the Cincinnati Zoo have 4D theaters, and I know that the SD Zoo/Safari Park both have small theaters, so they are becoming somewhat common in the US.

Personally, I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with them if they were a viable revenue stream that could be used towards improving animal well-being, but that seems questionable to me. In particular, I know Disney is specifically veering away from future 3D/4D theaters in their parks because their research shows they are no longer much of a draw. Now that people can go see 3D movies anytime they want at a movie theater for $10, the novelty of 3D theaters in amusement parks is wearing off. This would be exasperated at zoos, where the cost of the movie is not included in the entrance price, especially when you consider that the zoos only have low quality 20 minute films that hardly compare against Hollywood blockbusters.

Right now they seem to show cartoons (Dora the Explorer, Happy Feet, Spongebob), so I get the feeling they are nothing more than novelties to pilfer money from us. However, having high quality 3D footage of animals found in the zoo but shown in the wild, along with a conservation narrative, could have a positive impact. The Bronx Zoo does something like this, correct?

So, what is the general concensus here? Do these theaters remain viable for zoos? Obviously, many of you here would prefer new animal exhibits over a new theater, but would you mind them if they brought your local zoo $250K a year as the Louisville story claims? Would your opinion change if the movies had a clear conservation narrative?
 
I am always amazed at the free admission for the 4D theater whenever I visit the Vancouver Aquarium. Other zoos and aquariums charge a few dollars for a 20-minute, 4D film but my local aquarium has had the theater for perhaps two years and it has always been free with regular admission. I've been impressed when the movie being shown has been a series of excerpts from the Planet Earth nature series, as a conservation-themed introduction precedes the shows. However, on many other occasions the movie is simply an animated production (Happy Feet, Polar Express, Dora the Explorer, etc) and thus geared specifically for young children. If Louisville Zoo budgets to make $250,000 profit each year via the addition of a 4D theater then that money will definitely benefit the zoo in some shape or form and I have no issue with that. Louisville also added an adventure course a couple of years ago that aids in raising funds for new exhibits, conservation efforts, etc, and many zoos are looking at such additions in order to survive tough economic times.
 
jbnbsn99 said:
Huge waste of money.
Click to expand...

Presumably they must do some kind of economic analysis before they install one? If was a huge waste of money I imagine that whoever ordered it for the zoo would likely be fired (or at least should be).
 
DavidBrown said:
Presumably they must do some kind of economic analysis before they install one? If was a huge waste of money I imagine that whoever ordered it for the zoo would likely be fired (or at least should be).
Click to expand...

Not always. Sometimes the road to ruin is paved with good intentions and unbreakable 3 year contracts.
 
I quite like 4D theatres and movies. I have never been to one at a zoo, but it sounds like an awesome idea though. Go to any electronics shop selling HD TVs: what type of shows do they use to illustrate the resolution of the TV? Usually (at least in Australia) they use wildlife and nature docos. Add 3D, and then add a 4th dimension, and it would probably be a great experience. Imagine watching "Earthflight" in 4D!!
 
jbnbsn99 said:
Not always. Sometimes the road to ruin is paved with good intentions and unbreakable 3 year contracts.
Click to expand...

True. I guess the giant panda contract problems that have cropped up over the years have shown that to be true. Still, I can't imagine that someone would invest in building one of these things without assessing the economic benefits of it.

Getting to the question of whether these theaters are fads or have some lasting conservation value my gut feeling is that they are likely fads. Unlike conservation carousels which have a long track record of being beloved, these theaters seem like a techno-gimmick that will disappear when people tire of them.

Did the Bronx Zoo ever build one? This was mentioned in the article that was posted about their master plan, but I don't know that they actually built it. The San Diego Zoo just built one and it is playing "Happy Feet". I have not seen any of these movies so I cannot speak to their conservation value. It could be quite cool if someone like Iain Douglas-Hamilton or Cynthia Moss made an immersive elephant movie or Jean-Michel Cousteau made an ocean life movie, but most of the titles mentioned sound like fairly lame cartoons. Has anybody seen any of these movies and have a review of their contents?
 
jbnbsn99 said:
Huge waste of money.
Click to expand...

If the projections set forth by Louisville Zoo are correct then by 2016 the zoo will have gained $1 million in pure profit simply by having a 4D theater on site. Even if attendance eventually drops off and many years from now the zoo finds that the 4D theater barely breaks even...there will still be that $1 million in profit that can be put to good use somewhere in the zoo. I've heard that the 4D theater at the Detroit Zoo (currently playing the children's mini-movie "Dora & Diego's Adventure") is a gold mine and that beleagured zoo (in terms of finances) is raking in money showing cartoons for kids.

Georgia Aquarium, which has around 3 million visitors each year, has a 4D theater with mascot Deepo as the star and the aquarium's website recommends reserving tickets before you go in order to save a seat. I visited that facility on a Monday morning in August right when they opened and the theater was packed for the first showing of the day. I'm not sure what the profits for these shows are in regards to long-term planning, but short-term they are gold mines and far from a waste of money. No wonder so many zoos are coming up with adventure courses, zip lines and 4D theaters, and while those sort of things do not appeal to me I can fully comprehend the economic reasons for adding such attractions.
 
The Bronx Zoo is showing the same Dora & Diego show in its 4D theater as the Detroit Zoo, and at $5 a person that is another example of a gold mine. I'm even more amazed that the 4D theater in Vancouver Aquarium is still free!
 
My own personal experience with them says they are not as lucrative as many lead you to believe. People would rather see the real animals than a 4D movie of them. Go on a "real" safari as opposed to a virtual one.
 
The Aquarium of the Pacific has a theater that plays two films. One is more serious with a direct conservation message while the other one is a cartoon targeting children but with a conservation message included. I think this is a perfect combination because the aquarium could attract two different type of audiences.
 
I quite agree with snow leopard. 3D and 4D theaters are something that necessarily appeals to me but they can certainly be a viable and beneficial attraction for a zoo. I think the major factor in determining whether or not a zoo should add one is their list of priorities. For example, they should look at the state of the rest of the zoo, and provided the animals are well care for, and guests' base needs are being met, then adding an attraction like that is perfectly valid, and can be inexpensive if the zoo uses a pre-existing building.

The other major factor to bear in mind, is while many of us here on ZooChat would not care for such things, since they typically show cartoons and not often add shows with a conservation message, that a zoos primary demographic has first and foremost always been families with small children. Almost all smaller children love going to the zoo, so catering to their wishes is the best way to bring in the big bucks that a smart zoo will then use to improve its other facilities (the part we DO enjoy).

Now a REALLY good zoo, if they wish to pursue an endeavor like these theaters, will build these things of course with the children and families in mind, but add that extra flair and conservation message either through a pre-show movie, or even other separate movies that keep the zoos education and conservation message at heart and remind visitors of what the zoo does for people.

Don't forget, it's a delicate balance, and without money, a zoo is no zoo at all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top