The Official "I'm totally over this whole 3D fad; Totally!" Thread
3d was cool whenever you went to disneyland and saw some 15 minute short that was intended to be shown in 3d, thus the effects have been the main priority of the production team and are often pretty good. but for an entire feature it just seems overdone and is becoming more of a distraction than anything. sure, it was kinda cool at first, but after a few minutes of it i feel like i've had it. Some movies (ie clash of the titans) are just throwing 3d on at the last second for the sake of saying that they have a 3d version, and the 3d isn't really all that impressive anyways.
the bottom line: I'm going to the theater for a movie experience, not a 3D experience. Thoughts?
PS: does anyone else think that this little guy is dodging the bullet:
Never was into it. It was a stupid gimmick when it was around briefly in the 50s, again in the 80s-- I don't know what they expect to be different this time around. Every 30 years they do this stupid experiment when they're hurting for money and want to reinvigorate ticket sales. Every 30 years it hits hard at first and dies quickly.
To be fair, I have yet to see some these 3D films (outside of amusement parks.)
However, I just don't understand the point. In terms of clarity and even general depth of field, a well filmed, HD piece can seem to be naturally 3D. When the 3D effect is forced, I feel that it makes the whole image less natural, therefore less lifelike and a step backwards visually for the industry.
Not to mention that the 3D effect does not work for everyone. I forget the statistic, but a fairly large portion of the population cannot process these effects, so mass shift to 3D would be hell for these people.
The poll choices aren't as clear and specific as my opinion, so I just put in the middle. Allow me to explain...
3D is a tool, just like CGI or sound. When used properly it can enhance the movie experience such as in Avatar or Up. But the real problem behind the 3D 'fad' is that studios see it as a surefire way to gain an extra three or four bucks for every ticket sold, hence we have all these 3D conversions, which isn't true 3D (Clash of the Titans).
So as long as 3D is used properly (not gimmicky 'in-your-face'), I'm all for it. But as long as studios as simply cranking out these conversions, I'll sit and wait at home until I hear the film is being shown traditionally.
Location: The Host City of the 2018 Commonwealth Games, Australia
Same reasons as RA, would also like to add that they use 3D as a excuse to jack up BO ticket prices (It's 20 bucks for one adult for a 3D movie, which equals to one standard adult movie ticket plus a third more in Australia anyway).
Personally, I believe if filmmakers want to use 3D, they should dump digital movements (such as spins) in camera shots, as those movements often make people sick and dizzy and can be quite a health hazard to a few people. Movies should be accessible to everyone, not just to those blessed with an iron stomach. You can have your digital movements without the 3D. It's also otherwise too busy visually; and I personally haven't been comfortable with the thought of viewing a few of these 3D releases, (such as Avatar and even Alice in Wonderland) for that reason.
I saw Avatar in 2D, at the drive in by the way (It was the B reel). It really would have to be something special in 3D, because I actually fell alseep watching it!
I enjoy 3D when it's short and sweet, at a theme park, along with the "4D" effects as much as anyone. But when I go to the movies, sure there's a desire to see a visual spectacle with certain genres, but above all, a compelling, well-played out story. Give me my money's worth without the busy visual headaches and spinning nausea, thank you!!!
Aside from IMAX documentaries, I never want to see another F-ing 3D movie again.
I will never go to another narrative 3d film.
It's awful, it is LESS immersive than 2d. I am always reminded that I'm watching a movie. It's distracting, pointless, adds nothing to the process. It makes the movie look further away, more removed, smaller in scope, etc.
When the Eagle comic returned in the early 1980s there was a 3D strip made up of green and red ink, which you had to use the classic green and red lensed glasses to view. As a kid I was fascinated for a short while, but it was a pain to read. When my dad saw it he told me he'd seen The House of Wax in 3D back in the '50s, and that he even thought it was a silly gimmick back then.
Before the Eagle comic there was the Viewmaster with it's 3D photo images on card discs. They had the effect of layering images on top of each other, almost like scenery in a Victorian child's card theatre. In The Clash of the Titans thread Moedred quoted an article which described the 3D effects, which sounded similar to the effects created by the Viewmaster.
Based on all those experiences, I can say that I'm not fussed about 3D, and think that it will serve as a gimmick, at the expense of the film itself. If a film is good enough in the traditional elements of photography and storytelling, then I'll be immersed in it anyway, without the need of 3D technology.
Until we get full holographic film I'm not interested!
I saw Avatar in 3-D and that was it. Seeing it I really thought it was really cool and totally enhanced the experience. However, seeing the previews was awful. I saw a preview for "Despicable Me" and I felt like I was on the Tilt-A-Whirl. The movement can give one a horribly dizzing feeling. I can't contemplate sitting through a hour and a half of that. Heck, in Avatar I had to remove my glasses sometimes. I'm not saying 3-D is always going to look horrible, but I think with animation it doesn't look very good.
The main reason that I'm not really sold on 3-D is the price tag. Avatar was the exception to my rule to not go to a movie over 20 bucks because I had to see what 3-D was like and what better place than Avatar, but for any other movie I just don't want to pay so much for 3-D. It doesn't really do much to the movie other than give you some minor thrills and a upset stomach.
Like some others said, 3-D is great when your seeing a short show in an amusement park (I'm so excited to see Amazing Spider-man in IoA), but the film thing is getting tiring. I wish we could convince Hollywood that 3-D isn't so cool.