3D films

Post Reply New Topic

3D seems to be all the rage lately, probably because it's a new way for the companies to make money. I've never seen a film in 3D, and I expect I'd be overcome with motion sickness very, very quickly. Is it any good? I'm perfectly happy with my films in 2D.

3D isn't anything new, actually. Here is an excerpt, from Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_film
3-D films have existed in some form since 1890, but were largely relegated to a niche in the motion picture industry because of the costly hardware and processes required to produce and display a 3-D film, and the lack of a standardized format for all segments of the entertainment business. Nonetheless, 3-D films were prominently featured in the 1950s and 1980s in American cinema, and are currently experiencing a worldwide resurgence coinciding with the development of digital media and the introduction of high-definition video standards.

I find it interesting that 3D seems to be making a comeback after I commented
in public syndicated media that since the media itself is obsoleting analog media
it will end up putting itself out of business, for example, Edison invented the
lightbulb, but it wastes energy so now we have LEDs and Cold Cathodes and
Compact Fluorescents and Electroluminescents. Edison invented Recording,
which is the basis of the Recording Industry Association of America who liked
to sue kids throughout the 00 years, but Recording is now obsolete, since
no more recordings or recording devices are manufactured, and I observed
that all digital data is more easily calculable than recordable many years ago.
And I also said that Hollywood was on its way out due to the
obsolescence of Edison's FILM technology which does not exist
in digital photography, and suggested that they would have to
only make 3D movies (in transition to something else) to avoid
being a big fat old dinosaur on the edge of extinction.

You know how fashion is these days, vs. last year's stuff...its just sooo OLD!
We are in the 20_10's decade now! Who cares about Edison's old 1870's junk?
"iPhone? L@me. Cool is now Droid!" (silly fake example of the out-of-style effect)

3D isn't that spectacular... the last movie I saw in 3D was Avatar, and honestly it looked kind of cool for the first 15 minutes or so, but after a while I got used to the look and didn't even notice it was 3D anymore.

3D is not all it's cracked up to be, in my opinion. It does look like you can see 'into' the movie screen, but the 3D glasses kind of give me a headache and it just makes the movie cost more. I was all into seeing Coraline in 3D as it was the first 3D movie I'd seen in a while. I also saw Ice Age 3 and Avatar in 3D but didn't find it worth the extra dollars. Nothing really seems to pop out of the screen as it did when I was a little kid and more susceptible to the illusions.

I avoided all the 3D movies because I was also afraid of motion sickness and headaches because I can get both from regular movies (only on the big screen, movies at home are fine). But my mom really wanted to see Avatar because she'd heard all the hype and I admit I was slightly curious as well. I came out with mixed feelings towards the 3D-ness of the movie.

The animated parts looked nice most of the time, but it was rare that the 3D actually made it that much different than it would look in 2D. There were a few scenes that were quite stunning though.

The live action parts were absolutely terrible in 3D. I couldn't even watch them. I had to close one eye, which was pretty annoying - and painful, ever try holding just one eye shut for an extended period of time? And then you open it again and it's all blurry for a little while until it readjusts. My problem was that I apparently don't watch movies how the director wants me to because in order for the 3D to work, there is a small area on the screen that you are forced to look at or everything gets blurry, and that spot was rarely the place I wanted to look. But I found it was still a little blurry even when looking where the camera was focused, so I really didn't enjoy the live action parts at all. (Except for seeing some actors who I enjoy and wasn't expecting to see.)

I found the action scenes in both live action and animation impossible to watch because it just blurs by so quickly that you can't tell what's happening, made more blurry by the 3D effect. Another thing I had to close one eye for.

I will never see another live action 3D film, ever. It just doesn't work when you can't focus on everything in the shot so that the viewer can look around the scene without seeing double. If they can manage that somehow then I'll reconsider my stance. I don't even see the point in making live action movies 3D when they already have the depth because they are, in fact, already 3D. Animated films work better in 3D because everything can be in focus so the viewer can look around all they want and everything is well defined, but I don't think the 3D adds enough to really make a big difference. I'd rather watch it in 2D unless there's some reason that 3D would make it immeasurably better, but I can't imagine what that reason could be.

Summary: Thumbs down for 3D films

I enjoyed some 3D films. The first ones were The Final Destination and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatball, those films were enjoyable. I was planning to see Avatar but the film gotten so popular that I did not bother seeing it.