The People vs. 3D

Guess I'm back on IndieTalk, (for a couple of weeks) probably not missed -- but I sure missed the reading here. I do like to read what others say, get wide opinions and keep up on tech and creativity. Also met some pretty cool, smart, talented people here. Saw this thread and thought I would voice another of my 2 cent opinions.

Background for comment...

Wife and I invested in a Mitsubishi 73" 3D 1080i/p TV almost two years ago. Price was very, very low, with no tax or shipping on the internet. Did the IR active 3D shutter glasses set-up inexpensively too, cause we are not rich, thanks e-bay/amazon! Yes, we hate the glasses, but LOVE the 3D. I do not go to the 3D IMAX or the Real3D theater screens with new releases, sorry Hollywood (though I did go and see John Carter twice on the big screen 3D)... to expensive (8.50 to 21.00 for theater shows). I prefer to wait and buy the 3D BluRay on Amazon when those 3D titles go on sale (in the 12.99 to 22.95 price range). Every title does drop eventually. Hey, I just bought Abe Lincoln, Vampire Hunter 3D and Titanic 3D for 14.99 (no tax or shipping) each (not watched either yet). Dig. I watch 3D over and over and over... (of course I do that with a lot of 2D films as well), but I love 3D on the 73" (big is better -- wish we could of spent the more $ for the 92" but we were and are still broke).

Now, don't get me wrong a crappy movie is still a crappy movie, even with our own unique tastes. 3D will not save a crappy movie... But a good solid film in 3D... WOW! I now have about 25 3D BluRays (low priced purchases over the past two years), and when friends come over with beer, wine and snacks (you bring the munches)... guess what they want to see?

Would 3D make Pulp Fiction a better movie ? NO. Would I love to see Pulp Fiction in 3D? HAIL YES (where's my MF gun)!!!!!

JAWS? You Betcha (wink wink)! LOTRs extended BluRay version in 3D? Oh my Lord! GODFATHER 1 and 2? That would be interesting! Until then, I will enjoy John Carter 3D, Conan 3D, Avengers 3D, Capt. America 3D, Resident Evil 3D(s) and yes, even Piranha 3D (not the 3DD version) and yes, even Puss N Boots (my wife loved that one) with all the other 3D titles. 3D is here to stay and will be watched over and over and over and...
 
3D is crap in my opinion, its currently a cheap gimmick with no use, i compare it to the first steps of mobile phone video recording, the colours arent there, i have to wear stupid glasses which give some people headaches including me.

if 3D is to be a success then they should make films with 3D in mind, and i dont mean like the hobbit i mean as in its filmed so that objects are projected in a 3D way and planted specifically in a POV.
 
Quit drinking 4-6hrs before you go.
Eat a big salty meal just before you go.

3D is only a studio/theater owner gimmick to financially compete with home theaters and mobile devices.
Like it or not, it's coming and staying.

Personally, it's just a waste of money on me.
It looked fine for AVATAR and made THE AVENGERS look kinda funny, so...
 
Here in Germany, a lot of cinemas want you to pay about 2 Dollars for the 3D glasses which you have to GIVE BACK to them after the movie. This is the essence of 3D - a bunch of suits who want o get people to their crappy movies to rip them off with their COOL 3D technology.

I also don't think that 3D makes EVERY movie better. It's like you'd say "Photography is good, but 3D models are BETTER, because there is more depth to them". It's hogwash, nothing more. Movies are a flat medium and I hate to have 2 pairs of glasses on my nose, just because of 3D.
 
I don't mind it. It's kinda fun. Like trying the new ride at the amusement park. Some people love it and ride it over and over. Others hate it and want the old wooden coaster back... Either way it's like any new tech. It will stay. No one holds a gun to your head to go to a 3D show.
How'z about them 120hz TV's??? The picture looks so sharp it's as if your watching the monitor on your camera when your filming or something. I like the old, the new, the originals, the remakes, etc... They all have their place (if done well, of course).
 
icba pictures said:
I don't mind it. It's kinda fun. Like trying the new ride at the amusement park. Some people love it and ride it over and over. Others hate it and want the old wooden coaster back... Either way it's like any new tech. It will stay. No one holds a gun to your head to go to a 3D show.
How'z about them 120hz TV's??? The picture looks so sharp it's as if your watching the monitor on your camera when your filming or something. I like the old, the new, the originals, the remakes, etc... They all have their place (if done well, of course).
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with old or new, it's simply, 3D looks bad. It's a lame gimmick, that sometimes you are forced to deal with because theaters might not have a non-3D version.

And they need to come up with a better term for it, because it implies that movies without this horrible looking feature aren't in three dimensions. Unless you're retarded, you don't need glasses to tell that there's depth.

In closing, 3D can make the best movie in the world an utter piece of shit
 
don patterson said:
Guess I'm back on IndieTalk, (for a couple of weeks) probably not missed -- but I sure missed the reading here. I do like to read what others say, get wide opinions and keep up on tech and creativity. Also met some pretty cool, smart, talented people here. Saw this thread and thought I would voice another of my 2 cent opinions.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are missed, Don. =)
 
So, though I'm obviously a proponent of 3D, I will say this -- I'm glad that my local cinema always offers at least one 2D showing for every 3D movie, and more and more often, I'm choosing 2D. Most 3D movies are pointless, I agree.

For real, though, I think some opinions might be changed by Life of Pi. Not all 3D is created equal, and Pi is the best I've seen, not just technically, but artistically.
 
Oh, I have to say, the 3D trailer for Jurassic Park 3D looked pretty darn cool. Since it wasn't filmed in 3D, I wouldn't hold my breath that it will actually look that cool. But yeah, the trailer made it look pretty sweet in 3D.
 
mussonman said:
It has nothing to do with old or new, it's simply, 3D looks bad. It's a lame gimmick, that sometimes you are forced to deal with because theaters might not have a non-3D version.

And they need to come up with a better term for it, because it implies that movies without this horrible looking feature aren't in three dimensions. Unless you're retarded, you don't need glasses to tell that there's depth.

In closing, 3D can make the best movie in the world an utter piece of shit
Click to expand...

WOW!! I wear glasses every day...:lol: Without them I would be missing a lot of "depth"... haha. I have a 3D TV at home, and it's fun once in a while, not all the time, but once in a while, to see the gimmick. Lame or not, it's an interesting attempt to bring video into a new realm. When they make 3D hologram movies, well then, we'll see if that lives up to the highest standards.... LOL.:lol:
 
harmonica44 said:
Well it seems most people hate 3D. Do you think it will be phased out like Cinescope was for example? Even Cinescope looked a lot better.
Click to expand...

Absolutely incorrect; if most people hated 3D they would not go to see 3D movies. The number of 3D releases increases every year; someone must be making money or they would not do it. My 10 year old daughter LOVES 3D films. My 20 year old daughter wanted to see "Beauty and the Beast" in 3D for her birthday last year; she fell in love with it all over again.

It is still a very imperfect medium, and lots of directors are still experimenting. As I mentioned, I felt that Scorsese did the best job of 3D I have seen so far. I would like to see more directors of that caliber experimenting with 3D. It will definitely improve with time.

You know, lots of people were skeptical about the car, the airplane, natural gas, electricity, space flight, personal computers...
 
mussonman said:
But those things proved themselves very quickly to be great inventions. 3D has done the opposite
Click to expand...

Define "quickly". The current incarnation of 3D has only been around for about 8 years, but it's not going to change society the way other technological advancements did. Automobiles were around in the late 1800's, yet didn't really catch on until almost 1920, when Ford smoothed out the mass production process and brought the price WAY down.

From my way of thinking there are lots of films that don't need to be in 3D. "Casablanca" in 3D wouldn't make much difference for example. The use of 3D will change when it (hopefully) becomes a tool and not a gimmick - and when they smooth out the bugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top