comparing 3D cinema to normal cinema is like comparing the automobile with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1y4RRWm3xw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1y4RRWm3xw
Sure, because most people tend to not give them back and it would be too complicated to give the money back to the ones, who do return them. The cinema here lets you decide to bring your own or buy the glasses, which you can keep then. Fair deal, I think.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.
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...
comparing 3D cinema to normal cinema is like comparing the automobile with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1y4RRWm3xw
No one holds a gun to your head to go to a 3D show.
Nothing much to add, aside from Tron II still being the only 3D film that's actually been interesting.
True, but the cinemas sure can make it inconvenient. If running both 2D & 3D versions, my local theater would show the 2D at 2pm & 9:30pm. The 3D shows at 4pm, 5:45pm, 8pm. I'm going to be shoehorned into that 3D screening, unless I have no work that day or can stay up late. Neither time being family-friendly, regardless.