Does anyone like watching movies in 3D?
Asked by
AshlynM (
10684)
November 29th, 2011
or do you think it’s just a waste of time?
Which movies warrant the 3D effect and which movies would’ve been better off without it?
I WAS looking forward to the next Harold and Kumar movie, but was let down when I learned it was coming out in 3D.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
15 Answers
I don’t really like them, they make my head hurt a bit.
It depends. I think the biggest challenge for filmmakers is realizing when it is and isn’t appropriate to use 3D. Harold and Kumar, I agree, do not belong in 3D. However, I saw Hugo in 3D and that was actually worth it.
@Phobia They have glasses that turn movies back into 2D so you don’t get headaches. My friend has them and we’ll all go see a movie in 3D and she’ll see it in 2D so we can all watch a movie together and she won’t have to be worried.
Sure, if they’re in 3D I’ll watch them, but ultimately, I’m interested in the premise of a movie, rather than what it looks like. I watch plenty of black and white ones, so 3D isn’t in my movie watching priorities. Special effects are the exception, but then I love ALL special effects. Good ones, bad ones…especially bad ones. Anyways, not quite the same as 3D though, which can be interesting, but just really seems gimmicky to me.
Believe it or not, the 3D movies of the 1950s were more authentic and realistic.
The glasses used were red and green. I have a pair leftover somewhere.
@john65pennington I got the Friday the Thirteenth box set, and the third one was 3D when it came out in the theaters. My copy doesn’t have the effects though. I wonder how that fared compared to today’s 3D.
Bringing all this up though, I guess it’s not the first time that this was introduced.
A consistently immersive 3D experience where you actually feel the urge to flinch or turn your head to follow, yes. Otherwise (and until then), as I’ve yet to see a 3D film that wasn’t just as good (or bad) in 2D, it’s hard to see it as anything more than a strained and unnecessary gimmick to generate more revenue.
Until they figure out how to compensate for the loss of light when you use 3D glasses, I will treat it with mild contempt. Also, most of the time I am forced to buy 3D tickets because the theaters I frequent schedule the 2D version either too late or too early. Oh yeah, they do manipulate it that way.
But yeah, darn 3D glasses, they eliminate half of the screen’s illumination! This flaw sucks to the max. Plus, there are only a handful of movies worth paying 3D tickets for, Avatar, Hugo…uhmm…see I can’t think of anything more. The rest are pathetic attempts at declaring it a 3D movie when all they had were 3 scenes worth seeing in 3D! Screw em.
@AshlynM With Harold and Kumar however, I strongly recommend you go and see it and guaranteed you would like it and yes, they really made a commendable effort to deserve the 3D ticket price. Are you sure you are old enough though? Lol.
I like 3D movies when the effect is used in the right places. I hate it when they add in certain clips just to show off the 3D effects, or when they break the barrier of the screen and have it so it looks like things are floating off into the audience when there is no reason to.
Avatar in 3d was the coolest thing I have ever seen.
@AshlynM
“I WAS looking forward to the next Harold and Kumar movie, but was let down when I learned it was coming out in 3D.”
Perhaps you’ve already checked, but there might be a theater near you that is NOT showing it in 3D.
I like 3D movies. I don’t understand why so many people hate them.
Not really. I enjoy seeing a few films that have properly utilized the technology in 3D – but do I enjoy them enough to pay at least $15 for them? (And for reference, there are very few movies that I care about enough to pay for the $10 of 2D…). Usually not. And it’s often cool for 5 or 10 minutes, and then starts to make my head hurt and tummy ache.
I fucking hate 3d movies. The problem is most 3d movies are still really gimmicky. Avatar in 3D was nice because it was done right. The 3D was done in a way to give the movie depth not AGH SHIT BE JUMPIN OUT OF THE SCREEN AT ME ZOMGZ. Yea I can care less for that sort of thing. My other problem with 3D is that while we have made advancements with the glasses from the whole red/blue thing they are still tinted. So while Avatar was beautiful, a lot of the color became grayed out from the glasses so I actually preferred the full color 2D version. Also 3D glasses tend to hurt my head after wearin them for about an hour.
I just hate that 3D is the new trendy gimmicky thing that seems to be degrading the quality of movies. Even if you decide to see the 2D version of the movie there will still be those annoying scenes in it that are there only for the “ohhh ahh somethings comin out of the screen” effect
I don’t like 3D movies. I think 3D is a gimmick.
Answer this question