General Forum - RE: 3D Films - Am I missing something? - Page 2

Holodeck, now you're talking.
No spazzy glasses needed for that.

3D doesn't discriminate for spectacle wearers but it does discriminate against those who would rather see the films in 2D as there is sometimes a 5:1 ratio (or even greater) of a film showing in 3D to the non-stereoscopic format which meant that I missed out on seeing Shrek Forever After and a couple of other movies that, because of the paucity of 2D showings, meant that I couldn't go to see them.

Like others, I have yet to see a film projected in stereoscopic that I thought really benefited from the 3D format or a 2D film that I wished was in 3D.

Nosferatu.MyReviewer.com
My DVD Collection

This item was edited on Wednesday, 1st September 2010, 15:28

Pretty sure I read somewhere that someone was making the first 3D pron flick.


Editor
DVD REVIEWER
MYREVIEWER.COM

My Flickr Photostream

I know that Tinto Brass has ambitions of making a 3D 'erotic movie' which will probably be a bit like a 3D version of Caligula!

Nosferatu.MyReviewer.com
My DVD Collection

Quote:
Robert John Shepherd says...
Pretty sure I read somewhere that someone was making the first 3D pron flick.They have to be careful not to do with a hard willie that the guy with the telescope did in the 50s 3D movie.  Duck that Dick.

The whole 3D thing hasn't appealed to me or my boys either. In fact they were quite annoyed because they wanted to see The Last Airbender (much to my dismay) in the hols, but whereas the 3D version was on several times a day, the 2D version was only being shown once a day, at a time that was not convenient for us, so they couldn't go.

So the movie makers miss out as we will now wait for a plain old 2D DVD release, hopefully for less than a tenner, and save ourselves some dosh.

Quote:
A child is one thing.

I can assure you wearing 3D glasses over adult glasses is extremely uncomfortable.

Practically impossible, in fact.

I could, of course, get prescription 3D glasses.

How much though?

Quote:
Honestly, I usually let technology soldier on, I wish it luck and I adapt.

3D is the first technology I can think of that I hate with a passion and hope it dies.

I never had any problem wearing 3d glasses over my glasses when I wore them, neither did my parents when they tried the glasses on over their glasses.

At my local cinemas there seems to be loads of 2d screenings of films available in 3d.

in 3d at the Cinema I've sen

Up
Avatar
Toy Story 3
Alice in Wonderland

Up
Avatar
Toy Story 3

were all great, and I really think the 3d added to the atmoshphere and enjoyment of the film. little flying out of the screen for the sake of it, but added to the enjoyment.

Alice in Wonderland

was clearly an example of 3d added for the sake of it, and didn't work so well.



I remember seeing Captain Eo at Epcot center, enjoyed it at the time.

Also regarding cot 2d screenings are cheaper.

Odeon charge extra for 3d

cineworld chareg a bit more for 3d , and then you can buy glasses if you want. So if you keep them from previous time/Odeon, it's only slighly more than 2d film.

Still annoying they charge more for it though.

This item was edited on Wednesday, 1st September 2010, 18:22

When the 3D first started, we went to see it, but was very expensive for a family of four. (an additional £2 per person on top of the normal 2D prices).

Now we only go to the 2D version, not only due to price, but I and my wife feel our eyes get sore with this new technology. They say they can't, but I beg to differ.

What happens is we get fed up with the weight and ackwardness of the glasses, take them of for a minute then look at the now blurred screen, and our eyes get instantly sore, leading to a headache.

For all the few seconds that 3D offer for depth and stuff coming out fo the screen, it is just not worth the effort or the cost.

We will just stick with 2D movies which we are used to, and maybe 3D will die a quick death, as numbers of people going to see this fad, hopefully reduces.

I remember enjoying the 3D cinema at Alton Towers, well the first time I saw it, I think when I went back at a later date it was so faded and blurry it wasn't so good.


Editor
DVD REVIEWER
MYREVIEWER.COM

My Flickr Photostream