3-D why?

[AUFred]

This may only be my complaint but here goes. Seems like hollywood is really into making 3-D movies all of a sudden. First, I don't like wearing the goofy glasses for two + hours. I always leave the theater with a headache. Second, An extra $3 or $3.50 per ticket in this economy really sucks. Thirdly, I don't see it really enhancing my viewing experience.:surrender

 

[porterjack]

hear hear

i much prefer a film to challenge my emotions, get me thinking about real issues rather than marvel at visual depth perception

soemtimes high tech is not warranted

 

[sierrabravo]

i agree, let's try to get a good story line, not focusing on visuals.

 

[KLD1019]

i noticed that here lately too! but im glad they make the movie in non 3d version! i cant watch 3d movies.....i get sick and have horrible headaches! 3d motion sickness is very common actually.....
http://www.squidoo.com/3dsickness

 

[Minor Axis]

I've never thought 3D was all that wonderful. I can stand wearing the glasses and don't get headaches. However, I loved Avatar on the IMax screen and Avatar has the best implementation of 3D I've seen to date. It was incredible, but I think it would have been just as incredible 2D as 3D.

 

[Azazel]

​

 

[Francis]

This may only be my complaint but here goes. Seems like hollywood is really into making 3-D movies all of a sudden. First, I don't like wearing the goofy glasses for two + hours. I always leave the theater with a headache. Second, An extra $3 or $3.50 per ticket in this economy really sucks. Thirdly, I don't see it really enhancing my viewing experience.:surrender

Yes I have been saying the same.. I can only remember one movie that made it worthwhile and it was animated..

I truly believe the 3D thing is a money grab.. A new way to increase the cost, especially now they no longer offer ( I noticed with Alice In Wonderland ) a standard 2D movie at no premium..

 

[Springsteen]

They do it to show you how impressive the film is visually. I mean it's a big business now, the visuals and if the film is in 3D they do not fully benefit from it and thye may have people coming out of the cinema saying "the visuals weren't as impressive".

But what I would also say is there is a risk that the storylines could become secondary to the need to have stunning visuals.

 

[GuesSAngel]

i dont mind it. i just hate that some movies for kids are only in 3D...so i cant take my son to watch them

 

[Tyler Durden]

Yep, never been a fan. Always seems to be a bit of a distraction to make you forget that what they put into the visuals, they took away from the script

 

[justmee]

porn in 3D might be a little scary

 

[porterjack]

porn in 3D might be a little scary

yikes , i would have to have one eye closed

 

[Zorak]

3D is no replacement for decent cinematogrophy.

 

[Abcinthia]

I don't really like 3-D films. Especially as I am extremely short sighted and hate wearing the 3-D glasses over my normal glasses. It is stupidly uncomfortable.

 

[JanieDough]

all I have to say is that 3-D is cool, but it isn't cool enough to make for a shitty plot.

 

[Peter Parka]

I'm with Fred. 3-D is a silly 50s fad which died out then for good reason.:thumbup

 

[JanieDough]

i dont mind it. i just hate that some movies for kids are only in 3D...so i cant take my son to watch them

wait why not?

 

[Charles]

I would definitely agree. While 3-D films may be appealing to the eye for a good five minutes, at the end of the film my eyes feel like they're about to burn into a pile of ashes and blow away, and I've felt like I've had a heavy dosage of acid. I'd much rather see the film in it's plain, 'ole boring 2-D. The filmmakers and production companies have this theory that because it's in 3-D it will automatically attract more viewers, which is true in most cases. Avatar, for example, got most of its attention for the amazing special effects.. which were built up by the 3-dimensional aspect. It was nothing more but a shinier version of Pocahontas or Dances with Wolves.

 

[AUFred]

I would definitely agree. While 3-D films may be appealing to the eye for a good five minutes, at the end of the film my eyes feel like they're about to burn into a pile of ashes and blow away, and I've felt like I've had a heavy dosage of acid. I'd much rather see the film in it's plain, 'ole boring 2-D. The filmmakers and production companies have this theory that because it's in 3-D it will automatically attract more viewers, which is true in most cases. Avatar, for example, got most of its attention for the amazing special effects.. which were built up by the 3-dimensional aspect. It was nothing more but a shinier version of Pocahontas or Dances with Wolves.

along with fern gulley

 

[Dana]

They're also making 3-D television sets.