I’m rewatching Final Destination.
And it dawned on me that all of the shots were choreographed for 3D animation.
I remember disliking 3D movies whenever we had those red and blue lens glasses.
And whenever the movie industry switched over to the new clear 3D glasses. I still didn’t see the point in 3D movies. I watch them and then threw away the glasses at the end of the movie. The experience sucked, just like always.
So I’m curious.
Did anybody actually want 3D movies? Or was this something that the movie industry was just trying to shove down our throats?
When done right, yes. But i will say whenever i see a 3d movie i also see it in 2d either before or after.
Once i saw avatar and saw that this 3d wasn’t just “popping out” 3d like the red/blue kind and instead more like using the screen like a window into the world of the movie I thought it was brilliant. Still didn’t stop some films using it as a gimmick though.
I still kinda wish 3d took off more past the gimmicky phase. I was too young to get a 3d tv at the time and I wish I could experience some of those movies again in 3d. But even if I had a 3d tv now they haven’t released 3d versions of movies outside of the cinemas in like 10 years. I would still like to get one to experiment with 3d gaming though. But will probably result in me being disappointed because it’s potential was never fully realised, like 2 screen async gaming on the wii u.
I think certain movies are 3D worthy. Like I would I loved to watch Interstellar or Gravity in 3D. When full immersion is something that adds value.
I find that most movies aren’t worthy of it.
I enjoy them, but only when they are well made and use the 3d to add proper depths to shots. Too many 3d movies tried to rely on cheap “object comes out of screen” tricks that get old very fast.
No for two reasons.
-
I already wear glasses, these are just uncomfortable.
-
My brain stops noticing the 3D effect after a few moments. I think it’s cool when concentrating on it, but it’s not worth the extra cost and equipment.
-
Personally love 3d movies. Obv many are built around the 3d and that can feel gimmicky, but many like the marvel ones just add an extra element of depth which is nice.
Used vr headsets for 3d, and have had a series of protectors that do 3d for it. Thought it was dying out, but newer 4k projectors keep adding the feature.
But I agree the general public opinion is it’s not worth it, so the studios will follow the money. If people vote with their wallets I’ll just have to accept the limited library I have so far.
I also feel like I need to add that many people either don’t see 3d (and don’t realize it, my father and daughter included), or have poor depth perception making the effect headache inducing. This accounts for a reasonable amount of the public, making the effect either worthless or not worth the strain.
If a movie was shot in 3d and the CGI was designed in 3d and the movie was produced for 3d I’ve generally enjoyed them (Avatar, Gemini Man, Alita Battle Angel). If however the 3d is produced by an off shore sweat shot rotoscoping a 2d shot then layering everything over a parallax background that’s an immediate pass.
I’d love if there was a 3d movie distribution app/platform for VR headsets though. I had to buy the 3d Blu-ray release of a movie, a PC Blu-ray drive, Blu-ray ripping software, then render that to a stereoscopic player and set a VR app to copy my desktop in stereoscopic mode just to watch it. That cost like $100 for a movie, and it seems more people have a quest or some shit then ever had a 3d TV.
3D films is always a fad that comes in waves. Given it’s price to set up at home, it will be a premium that only movie theaters will offer—and such a gimmick is what those movie corporations spring on us to try to redrum up folks’ interest in paying to go to the theater (especially when a new technology for 3D is released).
The last one I went to on purpose was the first Dr. Strange movie since it was pretty obvious all of these effects would be well-suited for 3D which personally I think heightened the entertainment of that film. Many other cases were more forgetable, induced a headache, & were not worth the premium ticket.
They were a fun novelty when it was only theme parks doing it, because the theatre experience was tailored to that one movie and they could bring practical effects into the show.
In a standard movie theater there wasn’t much point and I watched potc 4 without the glasses because it genuinely looked better than with the glasses on.
That’s bonkers, how was watching it with a double image better than with the glasses?
With the glasses on I felt like I was going cross eyed. They fucked it up so badly.
Yeah ive always loved 3D effects, and never understand what folks have against it.
It’s definitely the tech getting in the way of the experience. There’s comments to be made about the gimmicky nature of content made for 3d but if it really took off you’d eventually see stand out art and ultimately it would become so standard and expected that even for a film not taking particular advantage it’d probably be there, literally, adding another dimension to the experience of the film. The problem is, in all it’s history we just haven’t figured out a way that isn’t clunky and irritating on the viewing side. A pair of plastic glasses may seem a pretty minor inconvenience but people balk at that type of thing and only have the desire and patience for it during brief spikes where it re-emerges as a fad.
It also, from memory suffers from making the films seem darker, the glasses are prone to being lost, or scratched. To make them comfortable you’d really have to make them as good as actual glasses, which are expensive. It’s also problematic from a theatrical perspective because a session has to be 3d only, you can’t have people in the same session watching it without glasses, the screening is unwatchable without them so you have to tie up 2 screens with a 3d and 2d version. I think I recall hearing about advances the last time this fad was big, where they finally didn’t need glasses, but it resulted in narrow viewing angle requirements.
If you’re picking up a theme here, it’s that all the complaints are about the practicalities of the tech, not necessarily the entertainment value of 3d itself. The trouble comes when that entertainment, while fun, isn’t worth it.
I dont think its the glasses, I remember plenty of people hating on the 3DS’s use of 3D.
