Is anyone else giving up on 3D?

MotthusMotthus Posts: 7,280
Forum Member
Recently I've given up on 3D due to some awful 3D versions of some films and also the extra cost of seeing it in 3D.I saw Wrath Of The Titians in 2D and I plan to see The Avengers in 2D as well.I was just wondering if any other people have given up on watching films in 3D?
«13

Comments

  • MissDexterMissDexter Posts: 1,644
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I was never "on" 3D.

    It made Avatar mildy interesting and some animation is ok but that's it.

    I hate it - it's pure gimmick and cash in. If 3D is supposed to replicate the real world and immerse you into a multi dimensional environment....well sorry you failed.

    The world i see through my eyes isn't dull, blurred and sucked dry of colour.
  • PhoenixRisesPhoenixRises Posts: 2,607
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I only watch 3D if it was filmed in 3D, although even some of those are terrible, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, was supposedly filmed in 3D but it was horrible to watch in 3D.

    So a new rule I have added is if I think the film is set mainly at night or in dark places, I will give the 3D version a miss, since darkness and 3D doesn't seem to work at all.

    I will be watching Avengers in 2D, I don't think I have watched a 3D film all year, I might be misremembering but I am sure out of all the films I have seen this year they have all been 2D.
  • NorfolkBoy1NorfolkBoy1 Posts: 4,109
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Likewise I'll be watching Avengers in 2D, but I consider 2012 the last-chance saloon for 3D.

    Having seen the video blogs with Peter Jackson and read various interviews with Ridley Scott I'll give it a chance and go into Prometheus and The Hobbit with an open mind, although I'll try and go to IMAX 3D screenings if I can, less colour wash-out than with that "RealD" bullsh*t.
  • marjanglesmarjangles Posts: 9,600
    Forum Member
    I've only seen two films in 3D and both times I've come out of the cinema with a splitting headache. So I've defintiely given up on 3D. I don't honestly see the point, it's mildly amusing when you sit through a 3D show for 5 minutes at a theme park but I don't think it adds anything to the 90+ minute experience of a film. I don't feel that in watching a film in 2D that I am missing anything.

    Plus as I'm short sighted anyway I have to wear the 3D specs over my glasses which makes the whole thing an incredibly uncomfortable experience all round.

    Should have stayed dead and buried and hope it goes back there soon.
  • MissDexterMissDexter Posts: 1,644
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's the brightness/colour issues what really disappoint me.

    I saw Despicable Me in 3D which was a great film but everytime I lifted the glasses up, the screen just lit up immensely and the colours jumped off the screen.
    So why would you choose to see something that deadens one the most important factors of the film?
  • Steve™Steve™ Posts: 7,286
    Forum Member
    Waste of time.

    The fact remains that enjoyment isnt increased, cost and profit for the manufacturers is.

    Bear that in mind and save yourself a headache and a pile of cash
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,482
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    HD (Blu-ray) can have a lovely depth to it when done properly, and you lose none of the colour. And get none of the migraine.

    I have little to no interest in 3D.
  • MissDexterMissDexter Posts: 1,644
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    dmuk wrote: »
    HD (Blu-ray) can have a lovely depth to it when done properly, and you lose none of the colour. And get none of the migraine.

    I have little to no interest in 3D.

    I agree, when I first got Blu-ray I was amazed at how the clarity increased the depth of the image.
    I specifically remember saying the the OH "wow it looks like it's 3D"

    Another stumbling block to 3D is the type of films/genres it will be applied to.
    It's always Action/SciFi/Kids/Animation.

    Would it ever really be used for Westerns/RomCom/Drama/ArtHouse/Romance/Period etc etc
  • IggymanIggyman Posts: 8,021
    Forum Member
    I gave up on 3D years ago - if I ever feel the need for experiencing a headache and to simultaneously 'enjoy' darkened colours and blurry vision I do the following:

    a) Put on my sunglasses, and then:

    b) Bash my head against a wall while throwing Pound coins down the drain and muttering to myself "It's all Cameron's fault"
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 660
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Iggyman wrote: »
    I gave up on 3D years ago - if I ever feel the need for experiencing a headache and to simultaneously 'enjoy' darkened colours and blurry vision I do the following:

    a) Put on my sunglasses, and then:

    b) Bash my head against a wall while throwing Pound coins down the drain and muttering to myself "It's all Cameron's fault"

    Pretty bad then! :)
  • Biffo the BearBiffo the Bear Posts: 25,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Iggyman wrote: »
    I gave up on 3D years ago - if I ever feel the need for experiencing a headache and to simultaneously 'enjoy' darkened colours and blurry vision I do the following:

    a) Put on my sunglasses, and then:

    b) Bash my head against a wall while throwing Pound coins down the drain and muttering to myself "It's all Cameron's fault"

    Likewise - 3D does look sort of nice, but it gives me a headache, it's expensive and the colours are all washed out.
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,684
    Forum Member
    Sometimes 3D looks sort of nice, but why are the colours/display darker than when watching in 2D? Clash of the Titans (especially shit) and Alice in Wonderland were pants in 3D, didnt see the point at all.
  • VashettiVashetti Posts: 2,361
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    For those who are concerned about the darkening of 3D, Peter Jackson has made the sets of the Hobbit VERY colourful to compensate for it. So you shouldn't see any difference.
  • MissDexterMissDexter Posts: 1,644
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Vashetti wrote: »
    For those who are concerned about the darkening of 3D, Peter Jackson has made the sets of the Hobbit VERY colourful to compensate for it. So you shouldn't see any difference.

    So in effect he's admitting that 3D technology is crap and he's got to use a brighter paint on his sets so it balances out.
    Great!
    :rolleyes:

    What's he doing to compensate for the fact 3D is more of a distraction than anything else? Is just going not bother and make it in acceptable and proven 2D?
  • VashettiVashetti Posts: 2,361
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MissDexter wrote: »
    So in effect he's admitting that 3D technology is crap and he's got to use a brighter paint on his sets so it balances out.
    Great!
    :rolleyes:

    What's he doing to compensate for the fact 3D is more of a distraction than anything else? Is just going not bother and make it in acceptable and proven 2D?

    The film is still going to be available in 2D, it's not like you're not going to have the choice between the two.

    The film should look phenomenal in either format as it is being filmed in 48fps.

    Let's hope the cinemas have updated their projection systems by then.
  • James2001James2001 Posts: 73,367
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Well, there shouldn't be any problem showing it in 48fps in 2D at least, because that's already part of the Digital Cinema specification, so all the digital projectors should be able to show it that way (in 2K at least). It's in 3D and at higher resolutions that's not part of the current spec, and some projectors won't be able to handle it, even with firmware & hardware upgrades.

    I personally think higher frame rates will be a MUCH bigger improvement than 3D ever could be. And thankfully it's something we can enjoy without the need for glasses or new TVs.
  • Delboy219Delboy219 Posts: 3,193
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I hate 3D. They're just fleecing us.

    I will dance on 3D's grave, when it finally dies again.:)
  • biggebruvbiggebruv Posts: 6,626
    Forum Member
    Regarding 3DTVs and 3D at home

    I havent really found the movie yet I really wanna see in 3D TBH theres not alot out

    gaming wise its ok though with
    uncharted 3
    batman arkum city
    silent hill downpour

    all have been 3D so its doing more for gaming than it is for movies IMO
  • Hit Em Up StyleHit Em Up Style Posts: 12,141
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I've never been into it anyway.
  • HelboreHelbore Posts: 16,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Vashetti wrote: »
    For those who are concerned about the darkening of 3D, Peter Jackson has made the sets of the Hobbit VERY colourful to compensate for it. So you shouldn't see any difference.

    I hope that doesn't mean The Hobbit will look garish is 2D.
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,684
    Forum Member
    If its filmed in 48fps, it will appear faster on screen right? Thats twice the speed of standard film/NTSC.
  • lovedoctor1978lovedoctor1978 Posts: 2,327
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The only 3D film i've seen (in fact the only cinema film i've seen so far this century was Puss In Boots.
    I thought that worked really well in 3D but I knew straight away it would not work with a non-animated film. There is just so much more you can do with animation that goes well with 3D that just cant happen with real life unless serious CGI is involved.
  • IggymanIggyman Posts: 8,021
    Forum Member
    grimtales1 wrote: »
    If its filmed in 48fps, it will appear faster on screen right? Thats twice the speed of standard film/NTSC.

    Faster? What, like everything moving twice as fast? Of course not:

    http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/12/the-hobbit-48-frames-peter-jackson/
  • grimtales1grimtales1 Posts: 46,684
    Forum Member
    Thanks for that, sounds interesting. :)
    So it will basically be a lot sharper and smoother? I cant get used to images being so smooth TBH, I've hardly ever watched BDs with 100Hz mode on, it looks odd :)
  • IggymanIggyman Posts: 8,021
    Forum Member
    grimtales1 wrote: »
    Thanks for that, sounds interesting. :)
    So it will basically be a lot sharper and smoother? I cant get used to images being so smooth TBH, I've hardly ever watched BDs with 100Hz mode on, it looks odd :)

    Yup, basically smoother. However, some people have said that it will be TOO smooth and that in action sequences you'll lose the sense of speed that you currently get due to the presence of motion blur.
Sign In or Register to comment.