The format is pretty much in it's last gasps, the last film I watched in 3D was Harry Potter 7 part one and it was just re-jigged 2D. Not worth putting the glasses on for. Watched part 2 in the conventional manner.
Gravity is only worth watching in 3D IMO. It's an event movie in every sense of the word and I honestly think watching in 2D would take away a lot of the sense of immersion and excitement that you get out of the 3D version.
Gravity is only worth watching in 3D IMO. It's an event movie in every sense of the word and I honestly think watching in 2D would take away a lot of the sense of immersion and excitement that you get out of the 3D version.
Having only seen Gravity in 2D, I'd say it worked very well, but I can see how 3D would make it better...
I watched at home in 3D... I don't think it added much at all. I'd rather of watched the brighter/crisper 2D version to be honest.
I think the key to the film is the claustrophobia and personal peril/danger.... the odd bit of 3D with bits 'n bobs floating by was pretty underwhelming in my view and looked a bit bolted on or bunged in as an after thought.
The format is pretty much in it's last gasps, the last film I watched in 3D was Harry Potter 7 part one and it was just re-jigged 2D. Not worth putting the glasses on for. Watched part 2 in the conventional manner.
lol what an ironic question. Gravity is a 3D experience. It HAS to be seen in 3D. Seeing it in 2D will expose all the horrible flaws in the movie.
lol what an ironic question. Gravity is a 3D experience. It HAS to be seen in 3D. Seeing it in 2D will expose all the horrible flaws in the movie.
BBC has dropped all 3D
ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 have never shown in 3D.
Sky only has one channel and that is mostly remastered
Cinema audiences for 3D are dropping
Sales of 3D TVs is dropping
Hollywood is hardly making anything in 3D
3D is on its way out.
So how is my statement ironic? (Poor use of the word anyway; irony means an unintended statement that is the opposite of what is meant - unlike sarcasm which is intentional)
But I got answers to my questions and actually I do not know who to believe. If Gravity was made in 3D it sounds like a no-brainer. But if remastered 2D I'll wait until it appears on Film 4.
Although it was a conversion, it was brilliantly done. Despite being shot in 2D, it was specifically shot with the intention of being converted to 3D, plus of course contains a hell of a lot of CGI.
As I said, conversions have come a *long* way since Clash of the Titans. They're not all piss-poor rush jobs...
It really does deserve to be seen in 3D, rather than 2D. And I say that as someone who generally hates 3D versions.
BBC has dropped all 3D
ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 have never shown in 3D.
Sky only has one channel and that is mostly remastered
Cinema audiences for 3D are dropping
Sales of 3D TVs is dropping
Hollywood is hardly making anything in 3D
3D is on its way out.
So how is my statement ironic? (Poor use of the word anyway; irony means an unintended statement that is the opposite of what is meant - unlike sarcasm which is intentional)
But I got answers to my questions and actually I do not know who to believe. If Gravity was made in 3D it sounds like a no-brainer. But if remastered 2D I'll wait until it appears on Film 4.
Wow. I was trying to help you. All I was saying is that Gravity is 3D experience; your enjoyment of it will largely be affected by it and even Alfonso Cuaron recommends you see it in 3D. The original title was "Gravity A Space Adventure in 3D". The 3D is as important to the film as is the story. And btw irony is much broader in meaning than that. Sheesh.
Comments
Four of those have been native 3D titles which were marketed for their 3D, Avatar, Hugo, Life of Pi and Gravity.
Good to see quality 3D being recognised.
The non-3D winner was Inception.
Having only seen Gravity in 2D, I'd say it worked very well, but I can see how 3D would make it better...
Gravity was shot in 2D and converted in post, it wasn't shot in 3D.
Conversions have come a long way since Clash of the Titans...
I think the key to the film is the claustrophobia and personal peril/danger.... the odd bit of 3D with bits 'n bobs floating by was pretty underwhelming in my view and looked a bit bolted on or bunged in as an after thought.
lol what an ironic question. Gravity is a 3D experience. It HAS to be seen in 3D. Seeing it in 2D will expose all the horrible flaws in the movie.
BBC has dropped all 3D
ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 have never shown in 3D.
Sky only has one channel and that is mostly remastered
Cinema audiences for 3D are dropping
Sales of 3D TVs is dropping
Hollywood is hardly making anything in 3D
3D is on its way out.
So how is my statement ironic? (Poor use of the word anyway; irony means an unintended statement that is the opposite of what is meant - unlike sarcasm which is intentional)
But I got answers to my questions and actually I do not know who to believe. If Gravity was made in 3D it sounds like a no-brainer. But if remastered 2D I'll wait until it appears on Film 4.
As I said, conversions have come a *long* way since Clash of the Titans. They're not all piss-poor rush jobs...
It really does deserve to be seen in 3D, rather than 2D. And I say that as someone who generally hates 3D versions.
Wow. I was trying to help you. All I was saying is that Gravity is 3D experience; your enjoyment of it will largely be affected by it and even Alfonso Cuaron recommends you see it in 3D. The original title was "Gravity A Space Adventure in 3D". The 3D is as important to the film as is the story. And btw irony is much broader in meaning than that. Sheesh.