They are migraine inducing and for some reason I can't see the depth in these kind of movies at all. I find it a waste of money anyway.
Poll: What does everybody think of 3D movies?
- Thread starter kwillis
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I've seen exactly three films where I can actually recommend the 3D: Avatar, Dredd, and Gravity.
Other than that, I actively avoid 3D screenings and only attend them if there isn't a 2D one available. They're more expensive, for one thing, but 3D is also basically just dark, blurry migraine-o-vision in my opinion. If the film was shot in or for 3D, then I'll usually be willing to see it in 3D because that's the intended format.
With something like The Winter Soldier, though, I would have preferred to see it in 2D. The opening sequence - at night, with lots of fast-moving action - was almost incomprehensible because of the increased darkness and lower picture quality of 3D. For the rest of the movie, the best I can say about the 3D was that it wasn't objectionable. It didn't bother me, but I didn't notice it either.
Apart from anything else, I find the obsession with 3D quite puzzling: we've spent so long pushing for better and better picture quality, and 3D is just a step back in that regard. I'm convinced the main reason so many films use it is so they can charge more for the tickets, which was a major factor in Avatar's success.
Other than that, I actively avoid 3D screenings and only attend them if there isn't a 2D one available. They're more expensive, for one thing, but 3D is also basically just dark, blurry migraine-o-vision in my opinion. If the film was shot in or for 3D, then I'll usually be willing to see it in 3D because that's the intended format.
With something like The Winter Soldier, though, I would have preferred to see it in 2D. The opening sequence - at night, with lots of fast-moving action - was almost incomprehensible because of the increased darkness and lower picture quality of 3D. For the rest of the movie, the best I can say about the 3D was that it wasn't objectionable. It didn't bother me, but I didn't notice it either.
Apart from anything else, I find the obsession with 3D quite puzzling: we've spent so long pushing for better and better picture quality, and 3D is just a step back in that regard. I'm convinced the main reason so many films use it is so they can charge more for the tickets, which was a major factor in Avatar's success.
It depends on the movie. I won't spend a dime if I heard that the 3D effects are not worth the admission price (One or two instances of 3d while the rest is 2D). Other movies do it quite well. My best experience was a documentary about fishes in the ocean. It sounds dull, but the 3D was so well done. It felt like we were in the ocean.
It's too bad that I missed Gravity though.
It's too bad that I missed Gravity though.
3d is an expensive gimmick. First when they were bringing it back i thought it would be a way to add depth, like you was looking into the movie and not a flat screen. Except all we get is pointless crap flying at the screen and paying a load of extra money for it on the ticket price. It doesnt add anything and mostly added as an after thought to make money. First you had to use special cameras to be true 3D. Now they are dragging old movies out the closet like Titanic and Jurassic Park to send back to the cinema to make money - how can you sell a movie as 3D when it wasnt filmed that way? Remember they were gonna make the Star Wars movies in 3D. Its just a money making scheme they are forcing onto everyone. If they really thought 3D was the future, then they should put their money where they mouth is and make 2D and 3D the same ticket price.
I remember when watching the latest Star Trek in 3D there was a moment very early on when an arrow appears to come right at you. It legitimately made me try to dodge it.
There aren't many moments that make 3D worthwhile but they do exist. I tend to watch 3D if I think it might be worthwhile ie action movies. I'm fine watching 3D or 2D.
There aren't many moments that make 3D worthwhile but they do exist. I tend to watch 3D if I think it might be worthwhile ie action movies. I'm fine watching 3D or 2D.
3D is a waste of money, a pointless gimmick I prefer to avoid.
Tried watching a movie in 3D once, it looked just... weird, unnatural, certainly not worth the higher ticket price. It also gave me a slight headache and I had to suppress weak nausea throughout the film. Overall, not a pleasant experience.
Tried watching a movie in 3D once, it looked just... weird, unnatural, certainly not worth the higher ticket price. It also gave me a slight headache and I had to suppress weak nausea throughout the film. Overall, not a pleasant experience.
I like it if it's well done(makes sense, right?).
3D gaming using high end pc hardware can be great too.
3D gaming using high end pc hardware can be great too.
I seldom see it make a difference in a movie. But I really like them when it does make a difference.
Well I wear glasses and am prone to migraines, so I'm not really a fan for obvious reason.
That said I did go to Avatar twice in theatres, and the recent Hobbit part 2 had a pretty cool scene (which I scene in 3d due to a group of friends).
I guess I'd be under 'avoids, but concedes'.
That said I did go to Avatar twice in theatres, and the recent Hobbit part 2 had a pretty cool scene (which I scene in 3d due to a group of friends).
I guess I'd be under 'avoids, but concedes'.
I generally aim for 2d showings for 3D movies, partly because of cost and because of all the movies i have seen in 3D, only two would I say the experience was actively enhanced by being in 3d (and the latter of those was because I got treated to see it in IMAX).
The films in question? Avatar and Pacific Rim.
The films in question? Avatar and Pacific Rim.
Viewing anything in 3D for an extended period of time tends to give me eyestrain and headaches, among other undesirable side-effects. As a result, I completely avoid 3D movies.
Where is the option for, Movies that Were Made in 3D and were meant for 3D.
Because I only watch a movie if I know it was filmed in 3D and were made for 3D. Such as Avatar or Gravity, Tron, Prometheus. I will only see a 3D film if they make good use of the 3D.
I watch something in 2D if I deem its a 2D type of movie, but I will watch a 3D movie if that's how the movie was intended to be watched.
Because I only watch a movie if I know it was filmed in 3D and were made for 3D. Such as Avatar or Gravity, Tron, Prometheus. I will only see a 3D film if they make good use of the 3D.
I watch something in 2D if I deem its a 2D type of movie, but I will watch a 3D movie if that's how the movie was intended to be watched.
Wow, this is really fascinating. Given how many movies there are in 3D, I was really expecting more people to like it, but it sounds like a lot of you hate it! DO you think this is similar amongst most general audiences? Do you think this is just an artificual push by the movie makers? DO you think there is a legitimate future for 3D, or is this just a fad?
3D comes and goes. This is hardly the first time 3D was a big thing...I'm led to believe that the first 3D science fiction movie was "The Robot Monster", back in the 50s.kwillis said:
Current 3D will likely wander off again same as it's done before.
I don't go out of my way to avoid 3D movies but I would much rather watch a movie in 2D than 3D. Half the time the effect kind of just...blends in after time. I stop noticing it until there's an obvious money-shot. I prefer to just watch movies in 2D.
If the movie is shot in 3D, I'll watch it in 3D. If converted, I'll check reviews then decide. There's good converted and shitty converted. Shitty converted throws too many blurry weather effects in front of the actors to create an illusion of depth that just doesn't work. I'm one of those people who doesn't get vertigo, doesn't get nauseated or headaches from watching 3D so I'd watch it all day if it was available to me.
Not too much of a fan. Partially because I'm not so keen on the visual trickery, and partially because my eyes are bad enough to be at that point where I can barely, if at all, see the damn effect. Most of the time all I see is a blurry, dark, eye-straining and headache-inducing picture.
3D is very rarely done well for movies.
Also it not only hurts my eyes, but it fucks with my eyes more than just watching a regular 2D movie. Let me tell you how much fun it isn't when you try to stand up and walk out and you can barely manage that because your eyes are just that bad at that point.
If I can avoid a 3D film I will. One of my best friends saw the first Hobbit film and she says the IMAX 3D gave her vertigo when they were panning down the gold. Neither her nor I get vertigo easily. I saw it in 2D and had the same reaction. Plus it caused my eyes to lose focus bad enough that the next 10 minutes of the film were a blur to me.
Movies that cause my eyes to lose focus for any amount of time are put on the list of movies I probably never want to see again. So, since that's what 3D does, I actively avoid it whenever possible.
Also it not only hurts my eyes, but it fucks with my eyes more than just watching a regular 2D movie. Let me tell you how much fun it isn't when you try to stand up and walk out and you can barely manage that because your eyes are just that bad at that point.
If I can avoid a 3D film I will. One of my best friends saw the first Hobbit film and she says the IMAX 3D gave her vertigo when they were panning down the gold. Neither her nor I get vertigo easily. I saw it in 2D and had the same reaction. Plus it caused my eyes to lose focus bad enough that the next 10 minutes of the film were a blur to me.
Movies that cause my eyes to lose focus for any amount of time are put on the list of movies I probably never want to see again. So, since that's what 3D does, I actively avoid it whenever possible.