3D is dying, thank god!

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by Mac'nCheese, May 30, 2011.

  1. Mac'nCheese macrumors 68040


    Feb 9, 2010

    Seems like the masses are speaking and they are saying no to 3D movies. Good. Save 3D for special events, a James Cameron movie once every few years or an animated film that uses 3D to add to the story somehow....I didn't see Thor in 3D and will see normal screenings of every other movie this summer, too. Even my kids hate 3D now, sick of the stupid glasses. Does anybody actually like this stuff?
  2. appleguy123 macrumors 604


    Apr 1, 2009
    15 minutes in the future
    I have never seen a 3d movie. I'll refrain from judgement until I do (probably with the next Harry Potter movie), but I think the idea is rather stupid.
  3. benthewraith macrumors 68040


    May 27, 2006
    Miami, FL
    Avatar was amazing in 3D. Tron: Legacy was decent in 3D. The other movies I just say no to. I could have done without Jackass in 3D really. Although the portable bathroom grossed me out.

    I wouldn't mind 3D so much if there wasn't a cost difference. Or if the cost difference wasn't four or five dollars. It's expensive enough to go to the theatres these days.
  4. SuperCompu2 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 23, 2006
    3D viewing almost makes watching movies work, when all you're really trying to do is relax for a bit. I also hate ending up with like 13 pairs of ridiculous glasses sitting around that have no useful function.

    Now, will someone hurry up and kill 3D TVs?
  5. Mac'nCheese thread starter macrumors 68040


    Feb 9, 2010
    Yup! I will never own a 3D tv unless that's all there is in the future. Who wants to be bothered with having enough glasses for guests, making sure everyone can sit at the right angle, the headaches.... once a year, tops in the movies! Not on my tv, not in my DS, never!!!!
  6. alust2013 macrumors 601


    Feb 6, 2010
    On the fence
    I completely agree here, although I didn't see Avatar in theatres, I can imagine it would be pretty impressive in 3D. Tron was definitely good in 3D, just because of the type of movie it was. But like you said, most movies it's not really worth it. It's expensive (as if movies weren't expensive enough already) and it really doesn't enhance my viewing experience that much.

    As far as 3D tvs, meh. I won't buy one until that's all there is to buy. And while the 3DS is kinda cool, the novelty wore off quickly with the eye strain and slight headache the demo gave me.
  7. samiwas macrumors 68000

    Aug 26, 2006
    Atlanta, GA
    This is how I feel about it, except I would say no to Jackass of any sort. But that's just me.

    Some movies lend themselves very well to 3D, and it really gives a whole different feel to the movie. The Pixar movies look astounding in 3D. Actually, those may be the only ones I've really seen in 3D. I wish I had seen Avatar in 3D, but I didn't see it in the theater. I would probably save my 3D viewing for movies that I thought would really show it. I would probably not go see "The Hangover" or something like that in 3D.

    I think some people just don't even see it, which doesn't help shape opinion. When we went and saw "Up", my wife and I both thought the 3D was a really nice extra and added some great dimension, while our friend who was there with us said he didn't even see it and thought it was stupid.

    One lucky thing for us is that my wife bought a mega pack of tickets about 5 years ago from one of the big local movie chains. The tickets were like $5 or $6 a piece. They have lasted us for years, and we still get to see any movie, 2D or 3D, without having to pay extra. If you have the dough to do so, and you go to the movies enough to warrant it, look into it.

    Oh, and I don't plan on doing 3D TV any time soon...to me, 3D needs a huge screen to really get the feel....watching 3D on a 50" doesn't have any appeal.
  8. firestarter macrumors 603


    Dec 31, 2002
    Green and pleasant land
    Good - glad to hear this is on the way out.

    It feels like an artificial gimmick when you're watching the film... and the loss of brightness and colour saturation really degrade the experience.

    I don't ever want to own a 3D TV. For me, movies are an art form - and 3D doesn't enhance that art in any way.
  9. MacmancUK macrumors member

    May 7, 2011
    I saw Avatar 3D.

    Enjoyed the film, but found the 3D distracting.

    Wearing spectacles didn't make the experience any easier, with the extra 3D glasses, and my eyes started to go bog-eyed halfway through the film.

    I'm waiting for Avatar 2D to be released on SKY (non 3D or movie) channel to enjoy it properly.
  10. Dagless macrumors Core


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    Must be a US thing. When I went to see Thor the queue for the 3D screening was longer than the 2D one, and that was just Thor so not exactly the benchmark 3D film of the decade! The ticket guy said on big titles like this they see a lot more 3D tickets than 2D...
    But here a 3D film is £1 ontop of a £7-10 ticket. You can't even buy cinema snacks for £1.

    Personally I love it. My eyes are quite bad but I get the effect. Always pulls me in more than 2D but I know it's not for all films. But when it works - I'm totally absorbed. During Thor I didn't even realise that my girlfriend had put her arm around me.

    Tron Legacy. IMAX. 3D. There's nothing like it.
  11. hexonxonx macrumors 601

    Jul 4, 2007
    Denver Colorado
    I've never seen a 3D movie so I have no idea what I was missing. Apparently, I haven't missed much.
  12. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Oct 9, 2006
    you know you are suppose to put them in a bin to be recycled and for other customers right?

    As for 3D movies it depends. Some movies feel like 3D was just an after thought so it does not look as good. Others (for example Avatar) were designed with 3D in mind so they are really great in 3D.

    As for 3D TV I think they are here to stay. As soon as they get them to the point were we do not need glasses and they have a huge viewing angle they will do really well.
  13. AdeFowler macrumors 68020


    Aug 27, 2004
    Sums up how I feel. If a film is good enough it'll stand on it's own two feet in low res black and white.
  14. Mac'nCheese thread starter macrumors 68040


    Feb 9, 2010
    Imax 3D here in the states: add 7 bucks to your film. i can barely afford to take my kids now, i can't add 7 bucks to each ticket.
  15. cube macrumors G5

    May 10, 2004
    3D guarantees that you will go to the theatre, instead of just renting the Blu Ray.

    Some movies you watch just because they are 3D.
  16. Hellhammer Moderator


    Staff Member

    Dec 10, 2008
    When/if glass-free 3D TVs with wide viewing angles become reality and affordable, then I might buy one. I went to see my first 3D movie few weeks ago, the Pirates of Caribbean 4. To be honest, I would have preferred the 2D version now that I think afterwards. The 3D didn't add much, though it might have been because of the movie. The glasses are horrible IMO. Very uncomfortable, especially for someone who never wears glasses. Then they ask you to pay extra for 3D!
  17. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030


    May 18, 2004
    The 3D movies I've seen haven't made me think they're worth the extra money or the minor annoyance of the glasses (and since I wear regular glasses, 3D glasses are even more annoying!)

    I finds 3D adds a bit for animated movies but not so much otherwise
  18. takao macrumors 68040


    Dec 25, 2003
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    they are even worse for people who wear glasses sicne they have to put two glasses on top of each other

    watched 2 3d movies in the cinemas a few years ago and since then it's pretty clear to me that it's just a stupid gimmick. A good movie will be just as good when it's not 3d especially with todays picture quality

    also around here it's ridiculous difficult enough already to catch the original sound version showing and not the dubbed one...
  19. cube macrumors G5

    May 10, 2004
    Yes, there is that caveat. 3D guarantees that you will go to the theater ONLY if it's shown in original version. Otherwise, there's no option but to downgrade to 3DTV.

    This means you will never go to see a sequel again until you get a 3DTV.
  20. zioxide macrumors 603


    Dec 11, 2006
    hahaha, 3d isn't going anywhere. :p

    you sound like everyone who two years ago was saying blu-ray was dead just because it wasn't widely adopted yet
  21. Dagless macrumors Core


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    Yup, IMAX is expensive here too. But it's only £1 ontop of the usual IMAX price at least. I think we paid £12 each for Tron Legacy.
    Here the pricing seems to be (on the days I go);
    Regular: £6 +£1 for 3D
    IMAX: £11 +£1 for 3D
    Plus you can keep your 3D specs and bring those back for a discount on subsequent ticket prices.

    I wear regular glasses too and my eyes are really very poor, but even when I was in the "I HATE 3D SO MUCH" camp wearing 2 specs at once never bothered me.
  22. Big D 51 macrumors 6502a

    Big D 51

    Jan 15, 2011
    Mobile, AL
    I watched jackass 3D and really didn't care about it. Not surprised it's not working out.
  23. bobr1952 macrumors 68020


    Jan 21, 2008
    Melbourne, FL
    I don't go to the movie theater much but watch a lot at home and I really don't want 3D glasses in my home theater. The industry always wants to make money any way they can but they really should have waited until they figured out how to do this without glasses.
  24. cube macrumors G5

    May 10, 2004
    The problem is the movies that were not shot in 3D but just postprocessed. Those are crap and give 3D a bad rep.
  25. Liquorpuki macrumors 68020


    Jun 18, 2009
    City of Angels
    This is exactly what I was thinking

Share This Page