Goafer Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 I thought I'd create a seperate thread for 3D films and how I think they're totally radical rather than cluttering up the RTLFYS thread. I think 3D films have added something that the cinema has been missing for a long time: an experience you can't get at home. Now that big TV's and surround sound systems are affordable (ish), the cinema doesn't offer anything you can't get at home. You could argue about the social side of things, but do would you really want to pay to go watch a film when you could end up set in front of someone whos legs are apparently too long to keep them the fuck away from your chair? Or next to that one person who is so fat that they snore when they're awake? If you want the social side you could always just invite friends round to watch a DVD or something. Lets face it though, most people sit in silence at the cinema so the social arguement is flawed. But now cinemas have managed to do quite a good job with 3D films. The days of red and green/blue lenses are gone and now we have these: Sure, they're not even remotely stylish unless your last name happens to be Holly, but they work well. Even over regular glasses. So now 3D films can be seen in full colour. Both times I've been to see a 3D film at the cinema there have been very positive audience reactions (ie gasps and the like). It's kind of like the Mama Mia thing where people sing along, it's made the cinema experience unique and memorable again. That said, aren't they working on 3D TVs now? Well at least it adds uniqueness for now anyway.
Ashley Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Not been to a 3D movie (our local cinemas are a bit crappy) but I did recently watch the fully 3D (as in all 44 minutes were 3D) episode of Chuck and it was like...meh. Granted it was cardboard glasses (and different from normal, not red/blue) but after a while it felt weird on my head and its like they got bored of making stuff 3D half way through. I would be willing to watch something 3D if I had the opportunity.
ReZourceman Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Leave it to amusement parks/3D cinemas. If the film is good it doesnt need gimmicks.
Ashley Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Leave it to amusement parks/3D cinemas. If the film is good it doesnt need gimmicks. That's what they said about sound!
Daft Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Apparently the new tech is amazing. I think BSkyB are rolling it out for live performances. I'm interested by it but I'm not too bothered either way at the moment.
Goafer Posted April 6, 2009 Author Posted April 6, 2009 its like they got bored of making stuff 3D half way through. Yeah, it does depend on the people making the program. My Bloody Valentine felt a bit half arsed and quite a bit of the film didn't use the 3D very well. Monsters vs Aliens was very good though, it managed to get a good balance of 3D bits so that it didn't distract too much from the actual film, but still offered a bit of awesomeness. Kind of like watching a film with really good special effects. It doesn't make or break the movie, it just adds something special.
Slaggis Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Everyone who hates the idea, needs to go see a 3D movie now. It's nothing like it used to be...i.e Spy Kids 3D *shudder*. It can now be part of the movie, rather than just a gimmick.
Goafer Posted April 6, 2009 Author Posted April 6, 2009 Leave it to amusement parks/3D cinemas. If the film is good it doesnt need gimmicks. But then why bother making good CGI in films? Things like Star Wars told an epic story with just crap puppets and ropey green screening. It's just adding impressive visuals to add to the experience.
Ashley Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Yeah, it does depend on the people making the program. My Bloody Valentine felt a bit half arsed and quite a bit of the film didn't use the 3D very well. Monsters vs Aliens was very good though, it managed to get a good balance of 3D bits so that it didn't distract too much from the actual film, but still offered a bit of awesomeness. Kind of like watching a film with really good special effects. It doesn't make or break the movie, it just adds something special. To be fair, they had Yvonne Strahovski crawling toward the screen in a nightie at the start. There was no way they could top that really.
bluey Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117999057.html?categoryid=13&cs=1 ..... if you're talking CGI animation ~ gimme ghibli any day. obviously i'm horrendously biased but they're doing a pretty good job on the whole "hand drawn/CGI integration" thing.. YAY! or if you're talking 3D "omg a spear is being thrown at meeee!" films ~ MEH. the most impressive stunt in one of the first 3D movies was a speare being thrown between your eyes... and decades later, 2009 sees disney's "journey to the centre of the earth" with the main attraction: a spear being thrown between your eyes. yawns..... NAY!
The Bard Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 Kinda gives me a headache. But then, the last 3D movie I went to see was My Bloody Valentine, so that may have been the cause.
Raining_again Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 I could never watch the 3D films with the red and green glasses. Sucks having pisspoor eyesight. If it still depends on synchronising your eyes then i doubt i could watch them even now.
Goafer Posted April 6, 2009 Author Posted April 6, 2009 Kinda gives me a headache. But then, the last 3D movie I went to see was My Bloody Valentine, so that may have been the cause. Yeah, there was something weird about MBV. It forced your focus, sort of like only one bit of the scene was clear and the rest was fuzzy no matter what you did. Monsters vs Aliens was much better for 3D. Almost all the screen was clear all the time, things just seemed to appear to have depth.
The Bard Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Lol, actually I just meant the fact that it was so awful and nonsensical that trying to understand why it existed almost gave me an aneurysm. Yeah, I've heard that MvA is supposed to be good, gonna go see that with the ladyfriend. Will be back with impressions.
Mundi Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 A big Yay for me, I love seeing movies in 3D. Beowulf had a cool look about it with the 3D and movies like Bolt were in my opinion were enhanced visually by being in 3D
Iun Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I am partially sighted, so I can't see the 3D in 3D films, and going to see them gives me a headache
jayseven Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Ditto on Iun; I'll never be able to fully appreciate 3D movies, so all I can do is PRAY that 3D doesn't become the norm in my lifetime :P
Rummy Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Only times I've ever seen them is at amusment park places, so maybe 3 or 4 times in my entire life(tho I encountered those presumably polarised lenses a very long while back), I dunno where things are on it all now or how good/different it is. It is/was bloody fun though! I think it'd have to depend on the film, but the first thing I thought of whilst reading this was Snakes on a Plane, especially that bit when the snake jumps up and stuff. It's such a silly film it could easily be 3D without it taking much away.
Eenuh Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I've never really seen a 3D film in the cinema, but did at some theme parks (like Disneyland). Thing is that I don't think I can fully appreciate either, as I have problems with my eyes, making it super hard to focus on the image with both eyes at the same time. Resulting in headaches! Which is why I haven't bothered with stereoscopic 3D films yet. Unless they can make it so us people with eye problems can enjoy it too, I'm not too interested in seeing them. =P Though I do think more studios are going to go the stereoscopic 3D way. Dreamworks for example said they'll include this stuff from the beginning of the production of their films, rather than putting it in afterwards. So yeah, might be the future for a lot of films.
Jav_NE Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Only seen stuff like Ine at Disneyland/World. Honey I shrunk The Audience, The Muppets etc. Might be others, i cant remember. They work well though and i enjoy them. Would be cool if they can use it to similar wow effect in films one day. I'd be interested. The thing is, i cant see it working on a household tele. The reasons its cool in theatres is because its such a large screen, so you actually do feel immersed in it.
Paj! Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Yeah, the 3D stuff at Disneyworld and Universal Studios are great fun, but in a normal film, I'd prefer not to. It's a bit of a gimmick (Imo).
EEVILMURRAY Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 The thing is, i cant see it working on a household tele. The reasons its cool in theatres is because its such a large screen, so you actually do feel immersed in it. You can just imagine the family sitting to watch TV and they're all wearing those stylish specs.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 You can just imagine the family sitting to watch TV and they're all wearing those stylish specs. They did this with some series here in Denmark. It worked to an extent - thing looked like they "popped" out from the screen a little.
Recommended Posts