Can't wait for the 3D fad to be over

I bet people said exactly the same when colour TVs came out to replace B&W, then DVD players to replace VHS, then Blu-Ray players to replace DVD..........:rolleyes:
 
Actually the House of Wax was designed to use the same polarizing system most cinemas use now! The red/blue glasses anaglyph system was rarely used in cinemas. People like my Gran moan they've seen it all before! :D
 
I'd disagree there. I think more and more films are being made with 3D in mind because it's making much more money, plus, they require a special camera. It's all pre-planned to make as much money as possible.

I was in the cinema watching Alice in Wonderland (crap film, by the way) and it was full of people who were clearly only there for the 3D aspect of it.
 
I take it you mean brightness? There's no colour loss! I hear people saying this, but 3D Screens are brighter than the 2D screens to compensate for loss of brightness the glasses cause.


I know people don't like 3D and that's cool but some of the reasons like 'colour loss' don't make sense.
 
I dont get that argument...

With b/w to colour... there was an obvious improvement.... We would all be able to see things in colour, like we see colour in real life... It was logical.

VHS to DVD was logical also because it was a much more stable format and the picture was much clearer.

Same with Blue-ray, much more detailed picture.

Now with 3D... yes we all see the world in 3D... well its actually in about 4d really... But when it comes to TV and entertainment... Well a part from sporting events and CERTAIN movies... It isn't much more than an expensive gimmick. And there's far too much hassle involved in actually having to get the supplied glasses to work with it, especially if you have got a few frienRAB around to watch something... you would need to get a few for them. Then you have to actually wear the bloody things... Which I hate anyways as that is the reason why i wear contacts... So that i wouldnt have to wear any form of glasses except sunglasses.

I mean come on.... Eastenders in 3D? The news? Do I really need to watch a terrorist event in 3D? Isn't it horrific enough seeing it in classical 2d?

Granted, it has brought a bit of excitement back to going to the cinema now. But I really only see 3D as a cinematic medium- Something that works on the big screen with a large audience... Not something that can work on a small 50 inch led screen at home.
 
It's not a fad as such. They've invested too much money into it for it to just disappear.
IMAX hasn't gone away but there is less and less of the "I must see it in IMAX" or "Have you seen it in IMAX it's awesome." Some people see films in IMAX, many more don't.
What is likely to happen is 3D will become an non-event. At the moment it's all new so we have the "WOW!" "Amazing!" "I/You have to see it in 3D!"
As more and more films get released in 3D the novelty will start to wear off. I think there are something like 10 films due for release this year. Once you are getting 5 or 6 a month it wil be seem as another standard way of seeing a film the same way IMAX is.
Some people will still choose to see the standard versions and some will choose to see the IMAX and/or 3D versions, but the "OMG it's in 3D" will be gone as there are just so many 3D films about and so the sparkle of the event will be gone.
 
Thing is though - 3D shouldnt be a spectacle. Since its the way we view the world - it should just appear natural to us. We have trained ourselves to watch stuff in 2D - which in the un-natural state for most people.

Once 3D technology gets over the initial hype - it will simply become one more aspect of our entertainment systems - just like colour, or surround sound did before it.
 
The trouble with 3D, is that like advances in CGI before it, too many films over emphasise this over the rest of the film, both in terms of budget and plot content. This inevitiably results in a number of overblown productions with a clear lack of quality. After all, for all the hype and lovely 3D effects, Avatar was an age old story rehashed for the millionth time...
 
You're right we do see in 3D but there is a big difference between natural 3D and the stuff you get in these films. Technology has a long long way to go to look natural and realistic. Until it does people will notice it and not like it or notice it and praise it.

When I saw AIW there was the trailer for the Dreamworks animation film; How to train a dragon.
I don't like 3D but will happily admit that the 3D worked really well on that, It seems to be when in conjuction with live action it's not at it's strongest at the present, well for me anyway.
 
Well yeah, if all you are talking about is everyday life in 3d.

However i have never been to another planet, to me seeing another world in 3D, and feeling like im actually there on that Alien world, is a spectacle.
Just like if independence day was in 3d, Very little about that movie is real life and mundane, therefore it is unlikely to feel realistic to many of us.
 
In your opinion.

Why is seeing pictures in colour because thats how we see "in real life" any less valid an argument for 3D.

All DVD to blu-ray gave us was a bit more detail - 3D is giving us a whole new dimension.
 
I like 3D films. Recently I've watched Avatar and Alice in Wonderland in 3D and enjoyed them but I haven't seen the 2D versions so can't compare. I even enjoy them enough so be interested in the 3D TV's coming out later in the year - either Sky or Sony bringing them out, can't remember and don't know much about them really, I just like the concept.

BUT my one big peeve with 3D films: the glasses make everything darker! Have you noticed? Why can't they make 3D glasses which clear lenses so the brightness of the picture isn't affected?
 
Back
Top