Post by profezzorx on Mar 18, 2014 13:10:53 GMT -5
I saw that earlier as well. The first film I saw in 3D was Beowulf... and it really turned me off of the concept. I don't know if it was more of me just not liking the movie all that much, but it wasn't a good first impression for me for 3D films. Since then, I've only seen a handful of movies in 3D and I'm having trouble remembering which ones they were. One was Disney's A Christmas Carol with Jim Carey. That was actually pretty good. But did it really need to be in 3D? I don't know.
I'm not opposed to it, but if I had the option I would probably say no thanks to the glasses and just watch the movie.
Like you said, I guess it all depends on the content of the movie, and if it warrants a 3D format. Films like Avatar, Pacific Rim, Life of Pi, Finding Nemo, and other films with lots of action or incredibly deep and detailed landscapes certainly deserve it. Films like the LOTR certainly would have benefitted from being shot in 3D, but if it's just an average movie for sake of converting it, then no - that's just an obvious money grab by the studio. Some animated films do well in 3D, but not all. If I were to recommend an animated 3D movie for you to see, it would be The Lion King. I cried when I saw the magnificent job they did with the layering depth of each scene. They even went as far as giving the characters rounded off and dimensional features.
For me, I've made 3D a way of life. I have a 3D phone (HTC EVO 3D), both my television and my PC monitor have 3D capabilities, and I have an extensive collection of 3D movies. So with that said, I'm pretty much in it to win it for the long haul. Even if studios stopped making 3D content, it'll be a good long while before I get rid of mine. To me, it's just a better movie experience, because it envelops you into the movie and gives you that feeling of actually being there. Have there been times when it's irritated my eyes, sure, but I'm either sleepy or I'm distracted by something else going on in the room.