Movies in 3D - largely SHIT

[Badger]

Gravity and Avatar stand out but as a general rule they don't do it for me. As soon as the camera moves quickly they seem to lose focus and be tricky to follow

These are the only 2 films I've seen in 3D and thought it was worth it. All the other films had it as a gimmick and it didn't add anything to it, in fact I would say some films are made worse by being in 3D.

Also, I wear glasses. So I have to wear TWO PAIRS of glasses at 3D screenings, making me look even more of a GONK than usual. So that's a personal gripe with 3D.

This is the most annoying thing for me too, they look ridiculous and aren't exactly comfortable after wearing them for 2 hours.

 

[Oscar]

My biggest issue is the glasses make the movie so damn dark. The ones converted to 3D being particularly bad.

Generally I think going to the cinema offers very poor value for money these days - even without the extra cost of 3D. That has always seemed strange to me anyway - a bit like charging you extra because the film is two hours rather than 90mins long.

The presentation in cinemas is so poor now too. I took issue with Odeon when I went to see Gravity for whacking the really bright maintenance lights on as soon as the final scene of the film was on and before the titles and was told this was now policy due to health and safety. I know it's not a big deal but it's yet another annoyance the paying punters have to put up with.

 

[bn1&bn3 Albion]

Not seen many 3D films because they tend to focus more on visual effects than the actual story but Avatar was definitely a stand out for me.

 

[Mellotron]

Another issue I have with 3D films is it constantly ruins the illusion for me - i.e. I'm constantly reminded that I'm sitting in a room looking at a screen. Whether that's the 3D effects themselves of the actual glasses I'm not sure, but the best part of watching a really great movie is that you forget completely where you are for 90 mins or so and immerse yourself in the world of the film. 3D puts up a barrier to that for me.

 

[Itman-dan]

Most I have seen I wish I just went and saw the 2d version and saved a few quid. I want to add despicable me and despicable me 2 to the list of good 3d films.

 

[Puppet Master]

It works sometimes but seen so many films now where the 3D just seems really forced and gimmicky (and expensive) that I completely forgot it was even in 3D. Life of Pi was one. What was the point?

 

[beardy gull]

Gravity and, trust me on this, Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted are the best 3d films I have seen (i.e. films that make the best use of 3d). Avatar was ok but that MAY have been the novelty factor. Everything else meh. A lot seem to have it tagged on almost as an afterthought. Still choose a 3d screening if it's available though.

 

[Notters]

Gives me motion sickness so would have to take travel tablets before going to the cinema, which make me fall asleep!

 

[Notters]

Another issue I have with 3D films is it constantly ruins the illusion for me - i.e. I'm constantly reminded that I'm sitting in a room looking at a screen. Whether that's the 3D effects themselves of the actual glasses I'm not sure, but the best part of watching a really great movie is that you forget completely where you are for 90 mins or so and immerse yourself in the world of the film. 3D puts up a barrier to that for me.

I think this happens to me for all films, which is why I'm not massively into films unless there's an element of reality about them.

 

[Goldstone1976]

I stick to 2D showings (with the exception of Gravity) where possible. Does that make me Mark Kermode?

Yes. Yes, it does! Me too though.

"We're all the good Doctor"!

 

[symyjym]

Also, I wear glasses. So I have to wear TWO PAIRS of glasses at 3D screenings, making me look even more of a GONK than usual. So that's a personal gripe with 3D.

 

[Acker79]

I can't be bothered to organise my thoughts in to some flowing prose, so some of my views:

-I liked 3D in My Bloody Valentine and Drive Angry. Didn't really notice it much with Gravity. I will watch The Hobbit in 3D, because that's the only way to watch it with HFR.

-I think 3D can work with horror films because they tend to be darker, so if you film it right, the light loss works (i.e. if you want a day scene in 3D you won't ever get it to 100% light, but if you're filming a night scene in 3D, film it at 80%, then the 30% loss would make it 50%* dark, giving you the required darkness for night scenes). Some horror movies are more about making you jump, and flinch, and react to what is on the screen. With 3D an axe flying out of the screen at you plays into that. With horror movies you are constantly reminded you're watching a film, anyway, every time you jump and then turn to the person next to you and laugh at how silly you were for flinching.

(*I know, 30% of 80% isn't 30%, but I was just trying to illustrate a point)

-I don't see what it adds to action films or superhero films or gladiator films etc.

-I prefer 2D versions of most films, but if the only time that works out for other plans (or for my multi-film viewing) is a 3D viewing I will go, especially now the 3D cost is included in the unlimited card.

-In the past I've been fooled. I've been watching one film in 3D, catch a trailer for another that looks like it finally gets 3D and was going to be worth it, then I go watch that film and it just doesn't use 3D that well.

-There also seems to be a thing where a lot of film makers use it to create depth, to back into the screen, but I think if you're going to use 3D it should be coming out of the screen.

-Post production conversion is terrible. It is about making more money by charging extra for tickets and this frivolous addition of conversion 3D turns people off 3D. You go see a film that doesn't need 3D and the 3D added is really bad, and the film was only turned into 3D because the producers recognised it wasn't good enough on its own, means people see a bad film with bad 3D done poorly and so they assume all 3D is that bad, so avoid it with their next cinema visit.

-Gravity may buck the trend, but typically the proportion of a movies viewers that watch the film in 3D is decreasing quite dramatically.

-Each studio should be limited to one 3D movie per year, it forces more thought into which one goes 3D, hopefully saving it for directors who want to use 3D because it fits their vision, and then they will film in 3D with proper 3D cameras.

 

[Rich Suvner]

Gravity and Avatar stand out but as a general rule they don't do it for me. As soon as the camera moves quickly they seem to lose focus and be tricky to follow

Exactly my thoughts. Avatar and Gravity were visually two of the most memorable things I've ever seen in a cinema. IMAX 3D worth every penny in those instances.

 

[Nibble]

I have only ever seen one film in Three Dimensions. The Great Gatsby. It was pretty okay, party scenes looked very good in 3D. Although we did see it in a rather snazzy cinema in Walton on Thames, armchairs, tables, pot of Earl Grey and a lovely Pizza brought over to us by an usherette lady with lots of sweater meat. My boo has rarely been more tickety.

 

[Rich Suvner]

-There also seems to be a thing where a lot of film makers use it to create depth, to back into the screen, but I think if you're going to use 3D it should be coming out of the screen.

Don't agree with this. When done well its like a genuine open doorway to another world. Depth is where 3D has gone from being gimmicky to a more encompassing visual tool

 

[Nibble]

I don't fancy Gravity, it looks very dull and I couldn't watch an hour and a half of watching Clooney cock his head, smirk and half laugh on an exhale or the terror stricken fizog of man-headed sturdy girl Bullock looming out of the darkness at me.

 

[tinx]

The kids love watching 3D movies on our TV at home. I can take it or leave it. That said I am looking forward to the Attenborough doc on new years day when the natural history museum comes alive in 3D. Should be a good showcase to show off what 3D really can do.

 

[Nibble]

3D is a waste of space.

 

[upthealbion1970]

Anything Attenborough is stand out good in 3d, as was dr who. Few good 3d ps3 games, but on the whole its a bit of a gimmick.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I have seen quite a few films in 3D at the cinema, but that is because I have an unlimited card for Cineworld so there is no extra cost to me to see the 3D version instead of the 2D.

I find, like all films, there are some that are good and work really well in 3D and others some which are poor and seem more interested in having things coming out of the screen towards the viewer than a plot, etc - these films also tend to be poor in 2D too so I hope that once the novelty wears off, film companies shy away from this and just go back to making a movie as they would if it was a 2D version but just happens to be available to watch in 3D.

The best 3D film i've seen was probably the life of Pi and the worst was probably the Resident evil film that they make especially as a 3D film (afterlife?) because of the reasons above.

ps - I didn't think that much of Gravity as a film because I thought it was just a typical Hollywood type movie of an impending distaster....escape just in the nick of time.....into new impending disaster....escape just in the nick of time ......into new impending disaster ...... etc....