3-D vs. Us!

Posted by Cliff Robertson on Wednesday, April 7, 2010

The new 3-D movies promise audiences with an enhanced entertainment experience, but some are just finding it just annoying.  There are between 2% and 12% of the population that can’t see 3-D due to blindness in one eye or mild binocular disorder.  Some people will leave from screenings early because of headaches and dizziness.

Sure the 3-D effects were amazing in Avatar, but after all the pizzazz you’re left with a weak plot.  3-D didn’t help with the storytelling.

Right now, there is a battle for the 3-D space in the movie theaters.  The new releases are pushing out the older releases for good or bad. 

Yes, there has been giant leaps made in the 3-D process, but the studios are fooling themselves if they think they have found a new way to lure audiences.  The concept of a 3-D movie is a very old gimmick.  1915 was the year of the first commercial release of a 3-D movie: Moving Picture World. A critic of the time wrote: “Images shimmered like reflections on a lake and in its present form the method couldn't be commercial because it detracts from the plot.”  The same could be said of any of the new 3-D releases. 

If it doesn’t improve the story telling: don’t do it!

The remake of Clash of the Titans is disappointing movie goers with its less than best 3-D effects.  It was shot in 2-D and then reprocessed for 3-D, giving it a pop-up book look.  There’s talk that Warner Brothers will do the same to the next Harry Potter movie!

Avatar’s first home release will be the 2-D version.  The 3-D home market isn’t stable enough for a large scale home 3-D release of a movie such as Avatar.

So, like so many movies that were in 3-D in the theater, it’ll take years for Avatar to be seen again in 3-D.



null

3-D vs. Us!

Posted by Cliff Robertson on Wednesday, April 7, 2010

The new 3-D movies promise audiences with an enhanced entertainment experience, but some are just finding it just annoying.  There are between 2% and 12% of the population that can’t see 3-D due to blindness in one eye or mild binocular disorder.  Some people will leave from screenings early because of headaches and dizziness.

Sure the 3-D effects were amazing in Avatar, but after all the pizzazz you’re left with a weak plot.  3-D didn’t help with the storytelling.

Right now, there is a battle for the 3-D space in the movie theaters.  The new releases are pushing out the older releases for good or bad. 

Yes, there has been giant leaps made in the 3-D process, but the studios are fooling themselves if they think they have found a new way to lure audiences.  The concept of a 3-D movie is a very old gimmick.  1915 was the year of the first commercial release of a 3-D movie: Moving Picture World. A critic of the time wrote: “Images shimmered like reflections on a lake and in its present form the method couldn't be commercial because it detracts from the plot.”  The same could be said of any of the new 3-D releases. 

If it doesn’t improve the story telling: don’t do it!

The remake of Clash of the Titans is disappointing movie goers with its less than best 3-D effects.  It was shot in 2-D and then reprocessed for 3-D, giving it a pop-up book look.  There’s talk that Warner Brothers will do the same to the next Harry Potter movie!

Avatar’s first home release will be the 2-D version.  The 3-D home market isn’t stable enough for a large scale home 3-D release of a movie such as Avatar.

So, like so many movies that were in 3-D in the theater, it’ll take years for Avatar to be seen again in 3-D.



null

Monster Menagerie


Cliff Robertson I'm a cartoonist who has many interest namely old time monsters and scary fun. I made this website to share creepy-fun stuff.
Make a Free Website with Yola.