Is 3D dead already?

[JonathonWally]

I hope so, wearing special glasses to watch TV or a movie is lame.

Say I go buy a 3D tv, now I have to go buy some 3d glasses for everyone to watch too.

3D Football games, interesting in theory, but if I have 10 people over for the game, I need 10 pairs of the glasses? GTFO!

 

[Skywalker]

I think the studios, as is typical for them, have oversaturated the market with rushed 2D-to-3D conversions instead of doing things properly and waiting to put out movies designed for and filmed with the new technology pioneered by Avatar. Instead they just went after the immediate profit, which has burned out a lot of people, when if they'd taken their time and been more patient with the format, they'd have ended up making more money in the long run.

 

[Sephiroth]

I don't mind the 3d glasses, I do mind the extra $2 per ticket, but going to the theater for me is usually just a 2 or 3 time a year thing/special occasion thing anyways, I don't see 3D going away again save for an economical or natural disaster, give the 3Dtv 8 or 9 years to go through the same thing the HDTV went and is still going through, maybe less if they can piggyback the expansion of 3d off of the expansion of High Def, but it's still going to take two or three generations of 3Dtv to get the price more palatable and to overcome the lag of the 3Dtv glasses

 

[Harvey]

3D television that requires glasses is too cumbersome for my tastes. And it doesn't encourage channel surfing between 2D and 3D channels, either. Too much of a bother (and too expensive) for the next five years, maybe longer, depending on the development and cost of technology.

 

[Level 2 Diagnostic]

Hey, remember those threads from not too long ago where people were talking about how 3-D was OMG!!!TEH FUTURE!!! and anyone who disagreed was a backwards-thinking curmudgeonly luddite senior citizen? What a difference four months make!

http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=120369

Of particular amusement is how some of the people who were the biggest rah-rah supporters of 3-D back in that thread are now complaining about how 3-D is overused. What happened, guys? I thought it was the next big thing!

 

[captcalhoun]

i saw Shrek in 3D because my fleapit wasn't showing it in 2D. i saw TS3 in 2D cuz they were. i resented paying an extra £2 for 3D. i fully intend to see Pirates 4, Transformers 3, Thor and Captain America in 2D. (and KFP2 if i get to it)

 

[The Lensman]

3D gimmickry? Hell I went to see Inception, sat in some red seats and was aked by an usher to see my ticket. Where upon he asked me to move one row down to the black seats. When I asked what the deal was, he said the red seats cost 17.00 dollars...I was like WTF?!?

When the movie started I saw why....it's the next gimmicky bullshit....the seats move. Seriously....I guess if you're watching a car, and it turns sharply left, the seats do that...or make some kind of vibration. Ditto for explosions, etc.

I was rolling my eyes that anyone would pay 17.00 for that! But hey, it's the new "thing".

 

[Admiral_Young]

I'm glad that destructive posted the list of those films...yeah we just have started getting the bulk of the 3D films out, it will be interesting to see which one of the natural 3D films will be successful out of the ones just reshot with 3D like "Clash of the Titans" was. It's not dead, just hasn't really started yet.

As for why hollywood jumped on the fad so quickly...Skywalker touched on it briefly...they saw the success that Avatar was and decided that this was the way to go thinking the audience dug the 3D experience without really understanding why Cameron used it in the first place. I personally don't like it and will try seeing the films in non 3D if that's possible and I think this is a fad that will go away after a year or so. Really though it'll depend on the box office of the films coming out over the next couple of years weather or not it continues. It's far from dead.

 

[Dream]

Cats and Dogs 2 3D was a huge flop thankfully. People are starting to realize bad movies are still bad even when they are shown in 3D.

 

[Starkers]

I don't see the point of 3D, and to be honest didnt see the point months ago. I saw Avatar and, for me, the 3D didn't make it feel immersive, if anything I found it jarring and it kept reminding me that I was watching a film. Plus I find it tiring on my eyes for some reason.

At least Avatar was specifically made for 3D though, Clash of the Titans was just terrible, by all accounts a better film in 2D but it just wasn't available in 2D when we saw it.

Did manage to see Toystory 3 in 2D, although I'm less bothered about it with cg/animated films.

 

[FPAlpha]

Additionally the technology is still not user friendly.

You have to wear cheap glasses at the cinema which are not always comfortable and, at least me, you get a slight headache after a while (which i hear is not uncommon).

Couple that together with bad movies (Clash of the Titans was one of the worst movies i've seen in a long time) and you are bound to hit a brick wall.

See you in 10-20 years when the tech has been improved.

 

[Trekker4747]

I do NOT understand the love-fest Hollywood has had for 3-D this go-round. Didn't they learn their lesson when it was first possible decades ago? I just really don't see the point. It's a stupid gimmick for which a story has to be either specifically tailored from the beginning, or else elements must be shoehorned into the story to take advantage of the effect. Either way, it weakens storytelling, which is the heart and soul of moviemaking.

Avatar over the course of the end of last year and the begining of this year made a little over 2 BIllion dollars. Obviously it did that being in 3D, ergo...

 

[Lonemagpie]

I strongly believe that it will be nothing more than a fad until they find a way to get it to work without glasses.

This.

Otherwise, it's just a fad that comes around every generation - the mid-50s, the mid-80s, the mid-2000s...

3DTV will die even quicker, so long as it depends on battery-powered glasses.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I think the studios, as is typical for them, have oversaturated the market with rushed 2D-to-3D conversions instead of doing things properly and waiting to put out movies designed for and filmed with the new technology pioneered by Avatar. Instead they just went after the immediate profit, which has burned out a lot of people, when if they'd taken their time and been more patient with the format, they'd have ended up making more money in the long run.

This is what I was going to post.

The 3D used in Avatar is miles beyond the crappy post-production 3D conversions most other movies are getting.

I think Avatar's 3D style has a bright future. People are likely already getting sick of the shitty "converted" 3D movies, though.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

On average, Toy Story 3 pulled in $27,000 for every theater showing the movie in 3-D, and $28,000 for every one that showed it flat. In other words, the net effect of showing Woody, Buzz, and friends in full stereo depth was negative 5 percent. The format was losing money.

I don't understand this, if the movie wasn't in 3-D, those $27,000 worth of viewers might have bought 2-D tickets worth $20,000 or whatever.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Yeah the glasses are gonna have to be improved if they want me to continue giving them my money. While watching "Avatar" I kept adjusting them so they wouldn't irritate me which they did. I was distracted by them half the movie.

 

[Saul]

3D died more than 20 years ago from what I remember.

 

[Pindar]

I already need to wear glasses, that means I have to wear two pairs at the moment to watch a 3D film.

Avatar did look nice at points, but the headache and balancing two pairs of glasses coupled with the price hike for the ticket... not worth the hassle for the novelty.

I will be interested to see how well the new DS works.

 

[JarodRussell]

I think the studios, as is typical for them, have oversaturated the market with rushed 2D-to-3D conversions instead of doing things properly and waiting to put out movies designed for and filmed with the new technology pioneered by Avatar. Instead they just went after the immediate profit, which has burned out a lot of people, when if they'd taken their time and been more patient with the format, they'd have ended up making more money in the long run.

This is what I was going to post.

The 3D used in Avatar is miles beyond the crappy post-production 3D conversions most other movies are getting.

I think Avatar's 3D style has a bright future. People are likely already getting sick of the shitty "converted" 3D movies, though.

I am reminded of the times when they hand-colored b/w movies. Same thing. Of course 3D conversion is utter shyte.
When directors think they need to throw stuff at you to get the best out of 3D, then it's just the same as when they made everything uber-colorful in the early days of colored movies and colored television. The Adventures of Robin Hood, anyone? Or... perhaps... Star Trek: The Original Series?

 

[kathryn i am]

I already need to wear glasses, that means I have to wear two pairs at the moment to watch a 3D film.

Avatar did look nice at points, but the headache and balancing two pairs of glasses coupled with the price hike for the ticket... not worth the hassle for the novelty.

Agreed! Annoying, headache-inducing movie experience? No thank you!