@ChunkyBitz You're just not visiting the right theater. There's some things that go flying in Tijuana you might find interesting . . . right at 'yer face. But, seriously, just not a fan of 3D, it mutilates the art-form.
@Headly My wife used to go to the midnight showing every week in costume . . . Damn but she did make a very nice looking Magenta. Oh Hell, now I'm going to have to go nudge her awake . . . I'll be right back - in three to five minutes. HA!
@joajo Now that it has won best animated feature, I'm sure it will be coming to Broadway soon . . . but I really don't understand your question / point, as Big Hero 6 was not released only in "3D" theatrically. You didn't HAVE to choose to see it in "3D" . . . .
@Pavlov You said, "If you want to watch a story in 3D, go see live theater." Well, I wanted to see Big Hero 6 in 3D. I also want to see all the other 3D movies, in 3D. So, if I follow your advice, just how am I supposed to see "Avengers: Age of Ultron" at live theater?
I think 3D is a gimmick. It actually gives me a headache (even when wearing the glasses, lol), it's more expensive and I think movies look just fine in 2D.
@jsh139 My (least) favorite was being forced to see one of the Hobbit films in 3D (which, reinforced the gimmick angle, the only 3D bits were like… ahhh a butterfly in your face for no reason!)… aside from paying more for this headache-inducing experience, we actually had to sit through more ads as well. The theatre manager came out to all of us in line to tell us how special it was that we got to watch said ads, and the bonus ads were not even of normal advertising caliber… it was like the first five minutes of Star Trek or some shit. Fucking hate going to the (movie) theatre.
@brhfl I like going to the theater, I just don't like paying extra for something that's gonna give me a headache and doesn't enhance my experience. They offered those Hobbit movies in some wacky high framerate, too. I passed on that as well.
It's gimmicky when it doesn't have to be. It's fine when everything is at a distance, the 3D gives dimension and texture to the scene, but just when you think 3D has grown up, they stick something right up your nose (the aforementioned butterflies, e.g.)! When they do this, your eyes focus close-in, and you lose the object, and the 3D illusion is broken. It's funny film-makers don't notice or realize this; it's like that freeze-frame pan effect from Lost In Space (circa 2000) or that stupid, low-frequency groan that you keep hearing the sound engineers use to tell you something is big (since 2011-ish, but in decline). Except they're still doing the same, broken thing with 3D since the 1950s. They never learn.
@JonT Depending on how near or far away what I was looking at was, one eye or the other would focus and the other one would just drift off on its own, Not THAT bad, but yeah, same principle. Had it corrected a couple years ago though. They cut all the muscle holding both eyeballs in place, aligned them both and restitched, like aligning a headlight. Sleep tight everyone!
We discovered with Avatar that my wife gets sick in 3D movies. I love 3D but would much rather her company. I'll go to an occasional "guy" movie with some buddies or if she happens to have something going on (like work) when I have time off, I'll catch whatever's 3D and decent in the cheap theater or maybe something that's 3D and supposed to be really good in the regular theater. The cool thing is that the local cheap theaters typically have at least one 3D offering. This is our regular: Cinemark Movies 10 Plano
"Hugo" worked in 3D. Martin Scorsese wanted to do it right, and I think he succeeded.
"Gravity" was awesome in 3D; I can't imagine seeing it in any other way.
Watching the minions in "Despicable Me" at the end try to outdo each other at getting farther from the edge (closer to the audience) was really funny and a good use of 3D.
@brhfl I'm not that anti 3d anymore. Its just an annoying $3 markup for a mildly poorer experience. Nowhere near as bad as when they downgraded most screens by me to Lie-max
@enoch As long as you and enough others pay to view it, they''ll still make it - it has nothing to do with opinion and everything to do with capitalism. 3D sucks balls.
@enoch Sure there is, if theaters only show things in 3D I get a worse experience. It's just darker and more expensive in my case. So screw 3D, kill it with fire! (Or you could buy me an Oculus Rift and some software that's out there to help train my eyes to see 3D now that I had the surgical correction.)
@TellarHK Yup, the more people push for shitty-ass 3D, the harder it is for us who aren't in major metro areas with bounties of theatres to see movies the normal way. Where I am, if a movie is released in 3D… that's probably my only option. Quit ruining it for me, @enoch.
My wife actually gets headaches from 3d, so I've had to make her 2d glasses. You actually can by them online here: http://www.2d-glasses.com/ (not my site, just posting in case people have similar problems)
@Pavlov Except that many, not all, but many are conformest. An incridably high percentage of people (read most) that I talk to and say they "hate" 3D, have never seen a 3D movie!
@brhfl It is extremely rare that a theater has the tech for 3D, but won't show it in 2D. However I do agree, we should push away from "shitty-ass 3D". However, good quality 3D, is a great experience for many. I don't care if you don't want to see it. Please don't. 3D bashing is the "cool" thing to do, and sadly, many blindly follow.
@enoch about 70% of the showings in my local theater are now 3d, making my options for finding a time severely limited. You want to watch 3d in your own home, go ahead, but I'm not happy about them taking nice imax screen, cutting them down to their new liemax size, and charging me extra for the privilege.
@MrGlass I would be very content to watch 3D in my home only, as its better 3D anyway. My frustration stems from 'having' to order from Europe to even get a 3D copy! Now as for imax, I get your frustration there. However, for an average movie, the resolution isn't there for the large true imax screen anyway. One thing we can agree on, these are real problems, and we need to fight for our rights to have the movie's the way our forefathers would of intended us to watch them.
@enoch It's not blindly following when people have seen films in 3D and realize they hate the experience. And while you may think it's extremely rare, my experience tells me otherwise. Even if the theater here does show the normal version, it's like one time, at 2, on a workday or something.
@enoch If you have any reliable European sources for 3-D programming, I'd love to get the link. I'm with you every step of the way on this debate. Even about half of my photography is 3-D. And I'm bummed that while my Toshiba 3-D unit works great, I can't find any newer 32" 3-D TVs if something happens to this one.
@editorkid I bought "Sammy's Adventure", surprisingly good movie plus incredible 3D, from Hong Kong through ebay. Otherwise, I have been purchasing through amazon's uk store. David Attenborough's "Kingdom of Plant" as well as "Micro Monsters" would both likely apeal to a fellow stereographer. I also purchased "Frozen", "Cars" and "Planes" all through uk. Looks like I'll be ordering "Big Hero 6" through them as well. I guess you will just have to go bigger on the TV. How sad is that!
@TheCO2 My father lived in Colfax for years. To me, Des Moines seems a lot like Omaha 20 years ago. And I really like Omaha now, just not in winter. And no, I don't live there.
@Pavlov I lived in Omaha from '88 - '91 and yes, there are a lot of similarities. @enoch I wouldn't have gone to Omaha to see any other movies, but Top Gun is my favorite.
I've only seen 2 3-D movies: Captain EO (during its original run at Epcot) and The Hobbit. I had no issues with Captain EO, but The Hobbit gave me a headache. Playing in 3-D mode on a 3DS also gives me a headache. I do have an astigmatism now that I may not have had way back when; perhaps that influences it?
(Pretty much the only thing I remember from Captain EO, other than it starred Michael Jackson, is the meteor that came straight at the viewer.)
@MsELizardBeth Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, released July 15, 2009. Filmed in 2D at 2.39:1 ratio. Most of the film was shown in 2D (as intended). However, IMAX 3D theaters presented a 70mm print with 15 minutes of footage converted into 3D.
Technically all movies are 3D since you can measure the height and width of the image and the length of time it takes to play. So shouldn't the ones you need special glasses to watch be called 4D?
If you want to watch a story in 3D, go see live theater.
@Pavlov But they don't usually throw things directly at your face in live theater. For that, you need to watch a 3D movie.
@ChunkyBitz You're just not visiting the right theater. There's some things that go flying in Tijuana you might find interesting . . . right at 'yer face. But, seriously, just not a fan of 3D, it mutilates the art-form.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-544906-why-3d-sucks-balls-and-the-science-behind-it.html
@Pavlov The Rocky Horror Picture Show has parts in 3D
@Headly My wife used to go to the midnight showing every week in costume . . . Damn but she did make a very nice looking Magenta. Oh Hell, now I'm going to have to go nudge her awake . . . I'll be right back - in three to five minutes. HA!
@Pavlov I was always a Janet myself. Got cold at the outdoor screenings, however…
On topic, fuck 3D.
@brhfl Dammit, Janet.
@ChunkyBitz A new generation of cooking shows is born.
@Pavlov OK. So tell me where I can see Big Hero 6 at a live theater.
@joajo Now that it has won best animated feature, I'm sure it will be coming to Broadway soon . . . but I really don't understand your question / point, as Big Hero 6 was not released only in "3D" theatrically. You didn't HAVE to choose to see it in "3D" . . . .
@Pavlov You said, "If you want to watch a story in 3D, go see live theater." Well, I wanted to see Big Hero 6 in 3D. I also want to see all the other 3D movies, in 3D. So, if I follow your advice, just how am I supposed to see "Avengers: Age of Ultron" at live theater?
@joajo
Srsly?
Too literal much?
I think 3D is a gimmick. It actually gives me a headache (even when wearing the glasses, lol), it's more expensive and I think movies look just fine in 2D.
@jsh139 My (least) favorite was being forced to see one of the Hobbit films in 3D (which, reinforced the gimmick angle, the only 3D bits were like… ahhh a butterfly in your face for no reason!)… aside from paying more for this headache-inducing experience, we actually had to sit through more ads as well. The theatre manager came out to all of us in line to tell us how special it was that we got to watch said ads, and the bonus ads were not even of normal advertising caliber… it was like the first five minutes of Star Trek or some shit. Fucking hate going to the (movie) theatre.
@brhfl I like going to the theater, I just don't like paying extra for something that's gonna give me a headache and doesn't enhance my experience. They offered those Hobbit movies in some wacky high framerate, too. I passed on that as well.
@jsh139 Get off your lawn?
@DaveInSoCal Damn whipper-snappers.
Saw Gravity in IMAX 3D and that was the perfect way to watch that movie. It was stunning. No other movies have made sense to watch in 3D.
@pepsiwine I want to see the Planet Earth documentary in IMAX.
@pepsiwine Gravity was great in 3D, I'll give you that.
It's gimmicky when it doesn't have to be. It's fine when everything is at a distance, the 3D gives dimension and texture to the scene, but just when you think 3D has grown up, they stick something right up your nose (the aforementioned butterflies, e.g.)! When they do this, your eyes focus close-in, and you lose the object, and the 3D illusion is broken. It's funny film-makers don't notice or realize this; it's like that freeze-frame pan effect from Lost In Space (circa 2000) or that stupid, low-frequency groan that you keep hearing the sound engineers use to tell you something is big (since 2011-ish, but in decline). Except they're still doing the same, broken thing with 3D since the 1950s. They never learn.
I can't actually see in 3D. Seriously. This is a thing. Only one eye works at a time.
@TellarHK
…
no offense…
@JonT Depending on how near or far away what I was looking at was, one eye or the other would focus and the other one would just drift off on its own, Not THAT bad, but yeah, same principle. Had it corrected a couple years ago though. They cut all the muscle holding both eyeballs in place, aligned them both and restitched, like aligning a headlight. Sleep tight everyone!
@TellarHK
I'll only see it if it was shot in native stereo, not a conversion.
We discovered with Avatar that my wife gets sick in 3D movies. I love 3D but would much rather her company. I'll go to an occasional "guy" movie with some buddies or if she happens to have something going on (like work) when I have time off, I'll catch whatever's 3D and decent in the cheap theater or maybe something that's 3D and supposed to be really good in the regular theater. The cool thing is that the local cheap theaters typically have at least one 3D offering. This is our regular: Cinemark Movies 10 Plano
And that's right. They still do dollar movies every Tuesday. I think it's a buck fifty regularly.
"Hugo" worked in 3D. Martin Scorsese wanted to do it right, and I think he succeeded.
"Gravity" was awesome in 3D; I can't imagine seeing it in any other way.
Watching the minions in "Despicable Me" at the end try to outdo each other at getting farther from the edge (closer to the audience) was really funny and a good use of 3D.
How about: When I can't find a showing in 2D
@MrGlass At that point I wait for the DVD/stream/TV edit/whatever…
@brhfl I'm not that anti 3d anymore. Its just an annoying $3 markup for a mildly poorer experience. Nowhere near as bad as when they downgraded most screens by me to Lie-max
@MrGlass This should have been a choice in the pole. I agree.
A message to those of you that can not see in 3D, or do not enjoy 3D for whatever reason.
Stop the anti-3D evangelism! There is no gain to you by ruining it for the rest of us that love 3D.
@enoch As long as you and enough others pay to view it, they''ll still make it - it has nothing to do with opinion and everything to do with capitalism. 3D sucks balls.
@enoch Sure there is, if theaters only show things in 3D I get a worse experience. It's just darker and more expensive in my case. So screw 3D, kill it with fire! (Or you could buy me an Oculus Rift and some software that's out there to help train my eyes to see 3D now that I had the surgical correction.)
@enoch except that it sucks, lol. honestly the only really good 3d i've seen is at disneyland
@TellarHK Yup, the more people push for shitty-ass 3D, the harder it is for us who aren't in major metro areas with bounties of theatres to see movies the normal way. Where I am, if a movie is released in 3D… that's probably my only option. Quit ruining it for me, @enoch.
My wife actually gets headaches from 3d, so I've had to make her 2d glasses. You actually can by them online here: http://www.2d-glasses.com/ (not my site, just posting in case people have similar problems)
@brhfl you and your fancy theaters "where I live". .. I have to go 30 miles to the next county. ..
@Pavlov Except that many, not all, but many are conformest. An incridably high percentage of people (read most) that I talk to and say they "hate" 3D, have never seen a 3D movie!
@brhfl It is extremely rare that a theater has the tech for 3D, but won't show it in 2D. However I do agree, we should push away from "shitty-ass 3D". However, good quality 3D, is a great experience for many. I don't care if you don't want to see it. Please don't. 3D bashing is the "cool" thing to do, and sadly, many blindly follow.
@MrGlass I'm not asking your wife (or you or anyone) to watch 3D. We can live in a world with both.
@enoch about 70% of the showings in my local theater are now 3d, making my options for finding a time severely limited. You want to watch 3d in your own home, go ahead, but I'm not happy about them taking nice imax screen, cutting them down to their new liemax size, and charging me extra for the privilege.
@enoch It's not our fault people are conformist lemmings...
@MrGlass That's cool. We'll have to give these a try. My wife has the same problem.
@MrGlass I would be very content to watch 3D in my home only, as its better 3D anyway. My frustration stems from 'having' to order from Europe to even get a 3D copy! Now as for imax, I get your frustration there. However, for an average movie, the resolution isn't there for the large true imax screen anyway. One thing we can agree on, these are real problems, and we need to fight for our rights to have the movie's the way our forefathers would of intended us to watch them.
@enoch It's not blindly following when people have seen films in 3D and realize they hate the experience. And while you may think it's extremely rare, my experience tells me otherwise. Even if the theater here does show the normal version, it's like one time, at 2, on a workday or something.
@enoch If you have any reliable European sources for 3-D programming, I'd love to get the link. I'm with you every step of the way on this debate. Even about half of my photography is 3-D. And I'm bummed that while my Toshiba 3-D unit works great, I can't find any newer 32" 3-D TVs if something happens to this one.
@editorkid I bought "Sammy's Adventure", surprisingly good movie plus incredible 3D, from Hong Kong through ebay. Otherwise, I have been purchasing through amazon's uk store. David Attenborough's "Kingdom of Plant" as well as "Micro Monsters" would both likely apeal to a fellow stereographer. I also purchased "Frozen", "Cars" and "Planes" all through uk. Looks like I'll be ordering "Big Hero 6" through them as well. I guess you will just have to go bigger on the TV. How sad is that!
3D and iMax. Oh yeah. I just wish they would come out with 3D glasses that fits over regular glasses.
3D makes me VERY motion sick. I avoid it.
@AnnaB - ^This. Had to leave Avatar ~20-30 minutes in - I was sick for 3 days.
I choose movies at random.
@chr for example?
@editemily http://www.randomlists.com/random-movies
@editemily whatever's playing when I show-up. I never look up times.
Only when the 2D version isn't showing at a convenient time.
@jbrown1114 Same, all depends on how the show times line up. I don't care too much one way or the other.
I always watch in 3D when available. More often then not, the audience in 3D shows are smaller and better behaved then the 2D shows.
I've only seen a couple movies in 3D. The most notable included a 2 hour drive, to Omaha, to see Top Gun in 3D, on IMAX.
TOTALLY WORTH IT!
@theco2 Move closer to civilization? Where do you live, Grand Island?
@Pavlov I'm in Des Moines. Maybe that's not civilization.
@TheCO2 My father lived in Colfax for years. To me, Des Moines seems a lot like Omaha 20 years ago. And I really like Omaha now, just not in winter. And no, I don't live there.
@TheCO2 I know your pain. I drive 2 hours to Wichita to see IMAX 3D. Yes, totally worth it.
@Pavlov I lived in Omaha from '88 - '91 and yes, there are a lot of similarities. @enoch I wouldn't have gone to Omaha to see any other movies, but Top Gun is my favorite.
I've only seen 2 3-D movies: Captain EO (during its original run at Epcot) and The Hobbit. I had no issues with Captain EO, but The Hobbit gave me a headache. Playing in 3-D mode on a 3DS also gives me a headache. I do have an astigmatism now that I may not have had way back when; perhaps that influences it?
(Pretty much the only thing I remember from Captain EO, other than it starred Michael Jackson, is the meteor that came straight at the viewer.)
I've been to ONE movie in 3D.... though, I've only seen one movie since ... 2009... so there is that. ..
@MsELizardBeth Avatar?
@Pavlov ummm... i think it was a Harry Potter movie?
@MsELizardBeth Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, released July 15, 2009. Filmed in 2D at 2.39:1 ratio. Most of the film was shown in 2D (as intended). However, IMAX 3D theaters presented a 70mm print with 15 minutes of footage converted into 3D.
I'm so sorry.
@Pavlov this wasn't at an imax. I'm not much of a movie watcher. Into the woods was worth breaking my dry spell.
@MsELizardBeth There's a pretty short list of 3D 2009 movies, just wondered what you may have seen.
@Pavlov it may have been 08 or maybe early 2010? I know it was before fall 2010.
Never, none of the 3D methods work for my crappy eyeballs.
I've only seen a couple of 3D movies- Harry Potter & Gravity.
Absolutely never. Don't live anywhere near close enough to a theater that shows 3d movies.
It's all about timing. If 3D is more convenient to my procrastination-heavy schedule, 3D it will be!
I do like HFR though. More of that please.
Technically all movies are 3D since you can measure the height and width of the image and the length of time it takes to play. So shouldn't the ones you need special glasses to watch be called 4D?
@lost1 I believe that's Muppet Vision.
0% 3-D is great in 5-15 minute doses.