3D vs 2D

[Isi Runasimi]

Which do you prefer when you go to the theater?

I like 3D however, I do not like paying 3D prices. It's kind of silly to pay enormous prices for 3D at the theater I went to considering wherever I put my feet I literally had to try to rip them off *very sticky*, and uncomfortable seats. Oh, I trailed off topic didn't I?

I like 3D because some of the things seem to pop out at you. But I think 3D still has along way to go. At disney in a theater built to show 3D movies, inside the park as a *ride* and not at the theater theater where you go to see movies when you enter, there would be water effects where water would spray at you, wind would blow at you, etc... I went to see AiW in 3D and it did not really seem to have a lot of 3D effects and the things that did come off the screen didn't go right at you like they did at the disney theater ride - Which moved too. I just think 3D currently is in trial phase and it has along way to go. But, I don't like 3D prices.

2D, it's umm... cheap ... 2D... you don't have to wear those glasses. But there's really nothing major between 3D/2D in my opinion..

[Anastasia Kirilovna Marisova]

3D is overrated. If I wanted to watch something fly at me, I'd ask my brother to throw a cup at me. The glasses are distracting and if you take them off then the blurred lines give you headaches. Might as well just go watch a play if you wanted to watch something that was 3D. I can get the same sort of enjoyment out of a movie watching it 2D as I can watching it in 3D. More so, even. It's a waste of money, and most of the theaters near me don't even play the movies in 3D, anyway.

[Isi Runasimi]

I like scary stuff flying at me. I think it would be brilliant to have that in a horror movie type setting. I didn't mind the glasses so much, I mean I put them on and sort of forgot that they were there. The screen did look a little dull when I took them off for a moment to see the difference.

I've only seen Coraline, Up and Alice in Wonderland in 3D. I like just literally remembered a second ago that I've seen 3D movies before. xP. My ticket was 9.50 compared to the usual 6.50 - A sucky difference of three bucks which I could have used for popcorn.

[Reli Kain]

Agreed with the '3D is overrated'. I've seen a couple of 3D movies lately (what with the new craze and all that) and half the time, if not more, you can watch the movie with little or no ill-effects without the glasses. So um yeah. Why am I paying for a 3D movie in 2D?

What makes me sadder is that I actually LIKE 3D - I've seen some good stuff at the IMAX (if any of you know what that is). But the stuff in the theatres at the moment just isn't enhanced by their 3D effects. It's just a gimmick. Nothing feels like it's jumping out at you - in my mind that means the 3D effects are failing.

That's all.

[ryn]

Isi I'm jealous we live in the same state yet your ticket prices are way less than mine. To see a movie in Orlando is 10.00 for a regular movie. 15.50 for IMAX 3D. So considering your 3d prices are still cheaper than my 2d prices I'd watch everything in 3d I like watching movies in 3D much for the same reason I can ride the spiderman ride at universal 3 or 4 times in a row without getting bored. 3D is fun alot of the times the visuals are alot better than 2d by far. Avatar for example I saw both versions in theaters and the 3d versions was visually stunning not even the parts where things popped out at you but just the scenery and stuff....so yeah I'd take 3D hell theres even 3d tv's now so you know alot more things are gonna be 3d shortly.

[Isi Runasimi]

Well you should drive 3 hours my way to see a movie then, Ryn.

I think it will be a few years until every home has a 3D TV in it.

[Anastasia Kirilovna Marisova]

Well. You know.

The only reason why everything is coming out in 3D now is because these 3D TVs exist. Samsung made their little 3D TV then realized that. . . there was barely anything that was 3D out there. So they went to Hollywood and begged everyone to make their movies in 3D and that they would help fund the movie. That way, people would have a reason to buy their TVs.

So there you go.

[Isi Runasimi]

3D is the next thing. Like BETA, to VHS, to DVD, to BLUERAY.

But it will be a long time before every home has one because I see online 9K for a Philips 3D TV. With people losing their homes, cars, etc.. don't think a lot of people would drop that much on a TV. I'll wait till it's perfected because 3D has the potential to be good but I don't think they've reached it yet. *shrugs*

[robbie117]

I just get annoyed because the stupid 3D glasses keep falling off my nose. >.<

Honestly, I can see 3D as the future which will replace 2D film, just as colour film replaced black and white, just because of the added depth perseption it allows, but at the moment I don't think the technology is good enough in your standard theatre. The images can become disorientating and blurry if they are edited too fast, and if they close up too far on an object or character I find I have to remove the glasses to get a clearer image. Again, these are teething problems and the format will improve, but as it is I don't like it.

Besides, it seemed to be used almost exclusively by big Hollywood films as a selling gimick, rather then a technique used for any reason. Most films that use it are filmed first in 2D and then changed at the last moment to 3D at the publishers will, damaging the quality of the film in the process. That'll change someday.

Um, I should say I haven't seen Avatar in 3D, which is meant to be the best. I saw Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans though, and 3D took away from the experience instead of improving it.