I don't think that very many people actively hate those things. Dislike? Sure. I'm very displeased when something like Twilight becomes successful. It's a sign of a decadent society when something like that passes muster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Museum
I'm blind in my left eye so can't enjoy 3D movies
Fixed
Naw, that's tough man.
5635996
Re: Films in 3D
Flash525
April 29th, 2012 01:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schofield
Small tangent: I like how people bash Avatar for having an almost identical storyline to Pocahontas. These people fail to realise that the movie Pocahontas was based on something that actually happened. So in a way, Avatar is more original than Pocahontas because of the planet it takes place on and the immense amount of lore on that planet.
Heh, it's just a bunch of people that have nothing better to do with their lives than to pick apart films. It's quite sad really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schofield
It sort of seems to me that the majority of people are very displeased when something becomes successful and critically acclaimed. Look at Twilight, I don't actually know why so many people hate it. I don't like it because I'm not a fan of the story, but I don't hate it, I just don't know why so many people do.
Quoted for truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totes
When you sit down and think about it, some things don't make sense. Edward is essentially dead, yet he can impregnate a human? Dafuq is that about? And Bella's choices essentially boil down to, "Do I have sex with the corpse, or the mutt?"
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Totes again."
5643138
Re: Films in 3D
Johngulger
June 4th, 2012 04:02 AM
Now most of Hollywood movies are coming in 3d...
5643147
Re: Films in 3D
Flash525
June 4th, 2012 07:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johngulger
Now most of Hollywood movies are coming in 3d...
Last Years News, Maybe?
5644028
Re: Films in 3D
conquerclub
June 10th, 2012 08:08 PM
My favorite movie in 3D is Avatar.
5647936
Re: Films in 3D
Mr. Matt
July 5th, 2012 05:33 AM
Aside from the discomfort caused by wearing the glasses, the added expense of paying for the ticket / setting up a 3D home cinema, and the resultant loss of clarity, I have one big problem with 3D movies - the effect isn't very good.
When I watch a 3D movie, I find the effect to be analogous to a pop-up book. As in, yes things at the foreground look like they are closer than things in the background, but the objects themselves seem to lack depth, as though they are cardboard cutouts. Perhaps it's just me, but I don't really consider that to be 3D so much as a puppet show.
As a result, I find the 2D version to actually be more visually impressive. Take Avatar, for example. I find it to be much more beautiful in 2D; the clarity, the vibrant colours, the smooth animations, everything works better when you're not distracted by the fact that the blue cat-like aliens are essentially just well-articulated cardboard cutouts. And you do away with the crosstalk, too.
Moreover, I find that many films designed specifically for 3D, much like many films released since CGI became easier to accomplish, are crap. They're designed purely to have as many things shoot out at you. If I wanted to have a thrill ride, frankly, I'd go to Alton Towers.
And last, but not least, 3D movies will completely destroy your eyes if you watch too many of them for too long. That's one of the reasons why Nintendo advise against allowing children under the age of 7 to use the 3DS. From what I've read, 3D movies are essentially trying to force your eyes to focus on things that aren't really there, and it can screw up your depth perception abilities in the long term.
5648370
Re: Films in 3D
okhealthy
July 8th, 2012 08:49 AM
Piranha 3D
Tron: Legacy
i like it, 3D
5648769
Re: Films in 3D
SuperSmeg
July 10th, 2012 07:06 PM
I've seen the following in 3D:
Great movie, horrible 3D = Tron Legacy
Great movie, great 3D = Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Good movie, incredible 3D = Avatar
Awful movie, even worse 3D = Clash Of The Titans
Great movie, awful 3D = Captain America: The First Avenger
Great movie, awful 3D = The Avengers
Fun movie, awful 3D = Transformers: Dark Of The Moon
Basically, 3D is not worth the extra money.
5648860
Re: Films in 3D
Flash525
July 11th, 2012 07:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSmeg
Basically, 3D is not worth the extra money.
I think, unless you're making a film that is generated by heavy computer animation anyway (such as Avatar) then there really is no need for 3D. Producers just throw it on these days to fill their wallets that little bit more, I doubt, in the long-run that it's that much more expensive for them to do, not after it was properly released with Avatar.
If you're making a computer-generated film and have the time to incorporate 3D into the majority (if not all) of the film properly then it works and looks brilliant. Half assed jobs just don't cut it.
5650143
Re: Films in 3D
Warborg
July 19th, 2012 02:59 PM
That's strange, I posted here yesterday. Oh well, here I go again:
I guess I'm the only one but I like 3D movies.
I've been pleased with all of them with on screen depths.
The actually pop out in your face part does needs to improve. Which I think will happen as time goes on.
Movies seen:
Final destination 4 or 5
Clash of the Titans
Iron man 2(I think)
Thor
Avengers
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!