It's a variety of things
For the most part, I find 3D either looks the same, or worse. Even when it's the same, occasionally "something pointy" happens, which reminds me I'm watching a 3D film, breaking the immersion.
The Avengers was a great film, but the 3D effects were fucking horrible. Why did I have to pay more for this? (nowhere was showing 2D any more).
The only time I have enjoyed 3D in a film was, oddly, Final Destination 3D. The 3D was only really used to make a gratuitously gory part even more gratuitously gory, which made me laugh quite a lot.
But I probably would've laughed anyway...
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier "...I think it counteracts Hitler's magic...", Mon 23 Jul 2012, 10:27,
Reply)
Interesting.
You're right Avengers in 3D was awful. But that's the only time I've ever really felt ripped off by 3D.
I think it's true what Happy Toast is saying, it's better suited for the big roller coaster movies, sure but I think there is a place for it if it's done well. I mean, in the case of Avatar, it probably made it better because you go 'fuck I'm bored, but ooh isn't it pretty'
And Pixar use it pretty well. Up and Toy Story 3 seemed more subtle, like the 3D was more inward, like a depth of field thing as opposed to stuff leaping out at you. But then by the end you didn't notice it any more so what's the point? Hmm...it's tricky init.
(
presferatu, Mon 23 Jul 2012, 11:14,
Reply)
I found the the addition of a sense of distance across the rainforest
and one propeller flying toward you in Up was not worth the loss of visual fidelity
it was a muddying distraction in Up which was the last thing I wanted during that film
(
HappyToast Groat froth, Mon 23 Jul 2012, 11:28,
Reply)
Well, I didn't think it was that bad.
But then I am blind in one eye so I'm just imagining the 3D usually.
(
presferatu, Mon 23 Jul 2012, 11:37,
Reply)