My wallet still aches when I remember this one.
I went to Alice and Wounderland in 3D, this cost me the best part of £10. The film was utter shite, and seemed to last forever. I also got in trouble from my friend for saying I felt 3D was pointless and detracts from films.
(Mong goose, Thu 23 Sep 2010, 22:19, 12 replies)

3D is pointless and detracts from films...
Glad someone else thinks so too.
( vix0r was not Matthew on, Thu 23 Sep 2010, 23:06, closed)

A friend once told me somthing an American film critic said, which perfectly sums up 3D for me.

When you watch a film, be it action, horror, romance, comedy or anything else, your going to escape from your world and be emersed in anouther. When you get a 3D effect, it breaks that emersion, rips you from that outher world by reminding you you are sat in a theater watching a movie.

True words on the irony of effects ment to increase the experience. There's also the fact that 3D reduces the colour of a film by 30%.
(Mong goose, Thu 23 Sep 2010, 23:30, closed)

Agreed!
Although if it's not overplayed (no gee-whiz, look at that coming out at us) it can give a good sense of scale. It worked in Avatar, I thought, because of the nature of the huge landscapes and deep perspectives. But generally I agree, a pointless gimmick.

The same for HD: I never sit at home thinking "Hm, this would be so much better if the picture resolution was higher". In fact, if you're aware of the screen, it's clearly a shit film/program, because you haven't been absorbed.
(moon monkey is busy making memories worth repressing, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 10:40, closed)

Avatar is about the only film ever that's used 3D subtly
rather than flinging things at the screen in the cheapest manner imaginable, which is why it worked well.

If all films did the 3D effect that calmly, Mong Goose's comment above would be a bit like saying "when you watch a film in colour, it breaks that immersion by reminding you you are sat in a theatre watching a movie".
(Falstaff's Spiritual Successor, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 12:30, closed)

Agreed
3D is pointless! I only went to Alice in Wonderland as about 30 seconds of it were filmed in the port down the road from me... and what a pile of wank the film was.. biggest waste of £15 (took the missus who hated it) ever
(macomateo is procrastinating on, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 9:25, closed)

Definitely
3D works well in films where you have a lot of objects flying around the screen, like all those 3D nature documentaries about marine life, or Avatar. It fails completely in conventional films because the effect is too subtle to make you feel part of the action but just noticeable enough to give you a headache.

Not even the best 3D in the world would have saved Alice in Wonderland, though, as it was a load of old monkey bollocks.
( .Yeti. El amor en los tiempos del cólera, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 11:19, closed)

^all the above^
Pirahna 3-D was a perfect example of the above, although Kelly Brooks boobies and whimsy really took the edge off it!!!!
(bROKEN aRROW PUA HVI Master, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 11:46, closed)

I remember seeing an advert for Piranha 3D
where for whatever reason, the 3D effect was *inside out*. Someone fucked up badly. I knew then and there it was one film I was never going to see, even without the shitawful premise and massively exaggerated 'ZOMG SUMTHING IS ZUMING TWARDS THE SCRENE' use of 3D (which due to aforesaid fuckup looked like it was both getting larger and retreating into the distance - eyestrainingly bad!).
(Falstaff's Spiritual Successor, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 12:27, closed)

The film does that without that effect -
It felt as though i was looking through a pair of national health glasses that were a few years out of date. I remember thinking, eye's please don't fail me now, this is the first time I have seen KB's bangers out.....
(bROKEN aRROW PUA HVI Master, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 14:01, closed)

I agree
I especially hate seeing the trailers for 3d films on tv in 2d. I hate how the story and principles of the film are fucked over so they can forcibly insert random scenes of people throwing axes or kicking towards the camera.

For example the new Resident Evil 3D film, it looks utter bollocks and full of shots of people randomly pointing and throwing things towards the camera.
( Bamboo Steamer, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 13:46, closed)

3D
To be geeky alice wasn't filmed using 3d cameras which is why it was shit and pointless. It was rendered after is was filmed and edited.
(phe, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 15:10, closed)

It also renders
a film absolutely un-watchable if you have anything less than 20-20 vision.
It also leaves me with a banging headache.
( bane, Fri 24 Sep 2010, 21:35, closed)