Will 3D Last?

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Student Driver

My friends think of 3D as being "mindless action, children's movies, and boring IMAX documentaries," and then go "...oh..." when they find out Hitchcock is in 3D. Or that Criterion is releasing Wim Wenders in 3D shortly. Or that Herzog's done 3D. Or that there are concerts in 3D. Etc. However, those aren't what get promoted... they see Smurfs, Disney, IMAX, superheroes, and Nicholas Cage in the stores and ads. If they're interested enough to research online, everyone's telling them that an imported animated movie about a turtle is a "must own," which is precisely the type of movie that they are least interested in, yet they think makes up a disproportionate amount of the 3D marketplace. And they're not entirely wrong. We early adopters are mostly in it for the 3D spectacle. Pop out! Parallax! They -- and a large portion of the marketplace -- aren't interested in spectacle for the sake of spectacle, but are willing to use 3D if it truly enhances the genres they enjoy.

Sorry, rant over.

I don't think it'll ever be over--
I'm relieved (and picking myself off the floor, actually ) to hear someone finally speaking out against the cult of Sammites: Yes, You-Know-Who's going to post any minute now with "It's All Smurfs!", and that is the current stereotype to overcome, although I think most of the damage was done by Robert Zemeckis and his 3D efforts--Remember how many people refused to go see Hugo in theaters, because they heard a major director was doing a, quote, "kiddy" film in 3D for the first time, and literally thought it was CGI about a young reporter and his dog?
(And Disney getting Christmas Carol out as one of the first Blu3D's released didn't exactly help, either.)

I've been through the early days of Blu-ray in the US, and had to fight off the loyal Playstation gamers saying "Casino Royale, dood! ", just as I'd been through the early days of anime and had to fight off the influence of loyal fans telling innocent first-timers "Eva rocks, dood! " The one thing I've learned is that headbanging yellow fans are the WORST thing to spread a new idea to the skeptical mainstream, because they believe in the Conversion of the Apostle Paul through an extreme experience changing all their long-held views overnight. Uh-uh. 9 times out of ten, don't work like that.
The mature fan has to learn that little thing called "Diplomacy", and tailor the sell to fit the skepticism--For example, if the stubborn sell thinks it's "all overpriced", you DON'T immediately tell him he's wasting his time if he doesn't spend all his purchases on a high-end projection setup.
One argument does not fit all, and no one is going to be as open-minded as you may personally be. We have Truth on our side, it's time to start using it --We should start reserving one day every month to invite a friend in, show them our setups, and prove it isn't the "one thing" they think 3D is.
And needless to say, you don't show them Sammy--Unless, of course, they're one of those folks who think "It's all depth, like Avatar, nothing pops out!"

[OrbitalDropPodTroop]

Will 3D last?...I hope so...I mean I REALLY, REALLY hope so because from what I've bought, and what I've seen, I haven't been as engrossed in a film as what 3D has provided me. Also 3D is NOT a requirement...the sets obviously give you the option of 2D or 3D, so nobodys being forced to watch films in 3D. Sure, I don't expect EVERY title to be 3D, but EFX heavy films are all the more fun to watch in 3D in my and many others opinions...So I hope the bigwigs take that into account before they begin to kill off anything. Just my 2 cents.

[KRW1]

As a long time 3D 'hater' I've grown to quite like it. I won't watch anything in 3D as it doesnt really appeal to me and it does give me a headache, but I like that its around now. For one thing, it's giving bluray a little boost.

You do have to take into account the way it was sold to us in 2009. When everything was going to be in 3D from then on. That was when opinions hardened against it and I think that's why people predict its doom. Bond was going 3D, as was everything Spielberg did from then on etc. I remember reading Warner was ceasing production of all 2D movies. That hasn't happened, thankfully, but because it didn't, its 'doomed'. Thats my theory anyway.

Incidentally, my father in law has a 3D telly now. He doesn't know it, reckons its not, but he does and it is. I think that's the future of it for a lot of people, an additional feature they might not know they have but the big picture is that it'll be around as long as the product is around and that's not stopping anytime soon.

[racefreak619]

I hated 3D after having seen a few movies in cinema's and the effect was terrible, even Avatar didn't look good.

But I now have a new TV since last week that has passive 3D, I was blown away by the picture quality. The 3D is so much better than in the theater, I couldn't believe it. It greatly depends on the movie how good the effect is, so far I've seen Piranha 3DD, Tangled and Final Destination 5. Piranha wasn't that good, but the 3D effects on the last 2 were pretty amazing when I turned the depth of the 3D on my TV to maximum.

In normal 3D mode it doesn't quite pop out enough, and I guess that's why in the theater I've not liked it. must be something wrong with my eyes as the sight on 1 eye is not 100%. Also the clarity on my TV is much better than in the theater, the image is always too dark there.

First I didn't care for 3D being a flop, but now I want it to stay. But it should always be an option and the 3D disc should be free with any blu-ray you buy. Get rid of the DVD copy and put the 3D one in there. I now have several movies in my collection that have a DVD (or digital copy) as second disc but not the 3D disc, if I want them in 3D I have to buy another edition which often costs more than the regular Blu-ray+dvd.

[Student Driver]

Originally Posted by EricJ

I don't think it'll ever be over--
I'm relieved (and picking myself off the floor, actually ) to hear someone finally speaking out against the cult of Sammites: Yes, You-Know-Who's going to post any minute now with "It's All Smurfs!", and that is the current stereotype to overcome, although I think most of the damage was done by Robert Zemeckis and his 3D efforts--Remember how many people refused to go see Hugo in theaters, because they heard a major director was doing a, quote, "kiddy" film in 3D for the first time, and literally thought it was CGI about a young reporter and his dog?
(And Disney getting Christmas Carol out as one of the first Blu3D's released didn't exactly help, either.)

I've been through the early days of Blu-ray in the US, and had to fight off the loyal Playstation gamers saying "Casino Royale, dood! ", just as I'd been through the early days of anime and had to fight off the influence of loyal fans telling innocent first-timers "Eva rocks, dood! " The one thing I've learned is that headbanging yellow fans are the WORST thing to spread a new idea to the skeptical mainstream, because they believe in the Conversion of the Apostle Paul through an extreme experience changing all their long-held views overnight. Uh-uh. 9 times out of ten, don't work like that.
The mature fan has to learn that little thing called "Diplomacy", and tailor the sell to fit the skepticism--For example, if the stubborn sell thinks it's "all overpriced", you DON'T immediately tell him he's wasting his time if he doesn't spend all his purchases on a high-end projection setup.
One argument does not fit all, and no one is going to be as open-minded as you may personally be. We have Truth on our side, it's time to start using it --We should start reserving one day every month to invite a friend in, show them our setups, and prove it isn't the "one thing" they think 3D is.
And needless to say, you don't show them Sammy--Unless, of course, they're one of those folks who think "It's all depth, like Avatar, nothing pops out!"

Warning, another long post coming up.

I felt very weird coming into these forums, because it was pretty apparent from lurking that my take on Blu Ray, 3D, and movies in general don't comport with the prevailing zeitgeist. Took a long time to make my first post, and I still don't post often. Your comments kind of echo my own feelings about the die hards and their relation to the larger home video market (and so many analogues exist: comic fans and Image Comics in the 1990s, for example). I don't care about steelbooks, and actively avoid collector's editions that come with extraneous crap or big boxes. And Lord knows, I'm tired of the deification of Sammy in 3D land.

To get this out of the way: I do love 3D for the sake of 3D. I have a relatively deep history of 3D fandom pre-BD; two "show and tell" sessions when I was in elementary school in the late 1970s were of my hologram collection and my antique stereoscope collection. I've got 3D setups for the Vectrex, Amiga, Famicom, Sega Master System. I collected 3D comics, field sequential VHS. Etc. (Never could do the Magic Eye stuff, though... ) I suspect most 3D fans in here would have, or even have had similar histories if they had access to this stuff earlier. We're the exception, though, not the rule.

However, I'm more of an art-film/indie guy than average. I like mainstream stuff, of course (Tron is my favorite film), but my tastes run more toward documentaries, classics, foreign, and art house, and I seriously dislike the majority of family-friendly/family oriented films. (For anyone cruising my BD and DVD lists on here and thinking my collections don't match my stated tastes, most of my video is on LD and DVD, and have over 500 DVDs that simply aren't in the blu-ray.com database; I'm sitting at ~600 laserdiscs and over 1200 DVDs.) Early 3D BD piqued my interest in 3D in general, but frankly turned off my inner cineaste. Tron: Legacy was when I finally jumped in. I've supported the format since then by investing in live action 3D day-and-date if the movie isn't something that repels me; I get to indulge my interest in 3D, if not my interest in the story itself. But the majority of these films simply aren't my first choice in entertainment, and as the novelty of 3D wanes, I'm finding myself pining for more films I actually like for their own sake, not just films that I tolerate so that I can get a visual thrill.

Everyone focuses on different genres, of course. Comic book movies, comedies, romances, westerns, whatever. Thing is, the majority of people don't have a love of 3D for the sake of 3D. Even if they enjoy it, it's as an adjunct to what they already like. The few 3D users I know personally get the 3D versions of whatever their niche is, they don't just snap up everything that gets released. Comic fan? Owns the Marvel movies, Green Lantern, Green Hornet, maybe Ghost Rider if they hate themselves... and that's it. Romance? Titanic... and that's it. They don't give a crap that it looks like a computer-animated sea turtle is hovering in their living room, they give a crap that they will be able to enjoy the story. And all the 3D early adopters keep trying to sell people on the turtle.

I understand financially why the 3D cinema and BD markets are the way they currently are. The nature of computer animation makes it trivial for animated films and FX-heavy live action to be rendered in 3D, so it's a no-brainer for a studio to pop out a 3D version and rake in a bit more income. IMAX has a huge back catalogue of 3D films that are educational, if not entertaining, so they have a low risk to reward ratio (the films are already profitable from theatrical rentals, so they can do 3D BR cheap and still profit even if sales are low). And I seriously can't fault Disney for focusing on animation and family fare, because that's their core market, and they're damn good at it. But this singular focus shuts out a huge portion of the market, only sporadically interesting shoppers.

The early days of near total domination of animation and family fare also created a problem beyond stigmatizing the format as being for kids... an investment in 3D at the time was prohibitively expensive and awfully finicky to be entrusted to children. Ever see what kids do to discs? This is a demographic known for sticking sandwiches in VCRs, drawing on DVDs, using Blu Rays as frisbees. Want to stick an expensive pair of shutter glasses on that kid? Ever see how active kids get when watching favorite movies at home? They want to play, dance, or even just have the movie on in the background to pay attention to from time to time while simply being a kid. Want to stick a pair of passive glasses on them, then tell them they have to pretty much be centered and impassive in front of the TV to enjoy it. Perfect for family night or a movie theater, but imperfect for how most kids (and parents) actually use kid-friendly video at home. So you have a medium that requires more investment and care than average, yet apparently caters to a market that would prefer low investment and little care.

The increasing availability of teen/adult-oriented live action is a good step toward destigmatizing the medium, but it's still precarious with its focus on fantasy, action, horror. These films tend to be very, very good, or very, very bad, with little in between. Given Sturgeon's law (90% of everything is crap), the very, very bad outnumbers the good. With a big catalogue, this isn't a problem, but with the still-small 3D catalogue, it leaves a very tiny percentage of films that non-3D-maniacs would be interested in.

Frankly, I think Prometheus will do more to wake up the average BD user to the merits of 3D at home than Avatar ever could have; not only is it an effective use of 3D, but it's a thoughtful, mature, even artistic film that also happens to appeal to mass market tastes. Avatar is great as spectacle, and in comparison to other 3D releases, is a pretty good film on its own merits, but there's no denying that it's a movie where 3D comes first, story second.