What do you think about 3D? Do you like it? Hate it? Think it's better than 4K? - Page 41 - Blu-ray Forum

Captain Kirk · 01-15-2013, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

Wonder why "sokrman14" who started this thread has not replied to our arguments on why we love 3D ?

We all know why.

[Show spoiler]

I

your avatar.

Karma16 · 01-16-2013, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerzdawg

Def have not read his book(s). A quick look on Amazon I can page through the TOC to see his picks. Godfather, Its a Wonderful Life, Gone with the Wind - certainly sounds like the usual "top movies" and I can safely say I have no interest in movies like that in 3d. Can you give an example of a movie that would "need" to be done in 3d to survive? I dont need 3d exaggeration, I appreciate just the added depth of movies.. I dont need pop out of screen effects like in Sammys adventure. So please give some examples of the movies roger picks that would benefit from 3d.

HI jerz,
It's not that easy. I think 3D adds to nearly all movies. It's an additional level of realism. Some movies benefit more than others. I think you are looking for sensational effects. I'm not. I want that additional level of realism not special effects. Don't misunderstand, I too like the effects 3D can provide. But I don't demand exaggeration.

First, I have not seen more than, say 25%, of Roger's movies. I'm working my way through his lists. The ones I have seen I usually own. Of course, almost none of his Great Movies are on Blu-ray though many may be remastered over time even as we speak.

I'm not trying to make excuses but I think you really don't care and are attempting to set up a trap. Research them yourself and come to your own conclusions. Become a real movie fan. It's worth the trouble.

Sparky

Rainhurt · 01-16-2013, 12:51 AM

3 Signs That 3D Movies Are The Way Of The Future

http://www.businessinsider.com/3d-mo...llywood-2013-1

I like it how all the positive articles about 3D are from professional reporters and news outlets while the negative ones are from crackpot reporters and sensationalist tabloidish news sites.

Zivouhr · 01-16-2013, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sokrman14

Why is Hollywood pushing 3D so much? Disney finally figured it out by cancelling its re-release of Little Mermaid on 3D. Haven't they figured out that 3D is purely a gimmick that "almost" no one likes. I haven't posted on this forum in a really long time; but I couldnt help myself with this little rant.

No one wants to wear glasses!
No one wants to get dizzy!
No one wants aching eyes!

The only reason people buy 3D TV's is because it happens to be included in the TV they want. I bet if you put identical TV's in 3D and non 3D on the market and charged a little less for the other identical TV, practically no one would pay for it, hence the low penetration rate of 3D blurays.

Sorry for my rant, but thanks for reading. Go ahead and bash for those few who enjoy 3D.

Interesting view of 3D. Probably not the best place to post it though. We're 3D fans here, but I can imagine you were expecting this response.

Thanks for the news on Little Mermaid 3D which I didn't hear about yet. It mentioned they were disappointed in the re-release box office sales, so that would be a good reason to hold off. The problem with these re-releases in theaters? Most people already have the movies they're re-releasing on video, and 3D isn't enough to convince the non-3D fans to buy a ticket.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/0...90E00C20130115

I wasn't a big fan of Monsters Inc when I saw it on TV, and the quality 3D wasn't enough to convince me to pay to see it again in theaters, even being a fan of 3D. Same feeling about Finding Nemo, as much as most enjoy them for their quality story telling.

3D isn't the real problem here for Disney, viewing the recent box office success of Disney's Wreck it Ralph, which was a new movie, in 2D and 3D.
Worldwide: $336,311,616
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=rebootralph.htm

Of course Disney spent way too much on the budget for it, 165 million. I have no idea why it would cost that much to make a computer animated film these days? Actors fees? Animators fees? Inflation?

When parents ask their kids at the theater, "You want to see an old movie, Monster Inc again? It's in 3D. Or this other movie, The Hobbit in 3D?" I think most kids might say, "I already have Monsters Inc on video at home, let's see the Hobbit!" (Or whatever else that is new still playing "Wreck It Ralph, Rise of the Guardians, etc).

I do believe most non 3D fans are deterred by having to wear glasses to see the 3D, and if glasses weren't required, they'd be a lot more open to viewing things in 3D, as they do every day of their lives with two normal functioning eyes.

Imagine watching football in 3D without having to sit at a certain angle and without the need for 3D glasses? I can't imagine most non 3D fans would object if they didn't have to pay extra for it and their eyes didn't hurt.

BleedOrange11 · 01-16-2013, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karma16

HI All,
Has anyone noticed that none of this years Academy Best Picture nominees are 3D? Well, maybe Pi, not sure. But basically this underlines my point that until the best movies, both current and re-releases, are available in 3D, the 3D era is not truly arrived. Be patient Sparky, be patient!

Not quite true.

11 nominations:
Life of Pi

3 nominations:
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

1 nomination:
Prometheus
The Avengers
Brave
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Wreck-It Ralph
Maggie Simpson in "The Longest Daycare"

And just for fun...

Past 3D Oscar Winners (not counting 3D converted and re-released after award):

[Show spoiler]

---------------------

EDIT - Well, now I realize that I missed the "Best Picture" part of your post. Need to read more thoroughly, I suppose. Life of Pi certainly fits the criteria though.

Past Best Picture nominees that we can watch in 3D:

Hugo - 2012
Toy Story 3 - 2011
Avatar - 2010
Up - 2010
Titanic - 1998 (Winner) (3D re-release)
Beauty and the Beast - 1992 (3D re-release)
The Wizard of Oz - 1940 (3D re-release in Fall 2013)

Zivouhr · 01-16-2013, 02:26 AM

Good list of 3D award winners/nominations in Hollywood, BleedOrange.

sokrman14 · 01-16-2013, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

Wonder why "sokrman14" who started this thread has not replied to our arguments on why we love 3D ?

I just couldn't get back in to post because I am not a troll and don't sit on this forum for hours a day. I have a real job and life and only check minimally. There is a reason I mentioned I haven't posted in a long time. I like hearing everyone else's side to this topic. I am glad I stirred the pot a bit, but I still hold to my reliefs about 3D.

To those who say they don't get dizzy, headaches, eye aches, etc or whatever I mentioned....Good for you. I also didn't say everyone got it. Just some people.

Thanks for voicing opinions, that what these forums are good for. Keep the bashing coming for what I have seen, observed, and heard from other people in the HT community

keb33509 · 01-16-2013, 04:00 AM

Wow, you must really hate 3D if you broke your almost 2 year hiatus to post a new thread. During that 2 years, more people have grown to appreciate 3D for what it is, fun! It is an expensive luxury, but those that take the time to invest in it appreciate it. If your eyes hurt from viewing it, then try training your eyes. There are several different types of 3D to try. It's not for everyone, but it won't stop a lot of us from supporting the format.

EricJ · 01-16-2013, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sokrman14

I just couldn't get back in to post because I am not a troll and don't sit on this forum for hours a day. I have a real job and life and only check minimally. There is a reason I mentioned I haven't posted in a long time. I like hearing everyone else's side to this topic

Lame Alibi Troll, Trying to Keep His Act Onstage

Taygan315 · 01-16-2013, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

Wonder why "sokrman14" who started this thread has not replied to our arguments on why we love 3D ?

I think it's because in reality, he really wants a 3D tv but can't get one for whatever reason and is trying to convince himself with this yawn of a thread and is looking for people to agree with him.

MovieFanatic2010 · 01-16-2013, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sokrman14

I just couldn't get back in to post because I am not a troll and don't sit on this forum for hours a day. I have a real job and life and only check minimally. There is a reason I mentioned I haven't posted in a long time. I like hearing everyone else's side to this topic. I am glad I stirred the pot a bit, but I still hold to my reliefs about 3D.

To those who say they don't get dizzy, headaches, eye aches, etc or whatever I mentioned....Good for you. I also didn't say everyone got it. Just some people.

Thanks for voicing opinions, that what these forums are good for. Keep the bashing coming for what I have seen, observed, and heard from other people in the HT community

I have a fake job and a fake life

Ryan0503 · 01-16-2013, 11:32 AM

I think Hollywood has figured it out ... 3D = $$$ ... look at Titanic ... $18million to convert and raked in $98million ... that's $80million and the studio did nothing

Karma16 · 01-16-2013, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

---------------------
EDIT - Well, now I realize that I missed the "Best Picture" part of your post. Need to read more thoroughly, I suppose. Life of Pi certainly fits the criteria though.

Past Best Picture nominees that we can watch in 3D:

Hugo - 2012
Toy Story 3 - 2011
Avatar - 2010
Up - 2010
Titanic - 1998 (Winner) (3D re-release)
Beauty and the Beast - 1992 (3D re-release)
The Wizard of Oz - 1940 (3D re-release in Fall 2013)

HI Bleed,
Thanks for your edit to get my point straight. So, we have had, on average, 1 Best Picture 3D nominee per year for the last three years but no winners. That's not too bad and it should continue to get better. Of the above 3D list I have three of them:

Toy Story 3
Avatar
Titanic

I plan to get the remainder. More than 3D I like great movies. I realize that the word GREAT has different meanings to different people. But I think that even the most avid 3D fan would admit that most 3D releases are just exercises in 3D effects. In general, they have not been great movies and not movies that I want to own.

As the 3D movement (is it a movement?) gains momentum we should see a steady increase in quality 3D releases. I'm most excited by the prospect of many of the great movies of the past being converted to 3D. Some would include:

Bridge on the River Kwai
Lawrence of Arabia
Braveheart
Alien
Aliens
Predator
Patton
Oklahoma
My Fair Lady
The Sound of Music
The Red Shoes

and many others.

All of these are in my DVD library and I would replace them with 3D conversions. Since I have over 1000 DVD's in my collection and many go back to the 1970's, 1960's, 1950's, and 1940's, I don't expect that many would be converted. Probably not enough of a market for them. One I would love to see converted is Forbidden Planet, one of the early, great science fiction films. Another is the original Adventures of Robin Hood which is beautifully photographed and an early and great Technicolor effort. And what about Hitchcock's great films? And Casablanca which many consider to be one of the greatest films ever made-unfortunately in black and white.... only time will tell.

Sparky

Jack_Ryder_2012 · 01-16-2013, 04:03 PM

I love it when haters point out their opinions as FACT! 3d depends on the person, some people have bad eyesight so sure they cant see 3d obviously, i have never gotten dizzy watching 3d movies or playing 3d games. and my 3d collection is constantly growing. if it was dead or getting axed i would not be buying 3d moves every week. if YOU dont like it dont buy it, dosent mean you have to try to convince everyone else

i007spectre · 01-16-2013, 04:34 PM

These kind of posts are interesting reads for me. Nothing better than making fun of trolls.

fitprod · 01-16-2013, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

I think Hollywood has figured it out ... 3D = $$$ ... look at Titanic ... $18million to convert and raked in $98million ... that's $80million and the studio did nothing

Um... $57.8 domestic, $285 international ($145 from China, it was very limited on it's original run, so this was the first time China actually had a chance to see it.) - You're $18 million doesn't include about $25 million in marketing, which is becoming the biggest issue.

Yeah, the studios are figuring it out... Disney has canned Little Mermaid 3D, Paramount scrapped a wide release for Top Gun (Cut to a 6 day run in Imax, which can not be extended due to commitments for Die Hard 5), Jurassic Park 3D is the first week of April (The week after GI Joe 2, not big competition, but still a new film, Croods will be in it's second week).

Fox moved Ep II and Ep III within a month of each other, in an effort to save on marketing dollars. I'd be stunned if either cracks $25 million domestically, just use the SE re-release of Ep IV ($138 Million), V ($67.5) & VI ($45.5) re-releases for a reference. And those were the films everyone loved, until Lucas mucked them up with the SEs...

Honestly, Jurassic Park 3D and the "Original" Star Wars trilogy will probably be the last 2D to 3D re-release conversions released theatrically in the US.

You'll see new stuff of course, but it will fall off as the returns fall off. If it wasn't for international returns, this 3D run would be on it's last legs already.

And, before you go "3D BD can save the day", there's not enough of a market to honestly keep doing these releases. (I Robot 3D tanked hard...) Lionsgate pulled a nice move by getting Samsung in a partnership to convert some of their films to 3D, but I'm sure Samsung if footing most of that bill.

fitprod

Taygan315 · 01-16-2013, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

I have a fake job and a fake life

lol....bout right. Like WE don't have real jobs and lives?? Guy is ate up,lol

Will21st · 01-16-2013, 06:57 PM

Quote: