3D is Dead in 2014

[LegacyCosts]

Originally Posted by Kevin Holly

Whatever happens, 3d is still a shit gimmick that hasn't been used to any positive degree in years now. I hope it dies, but if not, screw it anyway.

I second this. 3D just darkens the screen and bloats my ticket price. I stopped with it a few years back. It really is useless.

[Rickyrockard]

Originally Posted by levcore

Saying 2014 was a bad year box office wise is completely incorrect.

Sorry yes, you're right - I didn't read what I'd written before posting. I've now corrected. What I meant to say was "a combination of recognition critically, at the box office and in the industry itself".

There are literally an infinite number of measures of success because it's completely subjective but if you honestly feel that 2014 was as or even more successful for 3D than the previous 5 years offerings, well fair enough.

But I'd be very surprised if cinematographers will reference Xmen DOFP, Dawn of the Apes, Guardians and Edge of Tomorrow as influences on their use of 3D in the same way they do of Hugo, Life of Pii, Piña & Gravity....but maybe you're right. Only time will tell I guess. Luckily the Internet is written in ink so you can come back here and post some quotes from some big cinematographers to prove me wrong.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Rickyrockard

Sorry yes, you're right - I didn't read what I'd written before posting. I've now corrected. What I meant to say was "a combination of recognition critically, at the box office and in the industry itself".

There are literally an infinite number of measures of success because it's completely subjective but if you honestly feel that 2014 was as or even more successful for 3D than the previous 5 years offerings, well fair enough.

But I'd be very surprised if cinematographers will reference Xmen DOFP, Dawn of the Apes, Guardians and Edge of Tomorrow as influences on their use of 3D in the same way they do of Hugo, Life of Pii, Piña & Gravity....but maybe you're right. Only time will tell I guess. Luckily the Internet is written in ink so you can come back here and post some quotes from some big cinematographers to prove me wrong.

How has the argument shifted from general success and quality of 2014 3D films to cinematographers ? It strikes me that when you have been shown to make a poor argument, you simply shift the goalposts.

[Zivouhr]

Most people with two eyes see in stereo 3D every day of their life. When we don't have to wear glasses and can view it from any angle (in the 'near' future), general acceptance of 3D, much like when colorized films were first introduced along with stereo sound, will hopefully increase over time.

Even so, it's nice to have a choice of 3D or 2D, depending on your situation.


----------
What can 3D offer movie fans?
Forgetting about sales and numbers for a moment, what can stereo 3D offer a movie fan eager to enter into another world for 90 minutes?

On a purely visual level (not factoring if the viewer is used to 3D or not) if the 3D is STRONG (none of the weak, mild 3D that gives 3D a bad reputation), with immersive, believable layering of objects and scenery and the occasional pop out when appropriate, 3D can add another dimension of sight and heighten the sense of immersion, almost like being there beyond a just a flat 2D plane of sight.

We can choose to close one eye and go through life seeing 2D, or open both eyes to the potential of strong 3D, thinking back to the success of Avatar's strong 3D during the jungle settings.

Examples of strong 3D in Cinema 2014:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...014+3d+best+of

Best Picks for 3D in 2013:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ongest+2013+3d

List of upcoming 3D films in theaters 2015, 16, 17, 18, etc...
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=253172

[Kevin Holly]

I would also note I haven't seen a 3D film in years. Back in this particular era's prime, every movie that was 3D, there was no option. Now, there is in every case. Goodbye and good riddance, I say

[Infernal King]

I saw Jupiter Ascending in 3D and it didn't make the movie any shittier.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by levcore

I don't want to be lazy and respond with another LOL but this post really deserves it.

I hate to break it to you, but most people saw those movies in 2D anyway.

Only once in my life have I paid to watch a movie in 3D (Tron: Legacy). I hated it and enjoyed it much better in 2D when I watched the BD.

[MEB]

I was expecting to be in the market for a new LCD TV (70" or larger) in 2014. I don't want 3D and didn't want to pay for 3D so, as 2014 started, I was concerned about finding the right TV. But, I never pulled the trigger and by the end of 2014 it was quite obvious that getting a non-3D TV was getting increasingly easier.

I don't know if I'll pull the trigger in 2015, but by the end of this year I expect 3D TVs to be pretty scarce. Quite the change from about 2 years ago!

3D TV is so close to dead, it's silly to refer to it as having a future.

Mark

[Rickyrockard]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

How has the argument shifted from general success and quality of 2014 3D films to cinematographers ? It strikes me that when you have been shown to make a poor argument, you simply shift the goalposts.

My original post was "as a rough indication of how things have been received critically, by box office numbers and within the industry itself".

Everyone will argue different measures of 'success', but perhaps somewhere between all 3 elements is what most people inside and outside of the industry would regard as a success because critical opinion can often differ from box office success, which can often differ from how films are received within the industry (indicated by things like the ASC Guild awards but I suppose recognition is gained over time and you'd see it in interviews with cinematographers & directors when referencing their influences). The oscars are probably a watering down of all 3 elements.

Or maybe they aren't. Who cares, my point it that you've described that 3D was as big if not a bigger success in 2014 because of Box Office success and critical praise (although I wouldn't call movies averaging in early 70s on metacritic unanimous praise when compared to how Hugo, Gravity etc were received, but ok). What I'm saying is what about the third component - how it's received within the industry itself?

As I say, only time will tell but there wasn't exactly uproar in the world of cinematography that Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Guardians of the Galaxy and Edge of Tomorrow didn't get the Oscar for best cinematography now was there?!

[L-Rouge]

Dennis Murren of ILM fame, suggests that 3d is dying at the cinema mainly through misuse. However he reckons the home market will still be a strong market for the platform.

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by L-Rouge

Dennis Murren of ILM fame, suggests that 3d is dying at the cinema mainly through misuse. However he reckons the home market will still be a strong market for the platform.

Sadly, thats true.

I was a huge 3D supporter, if it was in 3D I would see it in 3D. But I gave up on it once studios started poorly implementing it in films. Movies like World War Z had zero 3D effect. After so many films with minimal depth and pop out effects I mostly gave up on 3D in the theaters. Its so obvious they are now just tacking it on with minimal effort. Man of Steel was the last film I felt had decent 3D. Back in 2012

[Rickyrockard]

Originally Posted by L-Rouge

Dennis Murren of ILM fame, suggests that 3d is dying at the cinema mainly through misuse. However he reckons the home market will still be a strong market for the platform.

Could you link the article please; sounds like an interesting read.

[L-Rouge]

well a friend of mine attended a 3d screening of Attack of The Clones last year, where Mr Murren was guest. My friend dislikes 3d very much (and 48fr HFR 3d)

He says this viewing was jaw dropping in depth, I believe Revenge gets a screening at celebration this april?.


Dennis gave a Q&A session after the screening, recorded and available on a podcast here

http://makingstarwars.net/2014/11/11...-episode-56-2/

listen from the 1hr:36 mark

[Bluyoda]

The sooner the better.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Most people with two eyes see in stereo 3D every day of their life. When we don't have to wear glasses and can view it from any angle (in the 'near' future), general acceptance of 3D, much like when colorized films were first introduced along with stereo sound, will hopefully increase over time.

Even so, it's nice to have a choice of 3D or 2D, depending on your situation.


----------
What can 3D offer movie fans?
Forgetting about sales and numbers for a moment, what can stereo 3D offer a movie fan eager to enter into another world for 90 minutes?

On a purely visual level (not factoring if the viewer is used to 3D or not) if the 3D is STRONG (none of the weak, mild 3D that gives 3D a bad reputation), with immersive, believable layering of objects and scenery and the occasional pop out when appropriate, 3D can add another dimension of sight and heighten the sense of immersion, almost like being there beyond a just a flat 2D plane of sight.

We can choose to close one eye and go through life seeing 2D, or open both eyes to the potential of strong 3D, thinking back to the success of Avatar's strong 3D during the jungle settings.

Examples of strong 3D in Cinema 2014:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...014+3d+best+of

Best Picks for 3D in 2013:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ongest+2013+3d

List of upcoming 3D films in theaters 2015, 16, 17, 18, etc...
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=253172

Great post mate, well said.

[prozacnation1978]

I will say this

2 years ago I saw everything in 3d at the theater
Now. I would say half the 3d films I hit.
Just tired of paying extra for it.

I did see Jupiter in 3d but not seventh son.

I do own a 3d tv.
I do buy 3d films for movies that I plan on getting
I don't pass up on it. But will say after I see it in 3d on my tv
I rarely see it again in 3d

[levcore]

If a movie is released in 3D i buy it in 3D every time. Most of my 3D movies I have only seen in 3D and never bother to watch the 2D version. I love 3D but i also love 2D movies too. There is room for both. I just can't understand people wanting 3D to die, if you don't like it, don't watch it. Just don't keep whining about it.

[Zivouhr]

Ways in which 3D can benefit at home and in theaters:
-Continue the option to freely choose 3D or 2D. People want a choice.
-Studios should not be offering weak, mild 3D (filmed or converted) to theaters. Watching an entire movie in weak 3D doesn't justify the purpose of 3D (or having to wear "sunglasses") and it hurts 3D's overall reputation when people pay extra just to see a movie that's barely 3D, almost 2D most of the way.
-Studios should continue to budget for stronger 3D to make the 3D really stand out and make it worth paying extra for. Strong 3D layers, strong pop outs when needed. Immerse the viewer in a 3D world. Not an "almost 2D" one.
-Offer a very low cost, glasses free, viewable from most angles 3D experience on a home, HD 3D TV set with a comparable price to a 2D only set.
-Eventually find a glasses free way to display 3D on a large theater screen.
-Reduce the cost of 3D for customers. 3D Movies shouldn't cost 34.99$ when the 2D version is 19.99$. And reduce the cost of 3D ticket prices.

Some underlying reasons statements against 3D are made:
-Viewer feels threatened by the idea that 3D might be the only way to see a movie.
-Viewer saw a weak 3D film and dismissed 3D afterwards as a waste.
-Viewer saw a weak 3D film and felt cheated for having to wear sunglasses in a dark theater for weak 3D effects.
-Viewer got a headache while watching 3D.
-Viewer doesn't want to have to wear something extra to experience a movie.
-Paying more than a 2D movie, when movies are expensive enough, is not an option they want to pay for to see a movie in 3D, or in Imax or XD.

Stronger 3D and the choice to watch a movie in 3D or 2D are the two main factors that will benefit 3D in the long term, in addition to 3D costing less for customers and a glasses free way to view it.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by levcore

If a movie is released in 3D i buy it in 3D every time. Most of my 3D movies I have only seen in 3D and never bother to watch the 2D version. I love 3D but i also love 2D movies too. There is room for both. I just can't understand people wanting 3D to die, if you don't like it, don't watch it. Just don't keep whining about it.

Stop telling us that 3D is the reason why movies are in the Top Ten at the box office, then. Most people saw those movies in 2D.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

Stop telling us that 3D is the reason why movies are in the Top Ten at the box office, then. Most people saw those movies in 2D.

Well Guardians of the Galaxy did HUGE business in 3D 45% percent is nothing to sneeze at

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3885

and is doing great business on 3D Blu Ray as well now with every week being in the percentage of 20-30% and that is since it came out its still selling this good on 3d blu ray that is really impressive

This thread really is a facepalm because its not true at all. There has been plenty of good 3D earnings in 2014 and there will be in 2015 too.