Active Users:936 Time:15/12/2025 05:28:19 PM
Two points: beetnemesis Send a noteboard - 04/06/2010 05:34:21 AM
Firstly, I saw it in IMAX 3D. Dunno if that's what you saw it in, but if not, that could be the cause of our conflict. It's just... insanely better. But as great as IMAX is, the reason Avatar was so beautiful was because it didn't just use the "throw a tomato at the screen" gimmick (in fact, I'm not sure if it used it at all). Put IMAX 3D of Avatar up to, say, "Up" or "Harry Potter," and there's no comparison (although I enjoyed the stories of the latter two much more, but that's neither here nor there...)



Unless there's shit flying off the screen making me duck in my seat I don't see the point of calling it 3D. I want to see a movie that makes me think I'm actually gonna get hit with debris when something gets blown to hell.


That won't happen. Ever. Unless you somehow go back in time and forget what a movie is, you're never going to go "AHHHH A ROCK DUCK!!!!" from a 3D Movie, as we know them today.


The entire problem with 3D movies is that they often try to do what you're talking about, to the exclusion of any other technique. It's basically the equivalent of watching a scary movie, and suddenly the camera pans over and AHHH THERE'S THE KILLER!

It's just shock value, and the realism is ruined the first time you DON'T duck that rock, and it just disappears.

3D- good 3D is about immersion. Unless you plan on making a movie where someone throws something at the screen every 10 seconds, you're gonna need a few new tricks- like Avatar used.
I amuse myself.
Reply to message
3D films - The real deals and fakers of the next months - 03/06/2010 09:58:28 PM 982 Views
I still haven't seen a single 3D film -- real or otherwise - 03/06/2010 11:29:22 PM 647 Views
Me neither. - 03/06/2010 11:59:27 PM 610 Views
You left out Piranha 3-D. - 03/06/2010 11:53:03 PM 596 Views
3-D what? - 05/06/2010 01:33:26 AM 590 Views
Was Goblet of Fire shot in 3D? - 04/06/2010 12:51:04 AM 623 Views
There's a difference between a movie in 3D, and a 3D movie - 04/06/2010 01:31:28 AM 583 Views
I have to disagree. - 04/06/2010 02:28:52 AM 582 Views
Rebuttal - 04/06/2010 02:45:38 AM 676 Views
I guess it's just a matter of opinion. - 04/06/2010 03:53:22 AM 647 Views
Oh, they definitely are. I think our (or at least, my) is that Avatar did something new - 04/06/2010 05:38:48 AM 626 Views
Yes - 04/06/2010 08:52:00 AM 612 Views
Two points: - 04/06/2010 05:34:21 AM 714 Views
Re: Two points: - 07/06/2010 02:32:03 AM 510 Views
I haven't seen anything in 3D since 3rd Rock From the Sun had an episode. - 04/06/2010 02:54:15 AM 582 Views
Interesting. I thought I was the only one who didn't care about 3-D. - 04/06/2010 03:12:35 AM 621 Views
*throws tp all over your house, bushes and trees* *NM* - 04/06/2010 03:26:12 AM 229 Views
I don't care for the In your face-effects... - 04/06/2010 08:58:30 AM 630 Views
Harry Potter? Seriously? - 04/06/2010 05:16:40 AM 557 Views
3D is terrible and needs to die in a fire. - 04/06/2010 06:13:40 AM 685 Views
Absolutely. *NM* - 04/06/2010 09:35:35 AM 217 Views
Then just don't go *shrugs* - 04/06/2010 10:13:45 AM 621 Views
with Avatar, it made the CG more realistic IMO - 04/06/2010 07:37:13 PM 676 Views
That's because you were watching a 3D movie without 3D glasses. - 04/06/2010 11:36:47 PM 631 Views
I agree! *NM* - 05/06/2010 08:41:56 PM 208 Views
I want Mike Leigh and Ken Loach to make 3D films. *NM* - 04/06/2010 03:39:51 PM 267 Views
I haven't watched anything in 3D since Captain EO. - 04/06/2010 05:15:11 PM 755 Views
I don't know about 3D - 05/06/2010 01:48:12 AM 576 Views
I try to only see the films made for 3D in a 3D theater. - 05/06/2010 08:40:37 PM 544 Views
Legend of the Guardians actually looks gorgeous. *NM* - 06/06/2010 07:48:09 PM 218 Views
I hate 3D. It makes my eyes hurt. - 07/06/2010 04:13:16 AM 555 Views
I enjoyed Shrek Forever After immensely. - 07/06/2010 09:10:27 AM 647 Views

Reply to Message