|
Post by Whovitt on Jan 23, 2018 0:36:27 GMT
No, 3D may enhance the picture and experience but it does not serve to drive the narrative and storytelling. I can watch the same film in 2D and the same sequence of scenes presented to me will give me the same narrative outcome. Now if the plot made mention to the 3D I was watching, then it would serve the narrative. Clearly you haven't seen Jurassic World or Doctor Who: The Day of the Doctor in 3D. Both examples where the 3D absolutely enhances the narrative, and watching either in 2D loses an added dimension to the story. I saw both in 3D and, honestly, apart from a couple of bits of flying debris that I (very) occasionally ducked from, it really didn't add anything for me. I don't think I've been to a 3D movie since, as the cost is greater and I don't really see how it adds anything. The Day of the Doctor - yes, debris felt like it was flying at my face; if anything, that actually distracted me from what was going on. Jurassic World - ...people looked a little more staggered in terms of how far away they were standing? Maybe 3D is a good narrative force in some instances (like I said, I've seen very little in 3D ), but I don't think the two examples you are giving are the best examples.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jan 23, 2018 0:40:00 GMT
I can see the attraction of 3D, and I understand why some feel it enhances the experience. To a certain extent, it's a matter of taste. I have seen some films in 3D, but I'm not a huge fan. Plain 2D works for me, and I deliberately didn't see The Last Jedi in 3D. I asked my daughter if she was going to see The Last Jedi in 3D and her response was, "No, it gives me a headache."
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Jan 23, 2018 1:03:12 GMT
The one time I've thought 3D really added to the experience was a factual film, an IMAX movie about the building of the International Space Station. With the wraparound screen and the subject, there were some awe-inspiring moments and the sense of actually being there, spacewalking with the astronauts in orbit, was amazing. Especially knowing it was real. For feature films, it's the primarily the story that carries the film (or not) not the effects, for me at least. I can get just as wrapped up in a B&W 'Doctor Who' or a 30s horror or film noir as in the latest epic blockbuster. As a jaw-dropping effects movie experience, I think that for me the original Star Wars (IV) will always remain impossible to top - 2D, so what? No other film can ever be such a huge step up on everything I've seen before. That famous opening shot changed my view of special effects forever and it's still a great story too! (The Force help me, that was over 40 years ago. )
|
|
|
Post by rran on Jan 23, 2018 4:37:08 GMT
I don't really have a fascination for 3D. I wear glasses, so 3D glasses are a nuisance to me. Even overlooking that, I don't see much of a value add in 3D. I don't mind 3D but I won't go looking for it. So given a choice, I'll go for the good old 2D
|
|
|
Post by omega on Jan 23, 2018 5:24:00 GMT
I don't really have a fascination for 3D. I wear glasses, so 3D glasses are a nuisance to me. Even overlooking that, I don't see much of a value add in 3D. I don't mind 3D but I won't go looking for it. So given a choice, I'll go for the good old 2D Ditto. It's a gimmick that I can do without. I've got to wear two pairs of glasses to sample it.
|
|
|
Post by rran on Jan 23, 2018 5:34:17 GMT
I don't really have a fascination for 3D. I wear glasses, so 3D glasses are a nuisance to me. Even overlooking that, I don't see much of a value add in 3D. I don't mind 3D but I won't go looking for it. So given a choice, I'll go for the good old 2D Ditto. It's a gimmick that I can do without. I've got to wear two pairs of glasses to sample it. I have to make it a point to remember to wear contact lenses (which I don't regularly wear) which makes it too much of an effort..
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jan 23, 2018 6:05:00 GMT
I used to always wear contact lenses to the movies in order to be able to see properly, before I had my eye surgery. I could never see well enough with my glasses, 3D or no 3D.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jan 23, 2018 10:57:45 GMT
Clearly you haven't seen Jurassic World or Doctor Who: The Day of the Doctor in 3D. Both examples where the 3D absolutely enhances the narrative, and watching either in 2D loses an added dimension to the story. I saw both in 3D and, honestly, apart from a couple of bits of flying debris that I (very) occasionally ducked from, it really didn't add anything for me. I don't think I've been to a 3D movie since, as the cost is greater and I don't really see how it adds anything. The Day of the Doctor - yes, debris felt like it was flying at my face; if anything, that actually distracted me from what was going on. Jurassic World - ...people looked a little more staggered in terms of how far away they were standing? Maybe 3D is a good narrative force in some instances (like I said, I've seen very little in 3D ), but I don't think the two examples you are giving are the best examples. This is all opinion based, but they are two examples where the 3D was applauded by many others too for their excellent use of 3D to drive the narrative. www.blu-ray.com/movies/Doctor-Who-The-Day-of-the-Doctor-3D-Blu-ray/85292/#Reviewm.bluray.highdefdigest.com/10084/dw_day_doctor_50th_3d.htmlwww.doctorwhotv.co.uk/the-day-of-the-doctor-a-3d-triumph-or-failure-56350.htmm.bluray.highdefdigest.com/22373/jurassicworld3d.htmlwww.cinemablend.com/new/3D-Or-3D-Buy-Right-Jurassic-World-Ticket-71946.htmlm.huffpost.com/us/entry/7674238
|
|
|
Post by coffeeaddict on Jan 23, 2018 13:43:58 GMT
Until it becomes cost effect to shoot in 3D or 4K there won't be any widespread shift towards the adoption of this medium. Until home units be they 4K or 3D reach a price point that the average Joe can afford people won't be helping support the TV and Film industry to make a move to these or any new format in the short term.
Personally I don't see the need for 4K - by and large you won't notice the difference between that and HD.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Jan 23, 2018 13:49:54 GMT
Until it becomes cost effect to shoot in 3D or 4K there won't be any widespread shift towards the adoption of this medium. Until home units be they 4K or 3D reach a price point that the average Joe can afford people won't be helping support the TV and Film industry to make a move to these or any new format in the short term. Personally I don't see the need for 4K - by and large you won't notice the difference between that and HD. 3DTV's (in the UK anyway) are priced at the same price as normal HD TV's. In this respect at least its not the price that is putting people off.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Jan 23, 2018 13:55:13 GMT
Until it becomes cost effect to shoot in 3D or 4K there won't be any widespread shift towards the adoption of this medium. Until home units be they 4K or 3D reach a price point that the average Joe can afford people won't be helping support the TV and Film industry to make a move to these or any new format in the short term. Personally I don't see the need for 4K - by and large you won't notice the difference between that and HD. Actually, there's a massive difference in picture quality. Blue Planet II really shows it off.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jan 23, 2018 14:07:51 GMT
I know it’s derailing the thread further, but why has no one mentioned “Hugo” as the best example of a 3D movie......
Beautiful, unobtrusive, gives real depth, aids the story telling.......ok so it’s a dull story but that’s the pinnacle of 3D use.....not doctor who or Jurassic Park......they are still gimmick 3D.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jan 23, 2018 14:44:14 GMT
I know it’s derailing the thread further, but why has no one mentioned “Hugo” as the best example of a 3D movie...... Beautiful, unobtrusive, gives real depth, aids the story telling.......ok so it’s a dull story but that’s the pinnacle of 3D use To each their own. I actually quite like Hugo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 15:57:21 GMT
I know it’s derailing the thread further, but why has no one mentioned “Hugo” as the best example of a 3D movie...... Beautiful, unobtrusive, gives real depth, aids the story telling.......ok so it’s a dull story but that’s the pinnacle of 3D use.....not doctor who or Jurassic Park......they are still gimmick 3D. The best example of a 3D movie is Piranha 3D! Exploitation cinema embraces that fact that 3D is just a gimmick & uses it as such, the only time I've enjoyed 3D is in these types of movies dating back to things like House of Wax which was made in the fifties. 3D isn't new but its great fun in schlocky horror movies.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jan 23, 2018 17:58:59 GMT
I know it’s derailing the thread further, but why has no one mentioned “Hugo” as the best example of a 3D movie...... Beautiful, unobtrusive, gives real depth, aids the story telling.......ok so it’s a dull story but that’s the pinnacle of 3D use To each their own. I actually quite like Hugo. i liked hugo too, but it was not that great at storytelling or pacing and some actors were a bit dodgy......but it is a masterclass in how to use 3d
|
|