Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Are 3D Movies Even 3D?

I'm not asking this facetiously; after last night's premiere of Tron: Legacy, I feel compelled to whine again about the non-3D-ness of recent so-called "3D movies". I've posted a bit about this on my Avatar review from a year ago, and now a year later, nothing's really changed: 3D movies simply don't look 3D enough to warrant the ticket price or the experience. You just have to look at the 3D intros of IMAX or Disney (see below, in 2D) to see the difference. The IMAX intro practically destroys you with its depth - it's IN YOUR FACE. And you want to reach out and GRAB the images. On the other hand, the "immersive" thing of most current 3D films go for strikes me as just pointless. It's disappointing after being hyped up by these eye-popping intros to find that the main film is kinda flat-looking and not as visually striking. If someone can tell me why this is, I'd appreciate it!

1 comment:

  1. The 3D effect is lessened during sequences of fast-cutting, just to avoid eye-strain. Those clips are single shots. I think movies shot in 3D (or CGI films - 'How to Train Your Dragon' being the best example) look convincing, and have never seen one good post-conversion. Narnia's 3D was terrible - I watched for minutes at a time without my glasses and didn't notice much difference except the picture brightness.