Active Users:1201 Time:22/11/2024 09:43:09 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 870 Views
I still haven't seen a single 3D film -- real or otherwise - 03/06/2010 11:29:22 PM 540 Views
Me neither. - 03/06/2010 11:59:27 PM 496 Views
You left out Piranha 3-D. - 03/06/2010 11:53:03 PM 480 Views
3-D what? - 05/06/2010 01:33:26 AM 460 Views
Was Goblet of Fire shot in 3D? - 04/06/2010 12:51:04 AM 498 Views
There's a difference between a movie in 3D, and a 3D movie - 04/06/2010 01:31:28 AM 455 Views
I have to disagree. - 04/06/2010 02:28:52 AM 473 Views
Rebuttal - 04/06/2010 02:45:38 AM 562 Views
I guess it's just a matter of opinion. - 04/06/2010 03:53:22 AM 528 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 508 Views
Yes - 04/06/2010 08:52:00 AM 498 Views
Two points: - 04/06/2010 05:34:21 AM 580 Views
Re: Two points: - 07/06/2010 02:32:03 AM 394 Views
I haven't seen anything in 3D since 3rd Rock From the Sun had an episode. - 04/06/2010 02:54:15 AM 469 Views
Interesting. I thought I was the only one who didn't care about 3-D. - 04/06/2010 03:12:35 AM 500 Views
*throws tp all over your house, bushes and trees* *NM* - 04/06/2010 03:26:12 AM 180 Views
I don't care for the In your face-effects... - 04/06/2010 08:58:30 AM 504 Views
Harry Potter? Seriously? - 04/06/2010 05:16:40 AM 440 Views
3D is terrible and needs to die in a fire. - 04/06/2010 06:13:40 AM 576 Views
Absolutely. *NM* - 04/06/2010 09:35:35 AM 165 Views
Then just don't go *shrugs* - 04/06/2010 10:13:45 AM 506 Views
with Avatar, it made the CG more realistic IMO - 04/06/2010 07:37:13 PM 560 Views
That's because you were watching a 3D movie without 3D glasses. - 04/06/2010 11:36:47 PM 513 Views
I agree! *NM* - 05/06/2010 08:41:56 PM 162 Views
I want Mike Leigh and Ken Loach to make 3D films. *NM* - 04/06/2010 03:39:51 PM 221 Views
I haven't watched anything in 3D since Captain EO. - 04/06/2010 05:15:11 PM 638 Views
I don't know about 3D - 05/06/2010 01:48:12 AM 453 Views
I try to only see the films made for 3D in a 3D theater. - 05/06/2010 08:40:37 PM 430 Views
Legend of the Guardians actually looks gorgeous. *NM* - 06/06/2010 07:48:09 PM 171 Views
I hate 3D. It makes my eyes hurt. - 07/06/2010 04:13:16 AM 445 Views
I enjoyed Shrek Forever After immensely. - 07/06/2010 09:10:27 AM 521 Views

Reply to Message