# Really? This is as good as they can make 3D? In 2010?



## AquariAM (Jan 28, 2010)

I've seen Alice in Wonderland and Avatar in 3D. Both times I walked away unimpressed, blurry, and with a headache. I sat right at the front for one movie and right at the back for the other. I didn't really get a very 3D experience either time. It certainly had more depth to it but I would call it 2 1/4 D at best. The picture is very blurry overall I find also. Avatar (Aka General Custer and the eleven foot smurf people with magical hair that has tubifex worms in it that talk to dragons and let you fly them with your mind) was so blurry in 3D I think I saw maybe 1/5th of the movie despite my best efforts.

I say 3Don't.


----------



## Fishfinder (Feb 17, 2008)

imo, avatars is pocahantus 2.0.... 
i havnt actually seen any of the new movies in 3D yet, but i remember the canada's wonderland 3D shorts/3D rides being quite good. also spiderman 3d ride at MGM was awesome.


----------



## ryno1974 (Dec 6, 2009)

You should go to your doctor or optician. The 3D in Avatar was very, very good. Not the old 70's 3D with the constant things being poked in your face that made no sense, but very immesrive. The subtle background effects of leaves floating by, or a firefly flicking on and offdrag you deep into the scene. If you are waiting for the "OHHHHHHHH AHHHHHHH " moment of thins jumping out at you you wont get it. The intent is to have the 3D an integral part of the experience, not to take over the movie.



AquariAM said:


> I've seen Alice in Wonderland and Avatar in 3D. Both times I walked away unimpressed, blurry, and with a headache. I sat right at the front for one movie and right at the back for the other. I didn't really get a very 3D experience either time. It certainly had more depth to it but I would call it 2 1/4 D at best. The picture is very blurry overall I find also. Avatar (Aka General Custer and the eleven foot smurf people with magical hair that has tubifex worms in it that talk to dragons and let you fly them with your mind) was so blurry in 3D I think I saw maybe 1/5th of the movie despite my best efforts.
> 
> I say 3Don't.


----------



## hojimoe (Mar 7, 2008)

go watch how to train your dragon in 3d - yes I saw it, the 3d for that kicked alice in wonderland and avatars 3d in the butt IMO


----------



## ryno1974 (Dec 6, 2009)

hojimoe said:


> go watch how to train your dragon in 3d - yes I saw it, the 3d for that kicked alice in wonderland and avatars 3d in the butt IMO


Doesnt surprise me. I saw Cloudy with a chance of meatballs in 3D and it was by far the best (even counting Avatar) 3D I have seen. I think the digital animation stuff is the best one suited to 3D.

Was the movie any good?


----------



## AquariAM (Jan 28, 2010)

ryno1974 said:


> You should go to your doctor or optician. The 3D in Avatar was very, very good. Not the old 70's 3D with the constant things being poked in your face that made no sense, but very immesrive. The subtle background effects of leaves floating by, or a firefly flicking on and offdrag you deep into the scene. If you are waiting for the "OHHHHHHHH AHHHHHHH " moment of thins jumping out at you you wont get it. The intent is to have the 3D an integral part of the experience, not to take over the movie.


Personally I'm sick of the gimmicky BS. Terminator 2 is as good as effects need to be. You don't even really need CGI to make a good action movie and I'd argue all good action movies were made before or with minimal CGI.

I want good direction acting and cinematography. If you want to put special effects in to spice it up, fine. Don't feed me 3D with no good plot or acting. It's not fair, it's not right, and it's not worth my money .

Still think modern 3D sucks.


----------



## ryno1974 (Dec 6, 2009)

AquariAM said:


> Personally I'm sick of the gimmicky BS. Terminator 2 is as good as effects need to be. You don't even really need CGI to make a good action movie and I'd argue all good action movies were made before or with minimal CGI.
> 
> I want good direction acting and cinematography. If you want to put special effects in to spice it up, fine. Don't feed me 3D with no good plot or acting. It's not fair, it's not right, and it's not worth my money .
> 
> Still think modern 3D sucks.


I disagree with you on the 3D in vatar, but I do agree that a great action movie is about the action, not the CGI. Avatar wa just Dances with Wolves 2009. Plot was old and done before, acting was so -so (except for the army guy which was unwatchable).

I hear Tron is coming out in 3D as well. Curious to see how that goes.


----------



## hojimoe (Mar 7, 2008)

is ironman2 going to be 3d? that would be awesome!


----------



## conix67 (Jul 27, 2008)

If you want good acting movie with good plots, just watch those classics.

IMO 3D in Avatar was top notch, the best 3D movie can offer yet (haven't watched all others since then). However, I heard many people cannot fully experience 3D movies this way (somewhere around ~10%, which seems surprisingly high).

I don't mind CGI effects, makes all those dangerous stunts safe, and can provide effects not realizable without it.


----------



## ameekplec. (May 1, 2008)

Wait? You sat at the front and the back? Movies in 2D are crappy from those vantage points in a theater as it is - 3D doesn't help any of that.

If you sit near the middle of the theater, the effect is best, as that's how the technology is made to be seen - front on. As with others, I'm quite impressed at how effectively it's used, and I can't wait to see things like sports in 3D. 

I've seen movies made for 3D as well as older movies that were redone for 3D and I've been pretty impressed every time.


----------



## aln (Jan 26, 2010)

ameekplec. said:


> Wait? You sat at the front and the back? Movies in 2D are crappy from those vantage points in a theater as it is - 3D doesn't help any of that.
> 
> If you sit near the middle of the theater, the effect is best, as that's how the technology is made to be seen - front on. As with others, I'm quite impressed at how effectively it's used, and I can't wait to see things like sports in 3D.
> 
> I've seen movies made for 3D as well as older movies that were redone for 3D and I've been pretty impressed every time.


yah middle is the best 
i watch Avatar and how to train your dragon in 3D and it wasnt blurry for me at all. i gotta say it was really clear for me


----------



## WiyRay (Jan 11, 2009)

Just gotta remember to wear contacts instead of glasses before going to those movies


----------



## arktixan (Mar 30, 2010)

Avatar crappy 3D? wow I think thats a first for me to hear...
I thought it was amazing well worth the money i paid for thats for sure...
Coraline was decent was well in 3D.

I really didnt care for Alice in 3D, I really wished I just watched it in 2D.
I was dissapointed in UP as well... 

Next on the list is How to train your dragon...


----------



## AquaNekoMobile (Feb 26, 2010)

How much are 3D movies anyways? Do you have to go to like the Ontario Science Center to see them? Any tips for discount times to see the 3D movies? I've not seen movies in a long time. Only movie I remember is Waynes World that I saw in the movies right now. If Mad Max 2 was in 3D I'd be camping out over night for the opening.  

So where are the 3D movie theaters in Toronto? When I think of IMAX I'm thinking like the golf ball dome at Ontario place and seeing a movie in there for some reason.

Hoping someone can help me out on this as I'm hoping on having a double bill of Avatar and Alice in Wonderland.


----------



## hojimoe (Mar 7, 2008)

many normal cineplex and famous players/silver city and empire theatres have some 3d movies, you just have to wear the silly 3d glasses


prices are from 14.50 (few $$ extra compaired to normal price) to $16.50


----------



## AquaNeko (Jul 26, 2009)

hojimoe said:


> many normal cineplex and famous players/silver city and empire theatres have some 3d movies, you just have to wear the silly 3d glasses
> 
> prices are from 14.50 (few $$ extra compaired to normal price) to $16.50


; I remember when it was about $5-6 to see a matinee (sp?) showing. I have heard in the US of A they do pat downs and hold cellphones/laptops before going to see the movies as they say to 'combat piracy'  It seems whatever the US of A does eventually the trickle down effect happens here. Do they do that at movie showings in the GTAA? Or is that a opening night/day thing? Thanks.


----------



## AquariAM (Jan 28, 2010)

AquaNeko said:


> ; I remember when it was about $5-6 to see a matinee (sp?) showing. I have heard in the US of A they do pat downs and hold cellphones/laptops before going to see the movies as they say to 'combat piracy'  It seems whatever the US of A does eventually the trickle down effect happens here. Do they do that at movie showings in the GTAA? Or is that a opening night/day thing? Thanks.


No but if they want me to never come again they can start


----------



## gucci17 (Oct 11, 2007)

I personally thought Avatar in 3D was really impressive. I sat in the middle of the theatre if that makes a difference. It was clear and I didn't get a headache like some people I knew did. I'm looking forward to watching more movies in 3D. 
On another note, has anyone watched Clash of the Titans yet?


----------



## Windowlicka (Mar 5, 2008)

WiyRay said:


> Just gotta remember to wear contacts instead of glasses before going to those movies


As a Brit, this comment made me think of the scene in Notting Hill... Sorry WiyRay!


----------



## aln (Jan 26, 2010)

Scar town center has specials on tuesday 
movies for 5$ and 3D for 8:50


----------



## AquaNekoMobile (Feb 26, 2010)

aln said:


> Scar town center has specials on tuesday
> movies for 5$ and 3D for 8:50


Got a link to that? What's the difference of IMAX 3D and 3D? I always think of IMAX films being in that big golf ball thing at Ontario Place.


----------

