|
|
|
|
#5
09-20-2010
|
||||
|
||||
Muse, Nik, I concur with all my heart, compare Avatar's millions of wasted dollars to Withnail and I, which cost all of 1000 dollars to make or The Man from Earth, which if possible, cost less than this and see which are the historical classic's and which is something doomed to gather dust in the masses cupboards, (I do not use masses negatively and include my family in that regard, despite technically none of us owning example of Avatar, we all known films were brought them because considered big thing, but then realise after watching them once, maybe twice how mundane they truly are and never watch them again)
=The problem with 3D in my opinion (as I realise that could be wrong massively here) is that it is Hollywood admitting it has run out of idea's and that audiences are getting bored with seeing same film under different title all the time, which is why film industries of Japan, UK, china and especially france/Bollywood are having massive growth while Hollywood is in slow decline, however Hollywood makes so many movies all time that it lacks the dexterity to change its under-core media, without losing lot of what it is unwilling to lose and so while will (however much I hate to admit it) throw just as many good films as the rest of the world, it will throw our millions more crap ones and these craps are considered that for reason, they are of low quality and so think that those making them, could suddenly change and inspire themselves into brilliance is navie, so how to fix this problem????? -Simple, do what Hollywood does best, throw money and technology at the problem, however why waste money on new idea, when just bring back this ancient form of versional effect which failed to impress even our positive thinking 80's/90's parents, give it face lift and say hole new form of cool and makes even same tired idea as become new, the problem is, I am happy to say that after a small success with Avatar, this is generally failing and so maybe hollywood may have to bite the bullet and accept, now got to quality over quantity if they want to remain a powerhouse in film world 
|
|
#6
09-20-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Unfortunately, Fared, Avatar will be remembered in hundreds of years time, simply because it's the highest grossing film ever and for it's visual effects, which I highly respect. However, it is as you say, these films will never be part of the canon, as it were, they'll never be put into a filmgoer's top ten, because all they are is looks. They have no substance, nothing worthy of claiming the top awards.
3D is a gimmick. A huge one. And what annoys me most, I think, is that before 3D, HD was the big gimmick - if it was in HD, it was a great movie, as was the general feeling. And with films like Avatar and Toy Story 3, the HD is is lost. The beautiful colour of these films is lost behind those tacky glasses which take away 30% of the colour. With films like Toy Story, it's OK, because, without 3D, it's a genuinely fantastic film. I think you've hit a point with Hollywood being out of ideas. But I don't think they're out of them, merely know what sells and can see a market there, which is a shame, because it kills the classics. HD was more than bearable, because it actually looked good and really did liven up your screen. But 3D, beside ruining the HD, barely even works. For example, take Clash of the Titans. That was shot in 2D, but converted and, as a result, looked terrible. The 3D just about looks good. If you watch a proper 3D film, the ones for kids, where they spray water in your face and you chair moves - that's ten times better than any of these new ones because they don't work in 2D. Luckily, recognised canonical filmmakers don't fall into the trap of 3D and realise that, as Mark Kermode made an oath to, it will die in a couple of years. One can only hope.
|
|
#7
09-27-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Certain movies can pull 3D off well. Despicable Me is one of them. And How To Train Your Dragon.
|
|
#9
10-29-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
i saw avatar in 3d and non 3d. i'm not going to get into the storyline here so i'll just leave it with: in this case 3d made the movie.
hollywood is out of ideas so yeah they're turning to refilming hundreds of films and ruining them...and ruining them in 3d. i despise 3d because most of the time it's a severe waste. personally i don't like 3d in general. it gives me a migraine. almost everyone i know from work and friends has said they get headaches from 3d movies. there've been studies on this that show that the majority of people either get motion sickness or headaches from 3d. BUT hollywood can make monies off those who don't...and that is the bottom line. it's a phase and like everything else it will pass. i just wish it never got started again.
|
|
#10
11-14-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nyeh, 3D.....more less story...more special effects...yay.... I think it belong inside of themeparks, where all the overrrated stuff can go. Sice §D is so popular every big hosted movie was completely overrated. Especially because the §D-effects are mostly low and not important. I watched Avatar in 3D, then in normal seight. No difference in sight, just 5 euros cheaper!!! Okay, maybe 3D could be funny, when the filmproducers would have had some creativity. But no. The same old special effects like we seen already in the old StarWars-movies. And they were better than all 3D-films these days. Even better than Avatar (i love this film, even its in 3D).
§D-movies let the film-industries just produce faster than ever before. Hillarious, 5 new big movies in a month. And next month, i can buy it on DVD. Hollywood just begins to proiduce dreams like Ford began to build cars - in a row, and we could imagine how colorfull, verrsatile and varied any movies would be in the future. 3D is just a nitrokick for the movieindustries...
|
|
#11
11-21-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Relevant link:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18877...e-to-suck.html In a nutshell, 3D movies don't have to suck if they're done properly, but studios aren't willing to put that much effort (i.e. money) into them.
|
|
#13
12-27-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
With films like avatar, you must film with an expensive 3D camera, as opposed to CGI movies that are aimed at kids that they just have to manipulate the foreground of; which is why they insist on making EVERY FREAKING KIDS MOVIE IN 3D NOWDAYS! Gah. This gimmick is getting out of hand...
|
|
#15
08-29-2011
|
||||
|
||||
|
ok some movies like avatar did good with 3d, but I found it better without it on a blue ray as well. I can see 3D ruining the new lion king, but i was glad they didn't ruin whinie the pooh lol. But all kidding aside I think that after watching a 2D version of cars it was fuzzy like on my old tv. 3D is also ruining 2D moves since they just sorta convert them to 2D. I did read about 2D glasses they might make it more bearable to watch a movie now. I guess I just have to wait for the cheep theater to get movies to watch them.
|
 |
|
|
