Comments on: Are You Looking Forward To 3D Movies? http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/ TV and Movie News without the Sugar Coating Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:23:51 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Amalthia http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-96059 Amalthia Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:05:37 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-96059 Re: Philbert Finding 2D Up isn't the problem. It's finding the best 3D experience that's the problem. There are no IMAX theaters up here and apparently from what I'm reading if you want the best 3D experience you really need to see the movie in a true IMAX theater, not the mini-IMAX theaters. I think I'm just irked about Avatar coming out and not knowing if there will be a 2D version. Re: Philbert

Finding 2D Up isn’t the problem. It’s finding the best 3D experience that’s the problem. There are no IMAX theaters up here and apparently from what I’m reading if you want the best 3D experience you really need to see the movie in a true IMAX theater, not the mini-IMAX theaters.

I think I’m just irked about Avatar coming out and not knowing if there will be a 2D version.

]]> By: Philbert http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-96005 Philbert Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:13:10 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-96005 Sorry, Forgot to add the website http://www.fandango.com/99501_movietheatershowtimes?txtcityzip=alaska Sorry,

Forgot to add the website

http://www.fandango.com/99501_movietheatershowtimes?txtcityzip=alaska

]]> By: Philbert http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-96003 Philbert Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:12:33 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-96003 Amalthia, According to The Cinemark website there are at least three places showing Up in 2D Check out these schedules for Anchorage. Amalthia,

According to The Cinemark website there are at least three places showing Up in 2D

Check out these schedules for Anchorage.

]]> By: Amalthia http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-95628 Amalthia Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:34:17 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-95628 re: Philbert I live in Anchorage Alaska. There isn't even an IMAX up here. :( And there is only one new theater (as in built in the last 5 or 6 years) re: Philbert

I live in Anchorage Alaska. There isn’t even an IMAX up here. :( And there is only one new theater (as in built in the last 5 or 6 years)

]]> By: Philbert http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-95571 Philbert Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:14:52 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-95571 Where do you live. All Cinemark theatres in the Bay Area in San Francisco show both versions. They also only charge 2.50 extra if you want to see the 3D version. Where do you live. All Cinemark theatres in the Bay Area in San Francisco show both versions. They also only charge 2.50 extra if you want to see the 3D version.

]]> By: Amalthia http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-94118 Amalthia Fri, 29 May 2009 17:57:39 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-94118 I saw My Bloody Valentine and even with the new technology wearing a pair of glasses over a pair of glasses just didn't work. I got a headache and it really makes me want to cry that Avatar is going to be in 3D because it really sounds like an awesome movie. I think it would be great if they could have 2 versions. One in 2D (for people with glasses and for those that don't want to pay another 5 bucks) and the other in 3D for everyone else. I saw My Bloody Valentine and even with the new technology wearing a pair of glasses over a pair of glasses just didn’t work.

I got a headache and it really makes me want to cry that Avatar is going to be in 3D because it really sounds like an awesome movie.

I think it would be great if they could have 2 versions. One in 2D (for people with glasses and for those that don’t want to pay another 5 bucks) and the other in 3D for everyone else.

]]> By: Ken J http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-73293 Ken J Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:27:25 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-73293 It's most likely to do with the framerate thing. 3D or 2D, if you watch something at a lower framerate than your eyes and brain likes (the range is different for everyone, some people have lower tolerances than others) you will end up with a headache, or worse, motion sickness. 3D movies have to show one frame for left, the other for right, so in essence, your brain interprets these TWO frames as ONE, essentially cutting the actual framerate of the movie in half. So watching a movie in 2D is kind of like a 30fps movie, while in 3D it becomes 15fps to your eyes and brain. Some people can't take this low framerate. I'm borderline. If it's in first person view (such as games), I'll NEED a minimum of 30fps, but if it's not in first person, like in movies or 3rd person games, then 15fps is fine. It’s most likely to do with the framerate thing. 3D or 2D, if you watch something at a lower framerate than your eyes and brain likes (the range is different for everyone, some people have lower tolerances than others) you will end up with a headache, or worse, motion sickness. 3D movies have to show one frame for left, the other for right, so in essence, your brain interprets these TWO frames as ONE, essentially cutting the actual framerate of the movie in half. So watching a movie in 2D is kind of like a 30fps movie, while in 3D it becomes 15fps to your eyes and brain. Some people can’t take this low framerate. I’m borderline. If it’s in first person view (such as games), I’ll NEED a minimum of 30fps, but if it’s not in first person, like in movies or 3rd person games, then 15fps is fine.

]]> By: Philbert http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-73240 Philbert Mon, 23 Mar 2009 17:49:45 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-73240 Loved Coraline - not a headache in sight? You may want to go to an eye doctor. Loved Coraline – not a headache in sight? You may want to go to an eye doctor.

]]> By: Aaron http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-72704 Aaron Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:18:10 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-72704 Coraline is stop motion. Depending on how much digital smoothing they did inbetween the frames, the rapid transition of objects from frame-to-frame will be jarring. Also, stereo 3D only works well if the director uses it well. Since you have control over depth through focus and parallax (you control how the viewer will focus), you can really hurt someone's brain by making sudden changes or by slowly adjusting the different settings to different extremes. Coraline is stop motion. Depending on how much digital smoothing they did inbetween the frames, the rapid transition of objects from frame-to-frame will be jarring.

Also, stereo 3D only works well if the director uses it well. Since you have control over depth through focus and parallax (you control how the viewer will focus), you can really hurt someone’s brain by making sudden changes or by slowly adjusting the different settings to different extremes.

]]> By: Ken J http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-72615 Ken J Sat, 21 Mar 2009 08:58:36 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-72615 You do not wear glasses AND you have 20/20 vision? Wow, I don't wear hearing aids and I have perfect hearing! :-D lol, just kidding with you man. You do not wear glasses AND you have 20/20 vision? Wow, I don’t wear hearing aids and I have perfect hearing! :-D

lol, just kidding with you man.

]]> By: Jordan Zim http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-72613 Jordan Zim Sat, 21 Mar 2009 08:10:09 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-72613 I just saw Coraline in 3D and have a massive headache and intense pain in one eye. I do not wear glasses and have 20/20 vision. Anyone have any idea why this happened? I just saw Coraline in 3D and have a massive headache and intense pain in one eye. I do not wear glasses and have 20/20 vision.

Anyone have any idea why this happened?

]]> By: Tony Robertson http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-65854 Tony Robertson Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:57:22 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-65854 Also I should to the above comment that the red and blue glasses will bother your eyes because those colors just plain clash. Also I should to the above comment that the red and blue glasses will bother your eyes because those colors just plain clash.

]]> By: Tony Robertson http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-65852 Tony Robertson Sun, 22 Feb 2009 09:53:55 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-65852 I see that there was some confusion about red and blue glasses that was cleared up but I just wanted to add something. All the 3d movies coming out in the 50's starting with Bwana Devil in 52 were polarized, not the 3d that uses red and blue. It was the 3d comic books at that time that did red and blue. Since then it has been color tv that has done the red and blue because televisions can't do polarized. Some time around 1982 or 83 our local television station did Gorilla at Large in 3d and the station provided the red and blue glasses at local supermarkets. I have seen so many comments about red and blue glasses of the 3d movies form the 50's on other websites. Jaws 3d in 1983 was polarized when I saw it in Springfield Missouri at the time. Also I wear the 3d glasses over my glasses and it doesn't bother me at all, I think it only would bother you if you just sit there a dwell on it, just like it might hurt your eyes if you sit there and dwell on they fact your having to narrow your vision when something in the movie seems to come closer. However it doesn't seem to hurt peoples eye when looking at something close up in real life, at least I've never heard anyone complain about it. I think it has more to do with the fact that people aren't used to it so they dwell on it to much so it then in turn bohters them, but if they just relax a little bit that bothering effect would probably go away. All 3d glasses do is filter light, it should not bother the eyes of the viewer. I see that there was some confusion about red and blue glasses that was cleared up but I just wanted to add something. All the 3d movies coming out in the 50’s starting with Bwana Devil in 52 were polarized, not the 3d that uses red and blue. It was the 3d comic books at that time that did red and blue. Since then it has been color tv that has done the red and blue because televisions can’t do polarized. Some time around 1982 or 83 our local television station did Gorilla at Large in 3d and the station provided the red and blue glasses at local supermarkets. I have seen so many comments about red and blue glasses of the 3d movies form the 50’s on other websites. Jaws 3d in 1983 was polarized when I saw it in Springfield Missouri at the time. Also I wear the 3d glasses over my glasses and it doesn’t bother me at all, I think it only would bother you if you just sit there a dwell on it, just like it might hurt your eyes if you sit there and dwell on they fact your having to narrow your vision when something in the movie seems to come closer. However it doesn’t seem to hurt peoples eye when looking at something close up in real life, at least I’ve never heard anyone complain about it. I think it has more to do with the fact that people aren’t used to it so they dwell on it to much so it then in turn bohters them, but if they just relax a little bit that bothering effect would probably go away. All 3d glasses do is filter light, it should not bother the eyes of the viewer.

]]> By: Ken J http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-62303 Ken J Sun, 08 Feb 2009 12:18:45 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-62303 LOL Ick, good point, what does 2D bring to the story??? Hmmmm? Answer us that! :-D LOL Ick, good point, what does 2D bring to the story??? Hmmmm? Answer us that! :-D

]]> By: Ick of the East http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-62087 Ick of the East Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:30:32 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-62087 Since 3D was the default entertainment viewing method for thousands of years, you might instead ask, "What does the 2D platform bring to the story?" The world is 3D. 2D is distortion, unless you walk around all day with one eye closed. I can't wait to be sitting behind home plate when that pitch comes in..in 3D. It is going to be wonderful. And why is it OK to wear headphones to hear stereo music, but not OK to wear glasses to see stereo entertainment? Not that the glasses will be around much longer, but think about it. Since 3D was the default entertainment viewing method for thousands of years, you might instead ask, “What does the 2D platform bring to the story?”

The world is 3D. 2D is distortion, unless you walk around all day with one eye closed.

I can’t wait to be sitting behind home plate when that pitch comes in..in 3D. It is going to be wonderful.

And why is it OK to wear headphones to hear stereo music, but not OK to wear glasses to see stereo entertainment?
Not that the glasses will be around much longer, but think about it.

]]> By: Ken J http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-61667 Ken J Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:02:05 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-61667 Especially since an ad during the superbowl costs how many million??? lol Especially since an ad during the superbowl costs how many million??? lol

]]> By: Vic Holtreman http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-61610 Vic Holtreman Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:04:16 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-61610 @Philbert I agree completely. It's the equivalent of an expensive steak restaurant advertising by giving away McDonalds cheeseburgers. That's a big, fat fail for Dreamworks/Paramount. Vic @Philbert

I agree completely. It’s the equivalent of an expensive steak restaurant advertising by giving away McDonalds cheeseburgers.

That’s a big, fat fail for Dreamworks/Paramount.

Vic

]]> By: Bruce Simmons http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-61597 Bruce Simmons Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:26:41 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-61597 Hey Philbert... thanks for coming by... did you check out some of the comments preceding yours? That's why one of my own comments was asking folks to tell us what was good or bad for them. They enlightened us and yes, DWs did, for some strange reason, pump up their ridiculous 3D ad for those stuuupid glasses indeed. Hey Philbert… thanks for coming by… did you check out some of the comments preceding yours? That’s why one of my own comments was asking folks to tell us what was good or bad for them. They enlightened us and yes, DWs did, for some strange reason, pump up their ridiculous 3D ad for those stuuupid glasses indeed.

]]> By: Philbert http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-61596 Philbert Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:14:35 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-61596 Wow! There is a lot of misunderstanding and confusion about 3D out there. There are several extensive web sites including Wikipedia that can shed some light on the various processes. And there are more than you'd think. I wouldn't attempt to correct the many misconceptions here but I feel obligated to say that Dreamworks did a hugh disservice to the 3D process with their pathetic attempt to advertise "Monsters vs. Aliens" during the superbowl on Sunday. They chose the worst possible form of 3D presentation, anaglyph, to advertise a film being released in the best possible 3D presentation process to date, digital 3D with circular polarization. Before the uninitiated criticize 3D because of that crappy commercial, at least see one digital 3D presentation at a theatre. I think you will be both surprised and impressed. And as for those who say the process adds nothing to films I suspect you are not the person who would attend the types of films 3D is presently being used for. Just as I have no interest in "chick flick romances" I don't criticize them because they have their appreciative audiences. So how about you non believers give 3D film fans a break and let us enjoy the current crop of 3D without all your nay-saying negativism. Wow! There is a lot of misunderstanding and confusion about 3D out there. There are several extensive web sites including Wikipedia that can shed some light on the various processes. And there are more than you’d think.

I wouldn’t attempt to correct the many misconceptions here but I feel obligated to say that Dreamworks did a hugh disservice to the 3D process with their pathetic attempt to advertise “Monsters vs. Aliens” during the superbowl on Sunday. They chose the worst possible form of 3D presentation, anaglyph, to advertise a film being released in the best possible 3D presentation process to date, digital 3D with circular polarization.

Before the uninitiated criticize 3D because of that crappy commercial, at least see one digital 3D presentation at a theatre. I think you will be both surprised and impressed.

And as for those who say the process adds nothing to films I suspect you are not the person who would attend the types of films 3D is presently being used for. Just as I have no interest in “chick flick romances” I don’t criticize them because they have their appreciative audiences. So how about you non believers give 3D film fans a break and let us enjoy the current crop of 3D without all your nay-saying negativism.

]]> By: Aaron http://screenrant.com/3d-movies-brusimm-5274/comment-page-2/#comment-61503 Aaron Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:45:03 +0000 http://screenrant.com/?p=5274#comment-61503 Right, but modern TV's and computer monitors are being built with the 120mhz speed, which enables polarization, etc. So this Red/Blue gimmick before the big switch is just silly. Right, but modern TV’s and computer monitors are being built with the 120mhz speed, which enables polarization, etc.

So this Red/Blue gimmick before the big switch is just silly.

]]>