Why is 3-D making a comeback in cinema?- Page 2

[best12bars]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 1:03pm

Now THAT's entertainment, taz.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 1:10pm

I was paraphrasing Daryl F. Zanuck. His full quote was, "Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night," He said that in 1946 when the first TV sets became available. How wrong he was!

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 2:16pm

Another reason is that illegal bootlegs are taking a rather huge bite out of the entertainment industry. Much more than you might think.

[Brave Sir Robin2]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 3:44pm

I read somewhere it was cheap to make a film 3D and makes alot more money. Plus, Dream Works had a "Dragon"-themed film and Clash of the Titans both come out in 3D within the next 3 weeks AND Alice and Avatar are still making money. Despite a shortage of screens, 3D is here to stay.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 3:59pm

besty- The movie theatre I work at doesn't want people to give back their 3-D glasses. Too many germs and public health to worry about were the reasons, I presume. In fact my theatre prefers people keep the glasses though I do wonder what purpose they will have in keeping it though at the same time I still keep mine handy while I work so I can see 15-30 minutes of Avatar on my breaks. Most patrons leave their glasses in the theatre, in many cases completely destroyed in an half-empty tub of popcorn dribbled with butter and hawaiian punch icies. Now I just reminded myself I have work this weekend.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 4:54pm

I think the worst 3-D movie ever made was FRIDAY THE 13TH.

Just the worst thing ever put on film. My grandmother watched it with me and laughed.

Anyhoo, on the 3-D thing. I think it adds a layer to the film you never got before. I don't care for the gags at all, but I did notice that when I was caught up in the film, I found myself trying to peek around corners during tense moments, trying to see if I could get a peek at something. Then I remembered, 'Can't do that'! It just seemed a little more imersive, if that’s even a word.

[Craww]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 5:03pm

I'm ambivalent on 3-D. I'd probably like it if I had contacts, but I have to wear the damn glasses over my glasses and it gives me a serious headache. (I tried just not wearing my glasses, because my vision isn't awful, but the 3-D wouldn't work unless I had my perfect vision.)

I can't imagine Avatar without it. The depth the 3-D added got rid of some of that "carved out of cream cheese" effect that CGI has.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 6:13pm

One of the things that killed 3D originally was the studios putting every movie into 3D. The headaches were also a factor

One of the worst was Comin' At YA a 3D western. The DVD version bites it.

House Of Wax was the best of the original depthies.

The Mask came along in the 60's when 3D got another shot . It only had 3 5 minutes 3D sequences but they were very good.

[tazber]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 6:44pm

"I think the worst 3-D movie ever made was FRIDAY THE 13TH."

Are you talking about part 3 of the original series, diva?
I recently saw this in 3-D for the first time last month. It was so deliciously awful! I loved every cheesy second. And come on, the spear gun bit? Priceless.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 3/15/10 at 7:04pm

And the crushing of the head with the eye ball that pops out.

That's where my Grandmother lost it!