Comments on: 2011: The Year In 3D

By: Tony R

Tony R — Sun, 22 May 2016 04:43:53 +0000

I agree with Mattheww. I think some kind of display will come along in about 10 years that will make 3d much more of a must have. I saw a "life in 2020 or 2030" video where the family was watching a tv the size of their whole wall, and the images jumped off the screen but none of them where wearing glasses. I think glasses that can display images like a computer screen but still let you see everything in front of you will come along. They will also go dark and let you watch a movie that looks like a large 20 foot screen is 15 feet in front of you, and it will be in seamless 3d, but even better, making it look like you are almost there. So technology will make 3d a must have especially for those under 40 years of age because it will "looks so good." However, the 3d they are doing now will really help us to arrive to that point because the discovery within 3d they are making now, so this 3d movement at the theater and in television is so important, though it may not seem like it right now.

By: mattheww

mattheww — Sun, 22 May 2016 04:43:53 +0000

Remember CD-ROM in the 90's? For it-seemed-like forever techie types were telling us that CD-ROM was going to change everything — multi-media! Hyperlinks! An encyclopedia on a disk! It sounded great in theory, then whole companies went bankrupt trying to foment that DOA revolution — which, when it finally hit, was called the internet.

That's how I feel about 3D. We're hungry for movies to be more immersive; there's a sense that something along those lines technologically within our grasp; we can even make out the fuzzy contours of what it might be. But just like the masses were never actually going to buy, store, and root around for identical-looking CD's every time they wanted to look up some niggly detail, so too we're not going to spend the rest of our days wearing stupid glasses every time we turn on the TV that turn everything into moving Viewmaster slides (and what looked less lifelike than those?)

I am certain that soon enough something will appear on the scene that fills the bill (and I bet it's not "glasses-free 3D.") When this new thing comes, all the people who have been tub-thumping 3D for the past few years will try to declare victory, and in fairness they won't be completely wrong. But just like the CD-ROM pioneers of old when the intertube finally came only, they also won't be the ones getting rich.

By: SK

SK — Sun, 22 May 2016 04:43:53 +0000

I'm not sure what to think of the Disney nostalgia trip.
Part of me thinks that most of the Playlist readers would rather go see The Lion King again, rather than most of the movies mentioned in this article (that were already released).
I've avoided most of the 3D movies, and regret going to see Captain America and Thor (I can't remember which played in 3D and which settled for "less").
That said, I'm looking forward to seeing Hugo and Gravity, but could almost care less for it being in 3D. I certainly would rather pay $10 than $14.

And it's almost like they're playing against themselves, trying to sell people on tablets, phones, and apps, pushing mobile viewing of programs and movies. And then spending $50 million to try to get people to pay extra for 3D at a theatre. $15 can get you a long way in the mobile world, why risk it on a mediocre movie milking Inception's soundtrack?