Comments on: Is The 3D Film Fad Finally Coming To An End?

By: AssassinLV

AssassinLV — Mon, 25 Jun 2018 16:08:00 +0000

I just checked – there is no “Spider-Man 3 (2007)” in 3D…
Though – “Amazing Spider-Man (2012)” was…
You probably meant “Amazing Spider-Man” while saying “Spider-Man 3” – those are 2 different movies.

By: HaveSomeIntegrity

HaveSomeIntegrity — Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:35:00 +0000

In reply to chltjwls. It's ok to admit when you're wrong chltjwls. Youll feel better afterwards.

By: chltjwls

chltjwls — Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:29:00 +0000

In reply to HaveSomeIntegrity.

Ironically just confirms my comment even further, since you didn’t provide any source.

Here’s another one, from Susan Wloszczyna in 2006 (https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2006-06-27-superman-3d_x.htm)

“Sony says Spider-Man 3 is pretty much out of the running (“We’re just trying to finish the movie,” Bruer says), but Warner Bros. could cast a dimensional spell over Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, already booked into large-screen theaters for July 13 next year.”

By: HaveSomeIntegrity

HaveSomeIntegrity — Sun, 15 Apr 2018 03:35:00 +0000

In reply to chltjwls. I'm glad you finally see things my way. I know it had to be hard for you to admit that you were wrong.

By: chltjwls

chltjwls — Sun, 15 Apr 2018 01:37:00 +0000

In reply to HaveSomeIntegrity.

No, it was NEVER released in 3D. It was released in IMAX 2D 70mm film, but not in 3D. There also isn’t a single source that even hints 3D showings. In fact, there’s a source regarding no plans for Spider-Man 3 in 3D.
http://www.canmag.com/news/4/3/4259

The Amazing Spider-Man is the first Spider-Man movie to be released in 3D, and the only Spider-Man movie shot in 3D.

By: HaveSomeIntegrity

HaveSomeIntegrity — Sun, 15 Apr 2018 00:32:00 +0000

In reply to chltjwls. yes it did, it was awful. It ended the run with Tobey even though it was financially a success. Critics and fans alike panned it and felt robbed of their money.

By: chltjwls

chltjwls — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:59:00 +0000

In reply to HaveSomeIntegrity. Spider-Man 3 never came out in 3D.

By: chltjwls

chltjwls — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 06:57:00 +0000

In reply to Classax. Jigsaw was never released in 3D, there was no 3D plan.

By: CRASH_Override

CRASH_Override — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 05:00:00 +0000

The price they charge for 3D is likely a huge factor. Ironically, the pricing just makes me wait till it hits 3D Blu-ray, otherwise I’ll rent it at Redbox for $1.50 in 2D.

By: CRASH_Override

CRASH_Override — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 04:58:00 +0000

In reply to Pi3OhPah. Having two eyes and seeing depth is a gimmick?

By: CRASH_Override

CRASH_Override — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 04:55:00 +0000

In reply to flickerKuu. HD and color don't make the story better either, what's your point?

By: CRASH_Override

CRASH_Override — Fri, 06 Apr 2018 04:53:00 +0000

In reply to Jafafa Hots. If by force you mean two options the consumer can choose from freely, then yeah.

By: mikesco

mikesco — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 22:53:00 +0000

I love watching movies in 3D, but price is an issue… One thing that really hurts demand is that Movie Pass does not work with 3d movies, I believe this is having a huge effect on it’s popularity.

By: WEWLAD394

WEWLAD394 — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 22:00:00 +0000

In reply to feeesh. plus $20 for parking

By: Aaron S. Montalvo

Aaron S. Montalvo — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:54:00 +0000

If films are gonna be only 2D, it’s ok if it’s for non-tentpole films like John Wick, Grease or some original or indie films. But I think tentpole films would flop if it was released only in 2D. Just look at Power Rangers 2017. Yes Deadpool and Logan did succeed, but other films that looks like tentpole material wouldn’t succeed if it’s only in 2D.

Lionsgate stopped releasing tentpole films in 3D, much to the US box office flop of PR2017, Early Man and the My Little Pony movie. (Although the latter two were modest successes than PR)

Not to mention, they started the trend of “2D animated films should stay only in 2D for theatrical releases” with the upcoming Teen Titans Go! To the Movies after the MLP movie was released.

By: flickerKuu

flickerKuu — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:53:00 +0000

In reply to Braaainz. Tech doesn't make the story any better.

By: flickerKuu

flickerKuu — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:52:00 +0000

“3d conversions of superhero movies”

Blecccch… garbage. Start writing good crap.

By: Jafafa Hots

Jafafa Hots — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:33:00 +0000

I don’t think it was a fad. Fads are things driven when consumers latch onto something and demand it. This was something forced upon consumers.

By: Classax

Classax — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 21:14:00 +0000

The problem is three fold, A)Shooting in 3D provides a very different result than 2d conversions. Live action shot in 3d keeps everything in the frame in focus so your eyes and brain actually work in real time the way they do in real life. 2d conversions are often pointless because only the foreground is in focus so there is no depth for the eye to precieve.

And B), many of the movies where just plain sucked as a vehicles for 3d. Most of the Transformer films are nearly unwatchable. Blade runner, what was the point. Godzilla 75% of that one was filmed as wide night shots, so there was nothing to see vs Kong Shull Island with nearly all narrow day shots with lots of fore, mid and background set pieces in every shot.

And finally C) Still other films where just plain poor movies the public not only didn’t pay to see in 3d, they didn’t pay to see them in theaters at all. Seriously who went to see Geostorm? Jigsaw? Or Smurfs? A 120″ screen 3d projector and full Atmos sound in my house means I don’t go to the theater unless the film is so awesome I just can’t wait. Ie I didn’t see Justice League, Jumanji or GOG II until bluray release, but saw Black Pather in IMAX 3d twice!

By: David Drafahl

David Drafahl — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:58:00 +0000

James Cameron doesn’t do what James Cameron does for James Cameron. James Cameron does what James Cameron does because James Cameron is… James Cameron.

By: Kevin Sanders

Kevin Sanders — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:54:00 +0000

I don’t have a problem with 3D movies, I have a problem with shitty dark shades that are scratched to shit that make it hard to see the movie. either the 3D needs to stop or theaters need to stop using “recycled” scratched glasses, and turn up the bright when its a 3D movie… shit I can’t even see 3D with or without the glasses but it makes seeing the movie in 3D with friends not worth it cause I have to watch it again in 2D to see what I missed in the dark & smudged parts of the film…

By: HaveSomeIntegrity

HaveSomeIntegrity — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:48:00 +0000

Not EVERY film should be 3D. It’s literally ruined films just looking to use it as a gimmick when it played no significant role. Look at how awful Spiderman 3 was. I haven’t watched a 3D film in ages. Would I watch Avatar 2 in 3D? Yes. Of Course. It was shot in 3D and made specifically for 3D.

By: alt animation podcast

alt animation podcast — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:48:00 +0000

In reply to Paul Rice. this is a very ridiculous viewpoint in my opinion. 3d animated films and live action arent that far apart, and certainly arent different in how the 3d aspect affects story. If a movie is designed with 3d in mind, then its better. Most live action movies did the 3d effect in post as an after thought and did it bad.

By: Pi3OhPah

Pi3OhPah — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:39:00 +0000

I saw Avatar in 3D also, was a gimmick then and still is a gimmick used to charge even more for movies. For myself it did not add anything worthwhile to the movie experience.

By: Mikey Geraci

Mikey Geraci — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:24:00 +0000

In reply to JED89. uuh im pretty sure theres like 2-3 more avatars in the works, do some research. considering the first one took 10 years to make. dumbass.