Poll: Why do people hate 3D?

[BeeGeenie]

It's a stupid gimmick and a shameless excuse for them to charge even more ungodly prices at the theater. I used to go to the theater all the time, but haven't been in months 'cause the price has doubled... I sure as heck am not going to pay even more for some stupid novelty.

3D is a practical joke that Hollywood is playing on the entire movie-going world.

 

[Nickolai77]

One thing i find about 3D films is that you tend to notice all the 3D effects at the start of the film but as the film progresses you don't see it so much. That's not say the 3D effects arn't there, it's just that after a while you stop noticing it. Which is why i don't like the idea of paying extra for my ticket just to see a special effect that i will only appreciate at the start of the film.

 

[drosalion]

The only movies I thought the 3D was actually done well - in that it actually added to the experience in a good way - were Avatar and Tron. It definitely has its place, but it is incredibly rare for it to be necessary (and even rarer that its actually done well).

 

[Faladorian]

When it comes to the movies, 3D is just a stupid reason to gouge out 5 more dollars from me.

Also, I NEVER ASKED FOR 3D. I don't want movies in 3D, it's stupid.




That being said, I absolutely love my 3DS to death. The 3D is amazing, despite what people say. And you may not realize it if you just tinker with a 3DS, but playing an entire game with heavily-extended 3D environments makes you fall into the screen. Immersion is through the roof.


Even despite the lack of games (KH3D was great but only 24 hours long...) I still want to be buried with the damn thing. Genius handheld.

Sorry I lost track of what I was saying.

 

[Beautiful End]

1. The price. As of lately, the 3D movies have a pletora of different showings during the day while the "normal" movies only have like 4 or 5 max. (At least where I'm at) So that kinda forces me to spend more and maybe skip the popcorn.

2. They ARE gimmicky. Some movies are meant to revolve around that feature. Check every Resident Evil and Final Destination movie trailer ever since they started using 3D and you'll see what I mean. They throw more stuff at the screen for no reason at all, they make stuff bloodier, more explosions, etc.

3. Some movies just use it as an excuse to rack up more money. When I watched the latest Pirates of the Caribbean movie, it was supposedly on 3D. For whatever reason, I took off my shades at some point and I realized it wasn't always on 3D. Some portions of the movie were while others weren't, don't ask me why. So if anything, they should deduct 50% off my ticket price.

4. Indeed, they work better with animation. I enjoyed How to Train your Dragon and Tangled on 3D. It worked great because they can manipulate the environment and characters to do whatever they want so that they can take full advantage of the 3D. I still hated paying so much for it but whatever. It's a one-time thing. But when a "normal" movie does that, it just makes it look...pretty. And unlike animated movie, it's not the kind of "Oooo, I'm in the freakin' movie!" pretty. It's more like "Oh, neat" pretty. In order to take advantage of it, they usually do all sorts of gimmicky things to justify it (See: Point #2)

I don't hate it but I hate the fact that they charge more for it. They're just pretty pop-up images. This applies to both movies and 3D gaming. Why should I be forced to get into that 3D wave in order to be "hip and cool"? And in gaming, it doesn't even make that big of a difference. 3D or not, I can still beat the game. When we get into interactive gaming/movie watching, then we'll talk.

 

[Eleuthera]

One more for the don't like it group. Wearing 3D glasses over my normal glasses sucks, so either it's blurry because I can't wear my glasses, or it's blurry because I can wear the 3D ones.
I'm also colourblind, and though it's not a direct problem (or it shouldn't be) I still feel it might impact the 3D somewhat, since my non colourblind friends never seem to have the problems I have.

Made worse by the fact that there are no 2D versions of movies available in my town (unless there is no 3D version of course).

 

[Kae]

Well it gives me a headache, and wearing two layers of glasses is really uncomfortable, not to mention it's more expensive, and the most annoying thing is that when I've gone to the movies with friends and they don't tell me it's 3D it's really hard to enjoy the movie, since I have to choose between a headache and the movie looking awful, but anyway I guess I just hate it.

 

[RN7]

Because the shoddy 3D most movies (and by extension, the 3DS) use is literally sickening, on top of being an unnecessary gimmick that just adds fluff to a movie. There's no real reason for it, and as such, the general quality of most 3D things takes away from the experience. Good 3D can be "cool" I suppose, but I still don't like it. Plus, the glasses are dumb.

 

[johnnnny guitar]

I like 3D when done right in film and I LOVE it when done well in games if more games have the 3D quality of Trine 2 and Civilization 5 then I think 3D will become more widely used at least in gaming but I do hate 3D cash grabs and think it hurts the technology and audience expectation

 

[Kyrian007]

It's bad. It destroys about a decade's worth of 2d resolution and color upgrades and reduces something I'm seeing in a digital theater to a quality on par with the 1990's. Current gen 2d digital is bright, vibrant, with infinite colorscale and focus depth. Current gen 3d features muted colorscale (thru polarized lenses) and anything behind a "pop" 3d item fades into a blurry out of focus mess after a depth of about 6 feet or so.

And the "pop" images themselves... look even worse. Shadow-ish, blurry, optical illusions that better be moving at high speed because the longer you look at it the more you realize how terribly it is rendered.

In short, it looks terrible. It's exactly the same technology developed in the 1930's just with better resolution. It was a gimmick in the late 1950's, it was a gimmick in the early 1980's, and it will go away just as fast now because it's a gimmick here in the 2010's.

Stereoscopic 3d will always be a pretty worthless technology. Until projectors gain the ability to project accurately into a 3d space, 3d technology will just be a useless curiosity.

 

[cerealnmuffin]

i can't see 3d in movies, games, or books due to my eyes. The eye muscle in one of my eyes doesn't work. If my good eye is covered or has its vision through a filter, I want to throw up. It actually makes me quite nauseous. Though to be fair, I have only been to the theaters at most once a year. I just dislike the 'theater' experience and don't really like movies much anyways. So the whole plethora of 3d hasn't really affected me save for a friend dismayed I couldn't see the 3d on the 3ds. Might just pick up a psp instead as the 3ds makes me sick and kind of a waste to buy it and not even use its supposed amazing feature.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

Because i've to play 15% more for a film, which isn't 15% more awesome due to 3D.
Usually there are not more than 1-2 forced scenes that makes watching 3d worthwile. The first was the last film using it correctly: Avatar.

Also alot of people get headaches and i know friends who simply can't watch it, since they don't see 3D. So the question is always: "Is the film 3d? Yes? Ok, i stay at home."

3D is hype-moneygrab. And i hate moneygrab unless it provides me with awesomeness.

 

[Valanthe]

I don't really know about anyone else's reasons, but I can't watch 3D movies. And I mean that in a very literal sense, I get migraines, bad ones, and things that cause eye strain, (Flourescent lights in particular are terrible, which is why I hate CFL bulbs) very much aggrivate this. I've found that animated movies in 3D don't agitate me, or movies that do it correctly like Avatar I can handle, but trying to watch something like Captain America in 3D left me feeling sick and I nearly couldn't stay through the whole thing.

 

[MysticToast]

Because it hurts my eyes and, as a glasses wearer, the glasses are uncomfortable.

Oh and the fact that it's unnecessary.

 

[Rule Britannia]

I watched the Avengers in 3D...It was my best 3D experience ever

I used to get headaches from watching in 3D but that doesn't seem it happen anymore

The only thing I hate about 3D is having to wear the glasses, they're uncomfortable and a nuisance.

 

[loc978]

Just makes the movie blurry and unwatchable for people like me with damaged eyes, so... yeah, it's pretty exclusionary. Also, I remember 3D when I was a kid in the 80s, back before the aforementioned eye damage... it was nothing to write home about. Depth of field tricks just look like cardboard cutout puppet shows. Pretty sure 2D screens will be the best thing available until we have widely available, compact holographic emitters.

Also this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uIVkhtU1Ls#t=1m55s].

 

[RedDeadFred]

It's fine for movies that are meant to be visual spectacles without much substance (in fact I think it makes them better) but I would find it extremely distracting in more serious films.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

What are the disadvantages? Uh. Ha. Well, speaking from experience:

1. The glasses aren't always clean. One time, I couldn't even use them, the movie looked LESS blurry without them. And I tried to clean them. Like, every 5 minutes. Because I was watching a blurry, 2-D movie and I didn't have much else to do. Didn't help at all. Believe me, if I could've cleaned them, they would have been cleaned.

2. Hurts my eyes and head after a while. I have to periodically lift them up and give myself a break.

3. It only works for a very specific kind of shot, and ruins others. Look at Prometheus: The opening shots of Earth are fucking astounding, as are many of the really wide "eye-candy" shots. But when it's just a bunch of people with a big, complicated hologram thingie in the middle? Totally ruins it. Everything gets blurry whenever the camera moves too fast, so it's impossible to focus on anything. Plus, the blurriness just adds to my head/eye pain. But the hologram just looks SO COOL I guess it's totally worth it.

4. I know this isn't inherent to 3D effects, but LOTS of filmmakers and studios tend to abuse it. I have a feeling that's what MOST people are talking about when they complain about 3-D. I'm sure there are a lot of people who actually aren't bothered by the effect like I am, but dislike how it's currently being used: As a cheap cash-cow with (somewhat ironically) no actual substance.

5. After reading the OP, I'm not entirely sure we're watching the same 3D movies. The OP seems to be under the impression that stereoscopic 3D effects can mimic an actual 3-dimensional space flawlessly. And it can't. It really, REALLY can't. I mean, sure, 3D is great in theory, but the technology just isn't there yet.

 

[Alternative]

The 3D that they use in movies at the moment is really bad for your eyesight.

because each eye is trying to focus on a image it percieves as different depths it starts spazzing out.

So while you're watching a 3D movie your eyes and the sight portion of your brain are freaking out trying to rapidly adjust to the different fields of depth.

Needles to say this is horribly damaging to your eye sight.

 

[Reaper195]

I've seen three movies which 3D improved. Lion Kind, Titanic and Avatar. Aside from that, it has always ended up making the movie harder to watch because I friggin' hate wearing the glasses over my own glasses. Not to mention it drives the prices for the movie through the fuckin' roof. And it's worse when we don't get offered a 2D version.