Comments on: WTF: 2D or Not 2D, That Is the Question http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php A Website About Movies Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:06:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: cheap r4i software http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159579 cheap r4i software Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:06:34 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159579 I think the Bible would have been better if Noah had a Holodeck on the ark. Imagine it: Instead of spending 40 days and 40 nights on a cramped ship full of filthy animals, Noah and his sons could have been in the Wild West. I think the Bible would have been better if Noah had a Holodeck on the ark. Imagine it: Instead of spending 40 days and 40 nights on a cramped ship full of filthy animals, Noah and his sons could have been in the Wild West.

]]> By: wdejong http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159580 wdejong Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:28:05 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159580 I can't watch 3D movies. They give me headaches. I can't watch 3D movies. They give me headaches.

]]> By: KevinCarr http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159582 KevinCarr Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:47:11 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159582 Are you talking about me? 'Cause these are all, in fact, my own words. Are you talking about me? 'Cause these are all, in fact, my own words.

]]> By: mychaleg http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159583 mychaleg Fri, 18 Sep 2009 07:36:11 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159583 who is this directed at? or is it, to whom is this directed? drana sense tingling! who is this directed at? or is it, to whom is this directed? drana sense tingling!

]]> By: Sam http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159581 Sam Fri, 18 Sep 2009 07:01:10 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159581 Next time you write something, try writing it in your own words rather than plagiarizing someone else's words from another blog. Next time you write something, try writing it in your own words rather than plagiarizing someone else's words from another blog.

]]> By: mychaleg http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-159584 mychaleg Fri, 18 Sep 2009 05:14:25 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-159584 from my experience, purely CG movies get the most benefit from 3D. UP was the best one, in my opinion. everything else wasn't worth the extra money - that's the biggest reason i'm avoiding 3D from now on (unless NIN does a concert movie). Mark Kermode had a wonderful rant on why charging extra for it is clearly a money grab gimmick for a struggling industry. This is a different vid he did about it, covering the same points: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi_02WkFcxQ" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi_02WkFcxQ</a> from my experience, purely CG movies get the most benefit from 3D. UP was the best one, in my opinion. everything else wasn't worth the extra money – that's the biggest reason i'm avoiding 3D from now on (unless NIN does a concert movie). Mark Kermode had a wonderful rant on why charging extra for it is clearly a money grab gimmick for a struggling industry. This is a different vid he did about it, covering the same points: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi_02WkFcxQ

]]> By: tylerdurden1681 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154407 tylerdurden1681 Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:28:02 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154407 I would have seen at least one 3D movie by now but all the theaters around don't support the 3D format so I get to see the 2D version. I tried watching My Bloody Valentine 3D at home but it didn't work so well and just ended up giving me a headache.<br> Maybe some day I'll get to live the dream cause the only real 3D movie I have seen in a theater was that Michael Jackson Disneyland 3D movie they had back in the 80's. Blew my mind even though I didn't really care about MJ all that much. I would have seen at least one 3D movie by now but all the theaters around don't support the 3D format so I get to see the 2D version. I tried watching My Bloody Valentine 3D at home but it didn't work so well and just ended up giving me a headache.
Maybe some day I'll get to live the dream cause the only real 3D movie I have seen in a theater was that Michael Jackson Disneyland 3D movie they had back in the 80's. Blew my mind even though I didn't really care about MJ all that much.

]]> By: Matt http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154406 Matt Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:50:43 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154406 3D is an annoying price-jacking gimmick. Nothing more, nothing less. All of you that are buying into it are helping to forever alter film to the realm of gimmick instead of art. 3D is an annoying price-jacking gimmick. Nothing more, nothing less. All of you that are buying into it are helping to forever alter film to the realm of gimmick instead of art.

]]> By: Kangaroo Be Stoned http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154405 Kangaroo Be Stoned Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:49:24 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154405 More theaters need to use the technology. The closest theater to my residence that has the technology is over 1.5 hours away. More theaters need to use the technology. The closest theater to my residence that has the technology is over 1.5 hours away.

]]> By: andrew http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154404 andrew Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:49:09 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154404 i agree with you whole-heartedly on this issue. ever since i saw coraline in digital 3-d this past february i've become very excited for the future of 3-d movies. i think most haters out there just haven't seen a recent 3-d movie and are still sore over past experiences with 3-d. i say f-em. anyways nice article. i agree with you whole-heartedly on this issue. ever since i saw coraline in digital 3-d this past february i've become very excited for the future of 3-d movies. i think most haters out there just haven't seen a recent 3-d movie and are still sore over past experiences with 3-d. i say f-em. anyways nice article.

]]> By: tonhogg http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154403 tonhogg Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:48:10 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154403 It's funny how people just assume that there never was an audience for 3d. They think that in the past people just didn't show up for 3d. From things I have read that was not really the case. In the past hollywood just didn't keep up with the format. They were the ones that gave up on 3d. Imax has done well with its 3d format for years. Sure there are those that don't like 3d and for them I think there should be a 2d format for them. So since there is a lot of people that would rather see 2d I think it will always be easily avalible for them. However, I think the haters have totally underestimated the number of people that like and are willing to see a 3d movie. We are the ones that usually have to drive further and pay more to see one, yet they are the ones that do the complaining. We didn't even have a 3d format for 20 years in the theaters. You had to find an Imax theater that had 3d or go all the way to Disney World.<br><br>If they think that 3d will die and that everyone has the same dislike for 3d that they do, they may be in for a rather rude awakening. It's funny how people just assume that there never was an audience for 3d. They think that in the past people just didn't show up for 3d. From things I have read that was not really the case. In the past hollywood just didn't keep up with the format. They were the ones that gave up on 3d. Imax has done well with its 3d format for years. Sure there are those that don't like 3d and for them I think there should be a 2d format for them. So since there is a lot of people that would rather see 2d I think it will always be easily avalible for them. However, I think the haters have totally underestimated the number of people that like and are willing to see a 3d movie. We are the ones that usually have to drive further and pay more to see one, yet they are the ones that do the complaining. We didn't even have a 3d format for 20 years in the theaters. You had to find an Imax theater that had 3d or go all the way to Disney World.

If they think that 3d will die and that everyone has the same dislike for 3d that they do, they may be in for a rather rude awakening.

]]> By: ladyofthelake http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154400 ladyofthelake Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:32:14 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154400 And yet I still don't know what Fly Me to the Moon is, lol. I still think it was a flop in the US. And yet I still don't know what Fly Me to the Moon is, lol. I still think it was a flop in the US.

]]> By: ladyofthelake http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154402 ladyofthelake Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:27:17 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154402 I don't care much for 3D, but it doesn't bother me in the least bit. It comes and goes, it'll die down and then pop up a few years later. Like all fads. I'll go see a movie if the trailer or comercial spots hit my sweet spot, reguardless if it's in 3D. Howeer, I would seriously think of doing a studio harm if they ever released a Jane Austen adaption in 3D.<br><br>I think it would be great if we could get the 3D experience at home on dvd, especially for the cartoons. Kids loose those cheap glasses all the time, or rip them. It would be great to advance on that. I don't care much for 3D, but it doesn't bother me in the least bit. It comes and goes, it'll die down and then pop up a few years later. Like all fads. I'll go see a movie if the trailer or comercial spots hit my sweet spot, reguardless if it's in 3D. Howeer, I would seriously think of doing a studio harm if they ever released a Jane Austen adaption in 3D.

I think it would be great if we could get the 3D experience at home on dvd, especially for the cartoons. Kids loose those cheap glasses all the time, or rip them. It would be great to advance on that.

]]> By: djjeffhall http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154401 djjeffhall Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:14:06 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154401 Kevin you summed it up perfectly. If you don't care about 3D, and I don't, then see it in 2D. I love seeing a film in the theater. A home systems will never be the same as seeing it in a theater. As long as there are good films shown in a big screen format, I'm happy. If theaters want/need to add a gimick to help their gross receipts, that is fine. As long as I get my personal experience, I'm happy for folks like you to get your "extras."<br><br>As for Iron Man 2, or whatever blockbuster is next up, as long as the new tricks don't interfer with the story, acting and script then who cares what format it's presented in? You know it will be available in any format that offers up a screen. The only limitation on your option of choice will be, "Are there the "gimic" theaters in your area?" The worst that will happen is that you will NOT be able to see it in 3D. I can certainly live with that. Kevin you summed it up perfectly. If you don't care about 3D, and I don't, then see it in 2D. I love seeing a film in the theater. A home systems will never be the same as seeing it in a theater. As long as there are good films shown in a big screen format, I'm happy. If theaters want/need to add a gimick to help their gross receipts, that is fine. As long as I get my personal experience, I'm happy for folks like you to get your “extras.”

As for Iron Man 2, or whatever blockbuster is next up, as long as the new tricks don't interfer with the story, acting and script then who cares what format it's presented in? You know it will be available in any format that offers up a screen. The only limitation on your option of choice will be, “Are there the “gimic” theaters in your area?” The worst that will happen is that you will NOT be able to see it in 3D. I can certainly live with that.

]]> By: KevinCarr http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154399 KevinCarr Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:27:22 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154399 Received this email from nWave, which produced Fly Me to the Moon. Worth noting...<br><br>Kevin,<br><br>Fly Me To The Moon 3D is not the flop you think it is. To-date it is still only feature released solely in 3D (except for the concert films). The film has grossed $50 million worldwide on less than 2500 screens (most of the screens available in 2008, except in the US where we got only about 50% of the screens available). Despite the botched US release, the film has topped $14 million which is 7 times the opening weekend gross ($1.9 million in 430 theaters). Most film reach only 3 to 4 times their opening weekend grosses. Fly did enjoy good word-of-mouth despite some negative press.<br><br>In other territories like Mexico, France, Brazil, Poland, Israel, Belgium, the Tchek Republic, Russia, Columbia etc... it has been a huge hit. Received this email from nWave, which produced Fly Me to the Moon. Worth noting…

Kevin,

Fly Me To The Moon 3D is not the flop you think it is. To-date it is still only feature released solely in 3D (except for the concert films). The film has grossed $50 million worldwide on less than 2500 screens (most of the screens available in 2008, except in the US where we got only about 50% of the screens available). Despite the botched US release, the film has topped $14 million which is 7 times the opening weekend gross ($1.9 million in 430 theaters). Most film reach only 3 to 4 times their opening weekend grosses. Fly did enjoy good word-of-mouth despite some negative press.

In other territories like Mexico, France, Brazil, Poland, Israel, Belgium, the Tchek Republic, Russia, Columbia etc… it has been a huge hit.

]]> By: Squint http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-154398 Squint Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:16:31 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-154398 I think 3D is wickedly gimmicky. And have a feeling that it's taking center stage to the technology and all that, that the quality of the story gets pushed to the side. Agree that 3D can make a movie more fun, but I still want a movie that can still be fun when I bring it home on a disk of some sort.<br><br>Also... I'm cheap. Movies at least in Canada are already crazily overpriced. Already forking over up to 13 bucks for a regular olde tyme 2D movies, but adding another 2 to 3 bucks to that is getting a bit much. With the price of a movie in the theaters getting up to meet up with a DVD price is a bit scary. So now I'm 'forced' to go to the local cheap-o theater which doesn't have anything even remotely digital, well there is the cash register. So no such 3D in that place.<br><br>But that's just me. I think 3D is wickedly gimmicky. And have a feeling that it's taking center stage to the technology and all that, that the quality of the story gets pushed to the side. Agree that 3D can make a movie more fun, but I still want a movie that can still be fun when I bring it home on a disk of some sort.

Also… I'm cheap. Movies at least in Canada are already crazily overpriced. Already forking over up to 13 bucks for a regular olde tyme 2D movies, but adding another 2 to 3 bucks to that is getting a bit much. With the price of a movie in the theaters getting up to meet up with a DVD price is a bit scary. So now I'm 'forced' to go to the local cheap-o theater which doesn't have anything even remotely digital, well there is the cash register. So no such 3D in that place.

But that's just me.

]]> By: tylerdurden1681 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-148638 tylerdurden1681 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:28:02 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-148638 I would have seen at least one 3D movie by now but all the theaters around don't support the 3D format so I get to see the 2D version. I tried watching My Bloody Valentine 3D at home but it didn't work so well and just ended up giving me a headache.<br> Maybe some day I'll get to live the dream cause the only real 3D movie I have seen in a theater was that Michael Jackson Disneyland 3D movie they had back in the 80's. Blew my mind even though I didn't really care about MJ all that much. I would have seen at least one 3D movie by now but all the theaters around don't support the 3D format so I get to see the 2D version. I tried watching My Bloody Valentine 3D at home but it didn't work so well and just ended up giving me a headache.
Maybe some day I'll get to live the dream cause the only real 3D movie I have seen in a theater was that Michael Jackson Disneyland 3D movie they had back in the 80's. Blew my mind even though I didn't really care about MJ all that much.

]]> By: Matt http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-148636 Matt Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:50:43 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-148636 3D is an annoying price-jacking gimmick. Nothing more, nothing less. All of you that are buying into it are helping to forever alter film to the realm of gimmick instead of art. 3D is an annoying price-jacking gimmick. Nothing more, nothing less. All of you that are buying into it are helping to forever alter film to the realm of gimmick instead of art.

]]> By: Kangaroo Be Stoned http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-148635 Kangaroo Be Stoned Thu, 17 Sep 2009 22:49:24 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-148635 More theaters need to use the technology. The closest theater to my residence that has the technology is over 1.5 hours away. More theaters need to use the technology. The closest theater to my residence that has the technology is over 1.5 hours away.

]]> By: andrew http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/wtf-2d-or-not-2d-that-is-the-question-kcarr.php/comment-page-1#comment-148631 andrew Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:49:09 +0000 http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=53434#comment-148631 i agree with you whole-heartedly on this issue. ever since i saw coraline in digital 3-d this past february i've become very excited for the future of 3-d movies. i think most haters out there just haven't seen a recent 3-d movie and are still sore over past experiences with 3-d. i say f-em. anyways nice article. i agree with you whole-heartedly on this issue. ever since i saw coraline in digital 3-d this past february i've become very excited for the future of 3-d movies. i think most haters out there just haven't seen a recent 3-d movie and are still sore over past experiences with 3-d. i say f-em. anyways nice article.

]]>