Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulD  It's not the directors being lazy, it's the studios being greedy. See also Del Toros upcoming Pacific Rim which is being post-converted against his request. 3D gets a bad name because of the light loss, the extra premium paid for the 'pleasure', the fact that it automatically excludes those with eye problems, the fact that its a distraction and takes you out of the film as you're more conscious of sitting in front of a screen. Post-converted or filmed in 3D, it doesn't change the fact that 3D just doesn't work. It's been and gone in the past and will do so again when more and more people get fed up with it. It is a fad as it always has been. |
I thought you were a fan of 3D
I actually don't mind it myself, but only in the cinema, I would never buy a 3D Blu Ray player and TV. When I take my kids to the cinema, if there's a 3D option, that's the one they always want so I suppose it appeals to children more than adults, in that respect I think it should really be left to Pixar/Dreamworks type films like Shrek etc.