# The case against 3D in movies and the case against the case against 3D in movies.



## k3ng (Dec 19, 2010)

.


----------



## garza (Dec 19, 2010)

I remember a 3D movie or two in the '50s, but I was not aware of any being produced today.


----------



## ODaly (Dec 19, 2010)

Too many directors or producers are still stuck in the "Oh wow we can throw things at the audience with 3D!" mentality. Thus the effects are bland and gimmicky. Then you have movies like Avatar which, while not being groundbreaking plot-wise, used more of a diorama style of 3D as opposed to a pop-up book. As such, combined with the quality of CG, it was hailed as one of the best-looking films in recent history, or depending on who you ask, ever.

I've formed the opinion that 3D shouldn't be used to pull the world of the film out into the audience, but rather pull the audience into the world of the film. It's supposed to be about immersion after all, isn't it?

As for edits, I didn't catch any glaring errors aside from your use of "literally" in the beginning of paragraph four. Literally is becoming a nonsense word because people insist on using it incorrectly, and it literally makes me cringe every time. Pet peeve of mine, I know, but please never do this.


----------



## k3ng (Dec 20, 2010)

Well spotted ODaly. I've found this to be a bad habit of mine. Still takes a while to stop myself from doing it though. I'll swap it out for 'practically' or something.

Cheers.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Dec 21, 2010)

Hi K3ng,

Humble suggestions:

_This is going to be one of those issues that I cannot bring myself to sit on either side of the fence_.
This is one of those contentious/difficult/? issues, with two points of view, and I cannot decide which side of the fence I am on.  

_Hence I find myself sitting on the nasty place that I have so often criticized the occupants of_.
Hence I find myself sitting in that nasty place, the occupants of which I have so often criticized.

_The world today is being gripped by the 3D phenomenon ever since it became accessible to the public._
The world has been gripped by the 3D phenomenon. 

Yes I agree, like the music industry with digital/techno music, the film industry must learn to "play" this new instrument called "3D". 

Thanks for a really enjoyable and most interesting essay.

Ian (smile)


----------



## k3ng (Dec 21, 2010)

Hey thanks for the edits Ian, greatly appreciated. It's stuff like that I'm really horrible at.

Cheers.


----------



## Guy Faukes (Dec 21, 2010)

ODaly said:


> I've formed the opinion that 3D shouldn't be used to pull the world of the film out into the audience, but rather pull the audience into the world of the film. It's supposed to be about immersion after all, isn't it?


 
Speaking of Avatar, I watched it twice, once in 3D and again on a regular format. 
Didn't really notice too much of a difference. I honestly spotted three short bits that 3D projection was being used, the rest was more or less the same. The extra money and looking dorky with thick glasses definitely wasn't work it.


----------

