http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/a.....ecious-3d-re-release

I read this article and decided to rant a bit, am I the only one who is really annoyed by this? Originally I was a fan of 3D and I still am when it is used properly. Avatar worked as a 3D film, there's the odd animated film that is really fun as a 3D movie but now they are taking 2D films and converting them to 3D clearly or the extra cash in 3D tickets. I think this is just wrong, from everyone I've heard from, Alice in Wonderland looked like shit in 3D, it all looked like cardboard cut outs and killed the films natural colours. In the article above, directors are saying that 3D is a big step up, which I agree to in a sense, it could be fun to explore but the fact that studios are converting films that were originally filmed to be screened in 2D and converting them to a 3D (that won't even have the effect of a normally shot 3D film) for the extra money really makes me angry! Especially because my local theater doesn't give you the option between 3D and 2D, (it's 3D or go home) I'm really hoping that if I'm paying that extra $4 or whatever it is that it's going to be worth it!! That could have been some skittles! Until they lower the cost of 3D films to regular admission price which is already steep, or only use the 3D for films that the effect is truly an advantage for (Avatar), I'm boycotting 3D!

- A cheap college student  >

I hear ya, Kev. It is shameless re-mastering (of sorts) to squeeze those extra bucks out of the cinema going public.  I'm pretty sceptical on the whole 3D thing myself, Avatar was very impressive but a lot of the stuff it’s just used as a gimmick to get people in.

You should check out Mark Kermode's film podcast. He's a popular British film critic, who has made a point (many times over) to express his disdain at the whole 3D movement  basically saying how unnecessary and pointless it is, besides the financial benefits reaped by the film companies.

He even boasts how he got a mate of his to make up a pair of (what he calls) "3D rectifying glasses" to convert 3D back into 2D and watches all 3D films through them. A big lover of Toy Story but stated that he will never ever go see it in 3D at the cinema when it comes out.

So to answer your question...No, you are not the only one pissed about this. And yes, I miss my skittles too.

I say...bring on the 3D porn!

3D films are going to be great.  Remaking 2D to 3D is just crap.  Completely understand.

Won't buy it & won't see it.  No point.

Quoted from stevie I say...bring on the 3D porn!

It already exists.  My Japanese exchange student friend went to a 3D porno showing last year in downtown SD.

He was never quite the same afterward.  

I've seen ALICE in both 3D and in 2D and it looked much better in 3D. I didn't think it distorted the colors or actors at all. The main difference is in the 3D version, when the Caterpillar exhales the smoke, it fills the room. That stuff doesn't happen in the 2D version.

I don't think this movie SCREAMS to be a 3D movie, though. There wasn't a lot of 3D effects, but it was very nice to look at.

The 3D was a lot better than UP. UP in 3D was pointless.

It's intersting that 3d was first introduced when television started to slow the sale of movie tickets.  Now video games are having the same effect, and 3d resurges in it's popularity. It died down last time and I'm sure it will again.

I've still got nothing against 3D at this point. It's no news that studio execs are utterly debased and will milk any gimmick until its completely devoid of any aesthetic value. They don't give a shit about you or what you really like. They just want your money. But in this case, it works. For me, at least. The only movies they slap with 3D are the same brainless big budget flicks you sneak vodka into the theater for. I still enjoy some of those movies and 3D only makes them better. That's why Piranha 3D is my #1 movie this year. Fuck it. I liked Avatar. Even the 3D Hellraiser remake doesn't bother me. 2D is already reprehensible enough. Could a third dimension make it that much worse than it already will be? Bottom line is my favorite movies will always be free of gimmicks.

That said, my only personal beef with this stuff is that it makes me into even more of a pretentious arthouse douchebag each time. Also, Scorsese's comment is retarded. Dude's completely lost touch. Nobody wants to see abusive mothers toss TVs at their pregnant daughters in 3D.

Quoted from James McClung Bottom line is my favorite movies will always be free of gimmicks.

Well put, totally agree.

Am I the only one who gets a headache from 3D?

I don't understand why Avatar will not be 3D on Blu-ray. If Bloody Valentine, Journey, Final Destination and even a zombie movie can be released as 3D why not spend the large coin you made to produce a 3D and 2D release.

I was watching Gamer and the directors were talking about how they were going to make it 3D after the fact and that the scenes they say done were good but they decided not to because of money.

Avatar has no excuse to be cheap when the above films combined didn't even come close to what this flick made especially since a lot of people say it is better 3D.

Quoted from Craiger6 Am I the only one who gets a headache from 3D?

No, far from it. I know a few people you can't watch 3D for the same reason.

The only movie, oddly enough, I've enjoyed in 3-D was Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, mainly because the premise lent itself to the 3-D, so it didn't feel forced.  I do lament, however, not seeing Coraline in 3-D, because that's supposed to be amazing.

For the most part though, it's just a gimmick.  A gimmick that's making it harder and harder to gauge a film's success.  For example, Alice in Wonderland was Number 1 this weekend, but the only reason it's numbers were so high was because the tickets were 2 or sometimes 3 times as much as they would normally be.  This isn't to say it still wouldn't have gotten Number 1, but it definitely means that you have to look at the numbers in a new light.