Many theaters misuse 3-D lenses to show 2-D films

[mustang guy]

This is an enlightening article. What ticks me off, is that there is even such thing as 3D. I challenge anybody to watch a 3D movie and its 2D counterpart displayed correctly using a 2D lense, and say they liked it better. 3D is for little kids, as it is nothing but a stunt. It is being pushed on the market instead of being asked for by the market. I'm ranting... Any way, read this article.

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2011/05/22/misuse_of_3_d_digital_lens_leaves_2_d_movies_in_the_dark/?page=full

[Schurkey]

Yeah, that's what they said about stereo, when it was a new format. Producers didn't try to make it "natural", they played games with hard left-right positioning. And yes, that sucked. When the "new" wore off, and the music wasn't tampered with to produce the artificial hard left-right images, people accepted that stereo was superior to mono.

3D is just "stereo" for our eyes; and when they get done playing games with the format, it'll wind up more natural and less artificial. Every movie will be recorded that way.

It's not the concept, it's the scripting. Yeah, I'm pretty sick of the actors pushing things towards the camera--spears, swords, etc--that aren't really justified by the plot.

[cornfedksboy]

IMO, when they can do it without the glasses it will be an accepted format. Until then, it's still "gimmickie." This is also similar to CGI. Jurassic Park did a FANTASTIC job of introducing CGI, but George Lucas abused it to the detriment of the Star Wars I as well as the re-release of IV, V, and VI. Now that it is a piece of the visual rather than some box office gimmic, the imagery is spectacular.

Just give me HD 3D w/o the glasses please.

[mustang guy]

Read the article. It's not a rant about how bad 3D bites. It is about how theaters are using the 3D equipment to play 2D movies. It is eye opening.

[Schurkey]

Read the article. It's not a rant about how bad 3D bites. It is about how theaters are using the 3D equipment to play 2D movies. It is eye opening.

Forgot to quote this part in my reply:

"3D is for little kids, as it is nothing but a stunt. It is being pushed on the market instead of being asked for by the market"

[Groomlakearea51]

Yes the local idiots do that also. If enough patrons (who know what the problem is...) get up and go demand the projectionist remove the p-lens, then AMC, and the others will get the hint....

[sunburnwilly]

IMO, when they can do it without the glasses it will be an accepted format.

Exactly !

[sunburnwilly]

Read the article. It's not a rant about how bad 3D bites. It is about how theaters are using the 3D equipment to play 2D movies. It is eye opening.

I have experienced this at a local theatre as well .

[Rich_Guy]

Current 3D is awful, it looks artificial and is a distraction from the movie, it is gimmickry at its worst. Fuzzy out of focus backgrounds with 2D images where some 2D images appear closer than other 2D images. It looks very unnatural.

Besides losing the need for glasses the technology needs a lot of improvement, I would much rather see high quality HD than the gimmick which 3D is now. Unless 3D vastly improves it should be left to animation and gimmick movies.

[t-man]

Now even more reasons to stay home and invest in my HT. I hate 3D movies, paying too much for tix/popcorn, parking my car safely, getting a sitter, etc...Now I have to be concerned the projectors aren't playing things correctly? As if poor/inconsistent sound wasn't enough to keep me out of theaters. I've only been to like 2 movies in the past year, and that's about average. I'll take my leather sofa, microwave popcorn, beer/soda, 63" plasma and KLIPSCH anyday over this multiplex nonsense.