Monday, November 01, 2010

Permanent 3-D

Again.

The Hollywood Reporter favorably reviews "Megamind":

"Megamind" an early holiday-season 3D winner

... 'Megamind' is snappy good fun. ...

And gives high marks to this:

... [T]he film stands as one of the best arguments in favor of 3D among the many examples that have surfaced over the past couple of years in that it feels like mature, restrained, even natural use of the technique. ...

We think that DreamWorks Animation has just about the best 3-D going. So if you like 3-D, the films of DreamWorks Animation are the ones you need to see. Because the 3-D really works.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why would anyone pay more to see a kids cartoon that is up to 30% less bright than a real movie?

Anonymous said...

Because when used well, 3D adds a lot to the immersivity of the experience. If the theater is configured correctly, dim projection should not be an issue.

Anonymous said...

Because not everyone's a jaded film critic like you.

Anonymous said...

If configured correctly? B.S. That's quite simply 100% NOT TRUE. Even the "best" stereoscopic viewings lose no less than 20% of their brightness.

Anonymous said...

Because some people can't avoid a fad, even when they know deep down that it's a fad.

Justin said...

Most stereoscopic projectors try to compensate by being brighter than normal projectors.

Anonymous said...

I dont go to movies to see brightness.

Steven Kaplan said...

Its an unfortunate yet documented fact that films shown in stereo are less bright than their "un-dimentional" copies. Its not just the projector lamp that effects it, but the opacity of the lens on the polarized glasses. I've stated many times that to me, its a remarkable difference and detracts from the viewing experience.

Anon 1:22pm - Silly statement. Of course brightness is a factor. If it isn't for you, keep your eyes closed and go see a film you haven't yet. But, then again, would that mean you even "saw" the film??

Floyd Norman said...

I saw a great 2D movie last night and it was totally immersive. Plus, no glasses required.

I think this might catch on.

Jeff Massie said...

"Playwrights! Add the words 'in 3D' to your play's title. It's the literal truth and it might trick a few moviegoers into buying tickets ... (from Viz magazine)"

-- Viz magazine

Steve K.: My friend, I couldn't begin to list the movies I've seen that would have been a better viewing experience if I'd kept my eyes closed.

meh said...

http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/31/guccis-3d-glasses-up-the-ante-with-225-fashion-tag/

Anonymous said...

So, this being a DW movie, if it bombs we all blame 3-D, right?
Just wanted to get the ground rules straight ahead of time.

Anonymous said...

@ Steve Kaplan- Silly statement. Of course brightness is a factor. Its just not THE factor.

Megamind said...

Fuck the 3D!!! It don't make me or break me! I be the Mega-D!!!

-Megamind

Site Meter