cinemablend.com — We've developed an unbiased, seven-point system for determining whether Clash's 3D is worthy of your wallet. Using that, we'll give you the tools you need to buy the right movie ticket at the right price. 2D or 3D? Answers here.
Apr 2, 2010 View in Crawl 4
myztryApr 3, 2010
My ex-wife got conned by Blockbuster. She hired the New Release title "Clash of the Titans"Naturally it was just a re-release of the 1981 title of the same name.These sorts of deceptive practises that pray on the naive should be illegal.
yacksApr 3, 2010
are you sure that you weren't in a 2D theatre with 3D glasses?
excommunicateApr 3, 2010
3D works well with non-cgi, if you use the 3D cameras from the beginning. The problem with Clash and Alice is that they applied the 3D in post-production and did not use the 3D cameras like Cameron did in AVATAR.
riolio11Apr 3, 2010
...Last time I checked, polaroids were flat.
Closed AccountApr 3, 2010
How to train your dragon was definitely the best movie I've seen in 2010 especially in 3D.
kraytwin2001Apr 3, 2010
Yeah I went to see the IMAX version so that may have contributed to it and my mate held us up when buying tickets so we had to sit close to the screen which also didn't help with enjoyment and because I didn't really enjoy it I felt no desire to watch it again. The beginning was very disappointing for the 3D as one person would be visibly closer than another but they were still flat. As the movie progressed I noticed this less but that would have probably been to me focusing less on the 3D itself and also the scenery having a lot smaller elements to it making the 'flatness' less apparent."Also, the movie studios are misapplying Avatar's formula, and THAT is what you should be disappointed in."That is what I am disappointed in. I guessed that if Avatar was a smash hit then every piece of s**t film that could justify it in their budget would be in 3D. We're in for a lot of s**t quality 3D movies for a long time but then that was to be expected.
brycehebertApr 3, 2010
I work at a movie theater (unfortunately), and it really surprises me the number of people who come up wanting to see a movie in 3D and are then upset to find that we don't have it in 3D at my theater. For instance, this past week we began showing "How to Train your Dragon" in 3D and, since we have only one 3D screen, had to lose Alice 3D. Many people come to the theater wanting to see Alice but not wanting to see the 2D version, as if 3D is the only way to see the film. What's the point of seeing a movie in 3D if you don't think you'll enjoy it in 2D? The extra dimension accounts for nothing if the movie is bad. The film needs to be able to stand on its own and let the 3D add to the experience the film brings. This is mitigated somewhat by (most) CG animated films (Dragon is definitely worth the 3D) and films that are actually shot in 3D (a la "Avatar"), but still the most important rule.The best advice I can give someone when they're about to go see a 3D movie is to find out how it was shot. Most movies' Wikipedia article will tell you how the film was shot (especially for the 3D movies) and using what cameras. If they didn't use a 3D camera (I know that the upcoming "Tron" movie did, thankfully) then it's probably low quality 3D and not worth the extra cost.Animated films are a little more tricky because of the process they use to actually "film" the movie. They basically use a virtual camera, and, for 3D films, a virtual 3D camera. This is both good and bad. You see, the 3D will likely be solid, but then you can run into other problems if the film was never "made" for 3D. My example of "How to Train your Dragon" is good because the filmmakers had always intended for it to be in 3D and so they made it for 3D screens. On the other hand, last year's Pixar film "Up" (an excellent movie) was made into 3D later and, while the 3D itself was fine, you had brightness problems as the author of this article noted some films have. So, in other words, in order to decide if an animated film is worth the extra cost of 3D, you have to know what the filmmakers intended at the beginning. That sort of information is often non-existent on the internet, or buried inside an interview with the director, producer, etc. And going through a bunch of videos just to decide whether to see a movie in 3D is something few people want to do. So, to make a long rant short, it's best to read the reviews and let the critics tell you whether it's worth the extra cash. However, many critics completely shun the use of 3D at all. Even when used to great effect in films like "Avatar." So before you take the critic's word for it, find out his/her stance on 3D.And remember, if you don't want to see the movie in 2D, it's not worth seeing in 3D./rant
pillar007Apr 3, 2010
Bad. They screwed up the story pretty badly.
antdudeApr 4, 2010
Pillar007: Bummer, so sucky story but pretty movie. :(
madddiggaApr 4, 2010
Or even better just see another movie