Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Why I Hate 3D and You Should Too" Roger Ebert

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:02 PM
Original message
"Why I Hate 3D and You Should Too" Roger Ebert
Edited on Thu Apr-29-10 05:07 PM by Stuart G
A very interesting read on the new 3D revival. From one of the nation's most respected movie reviewers, and a great progressive too..

By Roger Ebert | NEWSWEEK
Published Apr 29, 2010


"3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood's current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for.

That's my position. I know it's heresy to the biz side of show business. After all, 3-D has not only given Hollywood its biggest payday ($2.7 billion and counting for Avatar), but a slew of other hits. The year's top three filmsAlice in Wonderland, How to Train Your Dragon, and Clash of the Titanswere all projected in 3-D, and they're only the beginning. The very notion of Jackass in 3-D may induce a wave of hysterical blindness, to avoid seeing Steve-O's you-know-what in that way. But many directors, editors, and cinematographers agree with me about the shortcomings of 3-D. So do many movie loverseven executives who feel stampeded by another Hollywood infatuation with a technology that was already pointless when their grandfathers played with stereoscopes. The heretics' case, point by point:"

(see link for rest)


http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. I gotta agree
I saw two too many movies since this new wave has hit, and I was dissapointed both times. Now they are going to bring it into the living room? Fuck that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. Actually, for sports, porn, and videogames, it'll probably be wildly successful.
Me? I watch too many movies from the old days (when movies had
characters, plot, and dialogue instead of just "shit getting blowed-up
real good!"), so unless Ted Turner "dimensionalizes" the catalog, I
probably won't even have the opportunity to see much 3D.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. he sounds like a luddite bemoaning the advent of color, or sound
to movies back in the day.

ebert's been staggeringly wrong before (witness his review of clockwork orange)

nice to hear his opinion, but imo he's wrong

and fwiw, i thought avatar pretty much sucked. 3-d or not (saw it in 2-d granted)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. He has a point.
some of the dialogue in B&W flicks was timeless and fantastic. All too often, special effects seem to drive a movie, which is OK for pathetic Sci Fi, but not for anything else. For great sci fi, (see Attack of the Killer Tomatoes) again, the writing and the production are far more important that FX.


Bells and whistles can turn crap into HiTech crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. That's what's happened to 'popular' music. Tech-generated beats and auto tuned shlock. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. and thereby rendering it unlistenable.
ProTunes and other "fixes" sterilize live music and make it without soul, heart, spirit or life.

a very good point, make you, says Yoda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. and EVERY generation bemoans the new generations music this way
because we all know that "how much is that doggie in the window" "da doo ron ron" etc. were the HEIGHT of good music.

thanks for reinforcing my point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. I certainly did not condemn a "generation" of music. I think a lot of it is good, but
technology gives too many no-talents entry.

Look at the shitty 'singers' auto-tune has created. Get some hot babe, dress her up, then tune her up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
34. the same complaints were made about reverb
and the taping processes in general
and god knows no talent hacks have ALWAYS been a part of popular music (and arguably classical music back in the day)

plus ca change



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #20
62. New technology...opening the doors to horrible music...
"For myself, I can only say that I am astonished and somewhat terrified at the results of this evening's experiment -- astonished at the wonderful power you have developed, and terrified at the thought that so much hideous and bad music may be put on record forever."

--Sir Arthur Sullivan (of Gilbert & Sullivan fame), talking on an Edison recording in 1888, about the advent of recorded sound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Arthur_Sullivan_-_wax...







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. i have no doubt
it is sad that so few directors can do a black and white movie any more and get any success

there have been some really good one : Pi and Raging Bull come to mind

but my point is this, if you actually read the opposition pieces to SOUND in films they sound almost EXACTLY like how ebert sounds

eeringly similar. i remember studying this in college, and their arguments were nearly exactly the same

ANY new technology is prone to overuse, gee whiz, etc.

we saw that with CG, and now CG is used much more artistically and better

we saw that with color

we saw that with sound

etc. etc.

some of my favorite movies of all time have no special effects whatsoever (chariots of fire).

others do. Alien



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #12
63. IIRC, Schindler's List was B&W, wasn't it?
Except for a few moments when a girl in a red dress was highlighted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aviation Pro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
51. Or any Tarantino movie....
Edited on Fri Apr-30-10 10:11 AM by Aviation Pro
...which is always dialogue rich. The violence is just the set up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. tarantino is a mixed blessing
imo he's incredibly derivative, but he's derivative of GOOD stuff and stuff many people were unfamiliar with, so it worked well

my biggest complaint is his egotistical need to play bit parts in tons of different movies. he's a nerd trying to play tuff guys which always comes off looking ridiculous and it's just stupid.

some of his movies are phenomenal. imo, some are incredibly indulgent well... crap

i thought kill bill was pretty bad, but hey that;s just my opinion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. Great visuals can't save a mediocre story. That's my opinion of Avatar.
As George Lucas once said, "A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetloukillbot Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. Pity he didn't listen to himself with eps. 1-3 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #36
58. not to mention his rape of indiana jones
that was simply uncalled for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
57. i can agree
Edited on Fri Apr-30-10 12:30 PM by paulsby
it was the noble savage dances with wolves thing, except with blue people.

it was "fun", it just wasn't great.

i saw a lot of people whinging that they couldn't get why hurt locker beat out avatar

i had seen HL but hadn;'t seen avatar at the time

now that i've seen BOTH, it's no contest. HL was simply a much better movie (i don't use the term "film". it sounds pretentious to me)

avatar is remarkable for special effects, but that's really it.

i'd put it on the same level as jurassic park.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Something was lost with the addition of sound and something else with color
Turner found that out when he tried to colorize some of the classics. The photography just didn't work in color. Likewise, dubbing sound into a silent movie would be grotesque, selling a scene with guestures and expressions becoming overacting pretty quickly.

The only 3D film I ever enjoyed as such was Warhol's "Frankenstein." The scene with the impaled doctor giving a long winded soliloquy while a chicken gizzard dangled off the end of the spike in front of your nose was worth the price of admission.

Otherwise, Ebert is correct, I just end up with an eyestrain headache.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlancheSplanchnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
47. I know you have a good point there, but remember, when it's a question of quality or schlock,
Ebert will always come down on the side of quality.

If he were going to rank the possibilities for eye-candy, I'm sure 3-D would be right up there.

Maybe some director will create a film that makes good aesthetic use of 3-D, something that raises the entire film -- story, cinematography and all; that would be pretty cool.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Defintiely hard on the eyes
For films like avatar or star wars types of things, it's a decent medium. As a general rule for most films, I suspect it'll end up to be a fad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. There are going to be tons of 3D movies
coming out. And while I agree with Ebert that it doesn't really add much, and seems like a fad, it does employ many so can't complain about that. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. I saw that Avatar has a 3D version on DVD coming out next year..
Edited on Thu Apr-29-10 05:20 PM by Stuart G
So I contacted a friend up on this and he said that 3D TVs around now...and you will need a blue ray to play the movies..I am not sure it will be a fad. Who knows?
Roger has some good points though. Especially with dialogue and director's ability to use light and and form..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. Well
you are right. Hollywood is not expecting it to be a fad. They are heavily invested especially since the new 3D TVs are coming out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
6. I thought Avatar was great in 3D.
But it had a reason to be. Just throwing it in for grins is silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. In Imax it was really something. That will be the exception rather than the rule.
I have seen some junk in 3D...Something about meatballs??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. I saw it in 3-D, but a regular theatre (not IMAX)
I wish I would have saved my money and saw it properly the first time.

I wasn't too enthralled by the story, so I'm unlikely to go watch it again for the expense and the length of the movie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
22. How To Train Your Dragon
was pretty good too.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #22
53. Haven't seen it yet, but heard good things.
Sounds fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sentath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #53
66. Add me to the list
There's one moment near the end with a floating ash effect that is just scenic and appropriate.

Besides, this is the guy that said (again if memory serves) that video games cannot be art.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well, good luck with that attitude because nothing succeeds like success.
I've seen both Avatar and Alice in Wonderland in 3D and it looked good except for after about 10 minutes or so I forgot all about it.

I don't think I'd bother with it at home. When push comes to shove I started out watching the radio and spent years having to get up to change the channel on the tv.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
11. O and
if we're gonna make all these animated 3D movies for kids....how about making glasses that actually fit their tiny heads? When I took my son to see How to Train Your Dragon he literally had to hold the glasses on his head. Love how we get charged for using the glasses that don't fit and then have to return them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyewall Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
17. It's euphemistically called progress
but it's really a means for the electronics industry to create a new market where there is none today. They need new stuff to make new sales.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Very well said..Can someone tell me why records are making
a comeback if they were so outdated and poor comared to casette tape and CD?..Maybe they were not such a bad listen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. I think it's a back to basics movement by enthusiasts.
I don't think that the average person is buying too many records, but I could be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #18
59. where 'comeback' is an increase from zero to slightly more than zero?
Edited on Fri Apr-30-10 12:33 PM by Warren Stupidity
because there are always niche markets for arcane stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
23. I prefer black and white
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
25. Most 3D just looks mediocre and gimmicky.
If they could make it really really great, like virtual reality, then maybe it would be worth it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. If you think that this is gimmicky..well those of us who saw it in the 50s
will tell you what is real gimmicky..But just a little later..60s they came out with...smellovision...yea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Yeah, but your pop music was a lot better then. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. ha - our little local movie house showed "Polyester" in Smellovision (early 80s)
Edited on Thu Apr-29-10 05:41 PM by eShirl
gah!


edit: whoops! not Smellovision but the similar Odorama
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/50776




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snort Donating Member (132 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #30
52. Would that have been at the CHARLES?
Went to it. Stayed for the porn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SocialistLez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
27. I could care less about 3d
I'm doing just fine with the way technology is now.

The movies are already expensive enough, this just gives them another reason to rack up prices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The River Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
32. I'll Wait Until "Feelies" Are Available

"Feelies: These are the popular films. Filmgoers sit in special chairs that allow them to feel, and to interact, with the movie. The plots are simple, and often involve sex. Lenina takes The Savage to one of these feelies. She enjoys it very much, but he is horrified."

http://www.bookrags.com/notes/bnw/OBJ.htm#26
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #32
46. Believe me it's almost here, gestural interfaces nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaPera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. I agree with Roger....and my opinion; 3D fucking sucks!!
Edited on Thu Apr-29-10 05:48 PM by LaPera
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
35. I'm glad Ebert is doing well enough to write, hang in there! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pubslayer Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. here to stay
I work for a big studio pushing 3D. The bottom line is it brings in audiences in a big way. Theaters fill more seats, and tickets cost more money. Until they don't - it ain't going away. I'm not sure when the last time Ebert was right, but I agree that it is a distraction for some story telling, but in the case of kid's movies - they tend to be grandios adventures... rides, if you will, and the added dimension can greatly enhance that feeling. Most studios are just beginning to experiment with 3D, and don't do a very good job; your eyes will tell you if they know what they are doing. Movies like Up, Coraline, Avatar, Dragons have toned down the strain, and don't distract from the story with gimmicks in your face. If they do its always in the very beginning, like "see? that was neat, now let's get on with the story" and you won't see the paddle ball again. I've seen those 4 movies with and without, and they are all more fun with 3D.I can't say the same for the home experience; it is total crap, and I don't think it will stick.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Welcome to DU Pubslayer.
Best wishes on your work too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2Design Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
39. I avoid 3D - don't like things jumping out at me and certainly won't
pay more than the already outrageous movie prices
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JenniferJuniper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
40. A few months ago, I'd have completely agreed. Then I saw Avatar.
But I see his point. It must be done properly (Burton's Alice In Wonderland was dreadful, and the lousy 3D just made it worse) and it will be unfortunate if the trend ends up sending Hollywood down an even more juvenile path just for cheap, I mean, expensive, thrills and chills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #40
45. Hollywood has to make its buck, adolescents spend the most nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
41. Sorry, Roger, I totally disagree with you, just as I did on your review of Kick Ass
Best wishes, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tucsonlib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-10 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
42. 3D Is To Film........
...as MTV is to music.

A few words come to mind -

abomination

greed


The death of: art, imagination, creativity, culture, Western Civilization.......
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tutankhamun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
43. Although I've always liked 3-D, I think Ebert's right.
3-D isn't 3-D. It's flat 2-D on a few flat planes. I want real 3-D with no glasses, no headaches, no dimness, no jacked up prices, and no dumbing down of films. Until then, I'll enjoy the occasional sci-fi 3-D movie, but for most good movies, it's a distraction at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
44. He is being silly, it's just one of the many new technologies we'll take for granted soon nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeremyfive Donating Member (434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
48. Don't Dis' Steve-O's You Know What
It's Steve-O's best feature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gtar100 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
49. I disagree. I like and have enjoyed it in the movies I've seen with it.
Obviously not all themes lend themselves to 3D but I thought Up and Avatar were a blast in 3D.

Just wait until video games are more than just surround sound and 3D and become "surround vision". Total immersion into virtual reality. Now if we could just get the machines to operate off of a renewable battery source. Where could we find that.. hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flipper999 Donating Member (185 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
50. Ebert follows this article up with this statement: "You kids get off my lawn!"
He's been making a lot of noise like this lately. Earlier this month he claimed that no video game in existence can be considered art. This, of course, managed to rile up the entire gaming world in matter of seconds. Better writers than I have already refuted most of his points, so I'll just say that his criticisms are sadly stereotypical in an older-generation-not-getting-new-trends kind of way.

Theaters are buying and installing things like 3D projectors because enough people are willing to pay extra to see 3D. That's all. The few times that I bother to go to a theater, I opt for the 3D screen if it's available. Why? Because if I'm already going to plunk down a chunk of change to see visual spectacle, then I might as well have that spectacle jump out of the screen and inject heroine into my eyeballs!

If people don't want 3D, they'll vote with their money. Ebert needs to get over himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mimitabby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
54. one eyed
I can't see in 3d... so I agree...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
56. Occasionally a movie benefits from it i.e. Polar Express, because it's a thrill ride not a story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
60. 3D HD sports will end this debate.
Ebert has a valid point. But if Cameron is right that his cameras and processing technology makes it possible to do more than just poke the viewer in the eye, and there were quite a few examples of what he meant in avatar, then 3D will replace 2D as the standard for films and tv.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
61. eh, what's all this about sax and violins on tee vee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #61
67. As long as it's not gratuitous sax and senseless violins.
It has to have meaning. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freesqueeze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
64. "grown-up films of any seriousness"
do we have any of those any more?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
65. 3D is okay as a format, but it needs to mature
I totally agree with Roger Ebert that there's too much playing around with the novelty at the expense of story and acting. I think it all comes down to everything--even the movie industry--being motivated by profit. "Blowing stuff up" movies sell tickets, but are hardly lasting works of art.

But I'd support 3D if it came out of the "gimicky" stage--directors need to stop thinking of things to throw at or point at the camera. If they do that, and start concentrating on how the new dimension could enhance the story, then it'll be a successful art form, otherwise it'll go the way of the 1950s 3D fad.

I also look forward to technology that will enable people to view 3D without glasses (I'm sure they'll come up with a way within a few years).

I think 3D is just the beginning. When I was at Best Buy the other day, they were promoting a new video game system (forgot the name) that like the Wii, there's no controller cords to mess with. Not only that, but there's no controller! The player merely moves his/her body and the system detects the movements. That particular system supposedly doesn't work that well, but I'm sure it's just the beginning of a new generation of video game systems that don't require any controllers. I turned to my wife and said, I'll bet within 30-50 years, we won't be playing video games on flat video screens, either...instead, our video game opponent will be a life-sized hologram, standing right in front of us in our living room! Let's say it was a boxing game--we'd be duking it out with what appears to be a real person; no controllers or anything.

Same thing with movies...we'll no longer be staring at a flat screen. Our living rooms will literally become live stages for the actors. And "Saturday Night Live" will be really live, with the guest host interacting with you in your living room, as though you were part of the studio audience!

That's my amateur prediction...but I'm quite sure this will come about within 30 years. After all, look at the technology we have today (the Wii, etc.), compared to TV and video games of just 30 years ago (Space Invaders, etc.).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
68. He should write one on "Why I Hate CGI Overkill"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
swilton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
69. Technology Trumps Substance
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-30-10 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
70. Roger's grandfather
was probably upset when 'talkies' came out.

Yes, it is a waste of time for the next Matthew Mcconaughey romantic comedy, but for action, science fiction, and fantasy films, it's a wonderful thing. I've been to enough beaches, restaurants, hotel rooms, etc. to have a good imagination of what they feel like in 3-D to put into a 2-D movie, but when I'm using a movie to transport me to an otherworldly experience, I appreciate all that technology has to offer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 03rd 2020, 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC