Anyone opting to see it in 2D?

GG Pan

MemberOvomorphApril 19, 20122024 Views36 Replies

Depending on which screens it plays at here, I may opt to see the 2D projection (if it's still an option). I was wondering if anyone else doesn't care or dislikes the 3D aspect of it. The simple matter is: 3D gives me a headache. I don't enjoy it. I don't like the way it forces my eyes to a certain area of the screen. Part of what I enjoy about films is taking in the ENTIRE image, having the choice to look at the background & set design & art direction if I want to. For this and other reasons, I enjoyed Avatar more on video than at the IMAX 3D, because I was able to take in the entire image without having Sam Worthington's huge fucking face forced into the center of my eyeline. I mean, imagine Alien in 3D, you want to look at all of Giger's designs in the derelict, but Tom Skeritt and John Hurt's space suits are being shoved in your face. I don't think atmosphere is enhanced by 3D. Or Harry Dean Stanton's kitty search. You think you know Stanton's face in 2D...

Lee Wilson
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

3d is a total headache for me too! 2d all the way.

whtrz
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

@ShinobiX9X - 3D is not an "improvement" on 2D. Its a gimmick to get people to go back to the cinema, and one that is starting to fail. All most all the best selling films of last year in the UK were 2D, except for Harry Potter, and even then 2D tickets outsold 3D ones. 2D vs 3D is *not* the same as black & white vs colour. A black and white film will look just as good when you watch it at home as it did in the cinema. A 3D film won't. I'm not saying 3D is pointless. I'm saying if you have to use gimmicks to make an engaging film, you have no business making it in the first place.

the coming
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

anyone who says this 3D is the future is a moron...yes 3D is the future, but not this obsolete shitty version that has been around since the 50's...It is simply two images overlaid and the distance between them correlates with perceived depth. ...it's been around since the 50s until some fucking douche-bag in marketing decided to bring it back

alteredstate.
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

Never experienced 3d at all except in my local electrical retailers 3d tv screen shop where they had avatar on view and some high tech 3 d glasses to view through before you buy. i'm going to try 2d imax digital screen i feel that's my best option

ShinobiX9X
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

ow well, i'll let you know how i experienced the 3d version end of next month, than later i'll compare it with 2d when the bluray is out. To be honest ive only seen one movie in 3d in the theaters, and it was for my daugher, it was fly me to the moon? So no , ididn't enjoy it, but what i like in that 3D system, is that the images come out of the screen right to you. i think it might be good with a very good movie, i don't know. what i dislike with the actual 3d tv's i tried, is the dept is inside the screen, instead of coming out.

darthmongo
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

I'll probably see both versions. I saw Avatar in 2d first because my wife gets motion sickness from the 3d. Then, I went and saw it in 3d with my dad. It was pretty, but it was annoying to fiddle with the 3d glasses and keeping them on over my own glasses throughout the movie, which was a huge distraction. Saw Tron in 3d and it was the same feeling. Glad I got to see them in 3d, but I'm also glad I had an uninterrupted movie experience with the 2d.

Necrofan
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

Yeah, I am 39 and have never seen a 3D movie. I had told myself that this would be the first film I would see in this format, maybe even opting for a trip to Cincinnati to see it in IMAX 3D. If you guys say it is headache city though, I may change my mind.

CanadaPhil
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

Given the newer process that is being used here and the initial favourable press comments, this is one that I am DEFINATELY planning on seeing in 3D !!Not sure whether IMAX as well, but definately 3D. If I like it enough and want to make the effort, I may go back at some point a little later to check out a regular widescreen 2D show as well.

fanboy79
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

i am definitely going to see this movie in 3d the first time, but after that all 2d i have yet to have a 3d experience that has blown me away. In avatar i did see some differences between 3d and 2d but not enough to change the overall experience. I would like to give sir Ridley the chance to change my mind, but 3d always seems patchy often i see outlines on particular shapes and characters that seem out of place.....when i watch football on my 3d tv the player thats suppose to be projected out in 3d always seems......its kind of lame to me.....but i will see this flick the first round in 3d......

alteredstate.
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

aghh darthmongo you answered my question and concern as i to wear glasses for distance this was something i cant ignore so i'm opting for 2d. i also hate sitting to close to the screen i prefer to sit at the back fora better view.

Otto
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

I will ONLY see it in 2D...I cannot sit through a full movie in 3D before I start getting a headache and vertigo. It's not worth it to me. I still view it as a total gimmick, even though there's always a little eye candy in there. If there is ever a way to do it without the stupid glasses, I may rethink it and give it another try, but as the technology stands right now, it is nothing more than total gimmick.

allinamberclad
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

I can't handle 3D. I think there must be different specifications or types of it and I wish I knew more about the process because all I do know is that some versions of it give me the kind of migraine that makes me want to tear at my eyes and takes me days to recover from. I'd like to, but there's no way on Earth I can go near that again until I'm sure what happening. The last one nearly killed me.

VaderTime
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

I wear eyeglasses. Even now, after cataract surgery where my eyesight is legal enough to drive without glasses, I still wear glasses to help me see the finer details on TV. I've never been a big fan of 3D and the only decent 3D movie in the past 40 years was AVATAR. Even then, I saw the 2D version first. James Cameron did it right by using immersive techniques to surround you with the effects. I may or may not see Prometheus in 3D. AVATAR had spectacular CGI, special effects and was filmed in 3D. Prometheus, on the other hand, is more about the story and the plot and less about an immersive 3D experience.

Werthers Original
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

2d all the way. Can't handle 3d at all without getting headaches and after leaving the cinema everything looks flat and 2d which I find uncomfortable and annoying. IMO Movies should be left in 2d just as pictures and paintings are.

Spartacus
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 19, 2012

Out of respect for H R Giger and Ridley Scott and the countless others whom have worked on this thing and as much or even more than all of them...especially Dan O'Bannon whom I know in my heart would have intended for me to see it in 3D, That's just how I will, and IMAX at that !!!

takka_takka_takka
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

April 20, 2012

I have yet to see 3D done well. I have high hopes for the upcoming Hobbit film, though, and Ridley is using the same type of cameras for Prometheus. I have heard good things about it so far so I am willing to give it a chance.