Is 3D the worst gimmick in entire history of Kino?
I've never enjoyed this cheap shit, why do people keep using it in movies?
Pretty much. Sad thing is it's not dead yet and will probably be partially revitalised when Avatars 2, 3 and 4 come out
>>69205181
Because it is fun to watch. Maybe if you had friends you would understand...
plebs will quite often try to claim monoscopic is objectively superior to stereoscopic.in an attempt to appear patrician. so it makes a good pleb filter regardless of which you prefer.
>>69205181
It works sometimes (e.g. Ant-Man)
But i hate that every big movie uses it no matter if the movie profits of 3D
My small town theatre almost only show 3d releases for bigger movies. Its fucking bad, especially since the glasses they give out have smaller than average lenses
>>69205212
It's a gimmick that periodically pops up and dies back down and has since the invention of the moving image.
The last time it was big was in the 80's, then the 50's, then the 19-teens with nickelodeons you had to stick your face into like an old viewmaster (which by the way is another example of how this gimmick keeps popping up then dying off in popular culture).
It's a novelty, nothing to worry about.
>>69205181
In I max its enjoyable. In a normal theatre it doesnt add much.
Avatar and Jungle book are the 2 movies you kind of need to see in 3d. The rest didnt ad much.
>>69205610
i remember being a kid in the 90s and getting 3d glasses with dinosaur books so you could trip out
was pretty cool
hate these 3d movies though. ive tried so many times and not once has it been good. its just annoying. i shouldnt have to put on fucking apparel to maybe enjoy a movie
>>69206351
>>69206688
holy shit dude... i dunno if thats it but its close enough
