Ebert’s article so personifies how I feel about this 3D trend. I just hope it’ll fade away within a couple of years.

Same here.

I just found this article by Roger Ebert:

https://www.newsweek.com/id/237110/output/print

A wise man – on the same wavelength. ;)

Avatar #1: it was a media preview and we had brand new glasses, lightweight, like cheap sunglasses – the lightest and best I’ve seen. The physical discomfort and distraction was minimal and the effects were wonderful. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience.

Avatar #2: I was curious to see how the 2D experience compared. I preferred seeing it in 2D, but recommended that everyone see it in 3D to experience the new level of ‘wow’. I think the problem with Avatar in 2D is that the film is designed for 3D and the technical transfer to 2D has downgraded the quality. The visuals are quite flat (no pun intended), meaning murky and dark. I presume this is not deliberate but perhaps a technical and funding issue (there’s only so many zillions of dollars you can throw at a film).

Avatar #3: I really felt I needed to revisit 3D again, to compare with the 2D experience. This time, it was at another cinema, that had older, clunkier and inferior glasses. I didn’t like them at all. But something strange happened. I’d read about others’ similar dislike of 3D, but in spite of the glasses, I noticed that rather than expecting the 3D effect to be effortless (which it isn’t) – if one is more aware of the technology and makes a conscious effort to meet it half way with some effort, and overlook some of the flaws, it’s actually a very rich and rewarding experience. I don’t think Cameron is there yet, but he’s definitely made a major technological advance.

But this is not about Avatar. I just wanted to use that example of where how I’ve come around to 3D… sort of. I’m still not sold, and I think that a film has to use it well or not at all. I don’t think Up used it well. It was OK, but nothing special and ultimately I found the story flat, so 3D effects did little to inflate it in my estimation.

I actually thought that the 3D in How to Train Your Dragon was quite good. Not up to the level of Avatar, of course, but better than the other children’s films I’d see in 3D like Bolt, Up and a few others. My son also has disdain for 3D and prefers 2D, but when I surveyed him after the film (as I often do), he volunteered without prompting or pre-empting that he liked seeing it in 3D and was glad he hadn’t seen it in 2D. He also agreed that other than Avatar, it was the best 3D effects we’d seen yet.

I thought films would be cheaper because they make so much profit on the popcorn & drinks. I guess not :(

It won’t take long for that big screen TV to pay itself off …

Whoever does a decent job integrating big screen TVs with legal Internet films will make out like a bandit :)

In my humble opinion, as a business model this is unsustainable. Avatar was the clearest manifestation that we are in an age of, not just blockbuster movies, but mega-blockbusters. Movies can’t just be fantastic experiences that blow your mind. Now, they have to be immersive, life-changing experiences. Sometimes you just want to see a flick. What’s interesting to me is that as Hollywood movies get progressively more or more expensive, independent movies get less and less expensive. Now, special effects that were near impossible in the 80’s can be done at home with a good computer.

I predict this 3-D push will be the death rattle of the mega-blockbuster. It’s the big studios’ last push to prove how important they are. There will always be Hollywood blockbusters, of course, but I think we are on the verge of a completely new age of cinema.

“I guess there are benefits to not having a car.”

Thanks for rubbing it in. ($1,001 repair bill last week)

My smirking about Technicolor was just a sideways reference to the fate of 3D (as we know it).

Agreed.

But make no mistake: IMAX is not a guarantee for size. I saw AVATAR on Hoyts’ “Imax” screen at the Sydney Entertainment Quarter. WHAT A JOKE!! That screen was puny!

The sound, I must admit, was sensational. (Unlike that other Hoyts theater I visited yesterday.)