3D or 2D? The Movie Debate

After my post reviewing the new Transformers movie there was some debate and concerns about it being 3D at the vast majority of theatres (you can read them in the comments), but this really got me thinking, is 3D really worth it?

Source: weheartit.com

We all know by now that for some people 3D isn’t really an option – some can’t see it and others it just makes nauseous and gives them a headache. This only creates quite a big barrier for the 3D market as if it’s ultimate goal is to make our TV sets 3D – there will be some very unhappy people. Meaning, the chances are TV’s will come with a switch much like the Nintendo 3DS making the 3D aspect of it optional.

To see a 3D movie at the cinema right now, it’s almost double the cost of watching the same movie in 2D. Where I am in the UK, you’re talking just under £10 to see a 3D movie and if you take a friend, you’ve handed over nearly £20 for 2 tickets – of which you could by the DVD when it comes out for that much.
On a side note to that I feel I must add that going to the cinema isn’t cheap now either £7 for a small popcorn – the movie industry as a whole is really raking it in.

Admittedly the cost is all down to the money involved in making the movie 3D in the first place. Whilst it maybe easier to do shooting an entire new movie in 3D, the process is much the same for making an older movie into 3D. Each frame has to be meticulously separated into many foreground segments, many background segments and also the focus of that frame (i.e. characters, interactive objects such as cars, etc).
The true cost shines through when you see that George Lucas states that making the Star Wars movies 3D (note – NOT reshooting them, just making the old ones into 3D) costs more money than it took to originally shoot them in the first place.

Given the results, I’m not convinced that 3D is the future. I’m not blown away by the 3DS which I’ve played on several times and as for movies – as I said, I thought it did benefit the Transformers movie, however I wasn’t blown away at how 3D it was at all. Maybe if you visit an IMAX, you will see the 3D effect more but the IMAX isn’t an everyday thing.
It actually disappoints me that the small adverts before movies that tell you the feature your about to watch is 3D are the most 3D thing you see in those few hours.

Ultimately, the cost is too high and the results to low quality. It’s a great gimmick right now but it needs a lot of work for it to be the next High Definition. It puzzles me why their goal is to enter our living rooms with 3D TV in just a short space of time – knowing how expensive it is to do and knowing how little money people have to splash out on luxuries right now.

What do you think? (Comment below too!)

3 thoughts on “3D or 2D? The Movie Debate

  1. You can guess what I picked. I really hope it’s a gimmick. I saw Avatar & Pirates in 3D and I feel it didn’t add anything. In Pirates there were literally 3 moments that really made me feel 3D added anything. 3! In a 2 hour movie. Plus it gives me a headache. So I don’t like it.

  2. Over here, almost all of the ticket price goes to the movie makers.. The luxor itself only earns money from the sale of food/drinks and the commercials they show before the trailers&movie starts. It’s expensive as hell though… (they ask more money if a movie is longer then 2,5 hrs too, and for 3d movies and if it’s weekend)

Comment and Tell Me Your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s